Community
Wiki Posts
Search

CPUs improving ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 14, 2013 | 9:17 am
  #451  
1M
40 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: DEN
Programs: AA EXP, AA Million Miles, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 2,925
Originally Posted by anc-ord772
Well, I didn't get a CPU on SFO-LAX on a Tuesday in February. I did just get a CPU on LAX-SFO tomorrow....
Originally Posted by thegrailer
DCA-IAH-SJU-IAH-DCA all 4 upgraded this past weekend. And I was 3 for 4 the weekend before on a transcon. Even SFO-EWR cleared. Improving .... maybe(?).

Cheers
Aircraft? Fare class?
bse118 is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 10:18 am
  #452  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,092
2 flights this Saturday. Both F9 R9.

First one upgraded at the 96 or thereabouts.

Second one did not upgrade, still F9 R9, 4 hours after the 96.

EUA bugs still live on...
channa is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 10:18 am
  #453  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,240
Originally Posted by channa
2 flights this Saturday. Both F9 R9.

First one upgraded at the 96 or thereabouts.

Second one did not upgrade, still F9 R9, 4 hours after the 96.

EUA bugs still live on...
*CPU, not EUA.

Why is that a bug?
star_world is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 10:46 am
  #454  
10 Countries Visited20 Countries Visited30 Countries Visited10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: NJ
Programs: UA Gold, Hilton Gold, Marriott Plat,
Posts: 284
EWR - LAS on Friday night there were at least 18CPUs (mine cleared t-96) and one empty F seat. I strangely enough the upgrade standby list was empty - I've never seen this before but guess this is NOT an elite heavy route? This was the 753 so a decent amount of F seats as well
Blootch is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 10:52 am
  #455  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Originally Posted by star_world
*CPU, not EUA.

Why is that a bug?
Well when the new CPU system was introduced with SHARES rather than running when inventory opened up we were all told that it would only run once a day at the upgrade windows for that flight.

That was sort of what everyone expect given the representations that were made.

But you are correct, its clearly not a bug, its part of a deliberate strategy to hold back and try to sell as many seats as [and I know you hate the term, but hey, not my problem] TODs.

All part of UAfkaCOdbaAllergent's great plans for all of us.
spin88 is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 10:56 am
  #456  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,240
Originally Posted by spin88
Well when the new CPU system was introduced with SHARES rather than running when inventory opened up we were all told that it would only run once a day at the upgrade windows for that flight.

That was sort of what everyone expect given the representations that were made.

But you are correct, its clearly not a bug, its part of a deliberate strategy to hold back and try to sell as many seats as [and I know you hate the term, but hey, not my problem] TODs.

All part of UAfkaCOdbaAllergent's great plans for all of us.
Looks like you never actually read the post. This has nothing to do with upgrades happening outside a particular window.

And there's the fact that I never said it wasn't a bug - I asked a simple question.
star_world is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 11:10 am
  #457  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K2MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,318
Originally Posted by channa
2 flights this Saturday. Both F9 R9.

First one upgraded at the 96 or thereabouts.

Second one did not upgrade, still F9 R9, 4 hours after the 96.

EUA bugs still live on...
Agree that it's an (unsurprising) bug

While R space doesn't guarantee CPU running, there is of course high correlation...and still being R9 after the 1K window and an UG not going through is highly suspect.
UA-NYC is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 11:47 am
  #458  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 5,825
Originally Posted by UA-NYC
Agree that it's an (unsurprising) bug

While R space doesn't guarantee CPU running, there is of course high correlation...and still being R9 after the 1K window and an UG not going through is highly suspect.
So, R9 at 96 hours means all 1K's should clear?

And if they don't, it is 'highly suspect' or perhaps 'its part of a deliberate strategy to hold back and try to sell as many seats as TODs.'

Are there any other plausible explanations? Or only the ones that you believe are part of UA's insidious plan to chase away elites?
LarkSFO is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 11:50 am
  #459  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K2MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,318
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
So, R9 at 96 hours means all 1K's should clear?

And if they don't, it is 'highly suspect' or perhaps 'its part of a deliberate strategy to hold back and try to sell as many seats as TODs.'

Are there any other plausible explanations? Or only the ones that you believe are part of UA's insidious plan to chase away elites?
It's been documented many times that a single out-of-sync res will hold up the entire process. And it's also been stated by our former UAI that CPU should be running if R>2. This seems like a textbook example.

UA chasing away Elites has been only partly planned - a lot of it has been incompetence too. A wonky auto-upgrade process is but one example.
UA-NYC is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 12:29 pm
  #460  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 5,825
Originally Posted by UA-NYC
It's been documented many times that a single out-of-sync res will hold up the entire process.
Is this still happening? I do recall higher frequencies of this shortly after the system merge...

Originally Posted by UA-NYC
And it's also been stated by our former UAI that CPU should be running if R>2.
This I don't recall reading at all... Are you certain?
LarkSFO is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 12:36 pm
  #461  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,092
Originally Posted by star_world
*CPU, not EUA.

