AA seriously reviewing UA upchange of required award miles
Apr 19, 2006, 8:23 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Programs: AA EXP, 3.1 Million AA Miles, Hilton Diamond, *wood Gold
Posts: 245
AA seriously reviewing UA upchange of required award miles
Internal AA sources have leaked out that AA is definately reviewing UA changes in "upchanging" required award miles. They are also looking at who else is going to follow the UA upchange. As we all painfully know, several hotel chains have already done this over the last four years. AA has contacted other One World carriers to see if this could be "coordinated" to avoid different redemption levels and avoid a "run" due to different level differences in redemption requirements.
With the higher load factors AA has, AA is not burning up as many AA FF miles as originally forecasted internally. That has created a lot of AA FF disatisfaction, plus concern about ""How do we burn off theses liabilities"". Therefore AA is now exploring ways to burn more miles with: (1.) raising all levels, and (2.) a new third category of fast confirmed reservations, but at 40% to 70% more miles than the current anytime awards.
Seating priority would go to the new fast burn category. Initial analysis is that even with fewer people redeeming (read unhappy AA FF who give up) is offset by more actual AA FF miles burned in the new third category.
One of several "trial balloons" being floated by the bean counters.
"Bottom Line" AA FF mile deflation is coming, one way or another.
Picked this up via oral conversations with different people working inside AA that have access to the groups doing some of the analysis legwork for the "beancounters". Morale in these units is not high. They realise that this could be a real "downer" for their best customers.
With the higher load factors AA has, AA is not burning up as many AA FF miles as originally forecasted internally. That has created a lot of AA FF disatisfaction, plus concern about ""How do we burn off theses liabilities"". Therefore AA is now exploring ways to burn more miles with: (1.) raising all levels, and (2.) a new third category of fast confirmed reservations, but at 40% to 70% more miles than the current anytime awards.
Seating priority would go to the new fast burn category. Initial analysis is that even with fewer people redeeming (read unhappy AA FF who give up) is offset by more actual AA FF miles burned in the new third category.
One of several "trial balloons" being floated by the bean counters.
"Bottom Line" AA FF mile deflation is coming, one way or another.
Picked this up via oral conversations with different people working inside AA that have access to the groups doing some of the analysis legwork for the "beancounters". Morale in these units is not high. They realise that this could be a real "downer" for their best customers.
Apr 19, 2006, 8:28 pm
#2
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: NY/CHICAGO
Programs: AA Exec Plat; SPG Platinum; Hyatt Platinum
Posts: 373
Originally Posted by Brandy
Internal AA sources have leaked out that AA is definately reviewing UA changes in "upchanging" required award miles. They are also looking at who else is going to follow the UA upchange. As we all painfully know, several hotel chains have already done this over the last four years. AA has contacted other One World carriers to see if this could be "coordinated" to avoid different redemption levels and avoid a "run" due to different level differences in redemption requirements.
With the higher load factors AA has, AA is not burning up as many AA FF miles as originally forecasted internally. That has created a lot of AA FF disatisfaction, plus concern about ""How do we burn off theses liabilities"". Therefore AA is now exploring ways to burn more miles with: (1.) raising all levels, and (2.) a new third category of fast confirmed reservations, but at 40% to 70% more miles than the current anytime awards.
Seating priority would go to the new fast burn category. Initial analysis is that even with fewer people redeeming (read unhappy AA FF who give up) is offset by more actual AA FF miles burned in the new third category.
One of several "trial balloons" being floated by the bean counters.
Bottom Line" AA FF mile deflation is coming, one way or another.
Picked this up via oral conversations with different people working inside AA that have access to the groups doing some of the analysis legwork for the "beancounters". Morale in these units is not high. They realise that this could be a real "downer" for their best customers.
With the higher load factors AA has, AA is not burning up as many AA FF miles as originally forecasted internally. That has created a lot of AA FF disatisfaction, plus concern about ""How do we burn off theses liabilities"". Therefore AA is now exploring ways to burn more miles with: (1.) raising all levels, and (2.) a new third category of fast confirmed reservations, but at 40% to 70% more miles than the current anytime awards.
Seating priority would go to the new fast burn category. Initial analysis is that even with fewer people redeeming (read unhappy AA FF who give up) is offset by more actual AA FF miles burned in the new third category.
One of several "trial balloons" being floated by the bean counters.
Bottom Line" AA FF mile deflation is coming, one way or another.
Picked this up via oral conversations with different people working inside AA that have access to the groups doing some of the analysis legwork for the "beancounters". Morale in these units is not high. They realise that this could be a real "downer" for their best customers.
if they're going to do this they ought to sweeten the pot in some way--eg allowing upgrades for a price in $s or miles on the more expensive award tix
Apr 19, 2006, 8:33 pm
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: FIND ME ON TWITTER FOR THE LATEST
Posts: 27,730
Without commenting globally on the OP-- and without saying one way or the other overall what my impression is on the likelihood of some kind of change, one thing I will say is that a couple of items in the OP are definitely not true and that makes me suspect of the source(s) for the balance of the items.
