BA ANNOUNCEMENT - BA to move to a spend based Tier Point system From 1st April 2025
Jan 3, 2025 | 3:52 am
#2627
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: UK/US
Programs: Most of them (to one degree or another)
Posts: 452
This is overly simplistic. You haven't considered if the 8k passenger actually needs "rewarding" (e.g. if the pax is forced to fly with BA through a corporate agreement) and you haven't considered how much discretionary spending the 2K flyer brings to the airline. If the 8K flyer is forced to use my company and is going nowhere, I'd probably focus my effort on retaining flyers that could easily move their spending to a competitor and on recruiting new flyers that will increase revenues and, hopefully, profit.
Jan 3, 2025 | 3:58 am
#2628
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nottingham
Programs: BA GGL
Posts: 1,891
What's interesting to me is that the words "echo chamber" have only come up once in this thread. Don't get me wrong, the way in which BA has announced and implemented these changes is nothing short of treating any customer, loyal or not, with utmost contempt, however I really do think that ourselves and those on social media are in a small minority upset by these changes. I'm not a betting man, however in the spirit of KARFA I will put a Ł5 bet on BA not reneging on anything they have announced (except the potential incorrect announcement of the bonus TPs).
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:05 am
#2629
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold; FB Plat; * Senator; Marriott Bonvoy Platinum
Posts: 3,324
Michele posted an open letter to Sean Doyle on Turning Left For Less yesterday and some of the comments raise some very good points that I had not considered.
Full letter here.
https://www.turningleftforless.com/a...eo-sean-doyle/
"CallMeBetty" said
Full letter here.
https://www.turningleftforless.com/a...eo-sean-doyle/
"CallMeBetty" said
On a serious note, I always assumed that BA staff based out of London could commute for free. Is that not the case? How many CC have a similar set up to CallMeBetty (as far as commuting to LHR is concerned that is, not the husbands bit)?
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:12 am
#2630
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,847
'Minority' by refence to what? the whole UK population? Most certainly. The whole BA customer base? Without any doubt either. The elite BAEC membership at Silver or higher level? Perhaps but is that because that population is unaffected by the changes or is it because it is not yet aware of these changes and what they mean for them and does it mean that those, as of yet unaware or not fully aware, elite members, will be indifferent to these changes when they realise what they are and what they mean for them? I am not so sure...
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:18 am
#2631
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kent, UK
Programs: BA Gold; Virgin FF; United Airlines; American Airlines
Posts: 1,800
Definitely. The overcrowding is an issue, but that would have been resolved very quickly by removing soft landings or/and BAH double tier points offers (which are the actual unfair bits). The decision that BA has taken is a massive middle finger to 95% of its loyal customers - seems like an awful business decision, probably signed by a clueless consulting company.
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:19 am
#2632
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vancouver
Programs: BA for now
Posts: 1,373
The changes clealry don't take into consideration those who have to alternate their sectors to see their two husbands, in Madrid and Copenhagen respectively
On a serious note, I always assumed that BA staff based out of London could commute for free. Is that not the case? How many CC have a similar set up to CallMeBetty (as far as commuting to LHR is concerned that is, not the husbands bit)?
On a serious note, I always assumed that BA staff based out of London could commute for free. Is that not the case? How many CC have a similar set up to CallMeBetty (as far as commuting to LHR is concerned that is, not the husbands bit)?
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:21 am
#2633
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Japan
Programs: OneWorld Sapphire, BA
Posts: 700
Is is not much easier to reach Silver under the new incoming scheme?
To get silver currently, it takes a couple of long haul J's, say to Asia at 320TP per return.
So looking at my example (which I'd expect to be quite common), I do 3-4 flights LHR-Japan per year. Even if just two of them are in the cheapest J on BA that is already at least about Ł10 to 13k (just checked a few dates I will travel in 2025 to make sure I am not exaggerating the pricing).
So the new Silver/OWS requirements are about half of the current system. I do not travel much to Orange-land anymore, but even for Trumpland, two J tickets to LAX and back would be more than Ł7.5k on random dates I looked.
In the new system, all I need to spend is mere Ł7.5k plus taxes, minus credit card (up to 2,500 new TPs), so perhaps as low as Ł5k (plus taxes).
I do get it that some folks do "pointless" flights (well, TP runs) to places they don't want to go to reach Silver/Gold cheaply. But I only spend money to destinations I want to visit. Are people like me not better off?
