penner42

So... we can't even know, when we're buying the tickets, how many PQD we'll earn? We have to wait until it tickets and check the receipt? That seems like something that absolutely needs fixing before next year.

LarkSFO

Welcome to my world!

- From a VX Gold

GoAmtrak

This is another example of UA's credibility gap on their ability to competently determine and track PQD spend. On top of the murkiness and user-unfriendliness in planning one's spend to achieve desired PQD, it's why the thresholds should simply be sufficiently padded to account for taxes. Count all UA spend based on transaction totals (except gift certs, etc.) and this will be less of a chore for everyone.

DocTravel

Well this sucks.......

At Least the news didn't break on a Friday.

Jorgen

Since "What if I depart in December and return in January?" is an unanswered question, I'd also like to add "What happens if I depart in January and land in December?"

If United doesn't want to deal with this problem then they shouldn't have a daytime GUM-HNL flight.

love_to_travel

My guess is that it would split in half, part for 2014 and part for 2013, but who knows. I bet UA didn't think about this situation

I am going to try that one year and get to do New Year's twice, although I'm not sure if New Year's is fun in GUM.

cloudybw

I guess only the date of the first flight in one fare component matters.

MNL-GUM 12/31/2013 (+1 day)
GUM-HNL 1/1/2014 (-1 day)
HNL-*** 12/31/2013 (+1 day)

I don't think the above itinerary would qualify you for PQD in 2014 even though GUM-HNL is in 2014...

economyplusfan

This, to me, is one of the biggest hassles. Right now near the end of the year one checks PQMs and uses Award Accelerator or FLEX EQMs or MRs to hit an elite level, all the while tracking PQMs earned on credit cards to see that they are credited and whether or not they will hit in the right year, and whether or not you are over the card spend PQM limit ($5,000/yr in my case). Whew! And now there is an extra thing to track, PQD. This is even going to be more fun, as you are buying a ticket for travel in Dec and you are trying to figure out what the PQD will be. Add another column to your UA spreadsheet!

lcpteck

Hi,

Am I right to say that in order to qualify for any Premier status, at least 4 segments must be flown or operated by UA metal booked via UA website?

*A/Partner operated flights won't count towards the 4 segments? Whether it's booked via UA website or via partner website?

easte

And I insist... it may be prima facie profitable for the company, but to what extent wasting time with calculation will be convenient for the customers?

As far as I am concerned, assuming that now I am looking at details to be sure I can get 1K, I definitely stop doing it, and get what I get. No time to waste. I have a Presidential Plus, Platinum won't be difficult to get...

STS-134

Yes, I do. And it would fit the Smisek pattern of "what have you done for me lately?" over long term loyalty, in that recent PQDs count more than old PQDs due to the effect of inflation.

Boraxo

It bears repeating, but this really has nothing to do with mileage runners or people who buy low $$ tix. The bars have been set so low that most elites who fly exclusively on UA will not have any trouble requalifying, notwithstanding a few FT bargain hunters. Rather, UA is setting a marker for those who get status by flying *A and crediting miles to UA. We aren't going to give you perks anymore unless you send a certain minimum spend to UA metal or UA codeshare. This is consistent with the idiotic EQM changes as applied to certain *A carriers earlier this year.

Those who will be severely penalized are the elites (including many of my colleagues) who avoid UA international when they can in favor of SQ, LH, etc. Personally I don't get the LH worship, the old C seats are mediocre compared to lie-flat (though this problem will disappear within the next couple of years as LH upgrades its planes). But SQ is another matter. So the business traveler will be forced to choose between the better product or UA EQM. I have a feeling I know how this will end, and not the way Jeff wants.

As for me, my goal will be to spend just enough for a couple of UA international tix (SFO-FRA in C) to meet the $$ qualification, and after that the driver will be quality and convenience. If anything UA will lose biz when LH cabin upgrade is completed.

The irony here is that UA benefits from exchanging its worthless miles to other carriers rather than paying cash to true up accounts at the end of the year for all those free flights that we consume from *A partners. UA should be incentivizing people to credit *A flights to MP, but instead this will have the opposite effect. Few travelers are going to wake up tomorrow and say "oh, I need to fly UA mediocre C/F for 10 hours today in order to retain my 1K status rather than enjoying SQ premium service"

scottish_colin

Not necessarily in half. Each of your segments could have different fare classes. All of the data about what contribution of the fare corresponds to each segment in on the PNR, but there's no easy way for us to see/decode it at United.com.

For PQD to work they need to show 100% accurate information about PQDs for each segment when we're choosing specific flights, and again at the summary just before the final purchase. Definitely not too hard to do in the scheme of things, but then I've not been particularly impressed by United's recent IT efforts...

LAXOGG

Agreed .....or become the basis of a lawsuit.

A_Lee

Ok, I'm not a MP member, so maybe I'm way off on this idea, but seems to me there's an easy way to balance the desire to make the benefits more attractive to the best customers who spend a lot and still allow the current benefits to those who don't spend enough to make these newly imposed limits.

How about just keeping everything the way it is, but adding a '+' designator to each status level for those who spend above whatever the dollar amount threshold is? If you're a +, you get priority over someone who's not. That way the fact that there's an overabundance of elites doesn't matter to the big spenders, because they'll have first priority. If you spend double the threshold, you get a '++' designator, which trumps single +'s. If you get enough +'s, say 3 or 4, you get promoted to the next level. That way some of those who don't fly many miles, but spend a lot still can get status. And it doesn't require any big changes to the program to get the desired results by UA and by the FFP members.

Seems UA isn't giving enough credit to the guys who don't spend that much. The big spenders can be a finicky group. If their company is paying for their travel, and they get transferred or find a new job at a new location where a different airline has their hub, will they stick with UA? Maybe, but there's a good chance they won't. For the most financially endowed travelers, they probably don't even really care about a FFP. If they're flying always in F, and have people to take care of all their needs, what need do they really have for a FFP and the status it bestows? Maybe just collect the miles and have their assistant book some award travel for them, but I wouldn't think many of them care a whole lot. They just want the most convenient/comfortable flight and probably have no real loyalty to any airline, provided the airline is acceptable to them. Compare those groups to the guy who doesn't contribute that much financially to UA in actual ticket sales, but is a very loyal customer and helps to fill up the plane. An airline has to keep their planes full if they're going to make money. That means all booking classes, from the cheapest to the most expensive. They cannot concentrate on just one. In fact, the more they try to attract the big spenders, the more there will be of them (if they're successful), and the more of them there are, the more competition there is for some of the FFP perks (such as upgrades). So you really do need a balance of big spenders and those who are buying the cheapest tickets available. UA is trying to tell those who buy the cheapest tickets to go bugger off and find a different airline. That's being very short sighted. They need to make their FFP attractive to the guy who year after year stays loyal to UA and helps them fill their planes, even though they're not making a lot of profit off of him. They may even be making a loss on some tickets, but better that seat gets sold than empty and costs the airline even more.

So prioritize the passengers within each level, and the frequent but cheap passengers can still be given a reason to give their loyalty to you, and you don't piss off the big spenders. Do you think such an idea would work?

Sorry if someone's already proposed something like this. I've not read even a fraction of the posts in this thread. I'm just concerned that this sort of revenue based FFP will become more common and may spell the end to the alliances as we know them. I don't really care what happens to UA, but I do care what happens to *A.