Rate oneworld
 

We are writing a cover story comparing the three global alliances for the December issue of InsideFlyer magazine and would like your input.

If you would like to participate, please post your response in the thread with the pros and cons of oneworld and grade the alliance from A to F (A being the highest grade). You can include a plus or minus with the rating.

You can also respond directly to me at [email protected].
Thank you!

I'm a top elite member of all 3 alliances and I actually like them all. They all have their strong and weak points, but thanks to competition, they all have many similarities.

Sometimes a particular remote destination can dictate which alliance you use. But mostly I fly whichever one is the most convenient, or has a sale, or, lastly, which one I need the EQM's on to requal.

As for Oneworld, they have some great lounges and as an Emerald member you can use the F lounge in most places. They also have more flat seats in business class.

Overall grade of A- to B+ (I probably would give *A an "A" and ST closer to a "B"). I too am a top tier member of all three alliances and think that while generally they have many similarities, I now find myself using *A and OW much more. It actually has almost nothing to do with the FF program benefits per se, instead it is the fact that *A and OW have a range of "circle" products other than just the standard RTW. Skyteam really needs to improve here, they only have 3 levels of RTWs and quite frankly these are pretty weak (I honestly don't know anyone who regularrly uses ST RTWs).

OW has so many useful products in this regard, and my guess is they see a return on these products. They just introduced a "Circle Atlantic" product which I am going to use next month, it allows N America, S America, Middle East and Europe stops (and then a return to N America), gives a ton of flexibility and results in a very reasonable fare (which is less than 50% of what it would cost to purchase these segments separately). Circle Pacific and Circle Asia tickets as well as the multi-continent products round out the huge range of products that increase flexibility and reduce cost when compared to simple point to point and roundtrip pricing. *A lags a little bit in comparison to the OW range of products, but nowhere near as badly as ST.

OW also has a pretty good collection of carriers, and in particular seating products. BA and CX have fully flat seats, I think QF has some, and according to reports IB is heading to fully flat. A growing problem with Skyteam is that several of their carriers have failed to standardize around a current generation seat, so for both DL and KE, you run the chance of getting a 10 year old seat, but you are paying just as much as if you got a flat bed.

As for FF programs, I like that several of OW programs allow one way redemptions. I hold BA and AA miles for this flexibility.

I do a lot of ST, mainly for destinations that are better served by ST. But I have only done a couple of ST RTW's because of the lack of Asian carriers and the fact that I don't need to go to Korea often. If they could add Malaysian I would do more ST RTW's.

And don't most all airlines do one way award tickets now? I think I saw recently that AF/KL and UA have added that option.

Love : - First class lounge access for Emerald members
- Great RTW and circle products.

Hate : - No priority baggage and extra baggage allowance for Emerald members
- Big coverage gap in Africa

Depending on your criteria OW or Star A to A+ and Skyteam B+
 

I'm top tier and multi million flyer in all the 3 alliances.

Oneworld

Pros:

• Excellent lounges for Emaralds especially in HKG, LHR and acceptable in US. Food and bath in HKG, SPA service in LHR are best in class
• Good Global explorer and circle products
• Good physical products with upgrade now at AA, QF and CX complementing BA
• Well trained staff recognizing benefits in most locations during boarding and at lounges
• Current 10% discount on OW fare promotion
• Frequent Mileage promotions for F/J on select OW carriers (AA bonus on QF, CX for example).
• 3 tier FF recognition and separation of F and J class checkin and lounge benefits. Robust F product separate from J on most key carriers
• Good combination rewards from AA on OW partners. Mix and match OW partners for awards.
• One way awards on AA and BA very useful. Mix and match Y/J/F award segments in a round trip
• Good OW award availability on most non QF routes

Cons:

• Poor coverage of Africa outside BA cities
• Weaker in Continental Europe compared to Star or Skyteam
• No equivalent of Star upgrade rewards though some reciprocity between QF and BA
• Tier point based recognition on BA and QF favors J/F/Full Y pax rather than butt in seat flyers
• No online OW or partner award availability compared to Air Canada, ANA, etc in Star

B

If there was an ability to do upgrades (EVIP for AA members) across to the OW carriers I'd give them an A.

