usedtobeimportant

So I'm a long term UA customer, former GS (but only a few times only) and MM.

With all the recent changes, it's now clear that for UA its all about money not loyalty and I find I'm a bit resentful towards UA. I guess I'm also resentful because of all the changes.

As such I find myself:

i) All things being equal I book the non-UA flight.
ii) Where as I used to defend UA with colleagues I just don't now. I also flat out won't recommend them due to the constantly moving status targets.

For i) I've booked non-UA flights that were hundreds of dollars more expensive and comparable.
For ii) I actively tell new flyers NOT to build their flying "career" around UA as they change their program too often.

Anyone else feeling and doing the same?

gene2632

30+ years in the Elite/Premier catagories, just a bit short of MM status but now retired and not flying on OPM anymore. The 2021 Premier qualification requirements have me looking at other flying options now. We have some vacation travel already booked with UA but once we are past those trips, once we use up the ETC from a canceled trip--medical issue so no change fee--and once we use up the 200K miles that are still in the bank we won't be looking at UA as our first option anymore. Resent them? no, the people who work at the airports and in the airplanes by and large have been good to us and helpful. The "people" who work at HQ in Chicago are worthless to me.

IAH-OIL-TRASH

Even if the flight(s) is/are more convenient and status isn't important to the flyer?

OK, whatever...

and...

"I've booked non-UA flights that were hundreds of dollars more expensive and comparable."

An employee of mine who did this wouldn't be an employee of mine if I discovered this blatant disregard for expenses..

So you're suggesting punishing United and an employer is a good idea because one doesn't think UA's status requirements benefit his/her personal needs?

HNLbasedFlyer

I don't resent businesses.

When a business makes a business decision I do not agree with (or creates barriers that aren't worth it to me) - I simply move on and don't dwell on it.

jsloan

That isn't "all things being equal." That's... something else entirely. I'm not sure what.

It's your money, and you can do with it what you wish. Now, to be clear, the new qualification guidelines next year are better for me than this year's, because I'll be able to reach 1K more cheaply than I could this year. However, the primary reason that I (a) accrue status in the first place and (b) continue to fly UA is that, after taking everything into account (luggage fee waivers and E+ in particular), UA costs me less than their competition. (NK / G4 / F9 excluded, because I can't imagine a scenario where I'd fly them, unless it involved someone paying me thousands of dollars to do it).

Have I sometimes paid a slightly higher cost on any given UA flight than their competition might have cost? Probably, on relatively short flights where I might be OK sitting in E- on a competitor. But, overall, investing in a UA flight helps keep my total yearly travel cost lower.

I don't like BE. I hate paying extra -- sometimes an extra 30-40% -- for E+ and a chance at an upgrade... but when I compare it to the price I'd pay with their competition, it still makes sense.

Choosing someone else next year, instead of UA? Sure. But, to resent them to the point where I'd spend hundreds of dollars more to avoid flying them? I can't fathom that, personally.

zrs70

[Moderator edits] [T] he airline wants to make money. It is a business it’s not a charity.

That said, loyalty was much deeper when airlines were not as global. Just as all politics is local, loyalty can make a difference at your small local airport where somebody knows you by name. But when our face was replaced by a frequent flyer number, loyalty transformed into their making money off of us. And at the end of the day, that’s what they need to do.

SteveHK

I was a bit weary of the 2020 requirements at first, but now I'm resentful against an airline who DOESN'T have the new UA program. I flew two very high cost intl round trips on DL this year which has me at $12K in MQDs but relatively low MQMs and as such, I'll have only Silver next year on them. I'm honestly very annoyed by this. So if the reverse was true, I'd love the new system.

Things change. Don't get so personally hurt by a corporate rewards program!

lhrsfo

For me, it’s the confluence of no more 1K together with the wildly uncomfortable E+ on 777s and 787s (the only planes on my routes) that has done it. I don’t resent UA but I am disappointed that the product is now so bad that there’s no reason to fly them again when my Pluspoints are gone.

bart889

I don't want to sound harsh, but [moderator edits to this par.] it was [n]ever about anything but the money [moderator edit]. United is a business that has the goal of maximizing shareholder value. It is their legally-binding fiduciary responsibility to their owners.

The entire airline industry (as with most other industries) is moving towards a loyalty program based upon revenue. To the best of my (admittedly incomplete) knowledge, pretty much all of the LCCs have such a model, and it will only be a matter of time before all the mainline carriers do too.

The world changes. Deal with it.

Kacee

I sympathize. As a multi-year 1K who will end 2019 over $19k PQD, I also have some difficulty not being a bit resentful at the new qualification requirements, which single out hub-captive long-haul flyers for harsher treatment.

I'm not going to spend more not to fly UA, but I have stopped affording UA any advantage when choosing carriers and flights. And I'm finding that even SFO-based, when viewed without the lens of status qualification, UA rarely offers either the best product or value for my needs. Now that the blinders have been removed, I also see more clearly how badly UA miles have been devalued, and how chimerical the promise of upgrades has become.

TravellingMan

Quote:

Originally Posted by lhrsfo

For me, it’s the confluence of no more 1K together

I hate the 10 across on the 777 and the rock hard slim line seats on the domestic flights. The ones on the 787 are somehow bearable even though they feel the same.

I look at the schedule, price and the aircraft type before making a call as a free agent. So far anything with the 777 (with 10 across) with United or any other carrier is out of question for long haul

TXJeepGuy

No, not at all. They still get me from A to B, usually on a direct flight, which is all I'm paying for.

Everything else is just a bonus.

Ocn Vw 1K

While the thread title and even the OP's username can get members' attention, going forward, we still need to discuss the topic constructively within FlyerTalk Rule 12, without snark or undue personalization. Some posts in the thread have been edited in that regard, Thanks, Ocn Vw 1K, co-Moderator.

gmt4

I wouldn't say I resent them. Yes, businesses are in business to maximize revenue. What troubles me is the arrogance (for lack of a better word) from UA. Don't carry on like you have a superior product and service that commands a greater price point and greater degree of $$ loyalty from your frequent fliers when you clearly don't. The inflated self opinion management has of their company stands in stark contrast to reality us travelers see.

findark

This. Hundreds of dollars against a multi-thousand international ticket, maybe. But I will happily fly someone with no FFP at all if it saves me hundreds of dollars on a regular basis. I think jsloan's analysis is spot-on; consider the all-in cost of flying, including the kickbacks you get from status. Chasing and maintaining status only makes sense if it brings down this cost, although this analysis can get pretty skewed when on OPM and "all flights are the same price" usually in a miserable class of service.

If United has made status unattainable now, then raise the imputed cost of flying United accordingly.