# of Gold members post new rules

Old Sep 24, 03, 1:17 am
  #1  
C
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold
Posts: 87
# of Gold members post new rules

Here's a question for you. Assume some time flows by for the new EC rules to take effect. Anybody that has a fair guess of how many gold members will be left? Is it a decrease by 10, 20 or 50%? I understood there to be around 85,000 gold members currently.

I don't want to open up the whole discussion on how bad the changes are, etc. - but I guess fewer Gold members could be benefitial for those still at Gold.
C is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 9:09 am
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 37,486
IMHO VERY few golds will leave over the changes. BA Gold is worth too much compared to other programs, most golds are very loyal and make their miles in the premium cabins so on the whole I don't see many changes, I know I'm not bothered too much by the changes and will stay gold for years to come.
ScottC is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 9:20 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: MSY
Programs: BA GfL
Posts: 5,377
I agree with ScottC. The Gold status is very valuable to me even if my mileage earning potential and award seat potential have been somewhat diluted. I've just discussed the comparison of benefits between AA Platinum and BA Gold over on the AA board, and the consensus is that BA Gold is worth quite a bit more.

One reason the Gold membership might drop, though, is the now-higher threshold for retaining Gold status (was 1200 tier points, now 1500). This might become an issue for me in the future, unfortunately. I'll be doing everything I can to avoid losing that Gold status.
travelmad478 is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 9:24 am
  #4  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Berlin, Germany; Toronto, Canada; and SW Florida, USA
Programs: UA 1K, BA Gold, Hyatt Globalist, and assorted others
Posts: 23,501
I agree with Scott. I'm not sure the new rukes will really affect current Golds that much...they were flying a fair bit in the premium cabins anyway.
LondonElite is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 9:56 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago,IL.
Posts: 3,022
Also, the geographical element makes BA Gold pretty "sticky" for most UK based frequent flyers.

If you are UK based, its really hard to find a decent alternative to BA schedule if you fly to a mix of European and trans-ocean destinations. I.e. BA make it a lot easier to qualify for status if you are NOT UK nased, as they know that UK based travellers mostly stick with them anyway. Also, another important factor IMHO, a vast majority make BA Gold through corporate travel, i.e. their company has travel arrangements with BA and they do not have any choice in the matter anyway.

In summary, no, I dont think the changes will cause that many people to leave. They may be unhappy about the changes, but they will stick with BA.
JohnG is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 1:36 pm
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 14,212
I actually know quite a few people that are not going to bother anymore after this year. That being said most have already requal'd or will do it this year so will be Gold through 2/05 in any case. Considering that they'll probably still have a few flights and be dropped a level, that would mean that they'll have Silver through 2/06.

Therefore no one will know for sure for quite awhile what the true effects will be. I am sure that whoever would be fired for a huge drop off will make sure to comp existing members extensions, or make promos to make sure that the numbers do not drop so dramatically.

I will though give an example of a huge loss. There is a very large news organization which probably has at least 40 Gold's working for it. Most have already cut down their flights. A small but telling example.
hfly is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 2:06 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Programs: Sir CT-UK - Streaker pour les autres.
Posts: 5,463
Good to see you are full of praise as normal Hfly

I for one agree with most others that I don't think BA will see a huge drop on those that keep going for Gold. After all most these pax are premium cabin flyers anyway so do earn good amount of miles.

Of course the new redemption levels are an increasefor NA members but they would effect a low flying blue member far more than they would a fruquent gold flyer.

As for somebody getting fired, you never know they good get a pay rise for saving BA some money.

If your going to give up flying with one airline because you thing miles are the #1 priority then I guess that airlines product isn't enough to keep you so why subject yourself to other levels of service.

Of course I can fully understand that some will say that BA provide only marginal service anyway. Oh well I'm off to finish my half full pint how is your half empty one?


[This message has been edited by CT-UK (edited 09-24-2003).]
CT-UK is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 3:15 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Programs: BA - Gold, BD - Gold, SPG - Gold, HH - Gold
Posts: 1,777
Given that BA's biggest single customer (until recently) now has a no-BA flight policy which is strictly enfored for longhaul (less so for short haul) and a number of other financial institutions have also adopted a no-BA policy for transatlantic flights, I wouldn't be suprised to see a reduction in the number of gold card holders.

In at least two cases I know the employees are being forced to fly AA and therefore cannot collect BA points. However, they are being upg***** to F on virtually all journeys if there's space. So no tears for them!
vSFU is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 3:53 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Programs: Sir CT-UK - Streaker pour les autres.
Posts: 5,463
Mark, I can see this is a blow to BA, do you know if it was a financial choice or just beacuse some bod within the company got pissed off with the changes?

I would put money on it being a financial reason.
CT-UK is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 4:16 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Programs: BA - Gold, BD - Gold, SPG - Gold, HH - Gold
Posts: 1,777
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by CT-UK:
Mark, I can see this is a blow to BA, do you know if it was a financial choice or just beacuse some bod within the company got pissed off with the changes?

I would put money on it being a financial reason.
</font>
As far as I'm aware the decision is based purely on financial grounds with some element of consideration for the product (but not the FF scheme). For example, one of the financial institutions has to fly AA one-way but can fly Virgin on the other leg. Reason being that Virgin has a better "bed" than AA for the flights back to the UK. (Unless you're in F)

Discounts on AA can be as much as 45% lower than BA rate. I wonder how long it will take for employees to work their way round the rules, as they mostly seem to prefer BA (understandably). I know one person who chose to start their US trip in a city not served by AA (from LHR) but was by BA (though not for much longer).
vSFU is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 4:44 pm
  #11  
C
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold
Posts: 87
Thanks for good answers! I thought I read somewhere that shrinking the number of golds was a stated internal goal at BA - but I'm convinced by your input.
C is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 5:08 pm
  #12  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 37,486
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by marklondon101:
As far as I'm aware the decision is based purely on financial grounds with some element of consideration for the product (but not the FF scheme). For example, one of the financial institutions has to fly AA one-way but can fly Virgin on the other leg. Reason being that Virgin has a better "bed" than AA for the flights back to the UK. (Unless you're in F)

Discounts on AA can be as much as 45% lower than BA rate. I wonder how long it will take for employees to work their way round the rules, as they mostly seem to prefer BA (understandably). I know one person who chose to start their US trip in a city not served by AA (from LHR) but was by BA (though not for much longer).
</font>
OK, so this has nothing to do with post-rules and everything with BA's hideous rates out of the US. AFAIK raising prices wasn't one of the new rules in the EC.
ScottC is offline  
Old Sep 24, 03, 5:29 pm
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 14,212
Miles are not all its about, although I submit to you that a lot of people do not fly to the UK regularly and used BA to route through LHR. For these people it was often a package that made BA better... the product was a bit better, the FF programme okay, etc.

hfly is offline  
Old Sep 25, 03, 3:04 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Programs: BA - Gold, BD - Gold, SPG - Gold, HH - Gold
Posts: 1,777
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ScottC:
OK, so this has nothing to do with post-rules and everything with BA's hideous rates out of the US. AFAIK raising prices wasn't one of the new rules in the EC.</font>
Sorry Scott, my answer referred to CT-UK's question and was slightly off-topic.
vSFU is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread