LaserSailor

Everyone in the office travels based on shortest time to customer. Ff programs do not impact our travel spend.

RNE

Not wild at all. "Wild" is what happens when TSMRSRNE and her sisters all get into a hot tub with a bottle of Patrón. But I digress. United is visionary in its reassessment of the airline alliance paradigm. It wants its flyers to eschew the Alliance partners while it welcomes aboard LH, AC, etc. flyers. This Potemkin Village won't fool the Tsaritsa for long. LH, AC, etc. will follow suit, de-incentivizing their flyers from flying on partner airlines. I further scry that this trend will weaken Star Alliance. Indeed, this paradigm shift will manifest itself throughout the other Alliances.

RNE, no, the sky is not falling; but it's not going to be the same anymore either.

CMK10

"Visionary" is not a word that can ever be used to describe a decision made by the new United.

LaserSailor

Likewise you should always fully eschew your airline food.

mkr

UA has finally succeeded in driving away this Lifetime 1K with this proposed 2015 RDM policy. On top of the other MP devalations, this one is the final straw for me. I guess I am joining many other Premiers who are now seeking OAL for travel.

I calculated my planned spend and probable itineraries for the future and I will be losing over 50% RDM under the new policy.

So, I am already booking most of my trips away from UA and will fly UA only when needed. Loyalty no longer means anything to UA. I flew CO from the '80s then UA after the merger. About 30 years.

I hope AA does not follow UA and DL with its RDM policy. If not, AA will have me as a loyal customer.

UA, you are driving away many of your loyal customers. How do you plan to replace us with customers to fly in your degraded product? I do not think you will. Those potential customers are aware that UA has driven away many loyal customers. Why would they want to fly UA?

Superguy

I agree that changes to programs can weaken the alliance. It may be less of an issue for UA/NH and UA/AC/LH in their JVs but penalizing flyers for choosing other allied carriers actually works against one of their biggest selling points: to be able to get you virtually anywhere in the world seamlessly. We all know that any one carrier can't get you every where you need to go, but at least being able get perks on allied carriers made it easier and more rewarding.

OW seems to be sticking together now, but we've seen these cracks in ST as well. DL doesn't give MQMs on all of its partners - KE coming to mind as the biggest example.

The less rewarding it becomes to use a group of carriers, the more incentive there is to kayak.

It seems to work counter to what's in their best interests, but nevertheless, airlines these days only look at the their interests for the next 3 months, not the next 3 years.

The interesting thing is this seems to be led by the US carriers. I'm not sure what implications it'll have for the rest of the alliance.

emcampbe

I disagree with this point.

AC was devaluing its program before UA was. Their tango fares were introduced probably close to 15 years ago with fewer perks - believe initially with the same earning as other fares, though with other things (i.e. seat selection for a fee). At one point, you could save a few bucks by agreeing not to check bags. But devolved into at one point 25% mileage earning (I think that was no status miles), now up a bit to 50% and with PQM. And check out the AC board - with all the cuts, lots of folks there have or seriously considering moving their earning to UA - and still are. They were also one of the first, IIRC, to require a certain number of flights or miles flown on their own metal to earn the status.

LH has also done things like giving out fewer miles on lower fare buckets (and don't forget - that is both RDM and PQM). Also, believe its pretty hard to earn your status there. Asian carriers for years have had fares that earn only a percentage of miles, none on partners, etc.

Yes, the US legacy programs are not what they once were - but I would say they are doing things differently rather than leading the way.While RDM will now be directly related to $ spent, the ACs and LHs have been doing that to a large extent - just based on fare code. That also made it harder to earn status - something that US carriers (at least DL and UA) are just doing differently, with the PQD thresholds.

Superguy

I disagree that there's been a devaluation of the foreign programs when they've always been stingier than their American counterparts. Percentages and reduced earning, as well as higher qualification thresholds aren't anything new within the foreign programs. Now, there are some gems out there that are pretty easy, like A3, and some other programs that give a 2 year requalification period after initial qualification.

AC's been historically more stingy than UA or US, so I don't see anything new there. Plus, with EVERYONE devaluing their points, it's just a general downward trend.

