![]() |
I would rate OW alliance C-.
This is one case where the sum is lesser than the parts :( I don't think that I would rate any of the 11 members below C+ (and each would probably lose "1/2 a grade" due to OW deficiencies). Overall OW seems more like a bunch of stores that share a parking lot than an alliance in which all members are working together. The good
The bad
The ugly
|
Originally Posted by Sagy
(Post 13016886)
The bad
Originally Posted by Sagy
(Post 13016886)
The ugly
|
Originally Posted by atakam
(Post 12972898)
I will refer to OW and *A only, ST still not same level. Comparing from an Emerald and *G point of view. Based in Asia using RTW product from time to time, transpac, Asia regional and Asia-EU.
OW 1) First class check in and FC lounge access 2) No extra luggage allowance 3) Mileage posting takes extremely long time (using AA and LA accounts), when flying other members it can take up to one month. *A system seems to be better connected. 4) Having 3 tiers and achieving Emerald seems to be more exclusive (than *G) 5) Good coverage in EU/US/Asia-Oceania and South America, low-low Africa 6) Premium classes focus on C. F class seats limited and few members offer an integral F product (maybe because Emerald have access to check in and lounges). In general older F seats than *A 7) Lounge experience nothing special, especially F lounges lower than *A (only Concorde Room up to level) 8) Stronger RTW product with many options and flexibility. 9) Customer service not standardized due to irregular quality among members, IB for instance doesn't fit. If you get stuck in MAD nobody will help, OW means nothing (RTW tkt). LA GAs also don't care about OW elites. 10) No OW upgrades 11) FAs tend to recognize Emeralds and give a better service 12) Too many rules and fine print on mileage accrural, example BA/AA over the pond and many 0% and 25% miles fares (AA and LA are not as bad) *A 1) Biz class check in and *G only lounge access 2) *G gets extra luggage allowance 3) Fast mileage post in account. Using UA and LH accounts when flying other members average 5 days (or less) to see miles posted. 4) Would like to have a 3rd tier, too many *G members around 5) Excellent coverage in EU/US/Asia, good in Africa, fair in Oceania, low-low in South America 6) Overall F class experience better than OW. 7) Best F lounges, SQ F, LH F/HON, NH F, LX F, among others. 8) Good RTW product, but too basic and restricted. 9) *A system well connected and easy to move from one carrier to other (RTW tkt). Average quality GA higher than OW 10) *A upgrades help burning miles on several carriers 11) *G members are transparent for FAs (again maybe because there are too many) 12) Less fine print on getting miles (I use UA MP which is more transparent) I general, for me *A offers the best solution as an alliance. Good coverage, strong and consistent FCY products and smooth travel when connecting within its members. Big problem is South America. OW has interesting tkt products and a couple of very strong members (CX/BA/LA) and Emerald exclusivity. Conclusion: Since I fly more than 300k (BIS) a year I use both alliances keeping 1K and Emerald (LA) and accessing all benefits. No need to fly ST (in the past enrolled in DL and KE) but honestly difficult to use. Hope it helps. The speed that miles post is very much dependant on your host programme. For example AA tends to credit BA miles 5 or so days after the flight has been taken. The same flights credited to QF will appear 24-48 hours. The same issues also exist on *A. In fact a god 50% of my flights credited to BD (*A) require manual intervention whereas almost all flights for the last couple of years have credited to QF (OW). Most carriers use different loyalty platforms which are different from the airlines GDS and CRS systems so don't expect two airlines to be alike as they are not. I am surprised you have stated that OW has older F seats than *A. QF, CX and JL all have new F seats and BA has recently announced theirs. *A only has UA, LX, TK & SQ with NH also recently announcing new seats so I think we are pretty much tied there. Also don't forget that the dreaded SQ don't allow anyone to redeem premium awards except with miles from their own programme whereas you don't see those sorts of tricks played out in OW. I have to strongly disagree with your statement on lounges as I think this is the one area where OW excels both *A and ST. Most of the lounges you mention are not available to partner airlines; take for example the LH HON lounges you mentioned - even has a UA 1K flying in paid