Yes...check out response #694...1K Voice responded to me today that we will still receive the 2 CR1s...at least for now!

Nothing personal, but that's a dumb comparison. If I fly 100 segments a year it's because I have to fly 100 segments a year. To ask that I add another 20 to get the same status while not requiring it of others is insulting. Believe me, I'd rather get 1K on miles as it's a heckuvalot easier.

If UA wants more from their elites why not increase the qualifications across the board to 120K EQM/120 EQS then??? Why single out the group of flyers that pay the most? Is it their intention to drive away profitable customers? -Cause that's exactly what's happening here.

I see what you're saying but let me remind you that $0 < $20K.

They never have...Just last week I was invited to a meeting with a few other MM1ks and GSs...we were amazed at how the UA "suits" (a mix of UA and CO types) preached to us...never listening to anything we said! One of our group (I wish it had been me!) was quick enough to ask if any of "suits" had flown in Y recently...There was no answer!!...and no new information.

OK, if I follow the logic on my Q&A email, 50k=1P, 75K=1P+, 100K=1k. In segments it is 60=1P, 90=1P+, and 120=1K. The ratios are now equal. Assuming a systemic valuation that 30 segments=25,000 miles across the board, this now fits with the rest of the program. Why would they have 1 outlier? There math is really simple, it doesn't differentiate based on route or length of haul or even revenue, is is just 6 segments=5k miles for status, in multiples of 5 for status jumps. They must (or someone) must feel that uniformly, across the system 6 segments-5k miles. They aren't picking on those that hit status at 100 segments, they are just normalizing it for an even transitional ratio across the board for everyone, regardless of status, geography, or spend.

And yes, $20K>$0. People in my union talk about that as well, "Zero planes out is less than what I currently do now, so they better not mess with me!" Most of those people though talk the talk. Maybe many of you walk the walk, I don't want to dare anyone to do something to hurt our company, but like I said 20 pages ago, I have this link bookmarked and will look back in 6 months time to see where some of these posters that are going to leave are actually at. It is short sided, but realistic to believe that most will not leave, and of those that do, some others will come to replace them due to the combined route structure of UA/CO as well as other enhancements that may come of this "merger of equals". I don't have a crystal ball, and I am sure, neither do the decision makers. I bet that the combined UA/CO company will be much more attractive to those that sign big contracts with UA or with CO alone. This will generate new business, as the guy that signs the contracts say for the GSA, doesn't care about the frequent flyer benefits of the G-men flying. He cares about the schedule, route structure, and price. Assuming prices are competitive, a more robust network and schedule will be better for the guy paying the bills. Sure, most people aren't in exclusive or semi-exclusive contracts, but the big repeat businesses are. The thread about a company getting EXP on AA when transitioning from a UA contract to an AA contract, the Motorola contract that transitioned from AA to UA, these will go to price, schedule, network, as the rpimary, and perks as the 2ndary. These mega corporations negotiate their perks separate from the general publics reward program, just as they negotiate their discounts as well as their exclusive fares.

Given that, I am confident that this movement of people begging AA to match at their highest level won't send as big of a message to UA as they think it will. I hope they find what they are looking for. I am an AA member, and have nothing terribly bad to say about them or their program...DL, on the other hand...I dropped them as they were too out of line with the competition years ago (actually, it was NW for me at the time.)

I agree.

One of the main consequences of consolidation is fewer competitors, and as we've seen in the past, that generally means fewer choices, higher fares, and less "perks".

The announced changes may not be popular on FT, but, it could have been a LOT worse!

Message to UA? I don't for a minute think anyone is sending a message to UA. I want to fly where I get the best elite treatment. It is UA that is sending a message to me, which is elite benefits are shrinking. Basically that in the last x period of time I cannot think of one elite benefit that has improved. Some have gotten worse, and if you wonder how bad it will get just go spend time on the CO board. No reason to believe it will be any different than how CO operates, which I have always thought was average/hokey.

You're right on the money! I was gonna ask all of those who threaten to leave UA to the dAArk side, Delta, or whereever, to PLEASE LEAVE NOW!

That way, I will have less competition for my upgrades and so on.

I am with you that very few, if any will pack their bags, and those who do, make sure to not let the door hit you as you leave

I am debating whether or not to do a status match with Delta for 2011 solely because I'm beginning to fly more inside France and in other parts of the world where SkyTeam is strong, so it could benefit me.

But unless E+ is gone, SWUs are gone, and the route structure sucks, I'm staying right where I am with UA, due in no small part to the fact that my current employer has a very nice discount with UA (we do with AA and DL as well, but I'm a UA 1K).

So according to my crystal ball, you got nothing to worry about. Those who said that UA will go bankrupt because of these "enhancements" pissing off UA Elites are either kidding themselves or dellusional

Do they believe themselves when they write things like that? Once you qualify and re-qualify for 1k, that isn't true. You start the year as 1k and earn 2 at 10k miles flown per quarter. (or that starts after you qualify, if you are not already 1k in the current year).

