Originally Posted by
Hyperacusis
Most North American programs allows accumulation of miles in perpetuity. The window to keep miles active may be smaller (2 vs. 3 years), but BA is most certainly not alone in not forceably expiring miles. The likes of EK and EY are in the minority here.
AF/KL used to allow this option before getting rid of it, apparently because it was little used. My opinion is that since the last award chart change (prior to Avois), BA redemption rates have been higher than most other carriers anyhow. Many of those carriers don't charge YQ. If I'm already paying more on BA than I would on another carrier for redemptions, why would I want to pay EVEN more to bring the cash outlay to the same level as that other carrier? It just makes no logical sense.
Just because an airline says something it doesn't mean it's true (re: AF/KL's claim). How many times have we heard BA tell us they're 'enhancing something due to customer feedback' ? The point about giving the Avios-for-taxes as an option is it's precisely that - for those people who are rolling in Avios it is one option. Sort of like PCPM in reverse I suppose...
Originally Posted by
Hyperacusis
This is what I don't understand. Why would you willingly pay a higher redemption rate AND a 'tax' on that rate, when you could very easily find a 'tax-free' redemption at lower rates on other carriers, who have just as many outstanding miles sitting on their balance sheets? Seems like perfectly good grounds to 'compain' for me.
When compared to rates on other carriers, 2-4-1s and MFUs are really the ONLY redemptions on BA now that will provide you with a comparable cent/mile (or pence/mile) redemption value. And of course, the joker if you are GGL.
The point is, though, that for people with a large Avios balance and/or who are tied to BAEC for some reason you have little option. I tend to redeem on other OW carriers where I can because the charges are lower but it's not easy to avoid them all, especially given the IB/AA tie-up (stitch up perhaps ?). In any event some of the surcharges are the LHR taxes which are outrageously high and the airlines have no choice but to pass on.
I think everyone is agreed that the surcharges/extras/Willie Walsh's tie fund or whatever you want to call them are just too high and some parts of them should be removed because they are part of the normal cost of doing business. But what to do ?
Raffles post earlier re: CC charges gives one some hope, but I fear it will be years, not months, before these charges will ever be removed, even if it happens.
Put it this way - 2 years ago I flew to Japan in First Class. Outbound with BA the surcharges were in the region of £200 per person. Coming back was with CX, via HKG obviously. Better service, better food, longer flight and the surcharges were £23...
BAH