Good:

Lounges, for the most part, are very good.
Decent worldwide coverage.
Reliable and pretty consistent.

Improvements:

A standard award availability tool that is reliable for multiple carrier routing. Each carrier could continue to maintain expanded availability for their elite members but it's a pain having to search 2 or 3 sites to create an itn before calling reservations.

I'm a Sapphire with oneworld via Qantas and have been for several years now...

* A lack is the Africa network. I know oneworld are aiming for profit, and that is quite fine, but I think an African airline needs to be added.

* Strangeness is where some oneworld carriers use third party lounges in cities where other oneworld airlines have lounges. This doesn't make any sense to me

* A great thing is that the alliance is small, number of airlines wise. It's allowed almost all the airlines to have a similar product offering, with good safety records, and good service.

* A bad thing is where you go to the CX J lounge in BKK as a QF card holder and are told to go across to the QF lounge, when in reality you should be permitted in (this has happened twice)

While not perfect, the alliance is very good. I've flown some Star Alliance airlines (TG J, SAS Y, BD Y) and not really had the same impression of cohesive service that oneworld appears to have.

Can't really compare, but don't like that in most associated airlines, on most common fares, we get only 25-30% of mileage accural.

Pros:

-As flyers mentioned above. No repeat
-Great product
-Great airline with service(at least half of them)

Cons:

-Awful mileage accu. on most of the airlines as a sheep on board(BA, CX to mention a few)
-No through-out service and each airline has its own story and expectations
-LONE4 price hiked more than 60% in UK. It was £1298 + tax in May 2008, and the latest price is £2100 + tax.:td:

Some thoughts on 1K/*Gold vs ExPlat/OW Emerald
 

I have had the chance of holding United 1K and American Executive Platinum status for a couple years now and would like to share some thoughts on my experience with both programs and how they compare. I may send a copy to AA and UA and ask if they care.

My profile: I spend a lot of time on airplanes for business, flying around 300,000 miles per year, mostly internationally, I can chose which airline I fly but am generally expected by my company to purchase the lowest cost coach fare. So my interest is to get as many business class upgrades as possible and as many miles as possible, which I use for family and friends. I live in Miami, FL, an AA hub.

Obtaining the status:

Reaching 100K is easier for me on United/Star Alliance than on AA, United has more flights to Asia and a couple flights to the Middle East. AA is stronger in LatAm (though UAL also flies to GRU and EZE) but in Asia AA metal only flies to Japan and India.

Flying One World vs Star Alliance

There are some fare restrictions but in general it seems to me Elites get double miles on One World flights but not on on Star Alliance flights, except for some Lufthansa flights. That is a big difference which I have rarely seen highlighted.

CX vs SQ

When I fly Cathay Pacific in any class, the lead flight attendant comes to me, calls me by name, thanks me for my business and for being Emerald and sometimes I even get upgraded without asking.

When I fly Singapore Airlines, which is nonetheless a great airline, I get nothing and sometimes end up in a middle seat.

When I fly Cathay in coach I have access to the fist class lounge in HKG, where I can get a VIP room, take a shower, a bath, relax, then have dinner and be served fine wines in their restaurant.

When I fly SQ in coach I do not even have access to the SilverKris business lounge in Singapore, instead I can go to the Star Alliance Gold lounge and if I am lucky they will have noodles. No comparison.

BA vs LH

Can’t get miles on BA transatlantic flights, London is a difficult airport to connect to for me because of the multiple airports, hand luggage restrictions and the time it takes to go through the lines, I would rather avoid it. But I love the BA lounges.

On the other hand I can get double miles on LH transatlantic and attempt to use a systemwide upgrade (though I have never done it, not sure what the success rate is) and FRA is an easy airport to make connections. But I am not impressed by the Senator lounges I have seen.

UAL business vs AA business

No doubt for me that UAL business is superior, AA’s new biz is cramped, the seat is not completely flat and I have never been able to sleep in it. UA’s new business is a pleasure, especially on the upper deck of a 747, which AA does not fly. Good entertainment in both. I wish either would fly the A380, have not heard of any plans.

