If everybody is wrong and it's all going great then why did BA introduce temporary bonus TPs a few months after the change? Why was it subsequently made permanent instead of making it permanent from the start? Surely if permanent bonus TPs were always part of the plan the optimum strategy was to have them in place at the start as that would have made the change less unpalatable to more people. I can only think of two possibilities. Either bonus TPs was implemented in a wholly cack handed way ensuring maximum bad PR for the changes straight after they were announced (knowing BA this is plausible) or it was a two stage reactive measure to it going badly. You can't blame anybody for assuming the latter.

Two other points. Firstly it is a statement of fact that the effects of the BAC change will not become apparent until at least one whole membership year cycle has passed and soft landings etc have unwound. Secondly the argument that eroding standards of service hasn't affected revenue. How do you know? I worked for a very well known UK company which was raking in astronomical revenue back in the day and a senior manager once said to me just imagine how much more we'd make if we were actually any good. It is unknowable where BA would be if they'd maintained the market leading standards of 30 years ago.