Apr 19, 2006, 8:42 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: QLA
Programs: SBUX Gold
Posts: 14,507
One only needs to look at other threads OP has started to determine the validity of this one as well.
EDIT: Such as
http://www.flyertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=545517
http://www.flyertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=470396
EDIT: Such as
http://www.flyertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=545517
http://www.flyertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=470396
Last edited by IceTrojan; Apr 19, 2006 at 9:01 pm
Apr 19, 2006, 8:59 pm
#5
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: PHX/SFO/LAX
Programs: AA-EXP (1.7MM), BA-Slvr, HH-Diamond
Posts: 7,784
Originally Posted by JonNYC
one thing I will say is that a couple of items in the OP are definitely not true..
Apr 19, 2006, 9:01 pm
#6
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 7,368
Originally Posted by Brandy
"Bottom Line" AA FF mile deflation is coming, one way or another.
Otherwise, I have no comments that haven't already been made.
Mike
Apr 19, 2006, 9:10 pm
#7
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,296
According to the OP's September 2005 post, she is no longer flying on AA, so not sure what it would matter to her.
I would assume any time any major carrier changes its frequent flyer program in any way, the others review the change. That would be a normal business practice.
I would assume any time any major carrier changes its frequent flyer program in any way, the others review the change. That would be a normal business practice.
Apr 19, 2006, 9:12 pm
#8
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Ft Lauderdale
Posts: 2,596
IMO AA already has some of the highest levels out there.
Apr 19, 2006, 9:15 pm
#9
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: FIND ME ON TWITTER FOR THE LATEST
Posts: 27,730
Caution, how 'bout a little?
One thought before the suicides, rash mileage-redemptions and "ƒ%ç% AA!!!!" posts begin.
I have many friends who work at AA in many different levels and capacities. Some are FTers, some think FT is hilarious, some think FTers are a bunch of whiney wackos that they want nothing to do with (anymore), some think AA should take FT far more seriously. Some have never even heard of FT (or at least ever visited, more accurately.)
Point is this; several of these people leak info to me and others here.
Some of them have never, ever told me anything that didn't turn out to be 100% true-- if they emailed me and said AA was declaring bankruptcy tomorrow, I'd post it.
Some have been very specific about "this is what i heard, but have no idea if it's true." It usually turns out to be true, but these people are professionals and don't like to take risks as it were.
Some have told me things that I didn't post because it sounded to crazy to be true (ORD-DEL comes to mind.)
Others, well... others are well-intentioned but are also chatty [fill in name of preferred gender]'s, they mean well, they are honest, but they just don't know how to sift through the maze of info that's out there and distill out the truth from the galley gossip.
It took me many months before I learned to tell the former from the latter. It's not easy. I don't want to post bogus info, so much stuff goes unposted 'till confirmed.
Let's WAIT and see if anything is being considered and if it bears any resemblance to the OP.
Also, what IceTrojan needs to be considered as well.
I have many friends who work at AA in many different levels and capacities. Some are FTers, some think FT is hilarious, some think FTers are a bunch of whiney wackos that they want nothing to do with (anymore), some think AA should take FT far more seriously. Some have never even heard of FT (or at least ever visited, more accurately.)
Point is this; several of these people leak info to me and others here.
Some of them have never, ever told me anything that didn't turn out to be 100% true-- if they emailed me and said AA was declaring bankruptcy tomorrow, I'd post it.
Some have been very specific about "this is what i heard, but have no idea if it's true." It usually turns out to be true, but these people are professionals and don't like to take risks as it were.
Some have told me things that I didn't post because it sounded to crazy to be true (ORD-DEL comes to mind.)
Others, well... others are well-intentioned but are also chatty [fill in name of preferred gender]'s, they mean well, they are honest, but they just don't know how to sift through the maze of info that's out there and distill out the truth from the galley gossip.
It took me many months before I learned to tell the former from the latter. It's not easy. I don't want to post bogus info, so much stuff goes unposted 'till confirmed.
Let's WAIT and see if anything is being considered and if it bears any resemblance to the OP.
Also, what IceTrojan needs to be considered as well.
Apr 19, 2006, 9:27 pm
#10
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest
Programs: AA, UA, DL, LUV, SPG, HHonors, Avis, Hertz
Posts: 3,033
In the spirit of JonNYC's post, I'm not questioning you personally Brandy, but rather raising the possibility that there's some convoluted thinking being twisted around the AA grapevine. (I also think Jon's post is reallly good because it reminds us how much bogus information WE all probably hear at our OWN places of business that needs to be sifted.)
