Wow - selling the upgrades at the gate so explicitly.
#376
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.997MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,858
Not necessarily. The earning algorithm could be as generous or as restrictive as UA desires. In a most beneficial model to the airline, Premiers might only one upgrade dollar for every $100 spent on airfare. A 1K member who spent exactly $12,000 in a year would only earn $120 in upgrade credits each year. That would barely pay for a one-time upgrade from DEN to the West Coast. On the flip side, if the upgrade dollar earning accrual was one dollar for every $5 spent, the same 1K member would have $2,400 in upgrade credits to apply - a much more generous model for the customer. Both of these examples are extreme and not based in reality, but I use them to illustrate how there could be a sweet spot for UA that allows for cash upgrades to still be sold at the desired volume & yield... along with accompanying opportunities for Premier members to guarantee occasional upgrades by applying their banked upgrade dollar credits at their discretion.
Under this model, domestic CPUs would completely disappear. Everyone pays for an upgrade - either with cash or with the stored value of their banked upgrade dollars. The airline can be as generous or as stingy as they want in how they determine who earns upgrade dollars and at what accrual rate. It has the benefit of potentially being more revenue-positive (transactionally) for UA if they're tight with it - and it offers Premiers the system transparency needed to allow them to self-manage when & how they upgrade domestically.
Under this model, domestic CPUs would completely disappear. Everyone pays for an upgrade - either with cash or with the stored value of their banked upgrade dollars. The airline can be as generous or as stingy as they want in how they determine who earns upgrade dollars and at what accrual rate. It has the benefit of potentially being more revenue-positive (transactionally) for UA if they're tight with it - and it offers Premiers the system transparency needed to allow them to self-manage when & how they upgrade domestically.
This "system" is just a revised version of e500s, of award miles, of upgrade certs, ... these are the approaches airlines are leaving in the past, see no hope of them creating new versions. At least not until the economy turns and airlines have a need to fill empty seats. For now the airlines are interested in more hard cash revenue and see no particular need to enhance their benefit programs. But one day they may.
#377
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,891
This generates no new revenue and displace / reduce the present cash upgrade systems. {Although you might try to say it will generate revenue by increasing "loyalty" -- but that is old style thinking and not the direction the airlines are going)
This "system" is just a revised version of e500s, of award miles, of upgrade certs, ... these are the approaches airlines are leaving in the past, see no hope of them creating new versions. At least not until the economy turns and airlines have a need to fill empty seats. For now the airlines are interested in more hard cash revenue and see no particular need to enhance their benefit programs. But one day they may.
This "system" is just a revised version of e500s, of award miles, of upgrade certs, ... these are the approaches airlines are leaving in the past, see no hope of them creating new versions. At least not until the economy turns and airlines have a need to fill empty seats. For now the airlines are interested in more hard cash revenue and see no particular need to enhance their benefit programs. But one day they may.
The days of excess capacity giving way to lower fares are over - and while there are still some ‘free’ upgrades happening now, those have been declining, and will continue to. I don’t blame the airlines, and I don’t get upset because I don’t clear much anymore - this has always been a benefit which I appreciate when it happens, but don’t get upset about whe. I don’t. The fact is that I need United to survive so I can fly where I need to go, and I understand that giving away all the premium seats away for the price of economy, much less deep discount economy, is not a sustainable way to do it.
The fact is hese seats are going more more and more to the people who are willing to pay for it, which really is how it should be. The distorted beenfits of the FF programs have fogged a lot of people’s vision on this, and gives them the impression of expecting upgrades. IMO, it would be better for carriers to go to a model where folks are expected to pay a premium fare, or a buy up at minimum - if they want to sit in a premium seat, unlesss in case of operational necessity.
#379
Join Date: Nov 2012
Programs: BA Bronze, United 1K, HH Gold, SPG Platinum, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 3,477
Hmmm....so it seems my GPUs aren't worth very much anymore? I'm #1 on the UG list for IAH-MUC, right now, but the last few biz seats just vanished, so here I am, at least in an exit row aisle.....
And even some that applied a GPU will be tempted by the TOD to insure that other passengers don't buy the upgrade under them.
I learned my lesson and all my last flights to MUC were on week days. Tuesdays-Wednesdays are usually good. Weekends not so good.
#380
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SEA
Programs: 1K 2MM
Posts: 605
Reading back through the thread, I can't tell if an instrument (GPU, RPU) has any weight (value) in the decision process of who gets upgrades, or does it always go to someone who is willing to charge it to their CC right then and there?
And it seems to me that in the past year any upgrades via instruments are getting to be a rare bird.
Dang it.
And it seems to me that in the past year any upgrades via instruments are getting to be a rare bird.
Dang it.
