NickB

Indeed.

Richelieu

LIS-MAD-BUD would cheaper on IB, but they don't fly to BUD.

It's difficult to measure, but from the dummy bookings I made to discuss this thread I've seen much more "lower level" redemptions than "higher level". I am not sure availability on Y/C intra-EU award is as big a problem as it can be with longhaul...

redtailshark

Richelieu, but that's what I'm doing. It seems my rational basis for doing so just doesn't compute for some of you, but that doesn't mean it's not rational to me. It's a great value from award tickets when this is possible.

Mais, oui, mon ami! A to C to D to E to F to B, in fact. Very few miles needed. Quite a lot of accumulated taxes on such itins, of course.

You see that it is sensible, in that light.

As for what's being discussed, I beg to differ. We are discussing the value of award tickets and the changing ticketing structure. Here, AF/KL via FB, or maybe DL SM.

Let's take AF for instance. Connecting via CDG isn't optional when redeeming FB or SM for intra-EU travel. It's inevitable. Being able to back-connect is necessary, as some have argued for less unusual cases.

Two years ago using NW WP miles I flew TUS-ATL-EWR-EDI-AMS-CDG-OTP-CDG-LHR-CDG-JFK/LGA-ATL-TUS. It was a US-EU OJ redemption TUS-OTP/OTP-NYC(stopover)TUS award. I wasn't attempting to inject extra sectors, but the system logic permitted a layover at EDI and by introducing a stopover at LON I broke the demonic THREE-TIER JeffLogic [tm] and redeemed the whole thing for 80k WP (six sectors in J/F and six in Y).

Most of this intra-EU flying was on AF as well as the return TATL.

I did this kind of thing numerous times when redeeming on WP. I was always able to reach my stopover and destinations in the EU at low mileage levels by following these kind of plans.

a. The stopovers are fun, all part of the sport. Visit buds in NYC, HNL, SIN, NRT, SOF wherever. I get to see my friends a ton more than most imagine possible, at my income level.

b. Even if not, sometimes this artistry is necessary to break married segment/trip logic in order to secure low mileage redemptions for the entire itin. On DL, for example, breaking the itin at JFK almost always achieved this. Actually, it still can if played right.

You want TUS-ATL-CDG-OTP for 335k at medium SkySnork levels, or what I described above for 80k? That's another very good reason.

That SU example wasn't me and yes, it was revenue. Actually, I would have done that one too to reposition within the EU, but DL SM have such little value I used EZ instead and the heck with the miles.

You can search MR board for recent cases of this thinking.

Also, yes, you can accumulate miles on redemption bookings. I just did on that EU one for example - LH irop, rebook on RO in full Y, credit to DL SM, receive credit. C'est tout simple. Introducing more sectors almost guarantees that something like this will happen.

My point being, just because these activities are not practiced by those who post here regularly doesn't mean it's not a rational measure of award system value, nor that I'm the only person in the universe who does so. By no means, I know I'm not.

My experience with the FB board has been that it's not the jingoistic sticky-beak smoking parlor of the BA EC apologists. You know, the classic Brit intolerance of dissent, and even incomprehension of alternate uses of the FFP....

I must say that I am surprised that here on FT these kinds of things are considered too extreme to be rational, or that nobody transits CDG seven times in four days on these kind of award itins.

Or maybe it's the thin air at my current Andean stopover location on this current subversion

orbitmic

Perfectly agree again that the two are comparable within a few 1000 miles or Ł/€ in taxes and fees at most. In fact, as mentioned earlier, I perfectly agree with your general statement a bit earlier (sorry for paraphrasing) that now, for intra-European Y, EC and FB are broadly competitive and which is cheapest will depend on your specific itinerary or market (EC typically best if you are UK or Spain based, FB typically best if you are Italy or Czech Republic based). That is really the only 'news' to me in terms of intra-European Y as this statement would not have been true 1 month ago (because of the fuel surcharges).

By contrast, FB is always much worse when it comes to intra-European C.

Availability? I don't necessarily have the same impression as you (at least in European Y) but it is hard to comment on now anyway as FB is just introducing their new availability structure with those multiple bands. It remains to be seen whether this means previously available seats only become transferred to higher bands or new seats are being opened up or a mix of both. We can also go into details of change and refund conditions (a bit cheaper on EC than on FB), etc. but I think 'broadly comparable in European Y' is now the headline for those who are interested in that kind of reward.

Hannibal Lecter

Re availability short-haul, more seats are available for BA Golds at no additional cost
Gold Executive Club Member Benefit
Additional reward seats have been made available for you on 1 or more of the flights you have selected.

For Golds there are no fees for changing or amending a reward booking either

Richelieu

There is no value in being forced to connect in exotic places. Value can be had if you want to get there, which isn't the point at hand.