SWUs

Perhaps because they know their business class is superior, UAL has surreptitiously made an enormous change to their policy, which I questioned them about and they say they have not. My experience is, for the last 18 months I have NEVER been able to confirm a confirmed systemwide upgrade. Essentially the upgrade is pending until check in and then you get it or not, recently I have not been able to redeem my SWUs. What is the point of having them then, in the past it had never happened that I had an SWU expire, now it looks like it is going to, in spite of the 165,000 miles I have flown on UAL this year (OK, including DEQMs).

You get six SWUs per year on UAL, whereas you get 8 on AA, which makes it much easier to travel with a companion.

On AA, I make a call and almost always get my SWUs confirmed immediately.

Oh, and UA requires the purchase of higher “upgradable” fares. Paying more and then not get upgraded adds to the frustration.

Domestic upgrades

In most cases I get upgraded on domestic flights on either AA or UA. I do however have a preference for AA because I find their domestic biz better in terms of comfort and food and wine, and I usually get my upgrades confirmed earlier. And generally speaking AA/One World makes me feel more important to them than UA/Star Alliance (where are my 1K luggage tags?).

Of course Star Alliance is much bigger, which means more opportunities to earn EQMs if I didn’t mind flying the partners in coach and not getting double miles. But I do mind…

Premier lounges

A good example of how AA makes me feel more important is access to the Flagship lounges when traveling internationally (though very regretfully all of the Carribean and Canada are not considered international by AA), whereas UA will not allow me into their First class lounge at all, only into the Red Carpet (and the Red Carpet lounges in the US are really not that impressive, can you believe they do not have a single shower at IAD?).

Reservations

I do most of my reservations on line. But when I speak to an agent I have a better experience with AA, no wait, and one even called me back! Recently UA’s messaging system, SMS or email, has failed to alert me of events I suscribe to (departure gate, upgrades) on most occasions and I have been on hold for a while before someone picked up the phone.

Award availability

From Miami of course almost none on UAL metal, anywhere, anytime, did not use to be that way. Variable availability on partners. Not bad at all on AA, with the possibility to book one-way, which is a plus for me, and reduced off-peak awards.

Conclusion:

Generally better experience with AA/One World, especially CX, and I live in an AA hub with a flagship lounge. But UA has a better business class product and flights to South East Asia and the Middle East and a better transatlantic partner (did I mention BA only awards miles based on the fare paid?). So I am stuck, I will have to continue to fly both…. I have been thinking of getting a FF card from CX, SQ or LH, ask them to match my status and use them rather than AA/UA for international flights. But I am thinking this is going to cost me my domestic upgrades, has anyone tried that?

That's my answer. Well actually all three as I have top elite with Skyteam too. It's really good to be elite in more than one since your preferred alliance could be affected by a strike or something. Last year Lufthansa had a terrible strike and before that BA had the nightmare of the T5 opening. I was able to avoid both problems. Plus, with multiple options you can price shop which can be very important when you source tickets from places outside the US.

Since you live in the US, it's probably better to stick with US carriers, for the domestic upgrades if nothing else. But also you don't have to pay huge taxes and surcharges on award tickets like we do in Europe. Also, if you are only paying coach, it's best to stay with US carriers. Most international airlines, like BA as you noted, only reward business class fliers.

An interesting question for me to ponder since I am new to being an elite. (OW Emerald and *A Gold)

I am basing this on my OW expiriences on AA, IB and BA and recent status matching on CO with flights limited to interEuropean LH.

OW Lounges: A+ BA lounges are simply the best at LHR. BA lounges at LHR are far better than the comparable LH lounges at FRA.

Network: B Huge holes in Africa. I also think AA leaves some areas underserved in the US, mostly in the Southeast. When flying from CAE or CLT to Europe why do I have to fly to DFW or ORD when there is a flight from RDU to LHR?

Reciprocal Bennies: A I feel that I am treated very well on other OW carriers, to include occasional Op-Ups.

Very interesting post.

Of course you should consider crediting elsewhere. I was thinking off suggesting crediting a few flights to Qantas Frequent Flyer, 2 return "instant Upgrade" transcontinental flights on AA could easily earn Qantas Gold Stats )= AA Plat) and A/C access whenever you fly AA.

