# Delta SkyMiles shifts to fare-based mileage earning



## fairviewroad (Feb 26, 2014)

> In what marks a fundamental shift to its frequent-flier program, Delta will become the first major network carrier in the U.S. to have passengers earn award miles based on the fare they pay, rather than how far they fly.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2014/02/26/delta-frequent-flier/5815425/

This is a major change indeed, and hits pretty hard for those of us who more frequently fly cross-country. My "usual" r/t will earn about

one-third of the miles that I get now, based on the average fare I usually pay. [Of course I'm usually on United, so I won't immediately be affected by this. But I'm sure it's just a matter of time before all the biggies follow suit.]

But while I don't like it, it's hard to fault an airline for choosing to reward it's most lucrative customers as opposed to people who happen to be sitting in a seat for a longer period of time. Fundamentally it doesn't seem fair that a person who pays $300 to fly ATL-DCA should get a fraction of the miles of someone who pays $300 to fly BOS-LAX. (That latter fare would be a pretty good deal, but certainly possible).

And of course, this puts Delta somewhat closer to Amtrak's points system. (One difference is that there is no apparently minimum in Delta's

new system akin to the 100 point minimum on Amtrak. OTOH, there aren't a whole lot of sub-$50 fares to be found on Delta, either.)

Thoughts?


----------



## jis (Feb 26, 2014)

United already has dollar amounts associated with Elite qualification. Amtrak is not quite there yet.


----------



## Blackwolf (Feb 26, 2014)

Seems to be understandable, from my point of view. Just as long as there is not a devaluation of points with Delta (or any other airline that follows suit) after enacting the change of earning, of course. Making it harder (IE: more expensive) to amass points while increasing the number of points needed for an award ticket would just be ridiculous.

Elite status aside, much as it is with Amtrak, racking up points with paid travel is one of the worst ways to gain an award. While Delta is not a player with the Chase UR mall, use of one of the linked Chase cards to rack up points and then transfer them as needed into a partner account is still what I consider a best bet. I simply cannot justify traveling enough for elite status with ANYONE (minus my Gold status with Hilton, thanks to my American Express card.) So raw points are all I have going for me.

That said, I've not traveled on a Delta flight in over 9 years. They just don't fly where I want to go.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Feb 26, 2014)

jis said:


> United already has dollar amounts associated with Elite qualification. Amtrak is not quite there yet.


Shhhh! Dont give Anthony any Bad Ideas! h34r:


----------



## Ryan (Feb 26, 2014)

Has AGR had fare based earning for its entire existence, or was it miles based at some point?


----------



## PRR 60 (Feb 26, 2014)

RyanS said:


> Has AGR had fare based earning for its entire existence, or was it miles based at some point?


Always fare based.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 26, 2014)

Ahead of its time!!!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2014)

jis said:


> United already has dollar amounts associated with Elite qualification. Amtrak is not quite there yet.


Which was a reaction to DL's previous requirements as well.

Amtrak status of any sort is already a borderline useless benefit along most of their network. Rather than restricting status even further with dollar minimums and whatnot maybe AGR should try adding some compelling benefits for LD passengers to chase in the first place.


----------



## Anderson (Feb 26, 2014)

I've never actually understood how frequent flier programs wound up being distance-based in the first place. To be fair, I can see some sort of special bonus for taking certain longer flights, but that makes sense as a promotion, not as standard practice.

Edit: I agree that it would be nice for Amtrak to offer something for regular LD passengers. Heck, you can't even use a two-for-one coupon if you're in a sleeper, even if you're in the same roomette...which is sort of absurd when you realize that means you can't use it to save on a ticket MIA-NYP on a _Silver _(which in a sleeper would never be more than about $125 right now), but you _can_ use it to save on a more expensive ticket WAS-NYP on an _Acela_ (which could run over $250 right now).


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2014)

Anderson said:


> I've never actually understood how frequent flier programs wound up being distance-based in the first place. To be fair, I can see some sort of special bonus for taking certain longer flights, but that makes sense as a promotion, not as standard practice.


Most mileage based US frequent flier programs allow status to be earned via miles *or* segments.


----------



## fairviewroad (Feb 27, 2014)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Anderson said:
> 
> 
> > I've never actually understood how frequent flier programs wound up being distance-based in the first place.
> ...


Status, yes. But in terms of redeemable "points" the accrual has generally been in terms of real miles until now.

I think the basis for that harkens back to an era when the distance of the flight had a strong correlation to the fare

paid. To a limited extent it still does--i.e. on average it costs much more to fly from New York to Tokyo than from New

York to Charlotte.

But what's happened is that advance purchase fares for cross-country flights are artificially low, meaning you can

rack up an easy 5000 miles for a $250 round-trip transcon flight (been there, done that on multiple occasions) but

a last-minute Chicago-Cincy ticket can cost you $1000 and yield a fraction of the miles.

So the fare-based system is inherently more fair, no pun intended. Do I like it? NO! Because I'm the type who benefited

from those cheapo advance purchase flights.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 27, 2014)

fairviewroad said:


> Devil's Advocate said:
> 
> 
> > Anderson said:
> ...


Also until recently short trips used to come with minimum points accrual that helped to partially alleviate the issue of folks on short duration flights being short changed on miles.



fairviewroad said:


> I think the basis for that harkens back to an era when the distance of the flight had a strong correlation to the fare
> 
> paid. To a limited extent it still does--i.e. on average it costs much more to fly from New York to Tokyo than from New
> 
> York to Charlotte.


The Tokyo flight is probably cheaper per mile though.



fairviewroad said:


> But what's happened is that advance purchase fares for cross-country flights are artificially low, meaning you can rack up an easy 5000 miles for a $250 round-trip transcon flight (been there, done that on multiple occasions) but a last-minute Chicago-Cincy ticket can cost you $1000 and yield a fraction of the miles. So the fare-based system is inherently more fair, no pun intended. Do I like it? NO! Because I'm the type who benefited from those cheapo advance purchase flights.


The problem with the revenue based systems is that they lose their ability to manipulate passengers into choosing worse schedules and purchasing unnecessary flights. People love the idea of "gaming the system" in order to rack up the "big score" and that's never going to be the outcome of a revenue based loyalty program. Without that incentive the loyalty program loses much of its sales pitch.


----------

