mahasamatman

So I guess you didn't read the first section of the quote that's in bold? Seems 100% clear to me.

Hipplewm

He said 25 "Upgrades"

Making 1K is 10 upgrades (6 GPu and 4 RPU)
Every 50K PQM after that is 6 more upgrades

So, at 250,000pqm (Which is nothing for a GS) that is 28 upgrades

ecerts you get for volunteering your seat, complaining about entertainment or wifi not working etc, seat broken


He got busted selling an ecert, but LOST his 25 upgrades that were on his account, presumably that he wasn't trying to sell

Often1

+1 - I strongly suspect that "closed" means "closed." But, the writer has no complaint as UA reviewed the entire investigation and chose not to change its position. He is certainly free to disagree with that decision, but "won't even listen" is wrong.

This is only one situation. No idea what OP did to get his account closed. Without that, it's not even a datapoint.

nerdbirdsjc

It's fair to say now is a good time for everyone to "fly right" and play by the rules vis-a-vis all things UA. The carrier invested significantly in "Big Data" audit and compliance processes in recent times, and many gray area and/or blatantly improper activities that previously flew under the radar will be more easily flagged and addressed.

whimike

UA wonders why it is losing high-value customers? The guy made a mistake, give him a punishment commensurate with the crime, but make a business-savvy decision, it seems UA is cutting off their nose to spite their face, ultimately UA is the loser here.

UA would be abject idiots to think OP would continue flying UA after what they did.

Seems silly. If UA found an appropriate punishment they can keep their high-value flyers and get AA and DL's as well, this assuming it is high-value flyers that are getting the boot.

I think once the violator loses all of their miles they are unlikely to do the same thing again. I would think is most cases the violator had no idea what they were risking and once they realize they wouldn't do it again. That is why finding an appropriate punishment, for a HVF, seems to be the decision in the best interest of all involved. I.E. OP had 600k miles and 25 instruments. Why not confiscate 300k mies and 12 instruments? It is a very harsh punishment, but enough punishment to get OP to not do this again, but keep him as a profitable customer.

"Attempting" to sell a $150 e-cert hardly seems like the crime to confiscate all of OP's account and future business based on his GS status and 20-year history.

FlyfromDenver

As opposed to just doing the right thing because it's right ?

EMan

Want to tell us why they closed your account....And, your side of the story?

mduell

That would be more persuasive if UA would do the same.

FlyfromDenver

So never do anything unless there is something in it for you.

eng3

That also tends to happen when a company starts to pinch every penny and look for additional revenue where ever it can find it. Like how you find more parking and speeding tickets towards the end of the month or when a town needs the money. It's not too surprising to see UA take such a harsh approach. To probably feel they have just saved themselves thousands of dollars from the value of the miles, upgrades, etc's, etc.

GeP

It also means I could not have my significant other use this when joining me at the end of a business trip. Or when we have to part after a nice vacation. And I no longer would be able to use a cert for my dad when he travels alone.

Bad idea.

TomMM

Exactly, I have to scratch my head with some of these responses.

EMan

I think you're absolutely right......BUT, I think it's false economy on the part of UA.

For example, since UA started giving 1K & Global Services flyers a hard time for selling their upgrades, I made a decision to give away my System-wide or Regional upgrades. Before, I used to let them expire, if I couldn't use them.

Tell me how does UA make money when upgrades are sold versus given away? (As I understand The Rules, you can give upgrades to ANYONE!?)

Looking at the Bigger Picture, why does UA want to upset their BEST customers? Does UA even know the meaning of Goodwill or Good PR!?

Baze

Once selling becomes ok with UA it pretty much assigns a monetary value to them and when that happens the tax man comes a calling. So, in a way, UA is helping us out, and themselves. By letting us give them away there is no monetary value directly assigned to them as in a GPU is valued at X and an RPU is valued at Y.

milypan

I think they have a much better solution, which is to make the certificates nearly impossible to utilize. Once the market price falls below 10 bucks, I'm pretty sure nobody is going to bother reselling them.