Malev's programme since introduction into OW
Apr 1, 2007 | 4:06 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
Malev's programme since introduction into OW
Just had a peek at the Malev site and if what I am reading is correct, not only is their top tier invitational only (yet at the same time provides a number of status points required to reach the level) but also seems by far the most difficult in OW.
For example, it would take 80 short sectors in full Y to hit ruby (500 awarded per sector to reach 40K) whereas most other OW programmes would have awarded you with Sapphire by that stage. 80 sectors in full Y on CX at least would give you their top tier (assuming you were CX Gold in the previous membership year).
Seems that Malev have gone out of their way to make all of their tiers pretty much unachievable.
Unfortunately the RJ website does not give much away on how you earn their tier/status points or miles so can't comment on them at this stage.
For example, it would take 80 short sectors in full Y to hit ruby (500 awarded per sector to reach 40K) whereas most other OW programmes would have awarded you with Sapphire by that stage. 80 sectors in full Y on CX at least would give you their top tier (assuming you were CX Gold in the previous membership year).
Seems that Malev have gone out of their way to make all of their tiers pretty much unachievable.
Unfortunately the RJ website does not give much away on how you earn their tier/status points or miles so can't comment on them at this stage.
Apr 1, 2007 | 5:29 am
#2
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SIN
Programs: SQ PPS, LH SEN, Amex something, nothing everywhere else
Posts: 994
It may not be quite as bad if you fly longer sectors in business or first. Moreover, they also have a "level multiplier" which awards extra Club points depending on your tier, ranging from 10% for silver to 50% for platinum. This means that retaining a tier is a lot easier than getting there for the first time.
For instance, you'd need to fly 15 returns on LHR-JFK in J to get to platinum, while you'd need only 12 returns to retain it. This compares to 9.5 on AA, 3.5on BA (for Euro addresses), 6.5 BA elsewhere and 14 for CX. So MA's levels are definitely harder to attain than BA or AA, but in this example they're comparable to CX.
Note that the example on the MA site is incorrect. Either that, or I don't understand the program at all.
For instance, you'd need to fly 15 returns on LHR-JFK in J to get to platinum, while you'd need only 12 returns to retain it. This compares to 9.5 on AA, 3.5on BA (for Euro addresses), 6.5 BA elsewhere and 14 for CX. So MA's levels are definitely harder to attain than BA or AA, but in this example they're comparable to CX.
Note that the example on the MA site is incorrect. Either that, or I don't understand the program at all.
Apr 1, 2007 | 12:19 pm
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
Malev's site is definitely hard to read/understand which makes it all the more difficult, but I was under the impression that the club leveller only applied to bonus miles and not status, so that definitely makes it much harder than CX. Remember CX also only requires 80 sectors for DM whereas AA is 100 so it's not quite as simple as it appears (as we all know and love here on FT).
Even on the long haul segments it certainly appears that even in F, MA is harder than all other carriers even in F.
Even on the long haul segments it certainly appears that even in F, MA is harder than all other carriers even in F.
Apr 1, 2007 | 1:49 pm
#4
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Portland OR Double Emerald (QF and AA), DL PM/MM, Starwood Plat
Posts: 19,593
The MA plan is a lot different from other OW plans.
Emerald is by invitation only, and then 200,000 "points" per year to retain (vs. 100K miles on AA, for example). So, you will probably not be invited if most of the flights are on BA, for example. I suspect you have to have at least 100K points accrued on MA flights out of that 200K before you are considered for invitation.
Earning is basically 30% for discounted Y, 200% for J and 300% for F (but MA has no F). So it is 67K miles of F travel to earn 200K points -- making earning Emerald exactly the same as AA, except for the invitation part. The earn/burn ratio is good for F, average for J, and poor for full Y, very poor for discounted Y. It is lucrative compared to BAEC or QFF, for example, if you manage to get "invited". I think you'd need at least 12 J trips BUD-JFK to be invited, though (and you would not know until after you had credited the travel to MA, though you are guaranteed to get Sapphire if not Emerald).
