BA Executive Club change to spend-based status earning

[Viridis]

My experience is quite different to yours! BA F might be the world’s best business class, but it is still a good product. I also like Club World. Even the ying-yang seats I find really comfortable. I’ve never been a big one needing storage around my seat so it’s not an issue for me. And my qantas silver allows free seat selection 7 days prior, so I’ve always snagged a bulkhead with direct aisle access.

The Concorde Room… again I think we differ in that!

I don’t know how many people are going to be bothered flying a narrow body to connect in Germany, Switzerland or Paris when they can fly direct out of London. Regionally I suppose it doesn’t make much difference.

And all the warriors and status-runners who now say they’re going to abandon BA… good luck. The enthusiasm might run out after the first couple of times their connecting flight is delayed due to weather or ATC strikes or whatever.

I completely agree and the First/Gold check-in at T5 is a god-send. Direct to the First & Concorde Lounges is very convenient and is a far superior experience to many other places. I don't understand the complaints. I have used the QF First Lounge in Sydney & it doesn't really compare.

I know that

BA F [is] the world's best business class

is the classic standing joke but I do wonder what people expect. It really can't be compared with the SQ or Etihad suites which really are First+ and they are priced accordingly. If you want a suite, they're the airlines for you.

I have flown BA, QF & SQ (B777) First. To my mind, each offers the usual pre-flight niceties, a fully lie flat bed, PJs, excellent food and invariably superb service. I know that QF and SQ appear to offer more real estate (although the config' is the same) but I would ask "to what end?". BA offers more than adequate storage space.

And, at the end of the day, ex Australia, the BA pricing is very competitive indeed

I won't be changing FF programmes

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Not sure many will go over to VS. No domestic routes and minimal International routes plus many aren’t interested in SkyTeam.

Most flights between UK cities involve connecting at an international destination like AMS or CDG

 

[Viridis]

provided you fly quality airlines like Qantas or AA instead of British Air.

What am I missing here?

Are you seriously suggesting that QF and AA are quality airlines and BA is not??

I haven’t flown AA for years …. but there’s a reason for that. I wouldn’t equate any US major with BA or QF

And BA and QF are pretty similar

 

[Princess Fiona]

Could someone explain to me how this change is necessarily a bad thing? It remains distance based as before, provided you fly quality airlines like Qantas or AA instead of British Air. And there’s now new opportunities to earn status aside from flying.

What am I missing here?

-RooFlyer88

You are missing several things.
Differential earn on partner airlines
Eg. QF and MH now earn TP at lower rates than QR and AY.
Massive change to GGL qualification with minimum BA spend required.

There will be sweet spots particularly on optimized DONEx etc but for most BA loyal fliers this is definitely a negative change.

 

[p--and--t]

Are you seriously suggesting that QF and AA are quality airlines and BA is not??

I haven’t flown AA for years …. but there’s a reason for that. I wouldn’t equate any US major with BA or QF

And BA and QF are pretty similar

The nature of various people’s experiences is that they will always vary given the myriad of plane types, fitouts, crews and sectors along with individual expectations and bias’s.

I have never flown F on any international sector but I have flown J internationally, including in the three airlines quoted, multiple times.

I would chose QF or AA over BA on any day of the week on any sector regardless of price.

Maybe it is just the luck of the draw for plane, crew and caterer, but I have yet to fly BA in J where I thought the service was anywhere in the same ballpark to the experience in J on any other major airline.

Note: I am not “statused” in any airline program.

 

[justinbrett]

Could someone explain to me how this change is necessarily a bad thing? It remains distance based as before, provided you fly quality airlines like Qantas or AA instead of British Air. And there’s now new opportunities to earn status aside from flying.

What am I missing here?

-RooFlyer88

AA is based on spend not distance in most cases (where the fare is “available”)

 

[Flashback]

I completely agree and the First/Gold check-in at T5 is a god-send. Direct to the First & Concorde Lounges is very convenient and is a far superior experience to many other places. I don't understand the complaints. I have used the QF First Lounge in Sydney & it doesn't really compare.

I know that

is the classic standing joke but I do wonder what people expect. It really can't be compared with the SQ or Etihad suites which really are First+ and they are priced accordingly. If you want a suite, they're the airlines for you.

I have flown BA, QF & SQ (B777) First. To my mind, each offers the usual pre-flight niceties, a fully lie flat bed, PJs, excellent food and invariably superb service. I know that QF and SQ appear to offer more real estate (although the config' is the same) but I would ask "to what end?". BA offers more than adequate storage space.

And, at the end of the day, ex Australia, the BA pricing is very competitive indeed

I won't be changing FF programmes

First wing security half an hour ago...

 

[BrianQQ]

Could someone explain to me how this change is necessarily a bad thing? It remains distance based as before, provided you fly quality airlines like Qantas or AA instead of British Air. And there’s now new opportunities to earn status aside from flying.

What am I missing here?

-RooFlyer88

It is not distance based for AA, BA and IB flights, and you get stung on Tier Points for Oneworld partners that isn't QR and AY.

