agreed! and i'm counting on those folks to help stave off the latest wave of perks erosion!! :)

Very true, and if they do, they usually also get a smaller discount, then when they promise x% of eligible traffic to a single carrier. Volume is 1 factor, and exclusivity as well as a % exclusivity is another. A well diversified portfolio is safest, but a polarized portfolio can net you the most (and can also lose you the most if you choose incorrectly.)

This devaluation is ridiculous! I'm shocked and disappointed that they targeted their best customer segment to bear the majority of the devaluation! So much for DOJ approval for this merger that would help customers!!!!!!!!

It's not surprising they screwed with the CR-1's ... they did that a while back and they were I'm sure just looking for a creative way to minimize those. But I'm actually surprised they didn't move 1K to 125K during this devaluation -- who wants to bet that will be the next "enhancement"?

We don't have more preferred and less preferred carriers. They all want my companies business, and we're too big for one carrier.

You know I respect you, but there's no way either one of us can know these details, and if we did, we wouldn't/couldn't share them, so we can agree to disagree and/or just move on with the topic.

-David

I didn't hear any changes to the GS program other than the CO equiv program was being rolled in. What changed? (as I get most of my announcements here, rather than from work.)

There are several problems:

1. Immediate loss of six month (actually 7) in the initial overlapping period. This is not a small thing now I have 6 expiring SWUs unused and chance of upgrade in the holiday period looks bad. When chance not good I buy BC.
2. Loss of up to one month for each subsequent SWU (We now get full 13 months from 1/1 to 1/31+1. in the future it will average 12.5 months depending on date of the month).
3. Difficult to plan travel: We now know for sure the total (T) number of SWUs will be available any day in the 13 months 1/1 to 1/31+1. In the future the number we have at any time will be a variable x < T (because our T > 6). This loss of flexibility will make it even more difficult to use the SWUs.

Again, you will not be affected if you only fly 100K EQM each year, and if you do not have the option or do not want to buy BC so you always try to UG. You have more chance to use SWU because you try 100% of the time. But for those who fly 200K+ EQM, who try SWU only when chance looks reasonable, they are negatively impacted.

It varies tremendously. There are lots of cases where someone who flies both fewer miles and fewer segments bring in easily more revenue and income than someone who flies more.

One case is comparing the IAD-SEA nonstop (which is almost always $500-$600+, even at "cheapest fares," because of lack of nonstop competition on the route) to anyone who either connects IAD-SEA or does something like RDU-IAD-SEA. The options with more segments and miles are almost always several hundred dollars cheap, even though UA's costs are more.

There are so many situations where adding a segment (and miles) decreases fares and increases UA's costs that I could see an argument for switching from a segment-based to a # of round-trip based scheme, or the much-discussed revenue or profit based scheme.

A heads up on 1KVoice, I wrote to them on 7th November on a completely unrelated issue and I have NOT heard one word from them. So much for 1K service :td:.

I am NO fan of these so called "enhancements" that we are supposed to like...yeah sure :rolleyes:. What is next? :td::td::td:

If E+ goes and the lack of confirmable upgrade space continues, then I wont be getting on a UA 747. They are bad enough in Y as it is. There are much more comfortable options for similar prices. I am quite interested in the new NZ Skycouch :D.

Better to have credited CO this year
 

After 5 years as a 1K, I'll peak at 75-77K this year. That is just 1P, but same miles credited to CO would have been plat. So the guy who flew 90K on UA this uear is at a lower status than the guy who flew 76K on CO.

So it seems. :/

I'm beginning to think that only one of two things is possible

a) they really didn't think this through for current 1Ks...they only looked at the upside of offering CR-1s at 75k instead of 100k for new 1Ks and the impact for current 1Ks never even crossed their mind.

b) they are doing a horrible job of communicating that for new 1Ks there are new benefits that you start earning at 75K and every 25K after that. And for current 1Ks you now get two CR-1s after every 25k EQM (starting at 25K EQM) instead of after 10K BIS miles per quarter.

If B is the case, I think most current 1Ks would think this is actually an improvement, or at best neutral (if you requal for 1K with 100,001 miles, you will get 8 CR-1s). And for UA to botch the communication wouldn't be shocking at all.

I agree that they probably thought this was an improvement, but they completely ignored a segment of their elites:

- if you started 2010 as a 1K and requalified for 2011, then you probably earned your miles roughly evenly throughout the year and will end with 8 CR-1s, plus the means to earn more in 2011
- if you were never 1K and become one for the first time in 2011, you'll earn your CR-1's starting at 75k EQM and earn possibly more

but if you're a first-time 1K in 2010, like me, you get NOTHING until you fly ANOTHER 75k.

I can't imagine this was an accident. I can only think that they basically only care about the business they're going to obtain as a merged carrier, but they don't want to completely alienate people who have been loyal customers for years. Those of us who only gave them business recently are basically just leeches.

I'm not fully understanding how the new CR-1 scheme will be applied to "current" 1Ks (that is, those who qualify for 2011 this year). Will we have to wait until we reach the 75K level next year before we get our first CR-1s or will we get them when we pass 25K next year? If the latter, I can live with that; if the former, then we have a definite devaluation on our hands. UA needs to clarify this point asap to put a damper on the current firestorm.

That's the way I read it.

I'm thinking that I won't get CR-1 next year until I cross 75,000 EQM as well. To that end, I decided to book a MR in a few weeks to ensure I get my 4Q 2010 CR-1s.