Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Earning Status (PQP) on non-016 Tickets and Partner Metal {Archive}

Old Feb 8, 2024, 11:23 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
This is an archive thread, the active thread is Earning Status (PQP) on non-016 Tickets and Partner Metal
Print Wikipost

Earning Status (PQP) on non-016 Tickets and Partner Metal {Archive}

Old Apr 29, 2020, 9:13 am
  #736  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 170
Looking at the united website, it's not clear to me if this cap counts on United bulk fares. If not, there still might be some value there.
poohfighter is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 10:13 am
  #737  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: 4me
Posts: 12,073
Originally Posted by Weatherboy
This must be devastating to the 7 passengers actually materially impacted by it.
8 of which are posting here.
TomMM is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 10:16 am
  #738  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 15,161
Originally Posted by poohfighter
Looking at the united website, it's not clear to me if this cap counts on United bulk fares. If not, there still might be some value there.
The cap on mileage-derived PQPs is on tickets bought from other carriers (ie non 016)
IAH-OIL-TRASH is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 10:35 am
  #739  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 170
I guess then the moral of the story is buy a bulk fare whenever you can...more miles, more pqp and lifetime counts.
poohfighter is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 10:41 am
  #740  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Virginia
Programs: UA Plat (1MM), Marriott Lifetime Plat, Hertz PC
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by lhrsfo
The loophole did provide all sorts of disincentives to fly UA, so it's only sensible to close it. But the original incentive for those based overseas to tie themselves to UA is also being thrown out - first by removing the exemption and now by killing any form of earnings. Somebody based in a *A hub might still find it worthwhile to stick with UA if the partner program is poor, but for those based outside a *A hub, there's really no reason at all to consider UA's program. Imagine the person whose long-haul travel is largely to the US, so uses UA a fair amount, but who also travels to other long haul and short haul destinations. That individual has fewer *A options, or has to include stops: previously *A might have been worth it, now not at all. Changing the multipliers would have been the more sensible route.
Perhaps this type of customer is more of a liability for UA than an asset? If the result is that a customer who normally flies *A transitions from MP to another *A FF program; this customer's UA flights would now be a partner flight, which could very possibly make much more business sense, even if this customer stopped flying UA to achieve their 4 segments. It seems to me like this move is to encourage people to fly UA metal, whereas the previous change encouraged the opposite.
Nihon_Ni is online now  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 10:42 am
  #741  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: FLL, MEL, SIN, WAS
Programs: UA*Lifetime GS, Hyatt* Lifetime Globalist
Posts: 12,470
Here is an Analysis based on my 2019 activities

I think we can mostly agree the timing of the announcement is not timely and not sensitive in the current environment, but I have been withholding my views on the impact until I have a chance to review my full year of *A partner (ticked on non-16 stock) flights and perform an analysis of possible impact.

Here are my 2019 *A partner flight activities on non-16 tickets:

PQM: 91,474
RDM: 110,475

(Actual PQM and RDM earned from *A partner flights are higher but I backed out those flights ticketed on 016 stock)

SQ (multiple of 6) is my primary *A partner airlines (for my PPS status and also I like flying SQ), followed by LH/LX/OS, CA and NH (multiple of 5), then TG and OZ (multiple of 6).

Based on award miles divided by the multiples assigned for preferred partners vs. other partners, I came up with 18.456 PQP (with no Cap)
Based on award miles divided by the multiples assigned for preferred partners vs. other partners, I came up with 16,549 PQP (with Caps of 1500/1000/750/500)

How does the program changes impact me:

I earned 3.66 GPUs (Using the PQM earned last year)
I would earn 3.08 GPUs (using 20 PlusPoints per 3,000 PQPs, and 40 points equals 1 GPU) - With No CAP
I would earn 2.76 GPUs with CAP

My *A partner flight activities are irrelevant to achieving my elite status on United, because I flew over 270,000 BIS on United in 2019 and I am a lifetime GS.

Base on my 2019 *A flight activities I am losing one GPU (40 PlusPoints), but that is because my choice to fly more on SQ than preferred partners. If I balance my flight activities with earning PlusPoints in mind, I could move some SQ flights to CA/NH/LH/LX/OS while still maintaining PPS on SQ and make up for that 40 PlusPoints. However, the difference between CAP and No-CAP PQP numbers is not that great based on my 2019 activities.

Although the PQP difference is small to me, I do understand every PQP counts if one is on the borderline of making desired status each year.

This is just one data point and I am US based. Others may have different outcomes based on their activities.

I encourage FTers doing similar analysis to assess personal impact before forming opinions on the latest change instead of getting caught up in the changes.

Last edited by UA_Flyer; Apr 29, 2020 at 4:10 pm
UA_Flyer is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 11:56 am
  #742  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,569
Originally Posted by poohfighter
I guess then the moral of the story is buy a bulk fare whenever you can...more miles, more pqp and lifetime counts.
They are not easy to find and issue - I can't force a bulk fare in my GDS without risking a debit memo or other sanctions. If they became easier to find through a consolidator, I would be all over it. Honestly, as bad as UA has become, I would rather buy P as a bulk fare and get the value along with the Polaris Lounge and Polaris seat vs flying AC.

