Originally Posted by Ben Lipsey

You can ignore most of the odd specificities of the survey. For example there will never be any scenario where AF earns XP and KL doesn't. The intro of 0 XP long haul J fares also seems like a pie-in-the-sky idea and would undoubtedly receive extreme resistance both internally and externally. (I wasn't involved in this survey, but to me it's just trying to calibrate customer reaction to a variety of different factors, all else being equal.)

But my point stands regarding the principle of differentiating XP per fare brand, and finding ways to encourage our elite members to still find a reason/value in buying up from the lowest fare offered. Put simply - basic Y fares in Europe are meant to offer a product that competes with FR, U2, etc. The 0 XP is essentially us saying to our elite members, We don't want you buying this, but we won't 'punish' you if you do so (by preventing elite benefits from applying to this fare - like you see with some of our legacy competitors). Because of course, that's the other possibility: we can simply say, fine, you earn XP on these cheap Basic fares, but elite benefits don't apply. (This is more of the model you see from US carriers. )