Hi guys,reading threads I noticed that some of us are currently enrolled and have elite status in programs of airline partners(e.g:UA 1k and US or LH SEN/FT it doesn't really matter the level! or AA and BA and so on).
Isn't it useless (I don't want to offend anyone!)?I mean you could get the miles anyway,so why having multiple partnerships in the same alliance?
Some of you would just starting laughing their a***s off reading the thread but there's no obvious reason for me.

I have a question;I hope I can qualify for LH FT this year;I'd possibly move to NYC in september or so,what if I want to "transfer" my status on United Premier or Premier Ex?it would be easier for me to reach UA 1k with some MR's in the USA once I live there.

thanks for any help

E

3 obvious benefits of having elite status with more than one carrier in the same alliance.

1) most airlines provide best treatment and best benefits to their own elites
2) utilise differences in earning and burning rates for particular routes. There are some very significant differences in rate of earning miles and cost of awards which very frequent flyers can take advantage of.
3) currently, with a few exceptions, you can only upgrade using miles/vouchers of the airline you are flying

A major disadvantage is miles earned are spread more thinly, but if flying enough this may not matter.

I'll leave others to comment on status match.

"A major disadvantage is miles earned are spread more thinly, but if flying enough this may not matter."

That was my point...you really have to fly a lot to keep all up!
Thanks 4 the details...upgrading is sthg I'm not familiar with,now I understand much more though.

E

An obvious example is as follows...
I'm a UA Premex and a LH FT.
A couple years ago, LH had a 2x miles offer for your first USAir flight.
They also offer 3x miles for travel in F class... all counting toward status!
They also had back then a 1000 mile minimum for partner domestic legs.
USAir had a SFO-FPO First Class offer of $600 all in with 4 legs each way.
So...
For $600, I got around 70,000 miles, with enough EQMs to requalify for LH FT again. On UA, I wouldn't have even bothered, the payout would not have been worth it, around 12,000 miles total.

having ba status and aa status is usefull for lounge access.
aa status wont get you in but ba will on a domestic aa flight

I have AA plat which gets me double miles in a better program and good upgrades within the states.
Qantas silver gets me 10k extra on qantas flights and able to change qantas awards without penalty.
And I live in oz so I do get ponts on N class which AA gont give @:-)

Don't forget the vestige factor.

I have DL status (although dwindling status, which may disappear soon, and dwindling travel on DL) dating from before they were allied with NW. I have NW status (increased status up to platinum, and increasing travel on NW) from before that alliance, too.

So I have both right now. But I do think I'll just have NW status in the near future.

Don't forget that on most airlines, you have to fly on their metal in order to get your elite bonuses, unless it is a codeshare.

You get nothing extra on AA for over 100K miles - it would be really stupid (and I also would not want to offend anyone - touche) to stick to just that one, when being BA gold gets me admission not only to all of the BA clubrooms, but saves me $300/yr on Admirals Club because I can access any Admirals Club, or even the Flagship Lounge, when I am travelling on AA. Thus I can do something in Chicago no AA domestic traveller can - use the quiet, uncrowded Flagship Lounge, and enjoy sushi and hot hors dourves whn I connect in ORD.

These alliances are not all they're cracked up to be. They're mostly created for the purpose of SELLING tickets, and the mileage aspects are secondary.

For an extreme example, look at AA and BA. Let's say you're a business person flying often between the US and Europe (to or through London), and you have to make reservations last minute. Well, you can't earn (or redeem) AA miles on BA flights US<->London and you can't earn (or redeem) BA miles on AA flights US<->London, but if you're booking last minute, sometimes only a BA flight may be available and sometimes only an AA flight. If you AREN'T participating in both programs, you simply earn no miles at all, so doesn't it make perfect sense to participate in both in such a case?

Even where you can earn on a partner, you may earn vastly different numbers of miles depending on which alliance partner you credit to. Then different alliance partners may have significantly different award levels to the same desitnations.

Now, obviously, if you only fly just enough miles a year to qualify for the minimum elite level at one airline, it doesn't make sense for you to split that. But there are a number of people on this site who fly hundreds of thousands of miles a year (often because they fly a lot internationally), and in those cases it's not always better to put all the miles into one airline, whether the other airlines are in the same alliance or not.

And one advantage to going after miles in another airline in the same alliance is that you have some elite priveledges like lounge access and priority boarding already established across the alliance, so it's less "painful" that starting over with a non-aliiance airline where at first you have zero priveledges.

This is, as you rightly pointed out, an "extreme" example, and isn't a problem of an alliance but an anti-trust rule....

it makes perfect sense to hold status in the airlines you fly mostly.

for asia, my LH account doesnt make much sense, so know i got a thai account too.

when i got my thai gold, i will stop crediting miles to thai and will credit my miles to the programm which gives me the best miles for business and first travel (which is bmi or LH)

LH counts 2x or 3x if you fly business or first . so you get incredible mileage with biz or first flights. try this with united or thai, where you only would end up with 17k instead of LH 48K etc. depending on status, and class bonus.

dp

I'd have to re-read Sherman, but doesn't it seem a stretch to apply to a non-US entity (BA) ?
/.

So by your rationale, it would be OK for say BP to come into the US, buy up every oil producer, and have a monopoly on the market simply because they are not a US company? If a company operates in US markets, they are subject to US law.

The BA-AA issue stems from the fact that the US and UK do not have on open skies agreement. Their air treaty limits LHR to US slots to 4 airlines (BA, VS, AA, UA). If BA and AA could essentially combine their trans-Atlantic routes, they would probably have 75% of the slots going across and probably have strong monopoly pricing powers.

If you're moving to the US, one big advantage of having status on two airlines in the same alliance is lounge access. None of the major US carriers gives lounge access to their own elites (with the exception of Delta, for top-tier Platinum Medallions). You need to pay more than $300 per year, or have mid-tier status on a foreign airline in the alliance, to get into the lounges when flying domestically.

But if you have, say, Senator status on Lufthansa and United Premier Executive status, both Star Alliance Gold, you can credit the miles to UA and upgrade, but use your LH status to access the United Red Carpet Club.