Geordie405

BA make a certain number of Avios seats available per flight. Availability can and will fluctuate based on load-based factors, revenue management algorithms and so forth.

If every vacant seat was to be available to "purchase" using Avios then we're back to the same situation with complimentary upgrades. If a passenger knew they had a guaranteed upgrade using Avios on every flight they would never book the upgraded cabin using cash.

KARFA

BA doesn't agree with you.

Globaliser

No, I won't do it either. But that's because I accept that if I travel on an airline or use its frequent flyer schemes, the airline gets to set the rules - and I have to play by them.

I won't do it because I don't like the price. Given that the airline's rules are that unless it says otherwise, the price for any seat is cash only, no Avios, I think you are in the same position. You're not in any position to demand that the airline always takes Avios as payment for a ticket.

dmp1991

Why are you all "demanding" that I'm demanding anything? I didn't use that word ever except to quote you! Can we have a discussion without the exaggeration and hyperbole please?

Purchasing an upgrade into an otherwise empty seat can never be guaranteed for the simple fact that there aren't always empty seats. But if the airline isn't selling empty seats when they have them, then maybe that would explain poor earnings by the airline. :-)

Making upgrades purchasable has no equivalence to complimentary upgrades unless you're arguing that paying for a product is the same as the owner giving it away free. And that makes no sense.

KARFA

This is all very nice dmp1991, but as I noted BA does not agree with your arguments so it's all a bit academic.

I am not aware of recent poor earnings by BA, can you show me which year that happened?

Globaliser

This is what you said (emphasis added):-

dmp1991

So you're saying we can't post opinions that aren't held by BA here? Excuse my gaffe please. Seriously though, providing opinions of how things should be done is the only way to get things to change. As I'm not in charge, I'm restricted to describing things in this public forum.

I didn't say BA. I said 'airline', as in generic. I don't follow BA's annual finances. I'm just a customer who's feeling let down by the ongoing "enhancements" and who has enough years of Avios experience to feel mis-sold on the way that program is managed.

KARFA

No, where did I say that? I think you have made your opinions very clear on the thread several times. My point is regardless of what you think, BA clearly don't agree and don't seem in any rush to change the FFP as a result of your "analysis".

I thought your posts and points all related to your opinion on BA and BAEC?

Mis-sold? Where does it say all non-booked seats will be available for avios upgrades?

dmp1991

So you're implying that saying "they should" is equivalent to "I demand"? I find those clauses to have far apart meanings.

As an example framed to show that being absurd: If I go to a BA CSR and they tell me I "should" go left to get to the closest WC, then that means they're "demanding" I go to that WC and not another one?

Globaliser

Rather than playing these diversionary semantic games, we can all read what you wrote, in the context in which you wrote it.

That will avoid an OT discussion here.

dmp1991

You implied my posts were pointless ("it's academic") because BA disagrees with my viewpoint. So it seemed to me you were saying don't post unless it's something BA agrees with.

I certainly wasn't expecting a change within 24 hours of stating my opinion! I'd feel like I should be paid by BA if they quickly made such a change. :-)

Also, thanks for quoting "analysis" there. It's almost like you're offended I'm pointing out Avios are worth real money.

That is certainly where I started. But others kept deflecting from a discussion about BA's Avios policy to programs about complimentary upgrades and confusing "payment" for "free". At which point I changed my terminology to refer to generic airlines and FFPs to try and stay in scope with them.

Never said it does. I said it should (not demanded it should) as paying with Avios is equivalent to paying with cash, and not selling an empty seat for cash makes little sense to me. I then pointed out that I feel the Avios program is not what it was originally presented as by saying "mis-sold".


KARFA, I'm only continuing this discussion because I've seen you be so helpful in multiple other threads. But I've got to say I'm surprised, and a little offended, that you keep trying to shutdown my posts by simply claiming "BA doesn't agree" rather than pointing out (a) why it makes sense for the BA (or any airline) not to sell empty seats, (b) why Avios are NOT equivalent to cash, (c) how not selling empty seats "protects" revenue by encouraging original cabin purchase, or (d) any other logical statement that actually furthers the discussion. Do you *work* for/with BA mgmt and know they don't agree? If so, then perhaps you could explain why and help me understand what otherwise looks to be a customer unfriendly policy. Maybe my opinion (about BA and BAEC) would then change.

dmp1991

If you're going to claim I demanded anything, then I'm going to correct you on interpretation of what I meant. I'll stop that explanation when you stop misquoting me.

KARFA

Why do I need to point out (a), (b), (c)? They are your opinions and you have clearly set them out several times in the thread. Some reasons for why BA adopt the approach they do have already been set out by myself and others early in this thread, and in the many threads also linked to by Jerry. The widely recognised reasons BA seem to continually take the approach of not releasing all seats for avios upgrade have been set out in the thread.

For someone who is being "shutdown" you have certainly got quite a few lengthy posts in this thread. You have made your opinion very clearly several times, I don't think anyone reading the thread can be in any doubt of them.

The fact BA have pretty much always adopted the approach of not releasing all non booked seats for reward upgrades clearly indicates very strongly that they don't agree with you - I am not sure how you could reach any other conclusion? If they thought your suggested approach was better for them they would have changed to it by now surely. I can't think they simultaneously agree with your approach and instead use a different model for so many years that they don't agree with - that would be very odd.

dmp1991

I believe you're assuming that purchase with Avios is at a cost less than the fare difference when making this statement. Which I don't think has to be a given.

Why can't BA (or any airline) simply always offer upgrade purchases at the same fare difference as original booking, and then have "sales" on Avios upgrades if they want to encourage people to change cabin at reduced cost? Or offer each passenger a limited number of discount Avios upgrades to reward loyalty? I don't see this as being any different than having a CW fare sale without having an WT sale, which I believe happens from time to time. Or from targeted pricing which I know happens.

dmp1991

Actually, as phrased, those are the opposites of my arguments. :-) If you don't want to discuss them, that's completely fine with me (and I apologize if it came across as saying you had to do so!) But putting up a "BA doesn't agree" response isn't furthering the discussion but appears to me to be dismissive, especially when you quote me prior to saying it.

While you say I've clearly set out my opinions, the responses to my posts don't indicate that at all as they all seem to miss the point I've been trying to make. In fact, you're referring back to earlier statements in the thread as an explanation of why BA don't always offer upgrades shows you either haven't understood my point, or my reading comprehension is low. (I tried to inform myself by reading every post prior to jumping into this thread and have some faith in my self for understanding, so my initial reaction is not the latter.)

Because none of the rationale I've seen discussed ever includes charging the appropriate amount of Avios for the original fare difference. Everyone, including BA, seems to limit themselves to a lower amount of Avios (thus the idea of "protecting" premium revenue.)

I've been around long enough to realize that sometimes a good idea comes along that hasn't been thought of or applied before. So, I don't automatically assume every possible idea on structuring Avios upgrades has occurred to BA previously. You seem to feel differently. That's what makes the world interesting.