Originally Posted by Nihon_Ni
Perhaps this type of customer is more of a liability for UA than an asset? If the result is that a customer who normally flies *A transitions from MP to another *A FF program; this customer's UA flights would now be a partner flight, which could very possibly make much more business sense, even if this customer stopped flying UA to achieve their 4 segments. It seems to me like this move is to encourage people to fly UA metal, whereas the previous change encouraged the opposite.
All customers are liabilities in Kirby's eyes - that is how he was taught by Baldanza. The customer is the enemy - and you need to squeeze as much margin from them as possible, and any benefits must be rewarded with margin, otherwise out you go. Post coronavirus we will see if he is still able to hit 80% plus systemwide load factors will non status low cost customers, or if his only remaining viable business are loyalists who need to travel. I suspect Kirby is lining himself up for a big mistake if those low cost customers don't return in droves.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 29, 2020 at 12:50 pm Reason: merged consecutive posts by same member
bocastephen is online now  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 12:51 pm
  #743  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Combined with partner award price increases, UA going all-out to make MP less appealing.
wco81 is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 4:02 pm
  #744  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA 1K & 2MM, Bonvoy Titanium & LTP, HH Gold, Accor Silver, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 2,366
well, I had 6,000 useless PQP's from an NH flight earlier this year, would be 6,000 under this system too, so that one's an absolute wash. I guess if someone really cares they just need to throw in a connection.
cricketer is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2020, 5:52 pm
  #745  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Programs: UA Platinum, 1MM
Posts: 13,463
So much for using this to get to 1K this year. They should have brought this out when they first came out with the new qualification program.
CApreppie is offline  
Old Apr 30, 2020, 12:31 am
  #746  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1MM 1K, BA Gold
Posts: 431
Everybody is missing the obvious intention here: UA is just trying to help out the poor mileage runner here who needs to rack up both PQPs and segments. Before the cap, there was a tradeoff: you could get a comfortable itinerary with few stops, lots of PQPs, but few segments. Now you don't have to endure the psychological cost of weighing those two against each other, segments and PQP come together
fatlasercat is offline  
Old Apr 30, 2020, 6:43 pm
  #747  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: SFO/SJC, JFK
Programs: United 1K 2MM - Jet Blue Mosaic - Hyatt LTG - Marriott Plat - Hertz PC
Posts: 205
This is a truly awful change. I get that there were overvaluations on some alliance partners at the PE level and I am fine with adjusting for that, but these restrictions also further diminish what was already pathetic business class earning. I already thought it was absurd to spend $6,000 on a business class ticket on an alliance partner and not even get half that in PQPs and now on that very same ticket I will be limited to just 2,000 PQPs.

Some people have opined about UA status being for UA fliers, but what is the point of alliances then? One of the most attractive aspects of alliances when they were first introduced was being able to pick whatever airlines and programs were best suited and that was a big draw especially for Star since they had the best airlines.

Ah well, the only carrot UA had for me was making 1K so this just lets me fully be a free agent. No need to book any domestics on UA now either.
strife is offline  
Old Apr 30, 2020, 7:02 pm
  #748  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: YVR
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 980
Originally Posted by strife
Ah well, the only carrot UA had for me was making 1K so this just lets me fully be a free agent.
At least you still have Platinum for life. So that softens the blow a little. Not everyone is that lucky.
kevflyer is offline  
Old Apr 30, 2020, 7:04 pm
  #749  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Programs: UA LT GS | UA LT Club | Marriott LT Titanium
Posts: 1,250
Originally Posted by strife
This is a truly awful change....some have opined about UA status being for UA fliers, but what is the point of alliances then?
The original point of alliances was to take you places, your home airline didn't fly. SQ to SEA Asia, AI to Indian sub-continent, SAS to Scandinavia, Lufthansa to Eastern Europe, etc...

In today's world UA flies to all those places. The partner is only needed for the final short hop: AI for DEL-BLR, SQ for SIN-DPS, etc...

UA wants you to spend that $6K on them. If you're unwilling, they're unwilling to give you 1K benefits... It's fair.
spartacusmcfly is offline  
Old Apr 30, 2020, 7:11 pm
  #750  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: FLL, MEL, SIN, WAS
Programs: UA*Lifetime GS, Hyatt* Lifetime Globalist
Posts: 12,470
Originally Posted by strife
This is a truly awful change. I get that there were overvaluations on some alliance partners at the PE level and I am fine with adjusting for that, but these restrictions also further diminish what was already pathetic business class earning. I already thought it was absurd to spend $6,000 on a business class ticket on an alliance partner and not even get half that in PQPs and now on that very same ticket I will be limited to just 2,000 PQPs.
Just a reminder that before PQP and PQF were introduced last November, your $6,000 was getting zero PQD.

If absurd is used to describe not getting half of $6,000 for PQP, Id like to know what adjective you used when it was zero PQD.

Seriously, I understand your frustration. My initial reaction was probably more negative than yours and other FTers, because I typically fly 100K BIS on *A partner airlines of which about 70K BIS on non-016 tickets.

However, I used my entire 2019 flight activities as samples to recalculate what I would gain/lose if I use the non-cap and cap criteria, and the differences are not great, and in fact I could easily make up for the little difference by flying more preferred * A partners than other partners.

Please see post #163 for detail.

I understand my calculation is just one data point, but one does not know the real impact unless using real data instead of using arbitrary scheduled flights and may be unrealistic peak season fares to come up with a huge devaluation as in the title of the thread.

Assumption is not backed by real data, but if ones data proves there is a huge difference, then that particular flyer clearly needs to look for another program. I would be upset too if I were in his/her position.
UA_Flyer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.