Originally Posted by
iahphx
I find that hard to believe, at least from a US perspective. I would think Star would win hands down.
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/fligh...&ak=93622.blog
I personally don't like Oneworld much because its seems like their members are most likely not to award you full mileage on a partner airline (Iberia and Qantas come to mind). This has actually kept me from qualifying for elite status in the alliance. Also, the BA/AA relationship seems awkward and incomplete, at best. And, in the USA, you have the fewest earning opportunities.
You've got to wonder who votes for these things.
This mixes two issues: which is the best alliance, and which is the best FF program.
Some OW drawbacks mentioned here are more issues with specific FF programs. For example, several *A FF programs have similar fractional mileage earning problems. Geographical coverage, OTOH, is a true alliance issue.
Unfortunately, it's very difficult in practice for someone whose OW experience is as (say) an AA frequent flyer to separate these two areas, since everything they see of OW is filtered through an AA lens. It might be possible as an academic exercise, but people who fill out these surveys don't take the time to go through academic exercises. The bottom line is that comparisons such as this are essentially worthless.