Overreaction to changes?
Jan 29, 2015, 3:21 pm
#91
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: UK
Programs: I go wherever the content takes me.
Posts: 5,698
Most people have been graceful about it. It's a frustrating change for most on the forum. So, it's not surprising at all that there's a great deal of concern from some quarters. Only a minority are being unreasonable.
Jan 29, 2015, 5:49 pm
#92
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Those with long FT memories will recall that every change has been accompanied by much wailing and gnashing and those taking their cash elsewhere. And then after 3 months life has carried on as normal. Just a human response to change I guess.
The reaction to the great N America changes about 12 years ago would have you expecting entirely empty planes across the Atlantic ever since. Not quite...
The reaction to the great N America changes about 12 years ago would have you expecting entirely empty planes across the Atlantic ever since. Not quite...
While some people may simply opt to go without a loyalty program, I'm sure BA have calculated that this wouldn't significantly hurt them because they have a pretty competitive product for anyone travelling to and from the UK especially in the segment that loyalty programs are meant to speak to i.e. business customers.
Jan 29, 2015, 8:01 pm
#94
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ORD
Programs: US Air, UA BA LH AI DELTA MARRIOTT CHOICE SGP
Posts: 9,883
I am not panicked, nor frustrated, angry or anything else !
I am just sad that BA. Has just pushed me away farther than before.....how I long for the old BA or BOAC.
I am just sad that BA. Has just pushed me away farther than before.....how I long for the old BA or BOAC.
Jan 29, 2015, 9:39 pm
#96
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NYC, FLL
Programs: UA PP 1MM, Marriott Bonvoy LTTE, BA Gold
Posts: 6,324
The OP was to be expected, and is pretty laughable.
"Are things really that bad!?!?!?" Well yeah, they are. Others can vent; you're entitled to start an entirely new thread to raise your point of view / draw folks from the main thread to read your post / or whatever. Doesn't mean your view is correct (nor mine).
Should I start a "things ARE that bad, are we 'under-reacting?'!" thread, too?
"Are things really that bad!?!?!?" Well yeah, they are. Others can vent; you're entitled to start an entirely new thread to raise your point of view / draw folks from the main thread to read your post / or whatever. Doesn't mean your view is correct (nor mine).
Should I start a "things ARE that bad, are we 'under-reacting?'!" thread, too?
Jan 29, 2015, 11:07 pm
#97
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYZ
Programs: BA Gold/Marriott Gold/HH Diamond/IC Plat Amba
Posts: 5,992
BAEC has been behind the other FFP's with enhancements to their program. What has happened to Silver (which was a very generous tier) will probably hit Gold next year. Most FFP are getting to a point where only the very top tiers still have any real perks like say 5 years ago. I'm talking about LH HON and AC SE UA GS etc. and they have been hit too. BA Gold is far from the top tier unfortunately so you know we will get hit sooner than later.
Jan 29, 2015, 11:58 pm
#98
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hong Kong, France
Programs: FB , BA Gold
Posts: 15,564
The changes affect differently various types of travelers. Selfishly, let me take my example of a J pax traveling primarily between Asia and Europe (not UK). I believe that we are a significant number.
Many, many years ago I moved to BA because of its flat beds while competitors had angled seats that torture my back. That meant adding some four hours to my trip and a transfer at LHR, which is no fun when arriving from a 13 hours LH, despite the lovely F lounge (BAEC Gold). But the excellent product relative to competition made it worth it.
Progressively competition adapted its product and the quality difference became less obvious, but the EC program was clearly a great incentive. I could buy a return flight to HKG on CX nonstop for 120K in J or 180K in F, with an attractive avios+cash option.
By May 2015, the situation is radically different from ten years ago. BA J seat is below much of the competition (with the exception of AF and that should change in a few years). The 747 UD has been removed from my destinations and the 777/A380 seats are clearly inferior to my alternatives.
For an award in J, I will now need 180K, what I am currently paying for F or a 50% increase. Upgrading a paid ticket to J or F will apparently become more expensive too. There is no increase in miles earned or TP earned as I fly I bucket. I do understand that BA wished to align its FFP on other European or Asian FFPS (USA is another animal coz AA, but I don’t fly US), but the net result is that BAEC will not be very attractive compared to others. My major incentive to keep flying BA and suffer the increasingly-painful transfer in LHR will only be price. BA has shown in the recent past that it can be very aggressive in pricing. But they’d better continue now that the FFP is not an incentive anymore. That could turn out to be costly for them.