A person flying on QF on J from SYD to LHR would get you 240 Tier Points one-way, or 580 Tier Points return.

Remember that it takes 600 Tier Points to get to Silver, or Oneworld Sapphire. So theoretically, a return J flight would be 96% of the existing criteria to reach Silver.

According to this new model, on Qantas's earn table, it is now 25% of the miles you've flown.

From SYD-LHR via SIN would be 10,576 miles one-way, or 21,152 miles return. 25% of that is 5,288 miles. A return J flight would now equate to 70% of the new criteria to reach Silver.

Economy leisure fliers get stung the hardest. Which is probably the majority of the BAEC userbase at the moment. Not a good stunt from BA given that those people would just go to LCCs. It's basically the same as VA's updated model but worse.

 

[Flashback]

It is not distance based for AA, BA and IB flights, and you get stung on Tier Points for Oneworld partners that isn't QR and AY.

A person flying on QF on J from SYD to LHR would get you 240 Tier Points one-way, or 580 Tier Points return.

Remember that it takes 600 Tier Points to get to Gold, or Oneworld Emerald. So theoretically, a return J flight would be 96% of the existing criteria to reach Gold.

According to this new model, on Qantas's earn table, it is now 25% of the miles you've flown.

From SYD-LHR via SIN would be 10,576 miles one-way, or 21,152 miles return. 25% of that is 5,288 miles. In order to get Gold now is 7,500 Tier Points. That's 70% of the new criteria to reach Gold.

Economy leisure fliers get stung the hardest. Which is probably the majority of the BAEC userbase at the moment. Not a good stunt from BA given that those people would just go to LCCs. It's basically the same as VA's updated model but worse.

You might want to recheck some of your calcs there in the first part of the message....

 

[BrianQQ]

You might want to recheck some of your calcs there in the first part of the message....

Done, god BA's naming system is so confusing ;3;

 

[_TheTraveller_]

Maybe that’s the intention?

High spend leisure traveller… will get all the perks of status anyway.

Ultra-high spend will get BA gold/OWE and have access to nicer lounges.

Economy class, or pax getting status ‘on the cheap’ will be left out.

The last group may not be happy, but may not represent value and profit for the airline.

If those pax decide not to fly BA, BA could possibly offer cheaper fares for those left without status, as they don’t have to factor in lounge access and consumption in the lounges?

(Which is something Ben doesn’t address in his article. Major carriers are competing against LCCs, but removing lounge access and benefits might make them even more competitive? And still fill the planes.)

This is it. Sacrifice the 80% for the 20%. The question is whether the 20% find BA good enough.

On top of that, I also hope that BA manages to get a good deal where they lift the CC earn on UK Amex/Barclay cards. Similar to US levels otherwise the numbers do look astronomical.

It's essentially, look at US. Copy and make it BA (bad).

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Economy leisure fliers get stung the hardest. Which is probably the majority of the BAEC userbase at the moment. Not a good stunt from BA given that those people would just go to LCCs. It's basically the same as VA's updated model but worse.

Good question.

if QF and other airlines follow suit it wouldn’t matter how bad the status earning, I’d still fly a legacy carrier rather than Jetstar, Vietjet or Air Asia economy.

Economy ticket holders are still getting a product with all the extras included. Just not getting lounge access as well!

 

[BrianQQ]

Good question.

if QF and other airlines follow suit it wouldn’t matter how bad the status earning, I’d still fly a legacy carrier rather than Jetstar, Vietjet or Air Asia economy.

Economy ticket holders are still getting a product with all the extras included. Just not getting lounge access as well!

Majority of the people in my generation are still travelling with low cost carriers, and see no value in heading onto Qantas, or even Virgin at this point. I don't doubt this LCC trend is trending everywhere bar the US. This is why BA's decision is very questionable.

The reason why spend-based status earnings work in America is because no-one is going to pivot to Spirit or Frontier. When you have LCCs like Ryanair, as well as other European competition, it pushes your power down.

 

[_TheTraveller_]

Good question.

if QF and other airlines follow suit it wouldn’t matter how bad the status earning, I’d still fly a legacy carrier rather than Jetstar, Vietjet or Air Asia economy.

Economy ticket holders are still getting a product with all the extras included. Just not getting lounge access as well!

Majority of the people in my generation are still travelling with low cost carriers, and see no value in heading onto Qantas, or even Virgin at this point. I don't doubt this LCC trend is trending everywhere bar the US. This is why BA's decision is very questionable.

The reason why spend-based status earnings work in America is because no-one is going to pivot to Spirit or Frontier. When you have LCCs like Ryanair, as well as other European competition, it pushes your power down.

Having followed the BA forums on FT, I believe BA's customer base has been premium leisure as business travel has not rebounded. Not necessarily LCCs. Based on someone who has insights into their numbers/shareholder ppts FWIW.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Are you seriously suggesting that QF and AA are quality airlines and BA is not??

I’m not suggesting BA isn’t a quality airline. Arguably they are consistently rated the top in the world in terms of service and cabin. Generally when I think of the best, Emirates comes to mind!