MA clearly expects to have very few Emeralds -- and wants to be sure that the Emeralds it does have are highly profitable.
Emerald is by invitation only, and then 200,000 "points" per year to retain (vs. 100K miles on AA, for example). So, you will probably not be invited if most of the flights are on BA, for example. I suspect you have to have at least 100K points accrued on MA flights out of that 200K before you are considered for invitation.
Earning is basically 30% for discounted Y, 200% for J and 300% for F (but MA has no F). So it is 67K miles of F travel to earn 200K points -- making earning Emerald exactly the same as AA, except for the invitation part. The earn/burn ratio is good for F, average for J, and poor for full Y, very poor for discounted Y. It is lucrative compared to BAEC or QFF, for example, if you manage to get "invited". I think you'd need at least 12 J trips BUD-JFK to be invited, though (and you would not know until after you had credited the travel to MA, though you are guaranteed to get Sapphire if not Emerald).
MA clearly expects to have very few Emeralds -- and wants to be sure that the Emeralds it does have are highly profitable.
Apr 1, 2007 | 2:28 pm
#5
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
The MA plan is a lot different from other OW plans.
Emerald is by invitation only, and then 200,000 "points" per year to retain (vs. 100K miles on AA, for example). So, you will probably not be invited if most of the flights are on BA, for example. I suspect you have to have at least 100K points accrued on MA flights out of that 200K before you are considered for invitation.
Earning is basically 30% for discounted Y, 200% for J and 300% for F (but MA has no F). So it is 67K miles of F travel to earn 200K points -- making earning Emerald exactly the same as AA, except for the invitation part. The earn/burn ratio is good for F, average for J, and poor for full Y, very poor for discounted Y. It is lucrative compared to BAEC or QFF, for example, if you manage to get "invited". I think you'd need at least 12 J trips BUD-JFK to be invited, though (and you would not know until after you had credited the travel to MA, though you are guaranteed to get Sapphire if not Emerald).
MA clearly expects to have very few Emeralds -- and wants to be sure that the Emeralds it does have are highly profitable.
Emerald is by invitation only, and then 200,000 "points" per year to retain (vs. 100K miles on AA, for example). So, you will probably not be invited if most of the flights are on BA, for example. I suspect you have to have at least 100K points accrued on MA flights out of that 200K before you are considered for invitation.
Earning is basically 30% for discounted Y, 200% for J and 300% for F (but MA has no F). So it is 67K miles of F travel to earn 200K points -- making earning Emerald exactly the same as AA, except for the invitation part. The earn/burn ratio is good for F, average for J, and poor for full Y, very poor for discounted Y. It is lucrative compared to BAEC or QFF, for example, if you manage to get "invited". I think you'd need at least 12 J trips BUD-JFK to be invited, though (and you would not know until after you had credited the travel to MA, though you are guaranteed to get Sapphire if not Emerald).
MA clearly expects to have very few Emeralds -- and wants to be sure that the Emeralds it does have are highly profitable.
For example, a return flight in F from LHR to SYD/MEL will yield approx 50K status points, thus 4 F class returns would be required to reach 200K status points for Emerald.
A return F credited to AA should yield just over 30K, therefore just over 3 returns are required to reach Emerald. In J the contrast is even more stark - AA would yield the same EQMs as with F, yet on MA you would need to do almost 7 returns in J to achieve the same result. FWIW, crediting to BA and QF would also require only 3 J returns to reach Emerald. Even CX's notoriously difficult programme only requires 4.8 J returns.
End result....... MA at first glance seems a pretty harsh programme.
Apr 1, 2007 | 3:03 pm
#6
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Portland OR Double Emerald (QF and AA), DL PM/MM, Starwood Plat
Posts: 19,593
This was well known for many months; all 3 of the new OW entrants have FF programs that are worse for the most part than the existing OW programs. My point was in that context; MA is not as bad as it seems on first glance, particularly for burn for longer awards and earn for long-haul F. The status provisions make it unusable, however, unless you really fly MA a lot. And while MA short-haul is good service, their long-haul J is a very inferior product (makes EI seem luxurious).