Price Increase on UC reward seats - now $1200+ ?!

Checked out some UC miles flights on the basic NYC>LHR route, only to find that the charges are now over $1200/ 735 pondos (plus 80,000 miles). Excuse my acronyms, but WTF?!

It used to be about $1000, but now its gorn up $200 more - when did that happen?

Considering a regular economy ticket is $900 or so for same season, (and that earns you miles, not costs them) its a total rip off - the miles value is just a joke on VS now. I try to use miles on partners as much as possible, but still a reward ticket back to Blighty once a year should not be a chance to rip off loyal customers. (That and the only availability is on 1 morning flight, 2 months out)

It seems the only way to get reward value out of VS as a high mileage AU holder is to fly economy and abuse the lounge* before/after. I have 750,000 miles sitting in the account, and refuse to be gouged by VS when I want to redeem them. Annoying, but trying to laugh about it.


*will do my best on this front

Yes, the taxes and fees are a rip-off. Same with BA.

Have you tried pricing up an 'M' economy fare and upgrading to UC with miles?

That probably won't cost a lot more, plus you'd only spend half the miles and earn more miles and TPs for the economy fare.

I agree -- it's ridiculous, and the drastic worsening of reward availability over the past 18 months has only exacerbated it. They are ultimately shooting themselves in the foot, because it erodes what is a loyalty programme and there are loads of us here who have either switched airline or who are thinking of doing so.

It does sound ominous, the uk end of this isn't that bad, 450-500 taxes for UC, so its not just valued at the 2:1 dollar rate (7 years ago?), its that, plus a fair bit more. I hope the uk end doesn't match it, because you know we'd be the one up 750-800.

Perhaps this is for the US delta reward people...

Just checked on BA good availability but as Gumshoe states same 1200 dollars cost. I don't know what the major US airlines charge, but I believe it's a lot less.

I used 95000 miles on a flight NYC to JNB last month and it was $5 in taxes!! For a 16+ hour flight!

Better still was using 135,000 miles (iirc) on a 12hr UC flight on Air New Zealand (LAX to AKL) plus just $35 in fees. Did that 3 times. Think I'll go again before I give VS $1200 and 80,000 for a 6hr UC flight.

Its gone beyond being crazy now. The good news is I'm invited to some drinks thing at the NY stock Exchange later next week with the CEO of VS USA and Delta, and I'm going to plainly tell them what I think, and how they are going to loose me and my fellow UC travelers this way.

Yes, the taxes and fees are a rip-off. Same with BA.

Have you tried pricing up an 'M' economy fare and upgrading to UC with miles?

That probably won't cost a lot more, plus you'd only spend half the miles and earn more miles and TPs for the economy fare.

Yes I keep an eye on the M and even better, the PE 'S' fares, they are sometimes priced just a few hundred above the UC reward 'taxes and fees' nonsense, and you earn miles +TP for that ticket, plus can often upgrade to UC at the airport for 10k miles, plus some reasonable $ fee, assuming availability. That's the only acceptable redemption value left, when they are priced well, (which is not that often ! ).

It does sound ominous, the uk end of this isn't that bad, 450-500 taxes for UC, so its not just valued at the 2:1 dollar rate (7 years ago?), its that, plus a fair bit more. I hope the uk end doesn't match it, because you know we'd be the one up 750-800.

Perhaps this is for the US delta reward people...

Now this IS interesting - so its GBP508 to do an UC reward trip from the UK to NYC, which is $844, yet they want $1220 to do it the other way around. Same planes, same route. That's nearly a 50% surcharge for US based customers taking an UC reward flight.

How charming of VS to look after us so well. Is this a 'Delta effect' or just a screw you to US based Virgin flyers? ?|

How charming of VS to look after us so well. Is this a 'Delta effect' or just a screw you to US based Virgin flyers? ?|

Or good capitalist practice of pricing to what the market will bear?

Yes, let's just call it what it is. An Upper Class reward seat is really just a heavily discounted UC Seat. To be honest though, I'd still pay it.

Or good capitalist practice of pricing to what the market will bear?

I am not convinced that this is the best way to look at it. Loyalty programmes exist to encourage -- and to reward -- loyalty. Sensible companies recognise that the long-term benefits of that loyalty are profound, and profoundly profitable. The whole premise of reward seats is that you allow your repeat customers the opportunity to buy (at a hefty discount) inventory that would otherwise go unsold, at a price that still makes a very decent contribution to your fixed costs. The more you erode that discount, the less you reward loyalty. You may generate more cash in the short term, but that is not the aim of the game.