I haven’t flown AA for years …. but there’s a reason for that. I wouldn’t equate any US major with BA or QF

Give em a shot, you might be surprised. I quite enjoyed my United Polaris flight back to Sydney earlier this year. Are they as good as Emirates as you suggest? Probably not! But it doesn’t make sense comparing acBMW to a Rolly Polly, either!

And BA and QF are pretty similar

I would maintain that emirates is better than Qantas.

There will be sweet spots particularly on optimized DONEx etc but for most BA loyal fliers this is definitely a negative change.

I think that’s my argument though. Yes it will hurt many frequent fliers but the pain isn’t spread out equally. And look this ain’t my first rodeo, I left United a few years ago when they pulled this stunt for Qantas. But if you follow the enhancements of these programs to $$$ spent you’ll find clever people found loopholes and some of them now earning status for less!

AA is based on spend not distance in most cases (where the fare is “available”)

Then just don’t make the fare available. Same thing with British Airways. It’ll still be distance based if they cannot determine how much you spent on the fare. This is a trick some United fliers use, opting for speciality tickets instead of normal cash fares so they continue to earn on mileage flown.

As an aside One benefit I see of this new programs is the removal of taxes and fees from flight tickets. I think that’ll save travellers a ton in the long run.

This is it. Sacrifice the 80% for the 20%. The question is whether the 20% find BA good enough.

If they can pull in the right demographic anything is possible. And what British Airways is doing isn’t radical. Just look around the world, so many airlines have moved either partially or entirely to a spend based program.

On top of that, I also hope that BA manages to get a good deal where they lift the CC earn on UK Amex/Barclay cards. Similar to US levels otherwise the numbers do look astronomical.

This was something AA used to great effect. A decent amount of Executive Platinums earned their status on the ground through CC spend. Whether that is fair particularly for someone earning their keep on economy fares remains to be seen. Remember though most airlines have become financial companies that happen to fly planes.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

As an aside One benefit I see of this new programs is the removal of taxes and fees from flight tickets. I think that’ll save travellers a ton in the long run.

Eh? Taxes and fees are still there, it’s just they are excluded from the ticket price in terms of earning. If the fare is £100 but taxes and fees are £40, your only eligible earn is the £60. (carrier fees and surcharges *are* included in earning)

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Majority of the people in my generation are still travelling with low cost carriers, and see no value in heading onto Qantas, or even Virgin at this point. I don't doubt this LCC trend is trending everywhere bar the US. This is why BA's decision is very questionable.

The reason why spend-based status earnings work in America is because no-one is going to pivot to Spirit or Frontier. When you have LCCs like Ryanair, as well as other European competition, it pushes your power down.

These changes - or similar at VA or QF - won’t affect them.

LCC doesn’t really work long haul, perhaps up to 8-10 hours. You can’t get to the mainland USA on a LCC from Australia for example. But to Singapore or Bangkok for example, I don’t think current QF, TG or SQ customers would switch to Air Asia simply because they stopped earning status.

 

[BrianQQ]

These changes - or similar at VA or QF - won’t affect them.

LCC doesn’t really work long haul, perhaps up to 8-10 hours. You can’t get to the mainland USA on a LCC from Australia for example. But to Singapore or Bangkok for example, I don’t think current QF, TG or SQ customers would switch to Air Asia simply because they stopped earning status.

Would disagree with this notion. Many are feeling liberated with this change so expect BA loyalists to drop off to at least VS or someone in the Lufthansa Group.

With this change, loyalty is no longer being rewarded, so people would either fly the cheapest ticket, or the cheapest full service carrier ticket which in most instances is not BA.

If QF tries this, people would simply act the same. No one is going to be spending an extra $300 on QF if the goalposts were moved too far. People flying to SIN would simply just book SQ, JQ or TR, and so forth and so forth.

 

[nancypants]

Equivalent AUD spend:

bronze (OWR, QF Silver) $7000
silver (OWS, QF gold) $15000
gold (OWE, QF platinum) $40000

I posted this elsewhere but will bring it across here

Looking at the thresholds BA has put in place…for a long time I have budgeted $20k to retain WP year on year- my spend is likely necessarily higher due to being NT based but I’ve been told it’s a crazy amount to spend, should be able to get Plat for ~$6k blah blah. BA is pitching £7.5k for silver (=OWS, ~$15k) which is insane

 

[Flashback]

Would disagree with this notion. Many are feeling liberated with this change so expect BA loyalists to drop off to at least VS or someone in the Lufthansa Group.

With this change, loyalty is no longer being rewarded, so people would either fly the cheapest ticket, or the cheapest full service carrier ticket which in most instances is not BA.

If QF tries this, people would simply act the same. No one is going to be spending an extra $300 on QF if the goalposts were moved too far. People flying to SIN would simply just book SQ, JQ or TR, and so forth and so forth.

It's like COVID, that was liberating as I didn't need to worry about status renewal. Looking forward to it.

Status isn't worth much if flying premium anyway. I also have *A Gold and that is a waste of time ....