Elite M (or B) instant upgrades on CO

Discussion in 'United Airlines | MileagePlus' started by sjpaul, Feb 12, 2011.  |  Print Topic

  1. Do any UA elites have experience using CO's elite instant upgrade from M-fares? I understand that UA 1k's get this benefit, and I was hoping for an explanation of how the process works. Thanks.
     
  2. Scottrick
    Original Member

    Scottrick Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    4,078
    Status Points:
    2,570
    I have a B fare coming up on CO and haven't been upgraded as a 1P. I supposed I could call, but the wait time for CO's customer service line is always so long for me.
     
  3. mowogo
    Original Member

    mowogo Gold Member

    Messages:
    7,078
    Likes Received:
    12,942
    Status Points:
    12,520
    When I took advantage of this in October, I had to go into my reservation and click upgrade on the reservation, and then it upgraded my seats from Y to F
     
    cockpitvisit and Scottrick like this.
  4. Hannaman
    Original Member

    Hannaman Silver Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes Received:
    180
    Status Points:
    445
    With these, it's an instant-upgrade, with no waitlist. So if you can't clear immediately, you need to keep checking back. Once a seat is available, first eligible customer with an appropriate fare who calls or upgrades online will get it.
     
    Scottrick likes this.
  5. Scottrick
    Original Member

    Scottrick Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    4,078
    Status Points:
    2,570
    Thanks! I did that. Very tricky how they make you do the work and check a box. However, now my B fare is replaced by ZE, and I'm only getting 100% EQM instead of 150%. Is there a way to get my EQM back and still sit in F?
     
  6. mowogo
    Original Member

    mowogo Gold Member

    Messages:
    7,078
    Likes Received:
    12,942
    Status Points:
    12,520
    I had a similar thing happen on my reservation, but was credited with the 150%EQM in the end
     
    cockpitvisit likes this.
  7. Hannaman
    Original Member

    Hannaman Silver Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes Received:
    180
    Status Points:
    445
    It's safe to ignore the EQM. EQM should still post properly based on the ticket purchased.
     
  8. Scottrick
    Original Member

    Scottrick Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    4,078
    Status Points:
    2,570
    Yes, I've noticed that EQM on CO's web site is nearly always wrong. And my rebooked flights due to IRROPS or schedule changes are always misconnects or incomplete. I know .bomb has its issues, but hopefully they can fix some of this if they stick with CO (which I heard is the plan).
     
  9. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,219
    Likes Received:
    61,766
    Status Points:
    20,020
    FWIW, if the checkbox isn't there that means that there is no ZE inventory on the flight in question. As the ZE bucket closely parallels regular Z inventory setting up a monitor on the Z bucket can be useful. EF offers such a service if you are a subscriber. I've also got a similar service in beta testing here: http://www.wandr.me/Flight_Inventory_Alert.aspx/.

    I'd say that "nearly always wrong" is quite a stretch. It is bad for partners where the fare classes do not match CO's and the ZE bit is wrong. Other than that (which is to say most of the flights) it is correct.
     
  10. Hannaman
    Original Member

    Hannaman Silver Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes Received:
    180
    Status Points:
    445
    Ahh yes, semantics.

    Nearly always wrong is probably not technically accurate, though I get the point of the message. Wrong enough of the time to be unreliable might be more accurate.
     
  11. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,219
    Likes Received:
    61,766
    Status Points:
    20,020
    Ummm...no. Wrong on some partner flights? Sure. Wrong in one specific area related to upgrades because they use the same code for both M-Ups (where it is correct, actually) and B-Ups? Sure.

    Unreliable in most or even many scenarios? Not at all.

    Please enlighten me as to the other scenarios where is it wrong so often as to make it unreliable.
     
  12. Hannaman
    Original Member

    Hannaman Silver Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes Received:
    180
    Status Points:
    445
    I didn't say that.

    I think it's wrong enough not to trust it though. I would go by the EQM chart over what it posts on a ressie.
     
  13. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,219
    Likes Received:
    61,766
    Status Points:
    20,020
    How often is that? Seriously.

    Me, too, but only in situations that are rather complex. For nearly all reservations shown on co.com the info on the reservation is accurate because they are CO flights on CO metal without a B-Up. Suggesting otherwise - which you have, whether you are willing to admit it or not - is simply wrong.

    But keep at it. The constant "what I think must be what everyone else does to so I'll claim it as indisputable fact" style of your posts is always good for entertainment.
     