OW vs *A
 

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.

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

:confused: 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. :rolleyes:

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. :td:

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? :confused:

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.

I'm sure the people at Horizon Airlines appreciate your comments. I agree, their service from Seattle to Wenatchee is second to none.

And somehow I would think that someone who has flown 8 million miles with Oneworld would know about the U in Qantas.

I've not yet had the chance to visit the new QF F lounges in Oz, but even the T5 CCR is better, IMHO, than the Wing. Much better drinks, a spa, more comfortable seats, and quieter.

Haven't been to the CCR yet, but the MEL/SYD QF F Lounges are better than The Wing in every respect. CX used to have an amazing F lounge, but the other carriers (OW) have surpassed them. Time for them to re-invent (and re-invest) at their home airport.

My comments are about OW and what I expect from an alliance. Not in respect to what other alliances (with which I´m not as familiar provide)

1. But the lack of antitrust immunity does have a negative impact on the alliance, this fact (regardless of the cause) can´t be ignored.
2. So your point is that *A has a worse partial credit set of rules, I´ll trust you. This doesn´t change my view that the current OW system is bad.
3. Maybe I wasn´t clear. Except for between BA & QF you can´t upgrade on another airline within OW. I would expect an alliance to give me the ability to upgrade across the different airlines (QF & BA do that, if you are an alliance this practice should be available across all airlines).
4. Having to fly to “the outer reaches of the continent to get anywhere else” is in my view lack of converge.

1. You are explaining why it is the way it is, it doesn´t change the fact that the differences are there and give the clear impression of something other than an alliance.
2. I have to disagree, if you are an alliance the first thing that I expect is the ability to use the other airlines for code sharing to locations one alliance member doesn’t fly and another does. To me this is by far the most important feature of an alliance (one airline helping another). Otherwise, in my view what you have is not an alliance. An airline can do one-off code share with any partner.
3. I´ll take your word that OW it is better integrated. The fact that I can´t book a seat on IB from a BA website on a single itinerary involving both airline is ugly.
4. Hence my statement “as a OW Sapphire”, as an Emerald my view might be different. However, I can very well judge an alliance as a second tier elite and it is not less (or more) meaningful than view of a top tier elite.
5. The fact that others do not allow this functionality doesn´t change my view that is shows very badly on the alliance. I made it very clear that my comments are about the alliance. If 11 airlines want to call themselves an alliance, then I expect certain functionality to differentiate an alliance member from a partner. This is one area in which OW fails (others might be worse).
6. The issues might be common and I´m sure they are reasons behind them. When I look at alliance, I expect more than I get with just a partner and the grading scale is not on a curve. It might be very well that OW as an alliance is better than *A and ST. It is also the case that in my view OW is below average of what I would expect from an alliance and I consider “C” to be average.

A DONE4 experience
 

Planning/Exploration
--Overall Grade: A+

The oneworld web portal is very professional and in a few ways is even better than the *A web portal. The interactive map is excellent and provides a graphical representation of direct flights vs. connections. This utility has been invaluable to us during our plannig phase, especially with the new 16-segment limitation. I wish the *A site someting similar visually appealing as this utility.

Ticketing
--Overall Grade: B

*A has oneworld beat in this category. We found the best fares to be from South Korea on CX stock. The method of ticket issue was a bit cumbersome. Yea, we could have used a TA from Canada to get our tickets issued, but I'm not sure how a change-in-itinerary would have played out, given that it was like pulling teeth going through CX, our original ticket issuer. Another thing that I didn't care much for is the vast difference in fuel and tax surcharges amongst the different ticketing airlines. Get you acts together, will you, if you are going to act like an "alliance."

Changes to Itinerary
--Overall Grade: F

The changes involved RJ segments, and it was a colossal pain! We initially had CAI-AMM-ATH segments booked in 'L' and we wanted to get them rebooked in 'D'. When we called RJ, the D class was wide-open but they wouldn't make the change because the ticket was issued on CX stock and not on RJ. ...?!? It looked more like a cluster-F#$k more so than an alliance. And, CX wouldn't make the change either because the CAI station couldn't re-issue the ticket and they couldn't find anyone in this world who would?!? After a lot of yelling and screaming and a personal visit to the CAI CX office (which was actually a contract-office) we were finally issued D tickets for our CAI-AMM-ATH flights. Niether RJ no CX were behaving like either of them was part of an alliance.

