Why don't we simply trust what United says?
Dec 4, 2015, 12:13 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 75
Why don't we simply trust what United says?
The thread reporting rumors of changes to the Million Mile Flyer program was closed, shortly after the rumor was denied by UA Insider and a poster commented: "Why don't we simply trust what UA Insider says?"
While I have nothing against UA Insider, I found it laughable the notion that one should "simply trust" a statement made by a representative of an airline that successfully argued in court that they are not legally required to live up to any promise made in relation to Mileage Plus or the million mile program.
At the time, a representative of United had posted similar statements on the United web site. Promises that million mile flyers would continue to receive their benefits as they always had were later broken and United ultimately went to court to argue for their legal right to break any promise they made.
What United argued in court is best summarized by the dissenting opinion of Circuit Judge David Hamilton, who wrote:
While there may have been a time when one could "simply trust" what United said, clearly that is no longer the case. Today, long-term loyalty to any airline seems both foolish and naive.
United has made many negative changes in recent years, but the worst change of all by far is that one can no longer trust what they say.
While I have nothing against UA Insider, I found it laughable the notion that one should "simply trust" a statement made by a representative of an airline that successfully argued in court that they are not legally required to live up to any promise made in relation to Mileage Plus or the million mile program.
At the time, a representative of United had posted similar statements on the United web site. Promises that million mile flyers would continue to receive their benefits as they always had were later broken and United ultimately went to court to argue for their legal right to break any promise they made.
What United argued in court is best summarized by the dissenting opinion of Circuit Judge David Hamilton, who wrote:
United’s defense here is that the airline’s very best customers—its Million Mile Flyers—should have known better than to believe United’s promise of “lifetime” benefits. This defense amounts to a confession of consumer fraud. United could not—honestly and legally—promise “lifetime” benefits while reserving the right to cancel its promise at any time and for any reason. While federal law protects airlines from state consumer fraud laws, our court should not, as a matter of contract law, endorse this deception. I respectfully dissent.
United has made many negative changes in recent years, but the worst change of all by far is that one can no longer trust what they say.
Dec 4, 2015, 12:24 am
#2
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K MM, Marriott Life Plat, various others of little note
Posts: 2,763
+1. Their motto is "what have you done for me lately?" But they are just responding to market forces. If it doesn't cost them anything they will keep doing it. After all, lots of lifers are dead money whose heavy flying days are over, especially the ones who rely on that status..
Dec 4, 2015, 1:14 am
#3
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
There are no plans to change the Million Miler program.
-UA Insider
-UA Insider
Dec 4, 2015, 4:56 am
#4
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Dec 4, 2015, 5:31 am
#5
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 4,505
I thought that was part of the "UA Insider" portfolio. It wouldn't take "all day" monitoring. This rumor was on FT for three days and also hit some of the major blogs.
Dec 4, 2015, 6:28 am
#7
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: UA 1K 1.45MM, Marriott+SPG Plat, Clear, Nexus, Global Entry and MEX Viajero Confiable
Posts: 1,777
okay.. didn't notice thread was closed. I'm guessing removed in it's entirety .. unless I'm having a senior moment. I suppose UA Insider request.. but then there was no update in the Official UA Insider update to ensure recording of the official announcement that no change would occur to the MM program?
Dec 4, 2015, 6:31 am
#8
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 5,656
Blogs are for talking heads generally devoid of content. I would like FT to out the one who started this rumor so that we know the user and can consider future posts accordingly. Pm sent.
Dec 4, 2015, 6:37 am
#9
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 4,505
Rather derogatory and vindictive don't you think? In any event, I doubt that "outing" is something FT would do. Not only a privacy issue but would discourage a lot of people from posting, rumors or not.
Dec 4, 2015, 6:42 am
#10
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NYC, SLC, LAX
Programs: AA EXP, UA Plat
Posts: 3,951
Airlines often deny rumours and UA is no different. I'm sure the forum could come up with a multitude of examples.
US claimed PHL-TLV was one of their most profitable routes - until they shut it down and revealed that it actually lost money from day 1.
QR claimed they were not joining oneworld even as late as the day before the official announcement.
Can't think of any UA off the top of my head but I'm sure there are many.
Dec 4, 2015, 6:46 am
#12
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: DFW
Programs: UA 1K, HH Diamond, AA PLT, DL Silver
Posts: 427
Dec 4, 2015, 6:50 am
#13
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: United Arab Emirates & Arizona, USA
Programs: UA MM/1P, EK Au, QR, TK, Marriott Life Ti, Hilton Dia, IC Dia, Hyatt Glob, Accor Pt, Shangri-La
Posts: 4,521
Like all businesses.
Good point, OP. In particular, by closing the thread, FlyerTalk has acted as if it's simply a mouthpiece for the airline management. The rumor may or may not have had any credibility (though anyone paying attention would expect an eventual devaluation). The UA rep here has provided some good information, but is certainly not an argument-ender for every issue.
Good point, OP. In particular, by closing the thread, FlyerTalk has acted as if it's simply a mouthpiece for the airline management. The rumor may or may not have had any credibility (though anyone paying attention would expect an eventual devaluation). The UA rep here has provided some good information, but is certainly not an argument-ender for every issue.
Dec 4, 2015, 7:09 am
#14
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ORD
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Platinum/LT Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 5,594
There was a similarly detailed rumor posted once about UA tying passenger spend to status. A year later, PQD's were introduced.
I hope people aren't discouraged from posting (and clearly labeling) rumors just because this one was denied. For now.
I hope people aren't discouraged from posting (and clearly labeling) rumors just because this one was denied. For now.
Dec 4, 2015, 7:12 am
#15
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,986
It's also quite possible that this "rumour" is true.
Airlines often deny rumours and UA is no different. I'm sure the forum could come up with a multitude of examples.
US claimed PHL-TLV was one of their most profitable routes - until they shut it down and revealed that it actually lost money from day 1.
QR claimed they were not joining oneworld even as late as the day before the official announcement.
Can't think of any UA off the top of my head but I'm sure there are many.
Airlines often deny rumours and UA is no different. I'm sure the forum could come up with a multitude of examples.
US claimed PHL-TLV was one of their most profitable routes - until they shut it down and revealed that it actually lost money from day 1.
QR claimed they were not joining oneworld even as late as the day before the official announcement.
Can't think of any UA off the top of my head but I'm sure there are many.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us...ents.html?_r=0
Looks like Iger, Nanny Bloomberg, and Murdoch may get their hats handed to them on this one though:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/24/news...kers-h1b-eeoc/
