username

When the MileagePlus computer crashes on the address check, we know you caused it

bocastephen

...yet. I wouldn't put it past them to roll out a T+C change that requires a foreign address to be substantiated by an employment document, government residency card, drivers license or tax return depending on the number of new foreign addresses that hit the system between now and 12/31.

For now I'm comfortable with my utility bills and bank statement as sufficient proof - hopefully that doesn't change and hopefully some program security auditor doesn't start deciding that ex-US address changes occurring after Tuesday's announcement are for spend avoidance and arbitrarily close accounts.

5khours

Don't think they can ding you just for avoiding the spend allowance. You have to do something that's actually fraudulent. Also as noted, DL allows you to provide proof with one of any of about a dozen different types of documents. So it's not too onerous. As long as you have a legitimate address it should not be a problem.

bocastephen

That's the T+C today - but we're talking about the 'new' United which could change the rules overnight if it felt the 'spirit' of the new revenue requirements was being avoided by too many MP members suddenly going 'expat'.

At least DL is waiving the requirements for *all* SM Medallions who meet spending requirements on their credit card, and appears poised (although I don't trust them) to enhance the Medallion experience for the remaining members once they "rid the membership rolls of undesirable riff-raff".

Did UA offer an adjunct announcement that introduced new benefits for members in 2015 who meet the spend requirements? No. Probably because more service cutbacks are planned.

5khours

Again, I think the reason for the foreign exemption is legal. UA and DL don't have any choice so I don't think they can change them.

As a 1k I look at the recent changes as a major enhancement for me since there will be significantly less competition for UGs and award tickets. (Of course, it's certainly possible that a strike against 1K/GS is about to be delivered from the Death Star but I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

dsquared37

And none of those would apply for someone retired and living in a country where driving is not necessary and where government residency cards don't exist.

Proof of address I can (potentially) understand, the rest not so much.

LaserSailor

I just have to say anyone legally residing in the US thinking they will circumvent the spend requirements in 2014 with an address 'trick' is deluding themselves.

kilo

Yes the option to change site has been present for a long time (on CO.com) and my experience of UA/ CO not remembering your chosen site (despite remembering your account) also goes back years. One of a few glitchy things inherited from the CO website.

bocastephen

Why? Many of us have legitimate addresses in other countries - it's certainly not a 'trick' to move our accounts to that address as it's perfectly in line with the program T+C. Is United going to analyze the motivation of every member who moves their account? United cannot prove our motivation unless they discover the actual address for the account is not legitimate.

5khours

I don't think that's correct. I think you may run into trouble if you don't have a legitimate foreign residence, but I don't think it will be a problem if you have a foreign residence and also are legally residing in the U.S.

+1

gnaget

Here's why I think they exclude foreigners:

1) It's nearly impossible to spend < $10,000 for foreigners to get 1K unless they fly to the US and do lots of cheap flights. The < 10 cpm fares are typically domestic coast to coast for ~$300 so you earn 5,000 miles for $300. The cheapest K fare for LAX-NRT is $1250 not including taxes (does include YQ). So that's more than 10 cpm: 11,000 miles for $1250.

2) It's unreasonable to expect foreigners to consistently buy UA 016 tickets for non-UA Star Alliance.

I also think 2) is unreasonable for "global" people like myself. Fortunately, I have legitimate non-US addresses and my mileage plus address is currently in Japan.

Counting PQD for RTW tickets is going to be a huge mess. And it's outrageous considering that if you call UA and say that you want to buy a RTW starting in Japan with a first leg to Frankfurt they will say, sorry, we can't sell that to you. Meanwhile there is a great tool on the *A website that allows easy planning and booking with knowledgeable people who answer the phone instantly. They are LH staff and the tickets are LH stock.

username

I think by convention, the first over-the-water carrier tickets RTW tickets. I wonder say if you do NRT-ICN-FRA, what happens.... Assuming UA still has NRT-ICN, would UA ticket?

Still, the biggest puzzle right now is how UA will calculate the revenue for non-016 tickets that are partially operated by UA.

I have no problem providing phone number/address/documentation/door keys for residences in 3 countries. However, if one looks at my MileagePlus transactions, it is obvious I live in the US.

I guess what happens might depend on how many people take advantage of the exception... If it is bad enough, they will probably figure a way to crack down on it.

gnaget

Not true. You can book anything via the *A website tool, which is effectively LH with LH ticket stock.

I have booked 2 RTWs this year starting with UA (ironically).

But UA would be so incompetent in dealing with a RTW ticket that it's not worth my time.

For your second question, I asked on the *A forum and someone gave some feedback about what SQ does; they have fixed amounts for segments. They have two separate paths to status. One by miles and one by revenue. Of course, they are stingy about giving miles for cheap tickets, which would be the better option for United.

For the latter, UA could still award full miles for cheap tickets (and not alienate infrequent non-status pax who spend 3 years for their domestic round trip) and then cut PQM for cheap ticket classes.

leonidas

+1
I honestly see no problem, unless UA starts vigorously cracking down by asking for proof of current residence etc.

alex_b

UA does have overseas offerings (I have the UK MBNA Amex) but they suck, no sign-up bonus, no perks and earn 1 mile per �1 spend (i.e. 66% of the US rate).

I can confirm I could checkin online with my US passport before moving to the US with a UK address on my account, I was never asked to show my cc at checkin, nor did I have issues with non-matching addresses. TSAPre is connected with your trusted traveller number and nothing else.

So would that be the country where my UK MP credit card is issued or my US MP credit card is issued? Those of us who have multiple claims to residence have multiple credit cards. Anyway I don't store a credit card on file with UA and the one I use for booking with vary on a journey by journey basis.

I don't see why, GE isn't limited to US residents (US citizens qualify) and TSA simply rely on the airline providing your known traveller number to them at checkin.

This seems most likely, I stuck with UA when overseas because of their relatively good redemption policy and the *A network meant I could earn status fairly easily. For non-US residents the key benefit of MP rather than *G on another carrier is E+; CPU probably doesn't matter as it's not available on the int'l leg and the luggage and boarding benefits are *G benefits anyway.

I doubt it, they already have plenty in the T&Cs (e.g. can change anything at any time, cancel account without compensation) that would be unlawful within most EU countries under their consumer protection regulations. This is much more likely about retaining overseas travellers who don't actually consume much of their benefits from UA but still credit miles to them.