I now fly AY to Japan because of ridiculous BA fares than can be up to twice AY J fare. But even at 25% AY milage, it does not look like we are worse off?
Are people overreacting, at least as Silver is concerned? All you need is roughly 2 long haul J returns and you have silver, how is this bad or different to what we have currently?
I get the point for Gold, that is a different ball game under the new rules, but Silver does not look unattainable at all IMHO.
To get silver currently, it takes a couple of long haul J's, say to Asia at 320TP per return.
So looking at my example (which I'd expect to be quite common), I do 3-4 flights LHR-Japan per year. Even if just two of them are in the cheapest J on BA that is already at least about Ł10 to 13k (just checked a few dates I will travel in 2025 to make sure I am not exaggerating the pricing).
So the new Silver/OWS requirements are about half of the current system. I do not travel much to Orange-land anymore, but even for Trumpland, two J tickets to LAX and back would be more than Ł7.5k on random dates I looked.
In the new system, all I need to spend is mere Ł7.5k plus taxes, minus credit card (up to 2,500 new TPs), so perhaps as low as Ł5k (plus taxes).
I do get it that some folks do "pointless" flights (well, TP runs) to places they don't want to go to reach Silver/Gold cheaply. But I only spend money to destinations I want to visit. Are people like me not better off?
I now fly AY to Japan because of ridiculous BA fares than can be up to twice AY J fare. But even at 25% AY milage, it does not look like we are worse off?
Are people overreacting, at least as Silver is concerned? All you need is roughly 2 long haul J returns and you have silver, how is this bad or different to what we have currently?
I get the point for Gold, that is a different ball game under the new rules, but Silver does not look unattainable at all IMHO.
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:27 am
#2634
Join Date: Dec 2016
Programs: BAEC GGL; TK Elite; FB Platinum; Mucci des Puccis
Posts: 7,752
If you're paying Ł10k+ for J flights to Japan, I have a bridge to sell you.
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:27 am
#2635
Join Date: Oct 2019
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 45
Extremely Valuable Context - Thank You
Got to go back to some of my comments when the years were aligned, as the conversation has drifted into BA centric areas. The key driver to this change is the belief that a standalone loyalty business can add about Ł4B at tech company margins (good double digit) and growth. This is an IAG corporate strategic pillar, announced in the report and accounts, and the point I've made a lot is that that this means that objections from within the business unit are overridden, and there are incentives and probably sanctions designed to move quickly.
Thinking it's to do with the champagne bill or crowded lounges is way off the mark, IMO. That's a very internalised view.
The changes can be very easily explained.
1) It is (too) easy to get status from flying under the status quo
2) therefore no-one will bother getting status from other activities
3) to create our loyalty eco system we need to incentivise use of other activities, including credit card spend, hotel bookings, other affiliated activities
4) therefore we must make status earning through flying much more difficult or impossible
5) Ego will force customers to use any means necessary to cement the travel privileges they value, which channels them into the eco system.
These are perfectly reasonable assertions, I am certain these were on the table when the year alignment was made. In a sensible business there would have been an announcement March 2024 that the new start date would coincide with a new method of earning status to be revealed throughout the year. Sit back and enjoy the revenue from the rush to GfL and BAH bookings on double tier points, explain the reasoning and give examples of the earning methods that will come in. Manage the change with your customers, gather issues, and behave reasonably fairly (you don't have to be nice in business, but you do have to appear fair).
That wasn't done - I am guessing because there was internal opposition to the changes (as GGLs we were all being interviewed by the HVC team on improvements to the offer, that was very confusing and misaligned) and deals were difficult to get to with suppliers in the absence of a reason for customers to take them up. Bad News Fairy gave detail in September, very accurately and with what looks like inside information, but there was still no announcement. So we get to the very last date where this can be announced to allow adoption April 1st, someone panicked about their performance bonus and pressed the "do it now or pick up your cards tomorrow" button, and it all happened with comms teams on holiday, no time to fully brief staff, and engendering a massive wave of hostility from customers, many of whom had expensive bookings to get half way to status after April, and who were also on holiday with time to get mad. I suspect a lot of what can be cancelled will be cancelled, and you'd be a bit nuts to book anything new. There aren't even important details like the soft landing (my guess is there was no soft landing in the plan, but that's been suspended while they think about it because they're worried about backlash and don't want to paint themselves into a corner; there's no real other explanation).
