hfly
I really don't get it. What IS your point?
My original point was that I did not see why KL COULD NOT cut off status on 31/12/03. Whether they will or will not is another matter and I can see arguments on both sides of the equation. From what Cris says, it would seem that they will not, though.

Talking of mental editing, I never suggested that there was anything "farfetched" about maintaining status beyond 31/12/03. All I said was that I could see nothing to prevent them from not doing so if they so wished and I still can't.

If you couldn't care what Dutch law is, etc..., presumably you take the view that they are not legally bound to carry forward status. So what does prevent them from doing so, then?

And what do the precedents that you mention stand for?
1)that US programmes HAD to grandfather benefits? Yes;
2) that ONE European FFP chose to let their members keep to the old system? Yes;
3) that another European FFP who, in theory, has no US residents among its members (in reality a few with a dual address) CANNOT change a feature of its programme which is (AFAIK) uniquely generous in the industry to the detriment of its existing members? No.

I wish it were otherwise. From the information we have now, I do not like the changes that are taking place. But, as far as I can see, all I can do about it is vote with my feet.