  14. Hannaman
    Original Member

    Hannaman Silver Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes Received:
    180
    Status Points:
    445
    That's one way to skew the numbers. Another way to look at it is what would it display for every possible carrier and fare class combination, and whether or not that would be accurate without weighting them.


    Not sure what you're referring to here, but whatever it is, it certainly complements the, "Let's dissect the language of any post that makes CO look less than stellar so that we can find a technicality somewhere" style of your posts. ;)
     
  15. Erasmus
    Original Member

    Erasmus Silver Member

    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    22
    Status Points:
    130
    Sorry, but I'm still not sure there was an explicit answer to the OP's question (which I have also wondered about). Do 1Ks get instant Platinum upgrades from M (as opposed to B)? Does the CO webpage handle it properly? Or do 1Ks need to call?
     
  16. Scottrick
    Original Member

    Scottrick Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    4,078
    Status Points:
    2,570
    Hannaman is correct in interpreting my meaning. There have been times where it doesn't list the EQM, or doesn't add up the segments correctly at the bottom, or something else. I have almost always already priced it out on ITA and counted the miles myself, so I don't care as long as the booking class is right. It annoys me that, if the proper EQM is getting posted eventually, somewhere a computer has the correct information, but it isn't getting to the web site that the consumer sees. I also frequently get incomplete re-bookings or misconnections (recently I got both) when a flight is cancelled due to scheduling changes or IRROPS. It's like the left hand and the right aren't talking to each other, and the computer never checks to ask itself "does this make sense?". I can get it sorted out, but it is annoying.
     
  17. Scottrick
    Original Member

    Scottrick Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    4,078
    Status Points:
    2,570
    Apparently even 2Ps get instant upgrades for B fares, but you are required to go to the reservations page, click on an Upgrade link, and then check a box next to the applicable flight (if the appropriate ZE seats are available). It is not "Instant" as in UA UDU where a seat is assigned and you get a phone call. But it is in the sense that there is no window that opens up.

    I would guess that because the M fare benefit is specific to 1Ks but appears to have similar logic (higher elites get to go one notch down on the fare ladder) that the process is the same. You need to go online or call to initiate the process.
     
  18. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,219
    Likes Received:
    61,766
    Status Points:
    20,020
    I'm 99% certain they do and, yes, the website handles it fine. You have to view the reservation and check the box and it will be processed.
     
  19. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,219
    Likes Received:
    61,766
    Status Points:
    20,020
    :confused:

    If it is correct on the vast majority of reservations that it handles then claiming that it is incorrect too often to rely on is silly IMO. Of course I wish they better handled codeshare and partner options. I also happen to know that there are more than 500 different permutations to be accounted for with partner flights and that's even before codeshare flights get added into the mix. I'm not sure that it is feasible or desirable to build that logic into the website for the few cases that it covers.

    The ZE thing is slightly different because there are more of those than the other. Perhaps CO should introduce a new fare bucket, ZM, to handle the M-Ups so that the M and B-Ups can be displayed differently. But I'm not sure that adding that complexity to their back-end systems is worth it for the display to us, especially when it seems to always actually credit correctly anyways.

    As for the back-end/front-end systems not being connected argument, I buy it in schedule changes but not for something like this. Maybe that's because I know that the system works anyways so I don't care as much.
     
  20. Hannaman
    Original Member

    Hannaman Silver Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes Received:
    180
    Status Points:
    445
    Why is it silly to not trust inaccurate data? We've certainly had enough data points to show that it posts incorrect numbers that it's not always accurate. It's not like it was inaccurate once.

    I just don't seem to follow your logic. In some situations you use an literal, absolute interpretation, and then in others a more-or-less, good enough interpretation is adequate. The only commonality between those approaches is that the style seems to be adapted to make CO look or sound better.
     
  21. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,219
    Likes Received:
    61,766
    Status Points:
    20,020
    If you know the conditions that give it problems then you can trust it the vast majority of the time. Or you can trust it never even though it is accurate the vast majority of the time.

    Your choice.

    Choosing to write off the tool because it has a very limited, rather well-known set of limitations is silly. Choosing to rant about it rather than bother to learn it is even sillier.

    I've never claimed that CO is in the right on this or that they shouldn't fix it. In fact I've frequently complained about this bug and expressed my wish that they would fix it. But in the mean time I'm also trying to help people understand the specifics of its limitations rather than suggesting that it be written off completely. I'm pretty sure that's more useful for the people actually trying to use the information.
     

Share This Page