For non-1ks/new qualifiers, they could easily add a new benefit of 2CR1s at 75k then 2 more at 100k, then revert to the existing method if their goal is really what they said. 1k members could earn at the existing method, if that's their true goal.

If they don't even understand this, how could they possibly have made an informed decision about this change? Or is corporate really trying to sell this change as an improvement for existing 1ks? Wow.

-David

If this is the final rollout of changes from CO, then i agree it could have been worse...but it's not the final rollout. I agree totally with your first statement.

We will know more over the next twelve months. Wait until the new upgrade/inventory management algorithm is felt across this board. Wait until we see if E+ stays. Wait until they pull capacity and double the elites are trying for half the seats on a tight inventory algorithm. Then we will see if the whining has merit, or if the cry for AAdvil is necessary lol.

I really like UA. I do not like CO. If it ends up more like CO i think people will seek greener pastures. It's no biggy. Go where you get your best match of coverage and elite perks.

There are many people on the "business side" of the industry that would jump at the chance to implement such a program!

And, if consolidation of the industry continues as predicted, it likely will be even easier to implement such a plan in the years ahead.

erosion of benefits is going to happen a little bit at a time.

They are hoping that many people say "it's not so bad" for each change.

It would be delusional to think this is anywhere near the final set of changes. Changes will keep happening until there's a merged program and then there will be even more changes, just a little bit at a time. (fastair, I'll leave it to you to see if I am correct about this over the next 2 years. We can have a small charity wager if you want.)

E+? A tough decision for them? Right ... The only tough decision at this point is how to tell us, IMHO. Otherwise, what's so difficult about it? CO always said they couldn't make it work. What's changed now? Not a damn thing, except they have to figure out how to reconfigure a bunch of aircraft. Honestly, I hope I'm wrong about E+.

-David

How long ago is "x" period of time. Not counting the past 6 weeks, your UDU% was pretty good. Maybe you never ran out of e500's so that wouldn't be a change, but maybe you did, so that would be a plus, or maybe you got UDU'd on flights that you never would have used instruments for, so that too would be a plus. The ability to bring more people into E+ with you on your single status, as well as UDU those on your PNR for free...I can think of many others, one way UA and * awards...depending on how narrow of a time slot you make "x" time, if it is specific to make the argument, or a general period of time that is extensive to cover say the last 3 years, 5 years, 10 years...There are those that see the glass 1/2 full, others 1/2 empty, and some take a drop out to say it is worse than that, it is less than half full (maybe 49.999999 full) and scream about it. You may not be that last person, but depending on how you define x" time, you may be. 73/82 is pretty good, for sitting in F when buying Y. That is the holistic view of you since UDU. Singling out a 6 month period may or may not be representative yet. It's all on your perspective and how you spin it to yourself (and others.)

Well, this CLEARLY isn't the final rollout of changes, that's for certain. And I'm one of those people who firmly believes that the days of E+ are numbered. ELR will likely stay, but the rest of the E+ seats will soon be history.

And I don't disagree with you that many FT'ers who are unhappy will likely seek a new home in "greener pastures."

However, there's a significant number of frequent flyers who have little to no say over what airline they fly (either because of corporate policy or home airport), and those folks will continue to rack up uber-elite status even if the "perks" for doing so dwindle to nothing more than pre-boarding, a free checked bag, and a free drink chit.

Moreover, it's no secret that the newUA is actively courting those very corporate fliers.

A significant number of frequent flyers work for large companies that have multiple preferred carriers, also. And at that level, they can usually get some sort of status match based on the corp contracts.

-David

Hello everyone, I was introduced to FT last year by my roommate and am the ultimate lurker. I'd thought I'd chime in since fastair's "math" got me number crunching.

First, let me say that I don't agree with UA's new segment requirement, I'm not trying to be a UA apologist, and I also don't quite understand fastair's math. However, after crunching the numbers, I do agree with his implied assertion that when comparing similar type fliers - 1k mileage qualifiers bring more income than 100 segment qualifiers in many but not all cases. Here are two examples:

Case 1: People who fly on the cheapest fares
- A mileage qualifier pays $270 rt for a cheap tcon and 6000 eqm rt. UA Revenue = $4500 to make 100,000 miles.
- A segment qualifier pays $90 rt on some of these cheap SFO-LAX/SAN fare sales. UA Revenue = $4500 to make 100 segments.

Case 2: People who fly that are more schedule sensitive
- A mileage qualifier pays $2,500 rt for a tatl/tpac and 10,000 eqm rt. UA Revenue = $25,000 to make 100,000 miles.
- A segment qualifier pays $500 rt. UA Revenue = $25,000 to make 100 segments.

Let me say that I'm not as familiar with case #2, since I am an el-cheapo flyer, but I'm presenting it anyways as is.

In both cases, UA made the same revenue, but income on the mileage qualifier was significantly more. This is due to UA's backend costs of each segment (ticketing, GAs, maintenance, administration, etc.). The mileage qualifier only needed anywhere from 20-60 segments, while the segment qualifier needed the full 100.

Of course, my examples will vary based on location, routes, etc. and people don't usually fly so robotically. But just my two cents from a lurker who needs to go to sleep...