I mean the BAH point is right, if you book nice hotels as a BAH you'll get more TPs than previously, so that would benefit leisure travellers if the TP requirements weren't so ludicrously high. Realistically very few people can afford to spend £7.5k pp, pa on holidays, now sure airline status is a luxury, but it never has been reserved exlusively for the super wealthy, it's been attainable to many middle class people, and that's only for silver. With these current thresholds BA status with lounge access will be reserved only for the very wealthy and those who travel for business.

Now maybe BA don't care about the few trips per year leisure traveller, but I can't help but think that there must be a lot of people like that, who will no longer feel obliged to book BA, even if more expensive to get their status benefits and/or renew it, and so now that these people are free to shop around, BA will lose them as regular customers. And while they may be spending negligible amounts individually from BA's POV, collectively it surely must be a reasonable chunk of revenue. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that BA haven't considered the implications of this when it comes to consumer behaviour.

Valuing a current TP at £13 is nuts, some people estimated £10/TP, which already seemed quite high to me, but they've gone even higher than that. As I say, as a self funded traveller who has disposable income, but not hoards of it, even silver is now unattainable for me, whereas before I was able to achieve it, and even pondered going for gold with the double TP offer (which seemed designed to tempt people like me to spend more and go on more trips, yet they've now done a full 180 and have cast people like me aside).