Here's one piece, in particular:
This just doesn't make complete sense to me. It suggests a "lot of AA FF dissatisfaction". Assuming OP means among flyers (if not, it's very confusing) it's not at all clear why raising levels and charging 40% to 70% more for fast confirms is going to HELP that situation. If anything it's going to aggrevate it.
I'm also not sure I get why AA would be so anxious to 'burn off these liabilities' right now. I'm not saying it's wrong per se, but I'm having a hard time understanding the logic. Right now, perhaps more than almost (almost) anytime in the airline's recent history, it needs real rev pax to bolster the balance sheet. Of all times, why would now be a good time to try and fly more non-cash pax?
I'm also not sure I get why it would be imperative to try and burn more miles sooner. Granted, raising redemption levels is a good way to erode the purchasing power of the mileage liability, and all things being equal, it's better to have fewer future liabilities, but what's the urgency to speed it up right now? (Maybe there is, and my sleepless mind is missing the logic?)
Here's one piece, in particular:
With the higher load factors AA has, AA is not burning up as many AA FF miles as originally forecasted internally. That has created a lot of AA FF disatisfaction, plus concern about ""How do we burn off theses liabilities"". Therefore AA is now exploring ways to burn more miles with: (1.) raising all levels, and (2.) a new third category of fast confirmed reservations, but at 40% to 70% more miles than the current anytime awards.
I'm also not sure I get why AA would be so anxious to 'burn off these liabilities' right now. I'm not saying it's wrong per se, but I'm having a hard time understanding the logic. Right now, perhaps more than almost (almost) anytime in the airline's recent history, it needs real rev pax to bolster the balance sheet. Of all times, why would now be a good time to try and fly more non-cash pax?
I'm also not sure I get why it would be imperative to try and burn more miles sooner. Granted, raising redemption levels is a good way to erode the purchasing power of the mileage liability, and all things being equal, it's better to have fewer future liabilities, but what's the urgency to speed it up right now? (Maybe there is, and my sleepless mind is missing the logic?)
Apr 19, 2006, 9:27 pm
#11
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS
Programs: AA EXP, Hyatt Diamond, SPG Platinum
Posts: 423
Originally Posted by JonNYC
...one thing I will say is that a couple of items in the OP are definitely not true and that makes me suspect of the source(s) for the balance of the items.
Apr 19, 2006, 9:45 pm
#12
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: FIND ME ON TWITTER FOR THE LATEST
Posts: 27,730
Bt the way, among others, this part-- to me-- makes no sense whatsoever.
Huh?
Originally Posted by Brandy
...AA has contacted other One World carriers to see if this could be "coordinated" to avoid different redemption levels and avoid a "run" due to different level differences in redemption requirements.
Apr 19, 2006, 9:54 pm
#13
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
As DCAstudent said, a normal review would not be a surprise, but what the OP is talking about sounds like much more than that.
FWIW or not worth, I don't see AA jumping to try to coordinate with all its redemption partners (or even just the subset that is all the OW ones) -- esp. not at one time -- to create a cartel to fix mileage award amounts.
This is not going to stop me from adding to my AAdvantage account any time soon.
FWIW or not worth, I don't see AA jumping to try to coordinate with all its redemption partners (or even just the subset that is all the OW ones) -- esp. not at one time -- to create a cartel to fix mileage award amounts.
This is not going to stop me from adding to my AAdvantage account any time soon.
Apr 19, 2006, 10:33 pm
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: NYC, USA
Programs: AA EXP 3MM, Lifetime Platinum, Marriott Titanium, HH Gold
Posts: 10,968
IMHO, they can raise all the award ranges for flight awards all they want, as long as they GET RID OF THE COPAAY! (And keep mileage upgrade levels as they are.)
You probably can guess how many flight awards I claimed last year: Zero. And how many upgrade awards I claimed: LOTS.
You probably can guess how many flight awards I claimed last year: Zero. And how many upgrade awards I claimed: LOTS.
Apr 19, 2006, 11:05 pm
#15
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: DFW, 3.5 MM, AA EXP, LIFETIME PLATINUM, MARRIOTT LIFETIME PLATINUM, STARWOOD AMBASSADOR 223 NIGHTS, AND LIFETIME GOLD, HILTON DIAMOND, NATIONAL EXECUTIVE ELITE
Posts: 5,847
oh, i would believe it re: incraeses in mileage levels for redemption.
pardon me, yet why anyone here would question this in light of all the so-called "in flight dining" cuts in F and J is beyond me.
while the OP may not have all the correct details, i could believe the theme of it (from a high level perspective).
pardon me, yet why anyone here would question this in light of all the so-called "in flight dining" cuts in F and J is beyond me.
while the OP may not have all the correct details, i could believe the theme of it (from a high level perspective).