Multiple emerald. Does it make sense?
 

I haven’t been able to find a current thread that deals with the issue of multiple emerald memberships. I would be interested in learning what more experienced flyers have considered the pros and cons of multiple emerald?

For my travel patterns, and I would imagine for most North American based flyers, achieving EXP on AA would seem to be the top priority. After reaching EXP during the year last year, it seemed desirable to me to get BA gold for AC access, BA phone priority, etc., and so I did so. As I understand it, QF provides the same AC access and their mileage award benefits might be better, so this year I’d be inclined to aim for QF Platinum rather than BA Gold renewal. I realize after having reached EXP by switching from AA you are giving up the bonus miles offered at that level- so that is a significant cost. Has anyone investigated the incremental benefits of a second emerald, and would QF be better than BA – or maybe CX is better still?

You have a good plan. EXP first for the AA benefits - then a second oneWorld program for lounge benefits. The question is which plan is the best? I'd say BA and QF are similar from a benefits standpoint. BA is easier to attain especially if you have a continental Europe address you can use... CX is really hard to attain and you don't earn bonus miles with them, but as a Diamond you will probably get a fair share of op-ups from them. Some analysis had been given to JAL - but I don't recall it being any more beneficial than the others.

QF seem to be enforcing the 4 QF segments rule now, so if you're based in North America, it may be difficult to achieve.

I chose QF over BA, CX, etc. and have been happy with the result. I think QF is considerably better than BA; CX Diamond takes 210,000 miles to earn in the first year, so it is twice as hard as EXP. The major advantage of CX Diamond is that CX will sell any eligible fare to Diamonds on sold-out flights -- a huge benefit if you fly CX on discounted fares. QF will only sell full J (not even Y or F) as their equivalent benefit (while AA has no such benefit). Whether double Emerald is worthwhile is hard to say; it depends on how much you value miles. Most of the time it has little significance beyond the AC access (and that can be bought for a few hundred dollars), but occasionally it does act as a super-Emerald status which solves some problems. I've been happy with it.

If lounge access is your main goal, make sure to weigh that benefit against the AA bonus miles you'll be giving up. An AC membership only costs 35k miles (or $250) for an EXP, and I expect you will forgo many more miles than that to get your second Emerald. Of course, there are lots of other benefits to having status on BA, especially if you fly them a lot, but I can't imagine that AC access alone would be worth it.

Michael

Interesting question. I've been BA Gold for a while now, and am on my way this year to making AA EXP as well. Having a continental European address and doing at least one DONEx or AONEx a year, retaining BA Gold is easy. I've decided to add AA as the miles I earn there have higher value than the BA miles. So in my case, it's an issue of redeemable miles rather than pure status. But the other benefits of EXP are nice too, specifically the eVIPs.

I still use my stash of BA miles for the occasion MFU booking, but since I'm trying to avoid LHR as much as I can, the benefit of BA Gold is diminishing for me. Still, I'll definitely renew it as it's relatively easy to get.

I've looked at CX as well and I would probably switch from BA if I were to live in or near HKG. The (sometimes unofficial) benefits of CX Diamond are attractive only if you fly CX a lot, and I've had several op-ups on CX as a BA Gold. I've never considered QF Platinum as I've been spooked by the redemption horror stories, and it's harder to attain than BA Gold. I might consider it if I were to live in Australia or nearby.

QF has a guaranteed seat availability for economy not business

From http://www.qantas.com.au/fflyer/dyn/...atusPrivileges

Dave

I can't see getting another Emerald just for lounge access in the US. I'd rather have the 100,000 or so miles that I'd get from AA as bonus miles than save the $250 for that year.

I've considered switching to another oneworld partner (BA or CX would be the choices that make sense) entirely, but I just shudder at the higher bar to getting to emerald the first time since I currrently only get about 125,000-150,000 q points a year in the AA system.

If BA had the equivalent of an AAnytime award I'd seriously consider it, though.

Steve

Out of the big 4 OW carriers, QF possibly has the worst burn rate in OW. If it is miles your after BA definitely wins hands down and also gives you the chance to MFU across the Atlantic. QF will obviously allow you to upgrade onroute to Australia, although upgrades are not confirmed.

I would take a deep breath before recommending the QF programme to anyone unless of course your based in Australia and able to take advantage of points earning via a credit card.

I've only stuck to QF because BA don't fly to my home port in Australia and because of lifetime status.

If I were in your position, I would purchase Qantas Club membership which provides AA lounge access and otherwise keep all my miles with AA. AA in most cases is still by far the best mileage earning programme in OW.

Having multiple top tier status can be useful in some situations (eg I have multiple *G statuses). However, if flying mostly on one airline it may not be worthwhile, and my impression is less valuable in OW than in *A (because of minimum own airline flights rules for BA and QF, and poor redemption value).

If not flying BA or QF much (and thus not getting much value from those airlines looking after their own elites), I wouldn't bother. If you need domestic US lounge access then cheaper to buy it.

I have considered dual Emeralds but have decided against it. In my case the deciding factor was that it would take me that much longer to reach MM (life) status with AA.

You are quite right. It is a worthless benefit (must buy a full Y fare, which is often higher than the J fares available, and sit in Y). Thus it stuck in my mind as a J guarantee. I tried to use it once, but no more. The CX benefit is really quite nice (LH used to have a similar seat guarantee policy, but it was dropped).

Yes and no. The QFF plan was always quirky, and became more so after the 2005 changes. Award costs vary greatly, and seemingly similar awards can change in cost by 100%. For example YYZ-LHR-YYZ costs approx. 50% of YYZ-LHR-JFK-YYZ; lots of other quirks like that. Some annoying, some advantageous (for specific routings, QFF can be cheaper than AAdvantage). But these are rare. I do find QFF a lot better than BAEC for my purposes (BA has different quirks, and few ways to use advantageously other than MFU, but I don't often upgrade).

AA does have guarenteed Y +1 guest if you purchase 24+ hrs in advance.

I live in the US but travel to Hong Kong and Mainland China often. I am a border-line MPC Diamond. I cannot afford to split my miles among different airlines.

As I travel on CX and KA very often, being a MPC Diamond is great. Unlike QF, I can get seat guarantee on mileage earning fares in economy and also J and C on business. There is effectively no ticketing deadline, and easy to redeem my miles. Even though I cannot use seat guarantee with my family, I get waitlist cleared very quickly when I travel with them. These benefits save me a lot of money. I can use the Admiral Club even when traveling within North America (I still have not tried that yet).

If I fly a lot, I may actually try to put the extra miles on AA. It is easier to get to higher tier and get even 100% bonus miles.