Finally a word about fairness. I understand that UK residents can earn a lot of avios through non-airline partners (Tesco, Amex241, etc..). If the same earning rates are kept on those partners, BAEC might remain quite attractive to UK residents. But the weight of changes is falling disproportionally on non-UK residents.
Many, many years ago I moved to BA because of its flat beds while competitors had angled seats that torture my back. That meant adding some four hours to my trip and a transfer at LHR, which is no fun when arriving from a 13 hours LH, despite the lovely F lounge (BAEC Gold). But the excellent product relative to competition made it worth it.
Progressively competition adapted its product and the quality difference became less obvious, but the EC program was clearly a great incentive. I could buy a return flight to HKG on CX nonstop for 120K in J or 180K in F, with an attractive avios+cash option.
By May 2015, the situation is radically different from ten years ago. BA J seat is below much of the competition (with the exception of AF and that should change in a few years). The 747 UD has been removed from my destinations and the 777/A380 seats are clearly inferior to my alternatives.
For an award in J, I will now need 180K, what I am currently paying for F or a 50% increase. Upgrading a paid ticket to J or F will apparently become more expensive too. There is no increase in miles earned or TP earned as I fly I bucket. I do understand that BA wished to align its FFP on other European or Asian FFPS (USA is another animal coz AA, but I don’t fly US), but the net result is that BAEC will not be very attractive compared to others. My major incentive to keep flying BA and suffer the increasingly-painful transfer in LHR will only be price. BA has shown in the recent past that it can be very aggressive in pricing. But they’d better continue now that the FFP is not an incentive anymore. That could turn out to be costly for them.
Finally a word about fairness. I understand that UK residents can earn a lot of avios through non-airline partners (Tesco, Amex241, etc..). If the same earning rates are kept on those partners, BAEC might remain quite attractive to UK residents. But the weight of changes is falling disproportionally on non-UK residents.
Last edited by brunos; Jan 30, 2015 at 2:02 am
Jan 30, 2015, 12:16 am
#99
Join Date: Mar 2007
Programs: BAEC Gold, M&M Sen, Delta Skymiles Gold
Posts: 866
The changes affect differently various types of travelers. Selfishly, let me take my example of a J pax traveling primarily between Asia and Europe (not UK). I believe that we are a significant number.
Many, many years ago I moved to BA because of its flat beds while competitors had angled seats that torture my back. That meant adding some four hours to my trip and a transfer at LHR, which is no fun when arriving from a 13 hours LH, despite the lovely F lounge (BAEC Gold). But the excellent product relative to competition made it worth it.
Progressively competition adapted its product and the quality difference became less obvious, but the EC program was clearly a great incentive. I could buy a return flight to HKG on CX nonstop for 120K in J or 180K in F, with an attractive avios+cash option.
By May 2015, the situation is radically different from ten years ago. BA J seat is below much of the competition (with the exception of AF and that should change in a few years). The 747 UD has been removed from my destinations and the 777/A380 seats are clearly inferior to my alternatives.
For an award in J, I will now need 180K, what I am currently paying for F or a 50% increase. Upgrading a paid ticket to J or F will apparently become more expensive too. There is no increase in miles earned or TP earned as I fly I bucket. I do understand that BA wished to align its FFP on other European or Asian FFPS (USA is another animal coz AA, but I don’t fly US), but the net result is that BAEC will not be very attractive compared to others. My major incentive to keep flying BA and suffer the increasingly-painful transfer in LHR will only be price. BA has shown in the recent past that it can be very aggressive in pricing. But they’d better continue now that the FFP is not an incentive anymore. That could turn out to be costly for them.
Finally a word about fairness. I understand that UK residents can earn a lot of avios through non-airline partners (Tesco, etc..). If the same earning rates are kept on those partners, BAEC might remain quite attractive to UK residents. But the weight of changes is falling disproportionally on non-UK residents.