You literally could not manage a change like this in a worse way. Every single mistake you could make was made, But the reason it was done is valid in the IAG loyalty context (not the cost saving context although this would have been in discussions at the BA level). Please, forget the soul searching about abuse or lounge use. The underlying strategic thrust was in a different universe to that.
I would genuinely love to be a change management consultant to BA right now. The amount of sarcasm and finger wagging I'd employ would be delicious. But anyway they'll all get back into the office on the 6th and I'd imagine there'll be a bit of closing ranks, a bit of discussion about concessions around securing bookings after April, and some rolling of eyes and gnashing of teeth. Way to trash a brand guys.
PS BA, if you're reading, a great revenue stream would be to sell "fly on the wall" tickets for Waterside over the next few weeks.
Thinking it's to do with the champagne bill or crowded lounges is way off the mark, IMO. That's a very internalised view.
The changes can be very easily explained.
1) It is (too) easy to get status from flying under the status quo
2) therefore no-one will bother getting status from other activities
3) to create our loyalty eco system we need to incentivise use of other activities, including credit card spend, hotel bookings, other affiliated activities
4) therefore we must make status earning through flying much more difficult or impossible
5) Ego will force customers to use any means necessary to cement the travel privileges they value, which channels them into the eco system.
These are perfectly reasonable assertions, I am certain these were on the table when the year alignment was made. In a sensible business there would have been an announcement March 2024 that the new start date would coincide with a new method of earning status to be revealed throughout the year. Sit back and enjoy the revenue from the rush to GfL and BAH bookings on double tier points, explain the reasoning and give examples of the earning methods that will come in. Manage the change with your customers, gather issues, and behave reasonably fairly (you don't have to be nice in business, but you do have to appear fair).
That wasn't done - I am guessing because there was internal opposition to the changes (as GGLs we were all being interviewed by the HVC team on improvements to the offer, that was very confusing and misaligned) and deals were difficult to get to with suppliers in the absence of a reason for customers to take them up. Bad News Fairy gave detail in September, very accurately and with what looks like inside information, but there was still no announcement. So we get to the very last date where this can be announced to allow adoption April 1st, someone panicked about their performance bonus and pressed the "do it now or pick up your cards tomorrow" button, and it all happened with comms teams on holiday, no time to fully brief staff, and engendering a massive wave of hostility from customers, many of whom had expensive bookings to get half way to status after April, and who were also on holiday with time to get mad. I suspect a lot of what can be cancelled will be cancelled, and you'd be a bit nuts to book anything new. There aren't even important details like the soft landing (my guess is there was no soft landing in the plan, but that's been suspended while they think about it because they're worried about backlash and don't want to paint themselves into a corner; there's no real other explanation).
You literally could not manage a change like this in a worse way. Every single mistake you could make was made, But the reason it was done is valid in the IAG loyalty context (not the cost saving context although this would have been in discussions at the BA level). Please, forget the soul searching about abuse or lounge use. The underlying strategic thrust was in a different universe to that.
I would genuinely love to be a change management consultant to BA right now. The amount of sarcasm and finger wagging I'd employ would be delicious. But anyway they'll all get back into the office on the 6th and I'd imagine there'll be a bit of closing ranks, a bit of discussion about concessions around securing bookings after April, and some rolling of eyes and gnashing of teeth. Way to trash a brand guys.
PS BA, if you're reading, a great revenue stream would be to sell "fly on the wall" tickets for Waterside over the next few weeks.
I have been tempted to post similar but suspect your sourcing is more reliable than mine. However, from limited sourcing (with no conflict of interest involved or disclosure breach) plus market analysis my interpretation was identical.
This WAS a good strategy from IAG but somehow and somewhere someone forgot to look at Annex A (Timeline), Annex B (Comms Strategy) and Annex C (Retaining Existing Member Loyalty). Thus is it now a BAD Strategy. Instead of leveraging their FFP they’ve hurt it. They needed to grow the membership not reduce it. Whether this was corporate incompetence or whether IAG have been ‘played’ I guess we shall never know. Either way, IAG may have a potential significant problem as if your ‘membership Club’ is smaller then your suppliers (eg CC companies, shops etc) have greater financial leverage over you in a negotiation. ‘Slipping’ this announcement out between Christmas and NY does appear to be a deliberate calculation. That’s nasty. It’s blatantly wrong which suggests a deliberate sleight of hand. It is simply an arrogant and patronising act of self stupidity that insults the intelligence of BAEC members.