F out of FRA you won't be able to get into the HON lounge. Also try flying Y and trying to access the SQ J or F lounges with a *A Gold card and you won't get in, not to mention that the lounges are OK but far from special. Even the SQ Private area for suite passengers is nothing to blow one away with. I feel that the new QF F lounges in both MEL and SYD are pretty much on par with LH in many respects, not to forget that these lounges are open to all Emeralds. CX's HKG lounges whilst starting to date are still pretty good and again these are available to all Emeralds and Sapphires travelling as are the BA lounges in LHR (minus the Concorde room which at the end of the day is really very similar to the F lounge but with table service). Again in respect to the AA/BA TATL issues, remember these are all related to ATI and until this is actually received, you won't find either alliance partner likely to hand over miles. Also be aware that the 25% issue you mention is related to your programme (AA). For example I earn 100% miles on IB on all codes so you really need to compare apples with apples rather than oranges. For example, when crediting non US based carriers to my BD account (*A), most economy fares earn 25 or 50%. Finally in respect to the miles fine print issue, I guess you have never played the *A fare class translation game? Once you have actually experienced that, I suspect you might find OW easier as you know what you will earn before you actually take the flight. If you don't know what I am referring to, look at some of the *A carrier forums as this can even affect premium classes so it is not just an issue which affects those flying in Y. |
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
(Post 13036548)
take for example the LH HON lounges you mentioned - even has a UA 1K flying in paid F out of FRA you won't be able to get into the HON lounge.
|
Originally Posted by stimpy
(Post 13037270)
Yes you can. I have done it many times. Anyone flying LH F, paid or otherwise, has access to these lounges as they are F/HON lounges.
|
Originally Posted by IC6A
(Post 13037854)
I guess the FT is trying to say that he is UA 1K and flying in paid F ticket with UA can not get to HON lounge...lol
|
Originally Posted by stimpy
(Post 13037270)
Yes you can. I have done it many times. Anyone flying LH F, paid or otherwise, has access to these lounges as they are F/HON lounges.
FWIW, when BA and QF were both in T4 LHR and BA still had the CCR, QF F pax had access to the BA CCR. |
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
(Post 13036548)
Sadly I also have to disagree with much that you have posted.
The speed that miles post is very much dependant on your host programme. For example AA tends to credit BA miles 5 or so days after the flight has been taken. The same flights credited to QF will appear 24-48 hours. The same issues also exist on *A. In fact a god 50% of my flights credited to BD (*A) require manual intervention whereas almost all flights for the last couple of years have credited to QF (OW). Most carriers use different loyalty platforms which are different from the airlines GDS and CRS systems so don't expect two airlines to be alike as they are not. I am surprised you have stated that OW has older F seats than *A. QF, CX and JL all have new F seats and BA has recently announced theirs. *A only has UA, LX, TK & SQ with NH also recently announcing new seats so I think we are pretty much tied there. Also don't forget that the dreaded SQ don't allow anyone to redeem premium awards except with miles from their own programme whereas you don't see those sorts of tricks played out in OW. I have to strongly disagree with your statement on lounges as I think this is the one area where OW excels both *A and ST. Most of the lounges you mention are not available to partner airlines; take for example the LH HON lounges you mentioned - even has a UA 1K flying in paid F out of FRA you won't be able to get into the HON lounge. Also try flying Y and trying to access the SQ J or F lounges with a *A Gold card and you won't get in, not to mention that the lounges are OK but far from special. Even the SQ Private area for suite passengers is nothing to blow one away with. I feel that the new QF F lounges in both MEL and SYD are pretty much on par with LH in many respects, not to forget that these lounges are open to all Emeralds. CX's HKG lounges whilst starting to date are still pretty good and again these are available to all Emeralds and Sapphires travelling as are the BA lounges in LHR (minus the Concorde room