SAS EuroBonus - SAS or Continental if flying business (CPH-EWR)

When being a EBG member would you then recommend flying Continental C-class or stick with SAS C-class?

Upsides:
- Lie flat bed
- Approx. 50 % of the price of SAS C-Class (summer campaign)

Downsides:
- Less points (but anybody knows what you get for a Z class ticket on continental when being a EBG member?)
- A little bit longer flight time (and the risk for a technical stop if strong head wind)

Please share your comments

When being a EBG member would you then recommend flying Continental C-class or stick with SAS C-class?

Upsides:
- Lie flat bed
- Approx. 50 % of the price of SAS C-Class (summer campaign)

Downsides:
- Less points (but anybody knows what you get for a Z class ticket on continental when being a EBG member?)
- A little bit longer flight time (and the risk for a technical stop if strong head wind)

Please share your comments

Pretty much no brainer, if half price.

(but anybody knows what you get for a Z class ticket on continental when being a EBG member?)

Only 100%
http://www.flysas.com/en/EuroBonus/Earn-points/airlines/Continental-Airlines/

But half the price in combination with new business seats is a very convincing argument, isn't it?

Hard product better on CO.
Soft product better on SK without a doubt.

However for half the price on Co, this is a no brainer indeed.

I do this route quite a lot.

Lounge access at CPH is the same. Lounges at EWR are different, but I prefer the CO lounges to the SK lounge at EWR even as the food/beverage selection at the SK EWR lounge is better than what CO offers.

Fast-track security is not provided at CPH when flying CO, but it is provided when flying SK. Fast-track security at EWR is better with SK than with CO.

Check-in at CPH is more consistently quicker for me with CO than with SK, but a fair amount of time is eaten up with CO by having to get myself from the SK terminal to the other terminal for CO at CPH. At EWR, check-in with SK is often quicker than with CO; however, given I'm usually connecting from DCA on my way to CPH -- I still avoid IAD -- check-in at EWR isn't an issue for me; that, or I check-in at EWR in the morning so I can go directly to the gate upon returning from Manhattan.

Boarding process, a wash IMO; but at least with CO, more flexible cabin baggage practices. :D

In-flight hard product -- I prefer CO now to SK.

In-flight service -- I prefer SK.

... for half the price, I'd definitely pick CO. For any discount, I'd pick CO.

In most programs, Z on CO mostly credits like full fare economy class tickets. However, if booking a Z fare with the UA/CO-operated flight marketed as a LH flight (for example), the UA/CO-operated flight connecting CPH with EWR may end up crediting as a J booking class flight.

Given UA/CO's program doesn't charge fuel surcharges on mileage tickets, crediting the flights to UA/CO's program may make some sense if you plan to use them for a one-way ticket in Europe that would otherwise be expensive. If familiar with how fuel-dumping works for regular paid tickets, perhaps this will be of extraordinary use. :)

When being a EBG member would you then recommend flying Continental C-class or stick with SAS C-class?

Upsides:
- Lie flat bed
- Approx. 50 % of the price of SAS C-Class (summer campaign)

Downsides:
- Less points (but anybody knows what you get for a Z class ticket on continental when being a EBG member?)
- A little bit longer flight time (and the risk for a technical stop if strong head wind)

Please share your comments


Where did you find this campaign?

On a TATL I will always prefer a widebody before a narrow, and most european carriers before any US. But, for half the price I would say ^

..when on the subject: Unexpected Fuel Stops, Inconvenience and Delays (http://www.flyertalk.com/the-gate/blog/9438-unexpected-fuel-stops-delays-and-inconvenience-should-boeing-757-aircraft-be-used-on-transatlantic-flights.html)

On a TATL I will always prefer a widebody before a narrow, and most european carriers before any US. But, for half the price I would say ^

..when on the subject: Unexpected Fuel Stops, Inconvenience and Delays (http://www.flyertalk.com/the-gate/blog/9438-unexpected-fuel-stops-delays-and-inconvenience-should-boeing-757-aircraft-be-used-on-transatlantic-flights.html)

CPH-EWR doesn't get disrupted by that relative to SK equipment breakdowns. :D

CPH-EWR doesn't get disrupted by that relative to SK equipment breakdowns. :D

Good point:D

Where did you find this campaign?

It was on the Danish version of lufthansa.com

In the beginning of Jan., Lufthansa and Air Canada had a similar campaign for the easter traveling...