Many, many years ago I moved to BA because of its flat beds while competitors had angled seats that torture my back. That meant adding some four hours to my trip and a transfer at LHR, which is no fun when arriving from a 13 hours LH, despite the lovely F lounge (BAEC Gold). But the excellent product relative to competition made it worth it.
Progressively competition adapted its product and the quality difference became less obvious, but the EC program was clearly a great incentive. I could buy a return flight to HKG on CX nonstop for 120K in J or 180K in F, with an attractive avios+cash option.
By May 2015, the situation is radically different from ten years ago. BA J seat is below much of the competition (with the exception of AF and that should change in a few years). The 747 UD has been removed from my destinations and the 777/A380 seats are clearly inferior to my alternatives.
For an award in J, I will now need 180K, what I am currently paying for F or a 50% increase. Upgrading a paid ticket to J or F will apparently become more expensive too. There is no increase in miles earned or TP earned as I fly I bucket. I do understand that BA wished to align its FFP on other European or Asian FFPS (USA is another animal coz AA, but I don’t fly US), but the net result is that BAEC will not be very attractive compared to others. My major incentive to keep flying BA and suffer the increasingly-painful transfer in LHR will only be price. BA has shown in the recent past that it can be very aggressive in pricing. But they’d better continue now that the FFP is not an incentive anymore. That could turn out to be costly for them.
Finally a word about fairness. I understand that UK residents can earn a lot of avios through non-airline partners (Tesco, etc..). If the same earning rates are kept on those partners, BAEC might remain quite attractive to UK residents. But the weight of changes is falling disproportionally on non-UK residents.
Jan 30, 2015, 12:36 am
#100
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sydney & London
Programs: UA Lifetime Exec Plat (2MM)
Posts: 744
Well, as a mere 'casual" flyer with BA (I have 40,000 avios), my mission is now to burn them all ASAP, and then never travel BA again. As a lifetime Star Gold with a million UA miles in the bank, there's no reason I will ever have to.
In this world, generally speaking, (and we mustn't forget the "rusted-ons"), where things are competitive, the least good offer often gets the a..s.
Hopefully in BA's case this will be so. They deserve it...
In this world, generally speaking, (and we mustn't forget the "rusted-ons"), where things are competitive, the least good offer often gets the a..s.
Hopefully in BA's case this will be so. They deserve it...
Jan 30, 2015, 1:54 am
#101
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Programs: BA Gold, IC Ambassador, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Fairmont Platinum
Posts: 3,166
Continuing the theme of over-reaction, apparently The Times has a leading article today bemoaning the BA changes and saying that the airline is guilty of class discrimination as it is making the richer richer and the poorer poorer.
Please!!! How about that for over-reacting, and what hypocrisy from a paper that has no issue with a government whose whole agenda seems geared to making the rich richer.
Let's face facts. BA is a commercial company.
A few years back it made a commercial decision to increase avios and TPs on deeply discounted Y fares (which used to earn 25% avios and no TPs). At the same time it gave a generous bonus rate to Silver card holds, which matched the previous (and unchanged) Gold rate. It also status matched ex-BMI customers and issued billions of avios by mainly US-based credit card promotions.
Presumably all of those decisions were based on a projection of the likely outcome, which must have been commercially beneficial to BA.
However, at present we have a situation where redemption availability is poor and to much of North America non-existent. Lounges are also crowded. At the same time BA are expanding routes both at LHR and (surprisingly for those who thought it was dead) at LGW.
We are not privy to the commercial data, but presumably BA now reason that the market is more willing to part with money (hence price increases and reduction in availability of POUGs and AUPs). I suspect BA also believe or know that the redemption position (and possibly the lounge overcrowding) is putting off its more lucrative and profitable customers. It has therefore decided to act.
It cannot tackle the ability of AA customers to redeem on TATL flights or withdrew the billions of avios given out with credit cards. It might change non-flying earning in the future - see thread on speculation of end of tie up with Tesco.
However. what BA can do is focus on its customer base. Clearly it has decided that there are a group of customers who scrap silver on the cheapest flights that probably cost more to service than any benefit from their seeming loyalty. Therefore it targets the less cost-effective part of its offer, reducing avios and TPs on discounted economy flights (ironically back to where they were before its last major change).
