zurbec

Was anyone else burned by the Alaska Mileage Plan reduction of mileage credit from British Airways? Alaska disowned all responsibility for this retro-active change. I made a plea to BA for an upgrade to WT+, wondering if anyone else had any luck obtaining some recourse. Seems outrageous for an Alaska partner to sell tickets promising full mileage credit, then revoking that benefit to passengers who purchased tickets.

YVR Cockroach

Did the miles post at 100% then AS reduced them by 75%, or did you just credit at 25%? These things are subject to change. Yes, AS could have made it known earlier but with the exception of AA, most are pretty poor with letting you know what classes are eliglbe for what amount of miles. I am sure MP has a "subject to change without prior notice" clause.

AS still hasn't said what CX fares are eligible for miles.

Savvy Traveler

Regardless, I agree with the original poster; this is unacceptable behavior. A short notice change is bad enough, but retro-active? I mean, come on! In the case of AA, this was a change to an elite status qualifying parter after the status qualifying year had begun.

If AA knew 3-4 months in advance about this, why didn't AS? Did BA not tell them? Was AS simply not paying attention? Either way, it's inexcusable IMO.

YVR Cockroach

Do we know if it is really retro active, as in posting 100% miles first, then clawing back 75%? Waitng for OP to respond.

You can try arguing with AS or BA. A few years back, I flew IB for part of the OW 5 partners/100k bonus. BA changed the IB mileage credit (to none - I didn't care about actual miles but just that at least 1 mile credited) w/o any public notice. I managed to get them to give me the miles and the bonus differential.

Savvy Traveler

What I really mean by retro-active is that the effective date was July 1, 2003 and the change wasn't announced until later in July. That just stinks IMO. It's possibly to have purchased a semi-last minute discount ticket on BA in early July and have flown that same month (before being notified of the change) expecting 100% mileage credit.

Good job arguing with BA over the OW bonus... you definitely had incentive to do so!

zurbec

I use the term retro-active as narrowly applied to my decision to purchase a ticket on BA in April for travel in November, then in late July AS announces the change to be effective July 1st. I understand that this may be completely within the technical rules and rights of BA and AS, however, good businesses don't implement their rules in a manner that lead customers to feel cheated, regardless of what the rules say.

Since oneworld chooses not to offer much competition with United's Star Alliance and Southwest on the west coast shuttle market, AS seems to be in a position to drive a hard bargain and protect AS customers travelling on oneworld carriers like BA.

missydarlin

FWIW.. It was BA's decision to cut the mileage credit, and BA did not give advance notice to AS, therefore AS couldnt not give advance notice to its membership.

zurbec

my understanding is that AS knew as early as May 2003 when they amended the program guidelines. I am curious whether AS retaliated and reduced mileage benefits to BA customers. At the very least, I would have thought that AS and BA could have worked out a deal to allow customers already ticketed to accrue miles at the rates established at the time of ticketing. This may not be standard practice in the industry, but who wants to do business with a company whose only desire is to meet the minimum standards for their industry?

back to my original question, any advice on parlaying this grievance into some sort of upgrade on BA? I sent them an email asking for a token upgrade from WT to WT+ on the flight to Europe, that was a month ago and no response. (lack of response makes me wonder whether BA really is an appropriate partner for AS).

YVR Cockroach

BA pays AS for the miles credited to AS MP members. AS doesn't give miles for flying on BA out of the goodness of its own heart. As you know BA, had decided to reduce mileage accumulation for its own members as those of AA, HP and AS, and QF from 2004 onward. It should really have come as no surprise that it would effect all programmes BA participated in when it was announced BA and AA FFPs were going to reduce mileage credit.

You can always talk with your wallet and take your business elsewhere: AA, NW, KL and CO will give you full AS mileage for most if not all published fares to Europe. Many FTers have already done so.

I doubt if you will get anything out of BA. They're (typical of British companies) notoriously unresponsive as far as customer goodwill issues go (unless of course you buy $$$$$ fares).

WebTraveler

Yes, but Alaska could have balked at it and suggested to BA that it may consider terminating it's relationship with them. Does Alaksa need BA more than BA needs Alaska? That is the key question.

I have always maintained that Alaska has a group of pretty loyal flyers. BA, not being a local powerhouse, would like to tap into that network. This network of loyalty and customer goodwill is worth something. BA should be prepared to pay for it or Alaska can always seek another partner. So who is worth more to who?

I think the Alaska Mileage Plan is on a downswing. By a large still the best in the industry, but definately starting to fall a bit.

Savvy Traveler

Missy: As had to have at least as much advance notice as AA did, and AA was able to parlay that information to its customers several months before the change took effect.

terenz: BA decided to reduce accumulation for AA, HP, and QF not from 2004 onward, but from July 1, 2003. I was certainly not surprised BA did this with AS as well; what surprised me was that AS (having known or at least seen the writing on the wall) did nothing to forewarn its MP members.

YVR Cockroach

It's probably well within BA's contractual rights to change mileage accrual with partners' FFPs at a moment's notice (the partners are paid per mile), and probably not within AS's to terminate a relationship based solely on change in mileage accrual (taking a guess here since I've had as much of a chance to see the contract as you). I don't think either has anything to gain but certainly both have a lot to lose as far as goodwill goes. I estimate BA will gain $75 per roundtrip under the new programme (based on $0.01/mile and 10,000 miles per r/t to LHR/Europe).

As far as that goodwill goes, I think BA has clearly demonstrated they only care about their high-yield customers. They really don't care about those of us who fly on cheap fares.

South of the Border

This is an old thread, but I'm thinking about a future trip to Europe and wanted to strategize about the best mileage deal. Normally, I would pick the cheapest fare among CO, NW, BA, and AA, and accumulate the miles on AS (assuming the connection is acceptable). However, BA only gives 25% mileage credit on discounted economy fares.

If I value the miles at 2 cents each, and my trip is, say, 12,000 miles, wouldn't that mean I would be willing to pay up $240 extra for a flight on CO, NW, or AA (or perhaps BA at full fare), over getting a BA discounted fare? Of course, this assumes that the company isn't paying the bill... Any corrections to my math?

zurbec

I think it is $160, (12,000 - (12,000 x .25)) x .02 = $160. However, rarely will you find BA cheaper than AA, NW, CO.. usual situation, from Seattle at least, is BA is priced higher than the others, except maybe for the brief window of when BA launches a massive sale and the others take couple of hours or next day to match.

South of the Border

Zurbec, thanks for the correction on the formula. However, I think the result is: (12,000 - (12,000 x .25)) x .02 = $180
$240 would be the maximum fare premium if no flyer miles were being give, and $180 is 75% of $240. That might be a useful calculation with Hotwire, for example, which keeps all the miles.
And I completely agree with you about BA's pricing policy.