I still think the US based carriers are leading the way on devaluations now. While the foreign ones may have been there in some form for awhile, we're now seeing more "innovative" ways to screw consumers coming from US carriers. Question is how many of the foreign programs will follow.

Boraxo

+1

For everyone bailing to AA, mark my words: AA will definitely copy UA/DL by end of 2016. Now of course for many it makes good sense to switch, why forego higher RDM for UA status that you won't need. But don't kid yourself - this is the new reality. It has been this way overseas for a long time, the partners just reduce the RDMs based on fare class. And of course B6, WN and VX all use strict $/point earnings and awards.

They are not dismissed, (for now) they still get the same EQM and elite perks - but the free trips in international C based on low fare spend will be gone. As for full shop mode, frankly I don't see why elites (excluding GS) would not already have defected based on CPUs which are plentify at AA/DL but rare on UA. However Skymiles is even worse for free travel (good luck finding saver awards) and AA has dried up substantially over the last few years. AA's partner BA is also releasing less TATL inventory despite the heinous fuel surcharges. At least on UA when I fly free I really fly free. ^

Loads are important, and you may help to fill the planes, but you are not as "strategically vital" as the HVF. UA is betting most FF will stay due to routes/hubs/corp contracts/fares/elite perks - that the options are no better elsewhere. I think UA management is being proven wrong every quarter as people continue to flee but only time will tell if this stabilizes. More likely that you will see Jeffy & team gone by year end.

No question about that

This is true with all carriers. Most non-US carriers are even worse, and many have hard expiration dates which don't work for people who save miles for years only to have the rug pulled out when they want the free trip to Europe. Of course, now they won't even have that due to the double whammy.

I don't think most people are that stupid. They now know that they will pay luggage fees etc. and can do the math. On many you get the option to buy better seats when you are booking so you see the total cost right up front and can compare.

For example I was recently quoted a fare $1600 by UA for a family trip and $1450 by AS, but I add $150 to AS for checked bags so the cost is the same. I get free E+, lounge access on UA so that is the decider.

Certainly the mileage would be a factor. In this case we would get 2500 RDM per person on AS. Under the new UA program, I would get 4400 RDM but my non-status family would only get 2000 RDM pp. So not a big deal here. For a typical SFO-DEN @$150 my family would get 750mi (new) v. 967 (old) - again not a critical factor to me when shopping for the low fare. The free E+ and bags means a lot more than 400mi (RT) for my dependents.

Sounds like it worked out for the best for both you and UA.

tom911

Well, that gives me about 2.5 more years to keep bringing in 100% bonus miles and 8 systemwides. I'll hang in there as long as I can.

UA-NYC

Me three - as a Plat I'm now 8/9 with sticker upgrades on AA...forgot what it was like to feel confident that they wouldn't be sold out from underneath me

exerda

A lot of people don't do the math, though. They see the cheapest ticket and book it, knowing they'll have ancillary costs, but making the purchase decision based on the big numbers for the quoted airfare (in Kayak, Expedia, etc.). I hear it all the time: "Allegiant had such a great fare! I paid only $150 to fly to Orlando!" (They neglect to mention they then paid $35 to get a seat assignment, $5 to get a BP, $35 for their checked bag, and another $35 for their "legal" rollaboard as carry-on.)

Beyond that, though, UA's problem is that they think they can attract & retain HVFs who will pay their higher prices for perks which they've largely diluted over the past couple of years. The really big spenders aren't deciding based on whether or not they get miles (or how many miles they get), but the mid-tier spenders might, and they're driven off by this decision.

Superguy

All UA really has to offer the HVF is schedule and network. Hard/soft product suck, and if they don't care about miles, and reliability is crap, it's really only schedule and network. Network's questionable though with the RJ infestation.

If you kill everything off so all that's really left is schedule, price, and a questionable network, it really only attracts a handful of HVFs and the Kettles. It effectively makes UA an Allegiant/Spirit without some of the fees.

RNE

OK. OK. OK. Scratch that. Make it "hallucinatory."

easte

Why airlines keep offering frequent flyer programs if they cannot afford them, and add any kind of ridiculous complication? One almost needs an accountant to find out the accrued miles and how to get premier status.
It is getting ridiculous...