which at the end of the day is really very similar to the F lounge but with table service). Again in respect to the AA/BA TATL issues, remember these are all related to ATI and until this is actually received, you won't find either alliance partner likely to hand over miles. Also be aware that the 25% issue you mention is related to your programme (AA). For example I earn 100% miles on IB on all codes so you really need to compare apples with apples rather than oranges. For example, when crediting non US based carriers to my BD account (*A), most economy fares earn 25 or 50%. Finally in respect to the miles fine print issue, I guess you have never played the *A fare class translation game? Once you have actually experienced that, I suspect you might find OW easier as you know what you will earn before you actually take the flight. If you don't know what I am referring to, look at some of the *A carrier forums as this can even affect premium classes so it is not just an issue which affects those flying in Y. If you go for the full F experience from Southamerica to Europe, for example GRU-LHR-CPH (BA) or GRU-FRA-CPH (LH), I can recornfim that LH HON or LH FCL are far superior than the Concorde Room. Also at arrival in LHR you just walk (or at best get guided to the lounge), in FRA LH drives you to the lounge on a MB S-class or a Porsche Cayenne. No walking, no lines, VIP treatment. I could go on and on with examples. Anyway, good for you that you really like OW over *A. Maybe you should try to fly premium fares (not classes) and then come back. As Sagy said above, I can't agree more than: "Overall OW seems more like a bunch of stores that share a parking lot than an alliance in which all members are working together." OW way to go to catch *A (Btw the BA/AA TATL issue is a burden to the consumer and OW clearly doesn't deliver what flyers want. In this respect, *A seems to have a better team delivering more solid solutions). |
Originally Posted by atakam
(Post 13039522)
Seems that you experience a different OW than many of us here. Unfortunately for you, I have to inform you that I mainly fly C or F (full fare), sometimes D. Intra-asia usually Y (full). And in my experience (intercontinental F - LH FRA-EZE/LX ZRH-GRU or Transpac on UA F) the total experience is much smoother in *A than OW. OW 1st carrier doesn't care if you have a 2nd segment with other carrier connecting. For example, if you fly LA/IB (SCL-MAD-LHR) and arrive late (misconnect to LHR), IB will not issue you a BP on the following IB because it is LA fault. And from there if you know MAD and IB staff you can guess the nightmare starts. The same situation will not happen if you fly EZE-FRA-CPH (LH/SK). Actually, I get the new BP handed at the jetway and go directly to the new flight. Of course in the first case IB will not release the bags and you will get them (if you are lucky the next day, if not bags lost). On *A my experience is that they care about bags arriving with you.
I will however agree that *A in some areas in respect to service and ticketing does consequently feel a little more integrated.
Originally Posted by atakam
(Post 13039522)
If you go for the full F experience from Southamerica to Europe, for example GRU-LHR-CPH (BA) or GRU-FRA-CPH (LH), I can recornfim that LH HON or LH FCL are far superior than the Concorde Room. Also at arrival in LHR you just walk (or at best get guided to the lounge), in FRA LH drives you to the lounge on a MB S-class or a Porsche Cayenne. No walking, no lines, VIP treatment.
Overall I actually rate the QF lounges in SYD/MEL as better lounges than the LH HON lounge in FRA (which all partners have access to whether flying in F or the pax has Emerald status). The only better part of the LH FRA experience is the car which to be fair you need, especially as FRA as possibly the worst experience of all gateways in Europe, even CDG. Even LHR has improved dramatically over the past 12-18 months since some of the modernisation improvements have come through. I still however believe that lounge product wise, OW far exceeds *A and OW lounges feel more integrated in respect to access handling.
Originally Posted by atakam
(Post 13039522)
I could go on and on with examples. Anyway, good for you that you really like OW over *A. Maybe you should try to fly premium fares (not classes) and then come back.
Originally Posted by atakam
(Post 13039522)
As Sagy said above, I can't agree more than: "Overall OW seems more like a bunch of stores that share a parking lot than an alliance in which all members are working together."