Nonetheless, some existing and rightfully disgruntled BAEC members, may not follow through and stay with the ‘new’ BAC. I personally won’t be staying (and not because I wouldn’t make the new thresholds) but simply because I no longer trust in the competence and values/morality of IAG.
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:29 am
#2636
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Japan
Programs: OneWorld Sapphire, BA
Posts: 700
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:32 am
#2637
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kent, UK
Programs: BA Gold; Virgin FF; United Airlines; American Airlines
Posts: 1,800
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:35 am
#2638
Join Date: Dec 2016
Programs: BAEC GGL; TK Elite; FB Platinum; Mucci des Puccis
Posts: 7,752
I think you're aggregating the entire spend on all the tickets, so apologies if that's the case. But anyway you're an edge case - most silvers are not spending anything like that on status. You will be at the top end of spending, and I would imagine it's not your money anyway.
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:35 am
#2639
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South East England
Programs: AF-KL Flying Blue Platinum for Life, ALL Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,085
I'm not a BA (or oneWorld) flyer and so have no affect by these changes but have been reading with interest. As has been written about BA wants to focus on high-spending business and first class passengers only, and not interested about the economy class passengers. So do BA think they want to be a business class airline only? History has shown that those fold quickly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_class_airline. Or does BA still want the self-loading cargo down the back, but that those folks have zero status/any perks?
Jan 3, 2025 | 4:37 am
#2640
Join Date: Nov 2018
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 1,276
Is is not much easier to reach Silver under the new incoming scheme?
To get silver currently, it takes a couple of long haul J's, say to Asia at 320TP per return.
So looking at my example (which I'd expect to be quite common), I do 3-4 flights LHR-Japan per year. Even if just two of them are in the cheapest J on BA that is already at least about Ł10 to 13k (just checked a few dates I will travel in 2025 to make sure I am not exaggerating the pricing).
So the new Silver/OWS requirements are about half of the current system. I do not travel much to Orange-land anymore, but even for Trumpland, two J tickets to LAX and back would be more than Ł7.5k on random dates I looked.
In the new system, all I need to spend is mere Ł7.5k plus taxes, minus credit card (up to 2,500 new TPs), so perhaps as low as Ł5k (plus taxes).
I do get it that some folks do "pointless" flights (well, TP runs) to places they don't want to go to reach Silver/Gold cheaply. But I only spend money to destinations I want to visit. Are people like me not better off?
I now fly AY to Japan because of ridiculous BA fares than can be up to twice AY J fare. But even at 25% AY milage, it does not look like we are worse off?
Are people overreacting, at least as Silver is concerned? All you need is roughly 2 long haul J returns and you have silver, how is this bad or different to what we have currently?
I get the point for Gold, that is a different ball game under the new rules, but Silver does not look unattainable at all IMHO.
To get silver currently, it takes a couple of long haul J's, say to Asia at 320TP per return.
So looking at my example (which I'd expect to be quite common), I do 3-4 flights LHR-Japan per year. Even if just two of them are in the cheapest J on BA that is already at least about Ł10 to 13k (just checked a few dates I will travel in 2025 to make sure I am not exaggerating the pricing).
So the new Silver/OWS requirements are about half of the current system. I do not travel much to Orange-land anymore, but even for Trumpland, two J tickets to LAX and back would be more than Ł7.5k on random dates I looked.
In the new system, all I need to spend is mere Ł7.5k plus taxes, minus credit card (up to 2,500 new TPs), so perhaps as low as Ł5k (plus taxes).
I do get it that some folks do "pointless" flights (well, TP runs) to places they don't want to go to reach Silver/Gold cheaply. But I only spend money to destinations I want to visit. Are people like me not better off?
I now fly AY to Japan because of ridiculous BA fares than can be up to twice AY J fare. But even at 25% AY milage, it does not look like we are worse off?
Are people overreacting, at least as Silver is concerned? All you need is roughly 2 long haul J returns and you have silver, how is this bad or different to what we have currently?
I get the point for Gold, that is a different ball game under the new rules, but Silver does not look unattainable at all IMHO.
This year we’ve booked my 60th birthday trip to do some walking in the USA and with some tweaks we’ve got the cost down to Ł1300 and that also gives 640 points (or whatever it is under the new scheme).
So not Ł10k at all! We are probably the cause of this as the new breed of Double TP status holders (don’t hate the player, hate the game!).
It will cost significantly more to reach Silver post 2027 for us.