#381
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,415
That said, there are two things to keep in mind. 1 - it's not uncommon for there to be more instruments applied on a flight than there are seats in the front cabin (hub/hub or premium transcontinental routes), and 2 - for domestic / Canada flights, the price they're charging for the upgrade is usually the same as the difference between economy and first would have been when purchased originally.
"Selling upgrades" is often blamed for low instrument clearance, but the truth is that the biggest factor is that the airlines have figured out how to price first class attractively.
#382
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 710
Fast forward to 2018. The airlines have figured out how to segment the market such that they can fill every seat at the maximum revenue. Load factors are well over 90% and good luck trying to find less than 100% on midday flights. Loyalty programs are meaningless as they aren't interested in what you spent yesterday. The only thing that counts is revenue today. If they can generate $1 of hard cash at the gate, they will. Fortress hubs and choice limited to 3 or 4 airlines at best make it hard to switch carriers, and for every passenger that switches, they are likely to get one moving in from another airline.
It's another War Games situation - the only way to win is not to play the game.
#383
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: EWR
Programs: UA 1.65M , Platinum, 1K Emeritus, UC Lifetime , HHonors Gold, Presidential Plus card holder
Posts: 697
In the 1980s and into the 1990s with load factors well under where they are today the marginal cost to the airline of giving a good customer an upgrade was close to $0.
Today the load factors alone make upgrades much more costly to the airline and marketing also has made first much more profitable.
The perks (E+, bags, lounge access etc.) we do get today are easily more valuable in a high load-factor world than those upgrades ever were. It just doesn't seem like it.
I am not sure I follow how one can come to believe that airlines view loyalty as meaningless when they all have Million-miler programs that provide meaningful benefits for life.
The way I see it they are grateful for past patronage and hope that the past is an indicator to future patronage. It is just that what they see as an enticing emolument in this high density business is not what some of us have thought we deserved.
Today the load factors alone make upgrades much more costly to the airline and marketing also has made first much more profitable.
The perks (E+, bags, lounge access etc.) we do get today are easily more valuable in a high load-factor world than those upgrades ever were. It just doesn't seem like it.
I am not sure I follow how one can come to believe that airlines view loyalty as meaningless when they all have Million-miler programs that provide meaningful benefits for life.
The way I see it they are grateful for past patronage and hope that the past is an indicator to future patronage. It is just that what they see as an enticing emolument in this high density business is not what some of us have thought we deserved.
#384
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 710
I am not sure I follow how one can come to believe that airlines view loyalty as meaningless when they all have Million-miler programs that provide meaningful benefits for life.
The way I see it they are grateful for past patronage and hope that the past is an indicator to future patronage. It is just that what they see as an enticing emolument in this high density business is not what some of us have thought we deserved.
The way I see it they are grateful for past patronage and hope that the past is an indicator to future patronage. It is just that what they see as an enticing emolument in this high density business is not what some of us have thought we deserved.
Starting from the airline perspective: Mileage programs exist *today* for one reason only: to generate revenue - not loyalty. Wall Street are focused on ticket revenue, ancillary revenue and cost. Mileage program details do not affect the stock price. The primary source of mileage revenue are credit cards. Airlines sell miles to credit card companies, credit card companies offer miles as an inducement to use their card, for which they get paid by the merchant, and also the not so insignificant annual fee. The only way to maintain that revenue is to create a perception that those miles have value. So they come up with ways to create the illusion of value.
Right now, the primary way that illusion is created is by boarding order. It costs the airline nothing to structure the boarding order any way they like, but it means a lot to some travelers. As I mentioned previously, the airlines have gotten very good at filling empty seats with revenue passengers, so the days of getting a mileage upgrade are rapidly disappearing. They can't go away completely (see need to maintaining that perception of value above), but just like casinos and lotteries tweak the odds of a payout (more smaller payouts or a few bigger ones?), they airlines will continue to devalue awards that have a real cost impact. Million mile status may make some people feel good, but if you can't really use upgrades (because there are no empty seats or upgrades were sold at the gate) and the only actual benefit is boarding first, what's the point?
My view is that I won't surrender my vote on how well an airline is doing by letting their mileage program sway me to by tickets from them automatically. I'll buy the ticket that best meets my need for this flight, be it schedule, fare, equipment, seat space, or whatever. Next week I'll make the airline compete all over again.
#385
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Passengers were simply spoiled by a significant error made by the US carriers during the financial crisis. When business travel dropped, the economy crashed, and leisure travel then dropped as well, the legacies dropped prices and handed out free UG's rather than cutting capacity.
Anybody can fill a plane. It is just a question of cutting prices. But, if one does that enough, one goes under.
So, now the lesson is to keep track of PRASM and cut capacity when profitable demand drops.