Or good capitalist practice of pricing to what the market will bear?

I am not convinced that this is the best way to look at it. Loyalty programmes exist to encourage -- and to reward -- loyalty. Sensible companies recognise that the long-term benefits of that loyalty are profound, and profoundly profitable. The whole premise of reward seats is that you allow your repeat customers the opportunity to buy (at a hefty discount) inventory that would otherwise go unsold, at a price that still makes a very decent contribution to your fixed costs. The more you erode that discount, the less you reward loyalty. You may generate more cash in the short term, but that is not the aim of the game.

My point was not about the principles and practice of loyalty schemes, but to say that companies behave differently in different markets. Also, within your response may be the key - "inventory that would otherwise go unsold". Perhaps VS don't have that much unsold inventory, and nor do they wish to adopt the reward practices of some US flyers that actually deter people from ever actually buying a premium fare ticket as they know low cost upgrades will always be available.

Finally, the responsibility of the board of a company is to its shareholders, who may at the moment be demanding a short term return.

Also, within your response may be the key - "inventory that would otherwise go unsold". Perhaps VS don't have that much unsold inventory, and nor do they wish to adopt the reward practices of some US flyers that actually deter people from ever actually buying a premium fare ticket as they know low cost upgrades will always be available.

With great respect (I mean that sincerely!), I did not argue that low-cost upgrades should always be available. Availability is a matter for the revenue management people; I agree with you that the US schemes go wrong in effectively making it an entitlement of status. My point is that the price of such inventory, should it be made available, is better set at a level that provides a reward for loyalty. There are lots of loyal flyers who are not going to pay more than a given sum to upgrade and who are never going to even think about buying a revenue ticket in a premium cabin; if the marginal cost to the airline of the upgrade is less than that given sum, then I think the airline is missing an opportunity if they price the upgrade so that loyal flyers find it too expensive.

Finally, the responsibility of the board of a company is to its shareholders, who may at the moment be demanding a short term return.

That's fine, but, in my view, it is not what a loyalty programme is all about -- loyalty is about more than the short term (by definition, really).

All intended as friendly debate

All intended as friendly debate

And taken as such y)

Also, within your response may be the key - "inventory that would otherwise go unsold". Perhaps VS don't have that much unsold inventory, and nor do they wish to adopt the reward practices of some US flyers that actually deter people from ever actually buying a premium fare ticket as they know low cost upgrades will always be available.

With great respect (I mean that sincerely!), I did not argue that low-cost upgrades should always be available. Availability is a matter for the revenue management people; I agree with you that the US schemes go wrong in effectively making it an entitlement of status. My point is that the price of such inventory, should it be made available, is better set at a level that provides a reward for loyalty. There are lots of loyal flyers who are not going to pay more than a given sum to upgrade and who are never going to even think about buying a revenue ticket in a premium cabin; if the marginal cost to the airline of the upgrade is less than that given sum, then I think the airline is missing an opportunity if they price the upgrade so that loyal flyers find it too expensive.

Finally, the responsibility of the board of a company is to its shareholders, who may at the moment be demanding a short term return.

That's fine, but, in my view, it is not what a loyalty programme is all about -- loyalty is about more than the short term (by definition, really).

All intended as friendly debate

I don't think the US carriers are handing out upgrades as willy nilly as you both think, CPUs (complimentary premier upgrades) don't apply to international itineraries, they also don't apply on the premium transcon flights - really they're handed out by status order, and value paid, on markets where there might not necessarily be huge demand for buying first anyway - plus there are incentives when buying full fare economy that you'll receive a guaranteed upgrade if you have status, all of that I think feeds into rewarding loyalty well. So in short, I don't think they encourage pax to buy a regular fare on an international flight and hope for an upgrade as that's not possible.

I don't think the US carriers are handing out upgrades as willy nilly as you both think, CPUs (complimentary premier upgrades) don't apply to international itineraries, they also don't apply on the premium transcon flights - really they're handed out by status order, and value paid, on markets where there might not necessarily be huge demand for buying first anyway - plus there are incentives when buying full fare economy that you'll receive a guaranteed upgrade if you have status, all of that I think feeds into rewarding loyalty well. So in short, I don't think they encourage pax to buy a regular fare on an international flight and hope for an upgrade as that's not possible.

