|
Originally Posted by ObviousMan
(Post 31642972)
My typical paid travel on UA is mostly from ORD, 10-12 TPAC and 2-3 TATL coach trips annually, with a few domestic ones sprinkled in. For last 17 years I had at least a 1K status, with GS most years, and at least 150k annual miles, more than half of the years over 200k. 2MM for near 3 years.
Clearly UA wants to get rid of the FT like me. Even V/H TPAC flights have base fares that are under $1000/flight as a rule. TATL could be higher, but rarely over $1200. I can see myself getting to 18k PQP, but not a chance for 24k. Unless I get to crazy routing I will not make it above 40-45 PQFs. Switching to partners will not get me too far, since 7k miles RT TPAC in AC or AN will translate to the same 1200 PQP. I would need another 6-7 years of flying like currently to make it to 3MM. Without 1K and global upgrades that come with it there is no chance for me sustaining it. I will probably go free agent once I exhaust my upgrades... OM |
Originally Posted by hirohito888
(Post 31643116)
But if you're flying 12-15 longhaul flights in Y, and spending $18,000, you would still be Platinum, and wouldn't that be worth something? In Y, you at least get E+ and access to lounges and probably better IRROPS coverage and free SDC/award changes. That's still better than being free agent and book the lowest fare. That is unless you're fine with saving money and flying mainland Chinese carriers and DY.
When I first fell out of one K, I spent a year at platinum. I’m now gold. Since I don’t travel with 3 bags or 8 people, I can’t recall any difference between the latter two. |
Staying with UA. The 1k phone service is great and they always take good care of me when I have to make same-day changes or when flights are delayed. If my travel patterns don't change, I'll definitely make 1k next year, and I'm hoping this will thin the ranks a little and maybe I can start getting some of those upgrades all my Gold-status friends think they throw at us. :)
Makes perfect sense that they would change their loyalty program to be based on spend. They're trying to reward their "most loyal customers" so why not reward those who spend the most?
Originally Posted by porciuscato
(Post 31638542)
They fill seats that would otherwise be empty.
|
Originally Posted by Autonerd
(Post 31649846)
Staying with UA. The 1k phone service is great and they always take good care of me when I have to make same-day changes or when flights are delayed. If my travel patterns don't change, I'll definitely make 1k next year, and I'm hoping this will thin the ranks a little and maybe I can start getting some of those upgrades all my Gold-status friends think they throw at us. :)
Makes perfect sense that they would change their loyalty program to be based on spend. They're trying to reward their "most loyal customers" so why not reward those who spend the most?
Originally Posted by Autonerd
(Post 31649862)
I haven't seen many empty seats on my United flights these past few years...
|
I was already plat with Virgin Aus so just directing near all my flights to them and crediting my SQ stuff to VA instead of UA
End result is better use of the points, I'm happy to be gold on UA for the once or twice a year flight I take on them from here on |
Does anyone here believe the new Premier Qualification criteria might actually draw some from other airlines who fly high dollar yield, low mileage? I believe for every low PQD, high PQM UA loses with the new change there will be a high PQD, lower PQM flyer to take their place. If spending yield is the new criteria then I suppose this may possibly define future loyalty programs. Some will applaud it and some will jeer at it. Nonetheless it is what it is.
|
I'm in the "applaud" category.
My spend is like $125,000 a year. Anything that cuts down on the 1Ks crowding the gate area is a benefit for me. This has nothing to do with me being special or wealthy - it's my companies money I'm spending and I'm lucky that they put me in business class on long trips. The reality however is that anything that appears to reduce the amount of high tier members or trends to reward spend is good for me in my personal situation. |
Originally Posted by CDSEA
(Post 31650902)
I'm in the "applaud" category.
My spend is like $125,000 a year. :p |
Originally Posted by RobotDoctor
(Post 31650812)
Does anyone here believe the new Premier Qualification criteria might actually draw some from other airlines who fly high dollar yield, low mileage? I believe for every low PQD, high PQM UA loses with the new change there will be a high PQD, lower PQM flyer to take their place. If spending yield is the new criteria then I suppose this may possibly define future loyalty programs. Some will applaud it and some will jeer at it. Nonetheless it is what it is.
|
Originally Posted by ObviousMan
(Post 31642972)
My typical paid travel on UA is mostly from ORD, 10-12 TPAC and 2-3 TATL coach trips annually, with a few domestic ones sprinkled in. For last 17 years I had at least a 1K status, with GS most years, and at least 150k annual miles, more than half of the years over 200k. 2MM for near 3 years.
Clearly UA wants to get rid of the FT like me. Even V/H TPAC flights have base fares that are under $1000/flight as a rule. TATL could be higher, but rarely over $1200. I can see myself getting to 18k PQP, but not a chance for 24k. Unless I get to crazy routing I will not make it above 40-45 PQFs. Switching to partners will not get me too far, since 7k miles RT TPAC in AC or AN will translate to the same 1200 PQP. I would need another 6-7 years of flying like currently to make it to 3MM. Without 1K and global upgrades that come with it there is no chance for me sustaining it. I will probably go free agent once I exhaust my upgrades... OM Then your flight patterns have changed drastically.... If you qualified GS for "Most" years that means at least 40K, if not 50K At 50K if you spend half of what you did before and fly 4 flights on UA, you make 1K If you annual spend is going to drop below 24K and you are taking several TPAC or TATL, then fly LH/ANA and you get PQP equal to rdm calculation, this should put you over 24K easily |
Originally Posted by RobotDoctor
(Post 31650812)
Does anyone here believe the new Premier Qualification criteria might actually draw some from other airlines who fly high dollar yield, low mileage? I believe for every low PQD, high PQM UA loses with the new change there will be a high PQD, lower PQM flyer to take their place. If spending yield is the new criteria then I suppose this may possibly define future loyalty programs. Some will applaud it and some will jeer at it. Nonetheless it is what it is.
|
Originally Posted by CDSEA
(Post 31650902)
I'm in the "applaud" category.
My spend is like $125,000 a year. Anything that cuts down on the 1Ks crowding the gate area is a benefit for me. This has nothing to do with me being special or wealthy - it's my companies money I'm spending and I'm lucky that they put me in business class on long trips. The reality however is that anything that appears to reduce the amount of high tier members or trends to reward spend is good for me in my personal situation. In my observation its not 1Ks crowding the gate area, the crowding stems from the space required for the egos of those who like to let others know they spend more than others. Though, in reality its probably just a square footage issue. They don't make gates like they used to. |
Originally Posted by CDSEA
(Post 31650902)
I'm in the "applaud" category.
My spend is like $125,000 a year. Anything that cuts down on the 1Ks crowding the gate area is a benefit for me. This has nothing to do with me being special or wealthy - it's my companies money I'm spending and I'm lucky that they put me in business class on long trips. The reality however is that anything that appears to reduce the amount of high tier members or trends to reward spend is good for me in my personal situation. |
Originally Posted by RobotDoctor
(Post 31650812)
Does anyone here believe the new Premier Qualification criteria might actually draw some from other airlines who fly high dollar yield, low mileage? I believe for every low PQD, high PQM UA loses with the new change there will be a high PQD, lower PQM flyer to take their place. If spending yield is the new criteria then I suppose this may possibly define future loyalty programs. Some will applaud it and some will jeer at it. Nonetheless it is what it is.
This is of course excluding the high dollar low mile customers who already choose UA for the network and schedule. |
Originally Posted by mduell
(Post 31652792)
I can't see the high dollar low mile customers who have not been choosing UA switching for the FFP given the product.
This is of course excluding the high dollar low mile customers who already choose UA for the network and schedule. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:46 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.