Airport Lounge Experience
--Overall Grade: A

The lounges were very good to excellent, except for the one at CAI. Don't expect much at CAI when flying out in RJ. The lounge is one of the worst lounges that we've ever been in - even LAX interim *A F lounge in 2007 was better than this one.

In-flight Experience
--Overall Grade: A-

A few of the most memorable flights:
- BKK-HKG-LAX: CX on the upper deck of 744
- JFK-LHR on AA: Wow! We had low expectations but the crew + service were amongst the best and the arrivals lounge in LHR was a welcome relief after fast-track through immigration.
- LHR-CAI; LHR-BKK-SYD: BA. The NGBC cabin and crew were some of the finest and quite comparable to CX transpac business class. We even scored AA elite bonus by booking the LHR-SYD as a QF codeshare!
- CNS-BNE-HGK: CX on slant lie-flat seats. Very comfortable experience.

The only reason for A- is because the SQ business class soft product is defintely a notch better than either BA or CX. We did SIN-CMB-SIN-ICN in SQ as part of an award to go with this DONE4 and these three flights had the best soft-product overall!


AAdvantage
--Overall Grade: A++

Wow! Platinum Challenge, enough said. We were able to almost double our redeemable miles just because of the Platinum Challenge! Thank you, AA!

1. Why did you get the original ticket booked in L?
2. On these kinds of tickets, it is always best to visit the office. Never try over the phone as your entire routing could get screwed up.
3. It's best not to try this at an out-station such as CAI. If you went to the CX office in Kowloon, you would get comfortable courteous service. They even took great care of my RTW change to a BA issued ticket.

I can upgrade with BA from CX.

Alliances
 

It all depends where your hub is. If you're in America and you fly mostly coach and earn upgrades or use VIP's it's tough to let go of AA which gives ExecPlat's 8 upgrades a year (without any restriction on booking class) which I've always been able to use or give to my wife with minimum hassle. That's a very valuable resource. Africa coverage is light, but that's only an issue if one is traveling there often. Cathay is top notch in Asia and they treat Emerald's very well. Access to the F lounges despite your booking class is worth a lot too.

My real issue is LHR and the transfer between terminals by bus which is an enormous and inefficient pain. However, once you make your way through the morass of British inefficiency the lounges at T5 really are great, and I don't have experience in the F lounges in *A, but it feels like the really good ones (LH HON) are restricted to F tickets only, which means they're not really an advantage of being in an alliance and rather available only to dollars spent - which trumps any loyalty rewards for any alliance.

The one big issue in OW if you're American is that you are stuck with AA for all TATL flights because of the non compete with BA. This is a real bummer and *A really beats everyone here since you can choose between CO, UA and LH to get overseas and compare fares, timetables etc.

I have been considering a move to *A because of the LHR issue - which will get worse and worse with the recent whackjob failed attempt on the DL flight Xmas Day - but loathe to figure out if I bought the correct class to use a SWU , have less of them, and get the same or inferior lounge product when connecting after a long LAX to wherever in Europe jaunt across the Pond.

At the time of ticketing, CX couldn't see any D availability even though RJ representative could see availability. I was informed that I couldn't leave any segment open because it was an e-ticket and so I was left with no choice but to book the RJ segments in L.

This is a very sage advice, but also spotlights the major issues with the alliance. This kind of RTW ticket is the Flagship product of the alliance, isn't it?

It is, and you're right. Several of the major airlines in OW (e.g. BA, AA) have special RTW hotlines to handle changes as their normal call centres and airport ticketing counters always make a mess of it. My experience with these hotlines has always been good - no hiccups for the change, nor in any of the subsequent flights. Might not have helped you this time as I don't know if RJ has a similar hotline, but it's worth knowing about for the next time. Nevertheless, this is still a "work around" approach to fixing a flaw.