That alone will not solve the availability issue on redemptions, so BA increases redemption rates, cleverly introducing peak pricing to further address the bottleneck around UK school holidays. Logically, its most frequent premium filers are likely to have more avios and are therefore better positioned to weather this storm; indeed many will welcome it, if it genuinely means that they can now get the reward flights that they really want.
In doing this BA effectively reverts BAEC back to how it used to be, which in BA's mind is presumably a model that works.
It's speculation, but I believe that is what has happened. I know it is not a popular view, but BA is a business not a charity.
BA really does not want someone who just scrapes silver (for the lounge access), flies mainly in discounted Y (except their main holiday where they snap up F redemptions with their 2-4-1 when seats are released at 355 days), would never dream of setting foot in CE (unless they get a really cheap POUG, but even then they only did it for the TPs as they hate the product), talk endlessly about how if work offer them a trip in J they are going to try the competition as CW is so dated, and then reminisce on how good the BAEC was before the enhancements, although they only joined it themselves about three years ago.
Please!!! How about that for over-reacting, and what hypocrisy from a paper that has no issue with a government whose whole agenda seems geared to making the rich richer.
Let's face facts. BA is a commercial company.
A few years back it made a commercial decision to increase avios and TPs on deeply discounted Y fares (which used to earn 25% avios and no TPs). At the same time it gave a generous bonus rate to Silver card holds, which matched the previous (and unchanged) Gold rate. It also status matched ex-BMI customers and issued billions of avios by mainly US-based credit card promotions.
Presumably all of those decisions were based on a projection of the likely outcome, which must have been commercially beneficial to BA.
However, at present we have a situation where redemption availability is poor and to much of North America non-existent. Lounges are also crowded. At the same time BA are expanding routes both at LHR and (surprisingly for those who thought it was dead) at LGW.
We are not privy to the commercial data, but presumably BA now reason that the market is more willing to part with money (hence price increases and reduction in availability of POUGs and AUPs). I suspect BA also believe or know that the redemption position (and possibly the lounge overcrowding) is putting off its more lucrative and profitable customers. It has therefore decided to act.
It cannot tackle the ability of AA customers to redeem on TATL flights or withdrew the billions of avios given out with credit cards. It might change non-flying earning in the future - see thread on speculation of end of tie up with Tesco.
However. what BA can do is focus on its customer base. Clearly it has decided that there are a group of customers who scrap silver on the cheapest flights that probably cost more to service than any benefit from their seeming loyalty. Therefore it targets the less cost-effective part of its offer, reducing avios and TPs on discounted economy flights (ironically back to where they were before its last major change).
That alone will not solve the availability issue on redemptions, so BA increases redemption rates, cleverly introducing peak pricing to further address the bottleneck around UK school holidays. Logically, its most frequent premium filers are likely to have more avios and are therefore better positioned to weather this storm; indeed many will welcome it, if it genuinely means that they can now get the reward flights that they really want.
In doing this BA effectively reverts BAEC back to how it used to be, which in BA's mind is presumably a model that works.
It's speculation, but I believe that is what has happened. I know it is not a popular view, but BA is a business not a charity.
BA really does not want someone who just scrapes silver (for the lounge access), flies mainly in discounted Y (except their main holiday where they snap up F redemptions with their 2-4-1 when seats are released at 355 days), would never dream of setting foot in CE (unless they get a really cheap POUG, but even then they only did it for the TPs as they hate the product), talk endlessly about how if work offer them a trip in J they are going to try the competition as CW is so dated, and then reminisce on how good the BAEC was before the enhancements, although they only joined it themselves about three years ago.
Jan 30, 2015, 2:06 am
#102
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Cumbria
Programs: BA, Marriott, Hertz, Dennis The Menace Fan Club
Posts: 2,015
Seems like The Times have got it about right. BA are happy to take your money, but would rather it came from people who sit on the comfy seats than the unwashed behind the curtain/braid rope.
Jan 30, 2015, 2:29 am
#103
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: London
Programs: BA LTGold; LH Senator; HHGold; Bonvoy Plat
Posts: 1,370
Jan 30, 2015, 2:30 am
#104
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: UK
Programs: I go wherever the content takes me.
Posts: 5,698
Jan 30, 2015, 2:31 am
#105
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,605