Have United Miles, But Don’t Want to Fly the (Un)Friendly Skies? Buy Apple Gear Instead

1 minute read
| Cool Stuff Found

Do you have United frequent flyer miles, but don’t want to risk being dragged bloody and battered from a United flight? It turns out you can buy Apple gear with your United miles. United’s MileagePlus program has an entire Apple Store that allows you to trade your miles for iPhones, iPads, Macs, Apple Watches, Apple TVs, and even accessories. For instance, a 32GB iPad Pro (9.7-inch) Wi-Fi model is currently 79,900 miles. An aluminum Apple Watch with a Sport Band is 53,200 miles. AirPods are 21,200 miles, while MacBook Pros start at 173,200 miles. The store shops like Apple’s own, allowing you to choose options and configure your device as you want it. Plus, you won’t get thrown off a flight, thrown to the floor, or dragged out by your feet, which counts as a big win in my book. [Update: @markelp noted that Mileage Plus members with “status” get better deals on this gear. He noted, for instance, that the same Apple Watch I mentioned is 49,900 miles.]

Check It Out: Have United Miles, But Don’t Want to Fly the (Un)Friendly Skies? Buy Apple Gear Instead

Have United Miles, But Don’t Want to Fly the (Un)Friendly Skies? Buy Apple Gear Instead

9 Comments Add a comment

  1. tweety728

    Yes united has an apple store but they do not ship out the apple products. They will just keep pushing back the shipment dates I ended up cancelling my order with them and got my miles back.

  2. ibuck

    Scott, I think you may have misconstrued my initial comment above. Obviously they were both at fault, as were the Chicago police.

    What we all seem to want is for the airlines to return to treating us like valued customers. And United’s changes seem a step in the right direction.

  3. Scott B in DC

    @ibuck, the problem is that United told their regional carrier to transport their pilots to Louisville. United holds the contract and manages the contract. Their liasons set the rules and follow what the airline tells them to do. This is how it works when a regional flies with the tail logo of a larger airlines. Both are culpable. That is how the industry works. Sorry, if you do not understand that!

  4. ibuck

    I hear your frustration and agree that airlines should treat passengers better. I don’t fly as often as i used to do, because it has become such a hassle, no matter the airline. Their policies have exasperated many travelers, with fees and penalties to boot.

    Maybe, just maybe the tipping point has been reached, and more passenger friendly actions will follow. Check out United’s pledged changes:

  5. geoduck

    Thanks Bryan.

    You make a good point, but only to a point.
    Very true this was a particularly egregious episode made worse by execrable decisions at every level. However it is typical of the kind of attitude and abuse, albeit at a lower level, ALL US airlines give to ALL passengers ALL the time. It is why I do everything in my power to not fly commercial. You ask rhetorically “If Apple asked the police to remove someone from their store who was preventing the operation of that store, would you similarly pile on Apple if the police injured him/her?” If Apple had a history of treating its customers in such a shabby way then yes. Yes I would. Maybe it’s time people stood up and demanded respect from the airlines. Maybe a few flights need to be disrupted, even cancelled. Maybe a few airlines need to go bankrupt. Whatever it takes. all I know I do not fly commercial, and when I do it is not on a US carrier. I refuse to be treated like cattle. I refuse to be treated like a criminal suspect. I refuse to be disrespected by their ilk.

  6. ibuck

    C’mon, Bryan.
    The regional airline (operating as United Express) made a bad, late decision to insist 4 pilots had to ride that plane, displacing already boarded passengers. Then one of United’s gate people messed up, undoubtedly due to company restrictions on denied boarding compensation (a management policy mistake). And there were top management screwups in the aftermath. A bunch of mistakes, to be sure, but eventually there were changes in procedures.

    But it was Chicago’s airport police who physically removed and injured the passenger. It’s unfair to lay the whole incident on United. The airline did not direct the police to batter and bloody the passenger. A passenger who refused to follow the airline’s orders and police orders. And we all know that there are passengers who refuse to follow safety guidelines every single day and/or are passively or actively aggressive. Do we want these uncooperative acts to become even more widespread? Delaying or causing cancellation to our flight? Or just making our flight miserable?

    Continuing to batter United doesn’t serve anyone. If United’s traffic falls off or they lose revenue and go out of business, it will adversely affect the public because lessened competition will make seats on flights a lot more scarce, and that will push seats closer together and raise airfares.

    If Apple asked the police to remove someone from their store who was preventing the operation of that store, would you similarly pile on Apple if the police injured him/her? The airline made changes after the incident. And you can be sure all major US airlines made similar adjustments. As did airport police.

    Wouldn’t you want that after Apple screws up?

  7. geoduck

    I’m not on any “miles” program with United or anyone else. I fly so seldom it’s just not worth bothering with.

    Where3 did you get that picture? It’s great. I wonder if it’s Photoshop or actual vandalism.

Add a Comment

Log in to comment (TMO, Twitter, Facebook) or Register for a TMO Account