Originally Posted by atakam
(Post 13039522)
OW way to go to catch *A (Btw the BA/AA TATL issue is a burden to the consumer and OW clearly doesn't deliver what flyers want. In this respect, *A seems to have a better team delivering more solid solutions).
Finally I should state that equally I don't think Star Alliance is worse than OneWorld. I just feel that there is not this great huge gulf between the two of them. I regularly fly both but some of the areas you described above I completely disagree with. Nothing more and nothing less. |
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
(Post 13039142)
FWIW, when BA and QF were both in T4 LHR and BA still had the CCR, QF F pax had access to the BA CCR.
|
Originally Posted by atakam
(Post 13039522)
If you go for the full F experience from Southamerica to Europe, for example GRU-LHR-CPH (BA) or GRU-FRA-CPH (LH), I can recornfim that LH HON or LH FCL are far superior than the Concorde Room. Also at arrival in LHR you just walk (or at best get guided to the lounge), in FRA LH drives you to the lounge on a MB S-class or a Porsche Cayenne. No walking, no lines, VIP treatment.
Also, you don't have to deal with microscopically tiny scratch cards to log into the Internet at the CCR as all lounges have free WiFi. |
Firstly I am not sure how you can compare a J IB experience with an LH F experience as again you are comparing apples with oranges. In my experience especially on QF/BA/CX connections, I have not usually had an issue with a misconnect, nor have I had that many issues with IB although I will agree with you that the ground experience with IB is it's weakest point. I suspect if you misconnect with a carrier like MS you would have a similar experience if not worse. I will however agree that *A in some areas in respect to service and ticketing does consequently feel a little more integrated. The car experience is good, but I don't feel it makes the lounges the best and again I should remind you that the LH HON lounge in only available for LH/LX/OS pax flying in F or HONs. A UA 1K flying in F on UA out of FRA won't have access to the lounge. As Sagy has been an Emerald for 5 minutes, I don't think we can really compare your experience to his. Go and speak to your congressman then and complain as it is largely the Americans who have so far said no to AA/BA ATI (I am of course assuming your an American based in Japan so if this is not correct, ignore this paragraph). Sadly as I am not an American citizen, I don't really think they would be terribly interested in listening to what I had to say about the issue. |
I don't really care about the differences - for me the results of any comparison is moot.
Living in Australia, I get the best coverage with Qantas and therefore oneworld. On those flights where *A might be the best option AirNZ based *G status gives me the little I need. |
Originally Posted by stimpy
(Post 13040892)
The CCR was quite a different animal at T4. The CCR is now on par, in some ways, with the LH FCT. That is why there is no partner access allowed. It operates pretty much the same as the LH FCT. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if pretty much BA copied LH's policy.
I suspect if QF operated from T5 as was touted when plans for the C pier were originally touted, I strongly suspect they would be included in terms of access rights for the CCR. |
OW vs ST
I have nearly 8 million miles on OW, but am mostly using ST now. The OW RTW products are good but BA and AA have both deteriorated in Business. I refuse to fly BA Club because the new Club World seats are atrocious and service has collapsed in recent months. AA is getting ratty also on 767 and IB reflects their condition as does JAL. CX is still wonderful as is QX, but they aren't enough.
ST has AF, who are steadily improving and have good seats and excellent food and service. AF crews always are multilingual and ST has Aeroflot, maybe the most underrated carrier around. They're great, even in Y. Their AF/KL/SU/KE make me much more inclined to use them, and they normally are pretty generous to elite flyers from other alliances. Even SU, on invols, gives preferential service. Lounge access and upgrades are pretty similar as are other features, and ST makes me feel valued. OW through AA totally ignores me even with all those miles and EXP since inception, TOP before that, and lots of 400k mile years and more. Nothing anywhere matches the CX "the Wing" in Hong Kong, however, so OW will always have my Asian preference between CX and Quantas. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:51 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.