FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post

Dec 24, 2009 | 2:36 pm

#34

Sagy

Original Member, Ambassador: OneWorld Alliance

Join Date: May 1998

Location: Austin, TX, USA

Programs: AA ExecPlat & 3MM; Marriott Titanium

Posts: 1,015

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traveloguy

Quite confused at your appraisal of OW in respect to other alliances.

My comments are about OW and what I expect from an alliance. Not in respect to what other alliances (with which I´m not as familiar provide)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traveloguy

Firstly the AA/BA issue is related to competition issues and the fact that BA and AA don't yet have antitrust immunity.
Partial credit works definitely both ways. Star is all about metal whereas OneWorld is all about the codeshare you are travelling on. Overall I have to say I think that OneWorld is far superior in this respect as you never have to guess what the code may translate across to. Sadly on Star there are no public translation charts published at all and it takes hard core FT'ers to try to figure out what they _may_ translate to. This issue is probably the single most frustrating aspect of *A so I am surprised you feel it is good thing.
As your profile says your an EXP and I surprised you think you can use AA miles to upgrade BA and QF flights as you cannot. In fact the only OW programme you can use to upgrade other flights is CX although it is pretty restrictive.
OW coverage in Europe is actually pretty decent although the key issue is having to fly to the outer reaches of the continent to get anywhere else. LX of course would have solved this problem nicely, although we are now left with MA which is an airline which is underinvested in and cannot fulfill the role it was left with (I also suspect BA would not have liked MA to be in a position of strength anyhow).

But the lack of antitrust immunity does have a negative impact on the alliance, this fact (regardless of the cause) can´t be ignored.
So your point is that *A has a worse partial credit set of rules, I´ll trust you. This doesn´t change my view that the current OW system is bad.
Maybe I wasn´t clear. Except for between BA & QF you can´t upgrade on another airline within OW. I would expect an alliance to give me the ability to upgrade across the different airlines (QF & BA do that, if you are an alliance this practice should be available across all airlines).
Having to fly to “the outer reaches of the continent to get anywhere else” is in my view lack of converge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traveloguy

Elite bonuses on the AA programme are determined by AA themselves. In fact elite bonuses vary widely between programmes and alliances. I'm actually surprised how generous AA is with it's partners compared to other programmes both in OW as well as *A. Again, I suggest that if you did some proper research into other programmes, you might find that the grass is not greener on the other side and you are possibly in the best programme out there.
Code shares are up to airlines to decide bilaterally. Just because AA has decided not to codeshare to TLV does not make OW an ugly alliance.
From personal experience I have found *A to be slightly better integrated, yet when it comes to booking other members flights, OW seems better set up to do this. For example, use the AA website and the OW option, and booking other member airlines flights is very simple. In fact I feel AA might be the best website for doing this out of all airlines and alliances. Try doing the same with the UA website which promises much of the functionality yet fails to deliver. Also try the BD website to do anything and I think you would be very disappointed.
As you have been an Emerald for less than a month I really can't see how your in a position to judge this one. I have to say I would prefer Emerald recognition over *G any day of the week. Most carriers I have experienced issues with seem to be fairly helpful when you come in asking for assistance as an Emerald. *G (or OW Sapphire) however are pretty much run of the mill these days so partner airlines don't tend to give you too much in the way of 'above and beyond' service. LH is probably the one exception within *A although I would still keep one's expectations low.
Can I remind you that this is an AA issue and not a OW issue. MOST carriers out there don't allow booking of awards on partner carriers online. The few exceptions to this are QF, BA and NH. Most *A, ST & OW carriers don't offer this functionality.
Finally be aware that the seat booking issue is largely due to GDS issues. AA uses Sabre whereas most of OW uses Amadeus. That said, the issues one experiences on OW are also very much in existence on *A. Most often than not I have to call the operating carrier to get the seat that I want. Rarely have I ever been able to get what I wanted by calling the carrier who has control of my ticket.

You are explaining why it is the way it is, it doesn´t change the fact that the differences are there and give the clear impression of something other than an alliance.
I have to disagree, if you are an alliance the first thing that I expect is the ability to use the other airlines for code sharing to locations one alliance member doesn’t fly and another does. To me this is by far the most important feature of an alliance (one airline helping another). Otherwise, in my view what you have is not an alliance. An airline can do one-off code share with any partner.
I´ll take your word that OW it is better integrated. The fact that I can´t book a seat on IB from a BA website on a single itinerary involving both airline is ugly.
Hence my statement “as a OW Sapphire”, as an Emerald my view might be different. However, I can very well judge an alliance as a second tier elite and it is not less (or more) meaningful than view of a top tier elite.
The fact that others do not allow this functionality doesn´t change my view that is shows very badly on the alliance. I made it very clear that my comments are about the alliance. If 11 airlines want to call themselves an alliance, then I expect certain functionality to differentiate an alliance member from a partner. This is one area in which OW fails (others might be worse).
The issues might be common and I´m sure they are reasons behind them. When I look at alliance, I expect more than I get with just a partner and the grading scale is not on a curve. It might be very well that OW as an alliance is better than *A and ST. It is also the case that in my view OW is below average of what I would expect from an alliance and I consider “C” to be average.