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

• Lounge access across the board on international trips (some of the Lounges are great)
• Award availability
• RTW and circle products
• Good quality airlines

The bad

• AA/BA: Can't redeem/earn miles on other airline US to/from UK
• Partial credit (25%/30%) on some fares when "home" airline provides full credit on same fare
• No ability to upgrade across OW partners (other than BA & QF)
• OneWorld lack of coverage (for me mainly within Europe)

The ugly

• No elite bonus when flying on some OW airlines (regardless of fare paid)
• Limited code share (e.g. AA has no code share to TLV, I think that BA, IB, RJ & MA) fly to TLV.
• Only 11 members and it seem like little integration (e.g. can't book a seat from one member web site on another airline's flight)
• Other than lounge access, as a OW Sapphire (I have been Emerald for less than a month), I haven't noticed any benefits on other OW airlines
• Can't book OW (involve more than 1 airline) awards online

Quite confused at your appraisal of OW in respect to other alliances.

• Firstly the AA/BA issue is related to competition issues and the fact that BA and AA don't yet have antitrust immunity.
• Partial credit works definitely both ways. Star is all about metal whereas OneWorld is all about the codeshare you are travelling on. Overall I have to say I think that OneWorld is far superior in this respect as you never have to guess what the code may translate across to. Sadly on Star there are no public translation charts published at all and it takes hard core FT'ers to try to figure out what they _may_ translate to. This issue is probably the single most frustrating aspect of *A so I am surprised you feel it is good thing.
• As your profile says your an EXP and I surprised you think you can use AA miles to upgrade BA and QF flights as you cannot. In fact the only OW programme you can use to upgrade other flights is CX although it is pretty restrictive.
• OW coverage in Europe is actually pretty decent although the key issue is having to fly to the outer reaches of the continent to get anywhere else. LX of course would have solved this problem nicely, although we are now left with MA which is an airline which is underinvested in and cannot fulfill the role it was left with (I also suspect BA would not have liked MA to be in a position of strength anyhow).

• Elite bonuses on the AA programme are determined by AA themselves. In fact elite bonuses vary widely between programmes and alliances. I'm actually surprised how generous AA is with it's partners compared to other programmes both in OW as well as *A. Again, I suggest that if you did some proper research into other programmes, you might find that the grass is not greener on the other side and you are possibly in the best programme out there.
• Code shares are up to airlines to decide bilaterally. Just because AA has decided not to codeshare to TLV does not make OW an ugly alliance.
• From personal experience I have found *A to be slightly better integrated, yet when it comes to booking other members flights, OW seems better set up to do this. For example, use the AA website and the OW option, and booking other member airlines flights is very simple. In fact I feel AA might be the best website for doing this out of all airlines and alliances. Try doing the same with the UA website which promises much of the functionality yet fails to deliver. Also try the BD website to do anything and I think you would be very disappointed.
• As you have been an Emerald for less than a month I really can't see how your in a position to judge this one. I have to say I would prefer Emerald recognition over *G any day of the week. Most carriers I have experienced issues with seem to be fairly helpful when you come in asking for assistance as an Emerald. *G (or OW Sapphire) however are pretty much run of the mill these days so partner airlines don't tend to give you too much in the way of 'above and beyond' service. LH is probably the one exception within *A although I would still keep one's expectations low.
• Can I remind you that this is an AA issue and not a OW issue. MOST carriers out there don't allow booking of awards on partner carriers online. The few exceptions to this are QF, BA and NH. Most *A, ST & OW carriers don't offer this functionality.
• Finally be aware that the seat booking issue is largely due to GDS issues. AA uses Sabre whereas most of OW uses Amadeus. That said, the issues one experiences on OW are also very much in existence on *A. Most often than not I have to call the operating carrier to get the seat that I want. Rarely have I ever been able to get what I wanted by calling the carrier who has control of my ticket.

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.

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.

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

Nor can an OW Emerald access the BA Concorde room. These types of rooms are reserved for the airlines F pax and their very best customers.

For clarity I did mean should the poster be travelling in F on UA out of FRA, he/she would not have access to the LH HON lounge so my statement still very much holds water. Remember in my post I was referring to partner lounge access.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

Cut the arrogance for a moment as you are not the only one who flies premium fares and classes.

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.

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.

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 love the LH FCT, and it is better overall, but I must note 3 corrections here. The CCR is better in that there are higher quality drinks (no Vintage Champagne at the FCT), the private cabanas, and you don't have to walk 700 meters outdoors in the weather to get to the CCR. Your comment about no walking is very wrong. LH took away the shuttle van so on connections you have to lug whatever bags you have outside in the cold and rain. That is NOT a First Class experience.

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.

Here I am comparing LA/IB C class vs LH/SK C class. The following example compares F vs F. So no apples with oranges thing.

Asian operations on both alliances have no issues, only *A has better overall coverage in the region.

It is more integrated, an area which OW has to work hard to catch up. In the end this is one of the most important points of an alliance (especially when irrops appear).

As mentioned in my post, I fly LH from South America to EU. AFAIK UA doesn't fly this route. But if you have a UA F BP, you are welcomed at the FCL, which is better than BA's T5 FCL.


Talking about arrogance?

Seems you assume too many things. I don't know how you assume I am American. Shouldn't OW management and lawyers try to solve this 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.

As no other partners operate from T5, how could anyone else access the CCR anyhow?

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.

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.