It may have changed, but my US colleagues would never buy a premium cabin fare for transatlantic flights but would always rely on being upgraded.

I don't think the US carriers are handing out upgrades as willy nilly as you both think, CPUs (complimentary premier upgrades) don't apply to international itineraries, they also don't apply on the premium transcon flights - really they're handed out by status order, and value paid, on markets where there might not necessarily be huge demand for buying first anyway - plus there are incentives when buying full fare economy that you'll receive a guaranteed upgrade if you have status, all of that I think feeds into rewarding loyalty well. So in short, I don't think they encourage pax to buy a regular fare on an international flight and hope for an upgrade as that's not possible.

It may have changed, but my US colleagues would never buy a premium cabin fare for transatlantic flights but would always rely on being upgraded.

I can only really speak for United I suppose, but the only way you're getting an upgrade with them internationally is if you're on, at the very least, a semi-flexible fare and have been given GPU's (global premier upgrades) as a result of being 1K. Otherwise, no comp upgrades, nada.

I don't think the US carriers are handing out upgrades as willy nilly as you both think,.

I may have misunderstood your post, but my experience of (mainly) AA would lead me to doubt this -- SWUs do seem to be available on international and transcon sectors, and entitlement to them does erode the value of the premium product.

I can only really speak for United I suppose, but the only way you're getting an upgrade with them internationally is if you're on, at the very least, a semi-flexible fare and have been given GPU's (global premier upgrades) as a result of being 1K. Otherwise, no comp upgrades, nada.

Well, it was a few years ago and things have probably changed, but as FF my US colleagues would expect upgrades and have sufficient surplus to pass them on in some way. I benefitted from the generosity of the scheme through a colleague assigning me some kind of voucher and getting me an upgrade SFO -LHR...

Like many others here I'm finding the only practical & cost effective way to get reward flights is with Avios/BA. Plenty of reward availability and, factoring in BA's Amex two for one scheme, the BA offering offers excellent value in my opinion.

No way am I going to grumble at zero fare and £561 taxes/fees & 62.5K Avios for BA Club World to MCO, returning BA First (on the A380!) from LAX. VS goes nowhere near offering such value.

[preiffer]

Indeed - VS Flying Club is a bigger joke than the British Comedy Awards can collectively put together when it comes to redemptions.

Or good capitalist practice of pricing to what the market will bear?

I am not convinced that this is the best way to look at it. Loyalty programmes exist to encourage -- and to reward -- loyalty. Sensible companies recognise that the long-term benefits of that loyalty are profound, and profoundly profitable. The whole premise of reward seats is that you allow your repeat customers the opportunity to buy (at a hefty discount) inventory that would otherwise go unsold, at a price that still makes a very decent contribution to your fixed costs. The more you erode that discount, the less you reward loyalty. You may generate more cash in the short term, but that is not the aim of the game.

Do most people feel that it is still a "loyalty" program or just a point collection service and hopefully we may get something for free?(which we dont of course due to high fees) What percentage of flying club members earn more miles through 3rd party (credit card, shopping etc etc) earning rather than flying?

it does seem to be getting harder (and more expensive!) to redeem points for reward flights in UC, but it's probably inevitable given the limited number of flights and UC seats, VS's clunky system for finding flights doesn't help either

with BA's volume, availability is usually ok, and their rewards flight finder is excellent, it's getting tempting to head to the dark side

with BA's volume, availability is usually ok, and their rewards flight finder is excellent, it's getting tempting to head to the dark side

Yes I have to admit, if BA offered me status matching (like AF did) to go over, I would seriously think about it now. The Avios program offer huge benefits in the US with alliance flights on AA being terrific value for negligible fees or miles. VS cannot compete with that, so to retain its loyal core AU customers it does what? - shafts them with a 50% higher redemption 'fees' than the UK ones, that's what! - its really a bad move.

Quite frankly, status match or not, I'm thinking of jumping ship too, the BA credit card and its 2 for 1 voucher is great (yes its not perfect, but there is availability: just booked Paris in the Fall for me and missus Club World for one lot of 80k miles) and the USA local benefits are hard to deny for a US based FF, compared to Virgin. They don't seem to be trying to counter that, but rather make it a worse deal than ever. Argh!
v(

I must admit I have not had a problem booking G flights although mainly to Carribean destinations.

One point I would raise I wanted to book 2 flights using points to New York in September which would cost £526 plus 70000 VS miles . BA same dates £800 and 80000 hmm thanks and no thanks BA