We're trying to find benchmark for comparing BA and FB's offerings. NickB and I guess most of us contended that LCA-ATH isn't a good redemption benchmark as it is not sensible to fly LCA-CDG-ATH or LCA-LHR-ATH when you want to get from LCA to ATH. What you explained is that it makes sense to fly LCA-LHR if you want to get to LHR, then LHR-ATH when you want to get to ATH (which nobody disagreed).

More specifically, we're comparing BAEC and FB intra-EU award structure and the point that comparing cases where people wouldn't fly either of them isn't useful. You didn't provide explanation why one would fly one of these, except by saying "if I want to get there", which makes it a comparison not of LCA-ATH, but LCA-CDG and CDG-ATH. Or LCA-hub-LCA, as it would be priced the same in both programs.

The point was that it's optional: you're not forced to fly every itinerary on AF or a Skyteam company. If you're flying CDG-OTP, of course a ST company is a sensible option. If you're flying LIS-OTP, it may be, but if you're flying IST-OTP, it's not.

Again, this has no bearing on the discussion. The itinerary you propose isn't sensible for a TUS-OTP travel.

Note the plural. Comparing the total cost of getting to several destinations wasn't really discussed.

This again has no bearing on the topic at hand, which isn't "how to get to NYC, HNL or SIN at the price of a LHR-GLA redemption".

TUS-ATL-CDG-OTP half in J, half in Y (or maybe direct ATL-OTP) can be had for 75,000 FB miles and TUS-LAS-LHR-OTP can be had for 118,500 Avios with BA. There might be other way to break it up, but the convoluted itinerary you propose, which must add around two day of travel each way, even if it saved half the miles, still wouldn't be sensible unless you value your own time and comfort very little. Or happen to want to get to EDI, AMS and so on, which is the same case as above.


Indeed. If you don't accrue miles (or in your case, didn't care for them), and don't want to get to NRT, it didn't make sense to you (and to anyone) not to fly direct. That's why we aren't expecting JAL Mileage's Bank to be a competitor or a useful comparison for selecting carrier to fly BRU-MAD. And we won't chastize them for not being able to price it competitively.


Do you really expect people to fly convoluted redemption itinerary on purpose in the hope of an unlikely IRROP and being rebooked on another airline?

Nothing you said contradicts NickB's point so far. Saying "I can get LCA-LHR and back for the price of LCA-ATH" isn't a contradiction to "it's not sensible to connect in LHR to get from LCA to ATH". If we want to compare the price of flying from LCA to ATH, it's implicit that we're comparing the case of someone wanting to get from LCA to ATH, not someone who want to get to LHR, CDG, or IPC (and who might be marginally interested to get to LCA).

When we compare BCN-FRA, we compare that. If it's priced the same as BCN-LHR-GLA//EDI-LHR-FRA and back, then great for someone who wants to fly it, but it's a side effect and has no bearing on the BCN-FRA pricing option. And if one was _forced_ to do this itinerary to redeem, it would make it deeply undesireable.

irishguy28

I guess redtailshark's arguments stack up only when you are willing to accept a far more circuitous routing on a redemption than you would tolerate on a revenue ticket, and when you have "buds" in every possible stopover location who are willing to drop everything to entertain you on a brief layover.

NickB

Indeed. RTS is talking about features, opportunities, quirks and loopholes to 'maximise value' out of an FFP for hardcore FTers. Whatever the suitability of FB or BAEC for these purposes, this was not the subject at hand as Richelieu has helpfully and extensively explained.

orbitmic

The same extra availability within the base buckets for gold and platinum members is also a benefit on AF-KL (in addition to AF also offering an extra completely separate inventory for elites at 25% more miles, but it is and/and, not either/or). It used to be both economy and business class on KL and only business on AF but IIRC it is now both Y and C for both.

However, I do indeed personally appreciate the fee-less changes for Gold on BA.

KLflyerRalph

Well, well, well...

JOUY31

(Unless it is a typo) Close to 7 months of grace period is more than generous and does mitigate to a large extent the communication mishap IMHO. Thanks ^ !

Richelieu

I'd like to point out that we're still waiting for communication.

irishguy28

Should we consider this as tacit admission from FB themselves that the new scheme is a deterioration on the old one?

After all, if the new scheme was an improvement, why would anyone want to use the old scheme?

KLflyerRalph

They want to avoid a lawsuit like with LH(?).

JOUY31

Well, the new scheme is an improvement for economy awards with no downside (unless the inventory in the various award fare classes is reduced), and it is a deterioration with no upside for business class awards or flex awards (unless the inventory in the various award fare classes is increased).

As to the number of economy vs. business class awards intra-Europe, it has been confirmed that the overwhelming majority is in economy. How overwhelming is among the things that we (Gajan, orbitmic, chrissxb and myself) have asked the FFP to make public.