Hi,
I was just curious as to what some of the road wariors here feel is the safest/most stable ff program (I guess it would be directly tied into the longterm viability of it's airline. In this day and age of seeing companies going in and out of chapter 11 as though they were simply changing clothes, I have no clue what their actual viability and that of their mileage program is, as I get the impression that this sometimes being done simply to cancel some debts, restructure their contracts, see how much money the can get from the govt, etc.
SOOOOOooooo.....
Who seems to be doing the best thus making their ff program a quasi-safe bet?

Thanks
Mike

Anyone?!?
I think I may have inccorectly labeled this topic.
Any feedback? Doc?!?

If you're asking which (American) airline is most financially stable, that would probably be Southwest.

Most of the others are losing money to some degree, with United currently under protection from Chapter 11 and American reportedly considering it.

The FF programs of some dead airlines survived -- Qualiflyer survived Sabena and Swissair, OnePass survived the demise of Eastern. Pan Am's flyers had their mileage transferred in Delta's program, TWA to American.

Intriguing question. I personally consider Northwest and Delta to be the safest FF programs -- not including "upstarts" like Southwest, Jet Blue, and others, who don't have a long track record. This is primarly through the process of elimination (from worst to first):

UNITED: The shakiest program; from a financial point of view, the airline is in intensive care, with everyone is watching their vital signs regularly.

USAIR: Seems to have emerged from bankruptcy okay, but never really had a "psychological" commitment to frequent flyer programs. One of the last airlines to implement a FF program; if the programs start disappearing, USAir will probably happily lead the way.

AMERICAN: Narrowly avoided bankruptcy after 9/11; still a little shaky, but working its way back.

CONTINENTAL: The fact that Continental still exists as an independent airline today is one of the most amazing survival stories of our generation. Seems to be okay now, but risky due to past history.

NORTHWEST AND DELTA: Probably the financially healthiest of the major airlines. Unfortunately, this is because of their willingness to cut service and seat space in order to be financially competitive. (This may also save American, which recently ended its "More Room In Coach" program and started packing passengers in like matchsticks again.)

Just my two cents. What do others think?

Actually, American only said they were thinking about ending their MRTC, and only on their 757 type aircraft.

ATA recently announced that they were going to a MRTC concept also, and they fly a lot of 757's, so American's move to LRTC is not so sure now.

If you want "long-term" stability, it has to be Southwest (WN). They've been in the game for thirty years and seem to have determined the right strategy to survive both now and into the future.

But it depends on what you want. WN's FF program will not get you anywhere WN does not fly - period. So no international, much less a good chunk of the domestic US.

But if all your travel is confined to city pairs that WN serves, and you don't mind their in-the-air product, it's pretty hard not to pick them. Every fifth flight free and consistently low fares.

If you want more bredth of destinations and service, my money (for the short term) is UA or AA. Yes, UA is in C11 and AA was almost there, but both airlines have not recently made significant reductions in their FF programs in an effort to encourage high-fare frequent flyers and discourage low-fare frequent flyers. It remains to be seen how much revenue those low-fare frequent flyers who decide to abandon DL/CO/NW (if and when they follow) will take to UA and AA and what kind of effect it will have on the bottom-lines of the airlines losing them and gaining them.

All the previous posts think that the health of the frequent flyer program is always linked to the health of the airline. Analogous to switching employers regardless of the health benefits since you think that employer will be around longer. The other aspect that needs to be considered is the gradual loss of the loyalty program through diminished benefits, regardless of the airline's health. We've seen the recent abrupt reduction in benefits at Delta, BA and Radisson Goldpoints. Personally, I got hit with having to come up with 125,000 miles for an AA award that was 100,000 three months ago. Miles or points are a currency subject to devaluation. Choice of airline based on long-term prospects hints of wanting to 'bank' miles for the grandkids when they grow up. If airline choices are available, my philosophy is always geared to what can provide the most benefits for the immediate needs, regardless of the airline's health. Just my $0.02 worth.

Using a profitable European partner of a US carrier is also a possible strategy. AF's
Frequence Plus is a much better ff program than DL Skypiles, for example, although they do not comp status.

Thanks to everyone who gave their input.
Unforunately living in Pittsburgh is not really too viable of an option for me.
Interesting how different people see various airlines financial health.
Hmmmmm....using an "un-american" ff program.
Interesting idea.