Originally Posted by
PhilH
The point about an alliance is that it shouldn't matter. Most airlines fly to LHR, so you should have a good *A option (for example) to any destination of choice. If you want to fly to the USA, fly United. To Asia, SQ or LH via FRA, or many other options.
You make a good point about WT+ though - there are not many other competing products other than Virgin. And even then you can earn destination (not status though) miles on bmi.
Problem with alliances is the inconsistency of the product. In *A for instance UA is absolutely no comparison to SQ or even LH. OW actually is better than most and as most of us are London based, BA treats us like the captive audience that we are.
Originally Posted by
flyclub
However for day trips from London nothing can touch BA for dust.
I really think in the back of my mind in most cases BA have us over a barrel - from a frequency and route point of view most certainly.
Most of main cities in Europe, e.g. Germany, Scandinavia, AMS, CDG, are well covered by other airlines too. But for those of us whose business travel destinations are not consistent then I agree it makes sense to stick with BA from a tier point and mile maximising point of view.
But there is a limit to everything and for each of us there is a different point when we reach it. For the OP the limit was seat selection to Florida. For me it's a very shabby product on the LCA route - 8 returns in CE a year will be diverted elsewhere. For the rest of my travel, we'll see! There are benefits to my shiny gold card and i'll try to keep it with the less painful trips.
Will BA care? On the whole, probably not.