We are writing a cover story comparing the three global alliances for the December issue of InsideFlyer magazine and would like your input.
If you would like to participate, please post your response in the thread with the pros and cons of oneworld and grade the alliance from A to F (A being the highest grade). You can include a plus or minus with the rating.
Location: Seat 1A, Juice pretty much everywhere, Mucci des Coins Exotiques
Posts: 14,921
I'm a top elite member of all 3 alliances and I actually like them all. They all have their strong and weak points, but thanks to competition, they all have many similarities.
Sometimes a particular remote destination can dictate which alliance you use. But mostly I fly whichever one is the most convenient, or has a sale, or, lastly, which one I need the EQM's on to requal.
As for Oneworld, they have some great lounges and as an Emerald member you can use the F lounge in most places. They also have more flat seats in business class.
Overall grade of A- to B+ (I probably would give *A an "A" and ST closer to a "B"). I too am a top tier member of all three alliances and think that while generally they have many similarities, I now find myself using *A and OW much more. It actually has almost nothing to do with the FF program benefits per se, instead it is the fact that *A and OW have a range of "circle" products other than just the standard RTW. Skyteam really needs to improve here, they only have 3 levels of RTWs and quite frankly these are pretty weak (I honestly don't know anyone who regularrly uses ST RTWs).
OW has so many useful products in this regard, and my guess is they see a return on these products. They just introduced a "Circle Atlantic" product which I am going to use next month, it allows N America, S America, Middle East and Europe stops (and then a return to N America), gives a ton of flexibility and results in a very reasonable fare (which is less than 50% of what it would cost to purchase these segments separately). Circle Pacific and Circle Asia tickets as well as the multi-continent products round out the huge range of products that increase flexibility and reduce cost when compared to simple point to point and roundtrip pricing. *A lags a little bit in comparison to the OW range of products, but nowhere near as badly as ST.
OW also has a pretty good collection of carriers, and in particular seating products. BA and CX have fully flat seats, I think QF has some, and according to reports IB is heading to fully flat. A growing problem with Skyteam is that several of their carriers have failed to standardize around a current generation seat, so for both DL and KE, you run the chance of getting a 10 year old seat, but you are paying just as much as if you got a flat bed.
As for FF programs, I like that several of OW programs allow one way redemptions. I hold BA and AA miles for this flexibility.
Location: Seat 1A, Juice pretty much everywhere, Mucci des Coins Exotiques
Posts: 14,921
I do a lot of ST, mainly for destinations that are better served by ST. But I have only done a couple of ST RTW's because of the lack of Asian carriers and the fact that I don't need to go to Korea often. If they could add Malaysian I would do more ST RTW's.
And don't most all airlines do one way award tickets now? I think I saw recently that AF/KL and UA have added that option.
If there was an ability to do upgrades (EVIP for AA members) across to the OW carriers I'd give them an A.
Good:
Lounges, for the most part, are very good.
Decent worldwide coverage.
Reliable and pretty consistent.
Improvements:
A standard award availability tool that is reliable for multiple carrier routing. Each carrier could continue to maintain expanded availability for their elite members but it's a pain having to search 2 or 3 sites to create an itn before calling reservations.
I'm a Sapphire with oneworld via Qantas and have been for several years now...
* A lack is the Africa network. I know oneworld are aiming for profit, and that is quite fine, but I think an African airline needs to be added.
* Strangeness is where some oneworld carriers use third party lounges in cities where other oneworld airlines have lounges. This doesn't make any sense to me
* A great thing is that the alliance is small, number of airlines wise. It's allowed almost all the airlines to have a similar product offering, with good safety records, and good service.
* A bad thing is where you go to the CX J lounge in BKK as a QF card holder and are told to go across to the QF lounge, when in reality you should be permitted in (this has happened twice)
While not perfect, the alliance is very good. I've flown some Star Alliance airlines (TG J, SAS Y, BD Y) and not really had the same impression of cohesive service that oneworld appears to have.
Programs: InterContinental Priority Club Royal Ambassador,CX Asia Miles,Qantas
Posts: 307
Pros:
-As flyers mentioned above. No repeat
-Great product
-Great airline with service(at least half of them)
Cons:
-Awful mileage accu. on most of the airlines as a sheep on board(BA, CX to mention a few)
-No through-out service and each airline has its own story and expectations
-LONE4 price hiked more than 60% in UK. It was £1298 + tax in May 2008, and the latest price is £2100 + tax.
