Boycotting Frequent Flyer Programs Is Silly? A Response To One Mile At A Time

One Mile At A Time thinks boycotting frequent flyer programs like Lifemiles is silly. Is he correct or is he missing the point?

Boycotting Frequent Flyer Programs: Why It Can Make Sense

Earlier this week, after its second major devaluation in a short period, I wrote I would be personally boycotting Lifemiles, the loyalty program of Avianca. That means, at least for the time being, I’m not buying any more Lifemiles and also will refrain from writing about the program, including coverage of frequent promotions on purchased miles.

Ben thinks that is silly, arguing, “Besides, if we’re going to start boycotting certain programs, please do tell me which programs we’re not boycotting, which haven’t seen devaluations in some form or another.”

Ah yes, a logical fallacy called a strawman.

No one is talking about boycotting all programs which devalue, which would encompass every program over time. As I argued, devaluations are natural and expected in the evolution of any frequent program.

Speaking only for myself, I was talking about one program in particular that is unique in both its size and scope.

Hot Take: Not All Devaluations Are Equal

If my business is to fly airplanes and I have the global network to back that up, then a boycott becomes much more difficult. I’m not calling for a boycott of United Airlines MileagePlus or Delta Air Lines SkyMiles even though both have recklessly devalued without notice, representing a slap in the face of its members. It’s just a non-starter.

But Avicana LifeMiles is different: it’s a loyalty program that has functionally served as a clearinghouse for cheap Star Alliance award tickets and functioned independently from Avianca, a carrier that has struggled to find its identity, offers an inconsistent and poor product onboard, and yet is easy to avoid for Lifemiles’s primary customer base in North America.

And I don’t view these Lifemiles devaluations as business as usual…I view the recent double-devaluation from a company which exists to sell points and offer cheap redemptions differently. The draw (and the only draw) of the program is cheap redemptions.

What A Boycott Can Meaningfully Accomplish

A boycott need not be emotionally driven…it is a calculated and pragmatic move meant to encourage a certain outcome. The scope and duration are important, but less so than what it seeks to achieve: policy change. The objective to punish is secondary to the objective to halt or reverse bad behavior.

Why would it be inherently less serious to say I am boycotting United MileagePlus versus boycotting Avianca Lifemiles? For straters, I live in a United hub and am a MillionMiler in the program, representing decades of loyalty. Plus, I fly United a whole lot…something I cannot say about Avianca.

Lifetimes is not a massive frequent flyer program like SkyMiles or MileagePlus. It’s a boutique program whose business model is geared toward monetizing points. That’s a huge difference and it’s a reason why a boycott against LifeMiles could work.

If instead of mocking a boycott, someone like One Mile At A Time would encourage others to boycott, his voice would magnify far more than mine in making Avianca think twice before its next unannounced LifeMiles devaluation.

Because programs do listen. We saw even large carriers like Delta walk back some of its most punitive lounge access restrictions after pushback or British Airways re-add a segment-based earning method for elite status after great outcry.

But some folks seem content just to bend over and take it. Not me; I don’t think we should accept two massive devaluations coupled with increased blocking just because “that’s what programs do.”

How great would it be if we all said, you went a step too far Lifemiles? We’re not going to reward you with any coverage at all, even if there are still sweetspots, if you’re going to treat customers that way.

Here’s a parallel. If President Trump’s tariff threats have the effect of 1.) stemming the flow of illegal drugs and migrants and 2.) reducing trade barriers against US goods, then I’ll give the man some credit…that’s what his supporters tell me he is attempting to do.

And if that is the case, like the boycott I am proposing, the issue is not the boycott at all, but changing the behavior of the bad actor.

My voice alone won’t change anything, but if others travel bloggers all got behind holding Lifemiles accountable for its unethical practices, it would listen…because it depends on those same folks to push its product.

The sanctions against Russia after it invaded Ukraine never fully worked because there were too many countries–China, Israel, Turkey, and India to name a few–who would not go along.

A boycott from Live And Let’s Fly and my readers is similarly not going to accomplish much…but it does not have to be that way.

Still Find Lifemiles Useful?

Ben points to redemption rates between Sydney (SYD) and Tokyo (HND) to argue that there is still great value to be found in redeeming points via Lifemiles. Let me add that there are still good rates between Canada and Europe…

And it is true that even the worst frequent flyer programs have relative sweet spots and these particular redemption pairs are objectively and comparatively a good deal.

So would I begrudge any reader for using Lifemiles?

No, of course not. You do what works for you.

But I cannot in good conscience advise you to do so because I’m not convinced Avianca would not pull the rug out from under you if you bought the miles this afternoon in hopes of redeeming as soon as the miles hit. Over and over Lifemiles has shown it cannot be trusted and the frequency and degree in which it sells miles, basically that is its business model, makes it unique.

CONCLUSION

I’m not buying the argument that boycotts of frequent flyer programs are silly. When boycotts are seen as unemotional tools to influence behavior, they can work. There’s no boycott for the sake of a boycott. I’m fairly confident that if enough travel writers had come out on the attack for the latest Lifemiles devaluation, we may have seen at least a partial rollback.

Instead, we see acceptance…a vote of confidence for a program and a greenlight for further unannounced devaluations.

So caveat emptor…no one has ever argued otherwise. Miles are always a depreciating asset, not a nest egg. I’ve also argued that for years.

But for a program that so aggressively sells miles and points and offers so little else, I simply cannot reward the latest devaluation by encouraging business as usual.