Why is that a bug?
CPU is the type of upgrade.

EUA is the system that processes the upgrades.

EUA is what's broken.

At 96 hours, the EUA should have swept the flight and allocated something. The fact that the flight has remained F9 R9 well beyond that is suspect.

As I do with all such EUA anomalies, I call in and request a manual upgrade or a bug report be written. I usually end up with the latter.
channa is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 12:43 pm
  #462  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,240
Originally Posted by channa
CPU is the type of upgrade.

EUA is the system that processes the upgrades.

EUA is what's broken.

At 96 hours, the EUA should have swept the flight and allocated something. The fact that the flight has remained F9 R9 well beyond that is suspect.

As I do with all such EUA anomalies, I call in and request a manual upgrade or a bug report be written. I usually end up with the latter.
EUA doesn't exist anymore - it was an old CO process. This is United now.

You're making the rookie mistake that you chastise people for here on a regular basis. This simply isn't how the system works - it's very possible that the CPU process *did* sweep the flight and allocated *nothing*. That isn't a bug if it happens. You or I don't have the data to show whether that happened or not, so I'd be fascinated to know how you know this a bug.

The existence of R inventory has no bearing on whether the CPU process will run. How many hundreds of examples and statements from UA representatives are needed to show that this is the case?

And as for calling in? What makes it *your* upgrade to get manually? If there are 10 people ahead of you on the list and the CPU process doesn't hand out any upgrades for whatever reason (e.g., high likelihood of buy-ups on this route / flight / day of week / month / year, data shows likely last-minute purchases on this route / flight / day of week / month / year, didn't run due to an error, or any other reason) why does that automatically mean it's your upgrade to get? And what do you tell them to include in these "bug reports"? I'm pretty sure I know what they do with them

This is a classic case of somebody with no insight into the actual data putting what they think is two and two together and arriving at a completely erroneous conclusion. You just don't have the data to be able to determine what you think you can determine.
star_world is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 12:58 pm
  #463  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,092
Originally Posted by star_world
EUA doesn't exist anymore - it was an old CO process. This is United now.
Nonsense. EUA exists. The system is still called EUA. If you read a PNR, you'll even see if EUA upgraded the passenger.


Originally Posted by star_world
You're making the rookie mistake that you chastise people for here on a regular basis. This simply isn't how the system works - it's very possible that the CPU process *did* sweep the flight and allocated *nothing*. That isn't a bug if it happens. You or I don't have the data to show whether that happened or not, so I'd be fascinated to know how you know this a bug.

The existence of R inventory has no bearing on whether the CPU process will run. How many hundreds of examples and statements from UA representatives are needed to show that this is the case?
The last I heard from a UA rep was that EUA will dump all of R except in some markets, 1-2 R seats. A holdback of 9+ seats is not the design.


Originally Posted by star_world
And as for calling in? What makes it *your* upgrade to get manually? If there are 10 people ahead of you on the list and the CPU process doesn't hand out any upgrades for whatever reason (e.g., high likelihood of buy-ups on this route / flight / day of week / month / year, data shows likely last-minute purchases on this route / flight / day of week / month / year, didn't run due to an error, or any other reason) why does that automatically mean it's your upgrade to get? And what do you tell them to include in these "bug reports"? I'm pretty sure I know what they do with them
I don't know if it's my upgrade or not. All I know is it didn't run like it was supposed to. That's a bug, and that's what I report.


Originally Posted by star_world
This is a classic case of somebody with no insight into the actual data putting what they think is two and two together and arriving at a completely erroneous conclusion. You just don't have the data to be able to determine what you think you can determine.
The facts are R did not go down and I did not clear. Since R > 2, that's a bug. Nothing erroneous about it, something's wrong with the flight.
channa is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 1:10 pm
  #464  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
Well, what do you know... Right after I posted this thread, I got my first upgrade since January, BOS-EWR on a A319. No hopes for IAD-SFO tomorrow, unfortunately.
sincx is offline  
Old May 14, 2013 | 1:56 pm
  #465  
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago, IL
Programs: UA 1K 3MM , Marriott Amb, Hyatt D, HH D, Hertz PC
Posts: 856
I side with those who think something is still not right with the CPU process. Flying ORD-SFO last week with jchiguy1partner; same PNR, status (1K), fare class (tix bought together) and we both have exactly the same PQM this year. I went to check us in at T-24 and somehow I got upgraded while he remained on the wait list (which split the PNR). Got to ORD, headed to the gate and he appeared at number two on the upgrade screen. He went up to the agent at T-45 min to inquire about his chances and lo and behold she handed him a new FC boarding pass. I'm still not sure exactly how all that happened.

Last edited by jchiguy1; May 14, 2013 at 1:57 pm Reason: information added
jchiguy1 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.