I don't get it.

Factually:

1) If there are between 0 and 2 other GS on a flight who else is crowding the boarding area? I'm not wading through 20 other GS to get on the airplane.

2) The dollar amount of my spend is shared to explain why the changes to MP earning does not impact me and to give context to my situation. Not to validate anything. Again, I explain that my spend does not convey self importance.

3) The thread is asking users if we like or dislike the changes to MP earning policies. The radio button even asks those that indicate they are staying with UA to comment. I believe I fairly and accurately comment on my perspective.

Which airlines are now offering asylum for us elite status refugees kicked out by UA?
 

Which airlines are now offering asylum for us elite status refugees kicked out by UA? (for 2020)

The main UA refugee thread--> https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unit...ou-switch.html

The grass in not always greener on the other side. The grass in most(all?) ffp's is withered & brown

You aren't being kicked out. Either you didn't requalify, or you are leaving voluntarily.

Plus, they’re likely all looking at United to see what happens with these changes. If they like what they see, they’ll follow suit. You’d have a temporary reprieve at best. What you see as a refugee, they may consider to be United’s trash: something they don’t want.

thats what I’m wondering, too.

ive been a UA elite since moving to Chicago almost 15 years ago. And that was after moving from an AC elite because I left YYZ/YVR. I thought about moving to DL after the UA announcement - lliving in CVG, it could make sense, but based on my typical destinations and preferences, I’ve got many concerns (besides, I’ve connected in ATL probably 3 or 4 times in my life, which is 3 or 4 times too many to be ideal). One of my typical destinations, for example, is YYZ, and the thought of having to use T3 there makes that long walk from the end of the barn on arrival on some of the UAX flights seem delightful.

but my biggest worry is that if I chase status on DL, they are just going to do the same thing in 1-2 years. Which leaves me back to square 1. So My thinking now is to just book based on a combo of convenience/price as a free agent. Wife and I may both drop the select cards - and either just pay for bags (two kids - so carry on just isn’t going to happen), or transfer one of them to an Explorer, for free bags on UA, and one of us could apply for a DL Amex for free bags when we use them. Thoroughly enjoyed my time as an elite, but even though I fly a mix of low and what I’d call mid-somewhat high fares, I realize the game is about to be over. I do have a part of me - a very small part - that hopes DL/AA won’t follow and UA will have to revert back closer to what they had, but realistically speaking, it’s more likely AA/DL follow and up their requirements in a similar fashion.

I don't understand the difference between cease and retain but I'm gonna stop flying altogether. At least with cash. Just spend my miles down and keep earning via CC of course. Feels good to "get off the treadmill."

I chose remain with United which is what I am going to do for 2020 as I will have 1K status. May as well use it while I have it.

2021 I will likely choose the Star Alliance carrier with the best deal since I have *G for life.

So hopefully FT will do the poll again in 2021.

I do also fly Skyteam (and put the miles to DL) as some great business class deals with them.

Or. The grass is greener on the other side, it's just the cow .... is in different places.

You are correct. No one is being fired or kicked out by UA. They have just changed which group of customers they value most.

For those of us without lifetime *G, I really wonder why UA did not separate upgrades (which can be done by PQD) from *A status (which they could make 25k/50k miles OR (not AND) a certain number of PQD). Because what's going to happen is that I'm going to shift my flying, and my crediting, to a foreign *A carrier, and UA is going to have to give me *G benefits anyway in the rare case when I do fly on their metal in the future. Making UA*G achievable with a "reasonable" (in my opinion) amount of spend and giving me at least some extra benefits, like access to E+, or an extra free bag, would have at least kept me loyal to UA, even if I essentially had no chance of getting CPU'd even on Hawaii routes.

The only *G benefit that costs the operating carrier anything is lounge access, and that's paid for by the carrier which grants the status. So UA won't have to pay for anything.

Well in Kirby's spreadsheet, I'm sure there are entries for money "lost" due to *G pax not paying baggage fees, and those entries would still exist for me whenever I fly UA metal. Also, there are probably entries in there for people flying *A partner metal and crediting to MP, as well as negative entries for people who fly UA metal and credit to a *A partner program.

Point is, the lounge access is money going out, yes, but there's also money coming in via *A partner credits whenever someone flies partner metal. And if there's any airline in the *A that shouldn't be complaining about lounge costs, it is UA, as the only airline in the *A that denies its own elites access to its own lounges on certain routes.

Agree that's also an actual *G "cost" - I wonder which carrier pays for that benefit?

Almost certainly the operating carrier. Otherwise, one carriers could milk another for money by making fares cheap and charging a lot for baggage fees. Also, note that the *A rules simply say that you have to get one more bag free as a *G than you otherwise would, so the benefit is worth at least one free bag per ticket. Carriers of course are free to give more than specified, but that's not required. If they interpret the rules as strictly as UA, then that means on a domestic flight, a foreign *G member gets just one free bag, and said bag cannot be overweight.