That disappoints people who had become used to routine freebie upgrades and redemption tickets pretty much anytime they wanted them. That was not the scheme when AA first started its program. It used excess inventory for redemptions and people understood that and were quite happy with the occasional ticket.
Anybody can fill a plane. It is just a question of cutting prices. But, if one does that enough, one goes under.
So, now the lesson is to keep track of PRASM and cut capacity when profitable demand drops.
That disappoints people who had become used to routine freebie upgrades and redemption tickets pretty much anytime they wanted them. That was not the scheme when AA first started its program. It used excess inventory for redemptions and people understood that and were quite happy with the occasional ticket.
#386
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,415
Passengers were simply spoiled by a significant error made by the US carriers during the financial crisis. When business travel dropped, the economy crashed, and leisure travel then dropped as well, the legacies dropped prices and handed out free UG's rather than cutting capacity.
Now, with differential pricing, they can drop the F prices but still keep them higher than Y, and it's incremental revenue.
That disappoints people who had become used to routine freebie upgrades and redemption tickets pretty much anytime they wanted them. That was not the scheme when AA first started its program. It used excess inventory for redemptions and people understood that and were quite happy with the occasional ticket.
Mix the two effects -- better pricing and capacity reductions / load factor increases from demand outpacing supply (and consolidation) -- and you get the current situation.
#387
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: EWR
Programs: UA 1.65M , Platinum, 1K Emeritus, UC Lifetime , HHonors Gold, Presidential Plus card holder
Posts: 697
With respect, I would argue your conclusion is flawed. I've worked in the industry for over 30 years, so I have a somewhat informed perspective on how airline marketing works. You are of course welcome to disagree.
Starting from the airline perspective: Mileage programs exist *today* for one reason only: to generate revenue - not loyalty. Wall Street are focused on ticket revenue, ancillary revenue and cost. Mileage program details do not affect the stock price. The primary source of mileage revenue are credit cards. Airlines sell miles to credit card companies, credit card companies offer miles as an inducement to use their card, for which they get paid by the merchant, and also the not so insignificant annual fee. The only way to maintain that revenue is to create a perception that those miles have value. So they come up with ways to create the illusion of value.
Right now, the primary way that illusion is created is by boarding order. It costs the airline nothing to structure the boarding order any way they like, but it means a lot to some travelers. As I mentioned previously, the airlines have gotten very good at filling empty seats with revenue passengers, so the days of getting a mileage upgrade are rapidly disappearing. They can't go away completely (see need to maintaining that perception of value above), but just like casinos and lotteries tweak the odds of a payout (more smaller payouts or a few bigger ones?), they airlines will continue to devalue awards that have a real cost impact. Million mile status may make some people feel good, but if you can't really use upgrades (because there are no empty seats or upgrades were sold at the gate) and the only actual benefit is boarding first, what's the point?
My view is that I won't surrender my vote on how well an airline is doing by letting their mileage program sway me to by tickets from them automatically. I'll buy the ticket that best meets my need for this flight, be it schedule, fare, equipment, seat space, or whatever. Next week I'll make the airline compete all over again.
Starting from the airline perspective: Mileage programs exist *today* for one reason only: to generate revenue - not loyalty. Wall Street are focused on ticket revenue, ancillary revenue and cost. Mileage program details do not affect the stock price. The primary source of mileage revenue are credit cards. Airlines sell miles to credit card companies, credit card companies offer miles as an inducement to use their card, for which they get paid by the merchant, and also the not so insignificant annual fee. The only way to maintain that revenue is to create a perception that those miles have value. So they come up with ways to create the illusion of value.
Right now, the primary way that illusion is created is by boarding order. It costs the airline nothing to structure the boarding order any way they like, but it means a lot to some travelers. As I mentioned previously, the airlines have gotten very good at filling empty seats with revenue passengers, so the days of getting a mileage upgrade are rapidly disappearing. They can't go away completely (see need to maintaining that perception of value above), but just like casinos and lotteries tweak the odds of a payout (more smaller payouts or a few bigger ones?), they airlines will continue to devalue awards that have a real cost impact. Million mile status may make some people feel good, but if you can't really use upgrades (because there are no empty seats or upgrades were sold at the gate) and the only actual benefit is boarding first, what's the point?
My view is that I won't surrender my vote on how well an airline is doing by letting their mileage program sway me to by tickets from them automatically. I'll buy the ticket that best meets my need for this flight, be it schedule, fare, equipment, seat space, or whatever. Next week I'll make the airline compete all over again.
My primary argument is that I perceive the overall dollar cost to United of the benefits I get as a mid-tier elite is higher than it was 15 years ago. Unbundling the airfare changed everything.
I most definitely agree with your last point: you should always fly on the ticket that best meets your needs. Flying out of EWR makes that best ticket likely to be issued by United. That I have lifetime perks with them helps.