Is this in writing somewhere? Are we getting our "EARNED" SWU's in January 2011?

This is what I honestly don't understand: It's one thing to stick it to low-revenue flyers such as myself. It's another thing entirely to take someone flying 100 +/- expensive segments and tell them that their benefits are being reduced but that those who previously would have gotten nothing for flying 75K/90 EQM/EQS, their benefits are going to be increased. Why do this? :confused:

AA doesn't offer an EXP challenge. GLD or PLT only.

Well, I've surpassed 100K EQM this year and haven't received my SWU allotment, so that would suggest I'll get them on Jan 1,2011.

The change, again, as I read the release, will be upon requalifying during the 2011 calendar year. Then the SWU allotment will be placed in your account immediately.

Except UA is now hawking F UG like the old CO does/did. I have no definite proof except my own experiences but in the last month or so they have hawked to me for sure, even when I have CR applied, even when I am already in the UG queue for weeks, on a booked ticket in a reasonable high bucket booked weeks in advance with most of F wide open according to expert flyer. That is a newer "CO like" development.

Couple this development with losing CR's, no word on E+, etc and things are looking decidedly CO. I respect the people who are like "oh thank you UA for keeping CR's" but i think a bit of cmon people, for sure FOR SURE they are tinkering with our Best in class MP program and so far the engine looks a little worse than it did. It is not unreasonable to think further decisions along this trajectory will be equally disappointing, basically blending the "best of One Pass enhancements" into UA.

We all knew the merger could go this way. It's not great. No question it makes the 8 eVips from AA look better. We have definitely moved back down a rung or two in the richness of the program.

Now, we await word on our biggest distinctive: E+

Swu's are not distinctive, CRs are not either. How you get to use them is and DL, AA, UA all have slightly different spins with only DL pretty far back IMHO.

I got mail from CO, yet nothing from UA. Since I fly mainly TPAC and TATL, the regional upgrades situation, while unfortunate, is no dealbreaker or me. In the past I was quite optimistic, or at least hopeful that my NW/DL experience would not be repeated and this time the promises to make the new program the best would come true. Unfortunately it looks more and more like "dejavu" all over again. I am anxiously awaiting the E+ decision. Eliminating E+ will be the signal for me to switch alliances one more and then hopefully one last time.

Haven't seen much discussion about the above point that the "enhanced" upgrade priority seems based on the miles flown in the calendar year (not based on status earned from the past). If this is correct understanding, then this is the most significant devaluation of status IMHO. The "reward system" now is changed from loyalty to contribution to the bottom line seems to me.

Read the announcement couple of times and thought may be my mis-understanding but seems I am not the only one...

OK, 24 hours, nearly 600 comments later, and still no response from anyone at UA. Cowardice or the new UA culture, ring-and-run? You decide!

:)

no one
 

I fully expect, NO ONE to respond from UA. The gauntlet has been thrown down, we live with it or move on.

Segment Qualifiers
 

My speculation is that since most of the shorter segments are UX (and therefore operated by companies that UA subcontracts to), that the profit margins for UA are much smaller on these flights.

Again, I speculate, but from UA's perspective - Somebody who flies a lot of segments, mostly on UX, does not add much to the bottom line of UA. And UA is then obligated to give them all the benefits of 1K for very little revenue / profit. So in order to balance the equation, they increase EQS to 120 to achieve 1K.


I wonder whether many / most segment runners wouldn't be better off on WN? My coworker, based in SAN, flies more miles and segments than I do. 100% domestically, to many locations large and small around the country. He swears by WN - he's always A and boards first, rewards are easy to earn and the system is straightforward, but most importantly to him the rewards are EASY to redeem for any flights he wants to take in the US! His international travel for pleasure is almost nonexistent, so he just buys tickets when he actually does fly international.


As of May 23, 2010, Southwest Airlines operates scheduled service to 69 destinations in 35 states. And I don't think this includes new destinations previously served by AirTrans. AirTran Airways serves more than 70 destinations throughout the United States, Mexico and the Caribbean

United Airlines flies to 73 domestic destinations

Can someone explain me this:

I am currently a United 2P flyer and will end the year as a 1P. Next year, I will most likely end the year as a 1P+. However, if I throw an extra India trip next year on my own dime - I will probably make 1K. Can someone explain why I am better off on AA or Delta with a similar status than on UACO? :confused:

Uhh, no. short haul fares can be quite profitable. A short-haul flyer paying $400+ for a <500 mile RJ RT is more profitable than a longer haul flyer paying $400 for SFO-BOS. Those short haul flights aren't $39.

For segment qualifiers, I don't really understand how you're going to lose that much if you don't fly long hauls.

If that is the case the I am at least partially relieved. I have 3 international trips planned in the 1st quarter of 2011.

CR1 is not a deal breaker for me as I've been successful with UDU.

I make 1k with EQM so 120 segments doesn't affect me.

I am leery of what will be taken next.:(

Sorry, not buying it. The main difference is that once you're in the EUA window in CO, they have different upgrade buckets - the YBM/Miles one (ZE as I understand it) and R (traditional auto-upgrades). So they can turn off R to keep churning through ZE.

With UA, it's all NC/NF - if there's space, it's going to the highest status person, then by fare code. Common knowledge since UDU was introduced is that using an instrument doesn't matter once you're inside UDU. Even outside UDU, UA just doesn't make it as easy and transparent as CO to see what a cash UG will cost - a good thing I think (for us).

Compared to CO, where there are many cases documenting the "tens of dollars" upgrades either at OLCI or at the gate (regardless of whether it's a fare code buy-up or just a kettle cheapo offer), on UA it's after WL'd upgrades have been run. 90 segments on UA this year, not a single time have I received a buy-up offer when already WL'd for an UG.

While UA may be holding more upgrades until the last minute (frustrating, yes, but at least they're still there), there's just simply not the evidence that they're eroding UDU like CO is with EUA. You see countless threads about CO Plats on B/M fares riding in coach - I highly doubt that happens that often on UA.

Interesting theory. The problem is that these flights are often really expensive when booked as stand-alones rather than as connections to mainline flights. Just as a data point, to take an example, the lowest price MKE-ORD round trips are more than double the price of MKE-LGA round-trips transiting through ORD. And the price goes up even more if your destination is a smaller market with less competition (e.g., MKE-ORD-SBN). At the very least it would seem that the higher fares paid by segment warriors subsidizing the cost of pax connecting to routes with greater competition.