I've seen a few posts that seem to think this will be horrible/the worst/unacceptable/ridiculous.

So let me show you how it works on AC when you buy a full Y fare with a connection. I think you're all being a little pessimistic about this.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...09dadcc6a8.png
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...73da466886.png
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...c39fb68b64.png
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...2b2392709b.png

PlusPoints 1K - Meaning of qualification requirements
 

I just came cross this footnote on the new PlusPoint website in the 1K section:

*Applies only to members who meet all qualification requirements for 1K status

Whom will this apply to? Could that mean that 3MM will not get the 280 PlusPoints? Will this affect flyers outside of the US when they don't meet the PQD requirements? Did I miss something?

Cheers,

Joe

I wonder whether this simply means those who receive 1K by being partnered by a million-miler will not receive the points just as they do not receive upgrade instruments now.

Sorry, I truly am lost as to what you're trying to show here. AC is not UA, first of all. Second, you're showing a connecting flight that would require 1 point per leg but if booked together it becomes 1 point? How does that have any bearing on UA PlusPoints and the number of points required for things like Skip the Waitlist?

We all know that PlusPoints will behave similar to what you've shown. Book a connection with a domestic and international leg and you only need to apply 40 points (W+ fare). Clear the domestic only and you are charged 20 PlusPoints. Clear both legs or just the international and you're charged 40 PlusPoints.

Maybe you can help enlighten us.

-RM

Will Million Milers get PlusPoints?

Yes. Members eligible to receive upgrades with their Million Miler status will receive PlusPoints in place of Regional Premier Upgrades and Global Premier Upgrades.

It's the same as always. No change from who got GPUs.

There are a lot of "sky is falling" posts about PlusPoints in this thread. Some are based on an incorrect understanding of published information, and a bunch are based on speculation about how this could get worse in the future.

I think it's much more likely that you'll see good changes. One example is how on AC you can add a segment to a confirmed upgrade, and only pay the difference. In my example, that would be 0.

Another change would be changes to cost based on fare. The route I showed on AC can require 6x the points if you're in a lower fare class.

It doesn't make sense to have done multiples of 40 if the upgrades all cost 20/30/40/80. They could have just as easily done 2/3/4/8. If there's no intention to eventually do something like give Y/B(/M) fares a reduced requirement, then why did they unnecessarily add a 0?

Or even just comparing something like SFO-LAX with SFO-EWR. This gives a lot of flexibility to price based on the actual product, rather than just letting you use "an upgrade".

Except UA has already stated that for this situation the passenger *would* be required to pay the fare difference. For example, if you waitlist only the EWR-FRA leg of a DEN-EWR-FRA itinerary, and that clears for 40 points, then you *would* need to pay an extra 20 points to upgrade the DEN-EWR leg once the international leg clears, despite being able to waitlist both ahead of time for 40 points total. Doesn't make sense to me, but it is spelled out clearly.

I could see this happening, and agree that it offers extra flexibility.

I think the more likely scenario is that the number of points required will continue to climb, which is something they could not easily do with the "certificate" model.

Not only PN has vastly more availability than PZ, there are other hidden benefits of GS.

For example, GS can push through waitlisted upgrades even if PN=0 at T-72, as long as 2 more J seats remain on sale after the upgrade.

This is tremendous benefit. In this case, GS won't need to use triple PP for upgrades.

When only 3 seats are open at T-72, I imagine upgrade list will be long and many 1Ks will not clear.

Wouldn't it be nice if United would extend the Jan 2020 expiring RPUs & GPUs (20/40 points) out another a half year (or more) as a goodwill gesture?

Just wishful thinking on my part :)

My guess is to exclude status-matched 1Ks or other "promotional" 1Ks.

That may be right. But i was replying to your earlier statement. In the majority of cases, there are no PN inventory.

"Majority" is your word, not mine.

Given how much people hate this, I can see it being something they'd look into changing to mirror the old behavior. For all we know, it's currently a technical limitation more than their desired policy.

It's certainly possible, and AC has done that a few times. However, AC is another North American airline that has pretty much an identical upgrade credit system, so I think it's much more likely that UA would adopt some of that behavior rather than go a completely different direction.

Except that in the context of this discussion, something similar would depend upon UA IT being updated to allow flexibility to apply instruments segment by segment, and then to also have correct combinability programmed. I don't have a lot of faith that will happen.

Much more likely, it will now be even more important to call in for every upgrade application. Which is a drag. :o