Ozchinois

Pre-covid I only fly One World unless I have no choice. Post covid, I am thinking of giving up my CX Diamond tier and start flying SQ as I find myself in Malaysia and Thailand often. Should I?

Rumples

this is so subjective and based on your travel preference of carriers, etc.

Ozchinois

Concerned about CX's future, not crazy about QF's service even though I live in Oz and apprehensive about MH. These are the airlines I used to fly with, plus an annual trip on Emirates.

terbangalways

Adding to what others have pointed out with carrier of choice etc.
OMAAT has a blog comparing top tier *A vs. OW. Gotta agree unless *A matches OW and revamping its top tier to hypothetically �Star Platinum� with First class lounge access etc. Then it would be nice! *G lounge access and premium lane are handy. But access to First class lounge is sweet!

lokijuh

Although if you eliminate the dopamine from the equation, and just look at cold hard facts, First Class Lounge is just a marketing tool. OK, nice free food and alcohol, but at the end of the day, it's still basic cafe food and I suspect I'm not the only one in a position that can easily afford to superior food to what's on offer in most oneworld FCL's (not that I'm OWE any more, haven't been for years) albeit perhaps not at most airports (Changi being an exception, due to the plethora of restaurants at Jewel).

Ozchinois

Thanks will check blog.

SilverChris

By that logic, is the whole premium travel industry little more than dopamine one can do without? There are many individual aspects of air travel that one can easily afford. Onboard meals, alcohol, entertainment, toiletries, bedding, etc.

In F lounges it's perfectly fine to occupy a seat for work or relaxation, and have as little or much food as you want, at your convenience. You can't do that at most restaurants.

Lounges are an integral part of the travel experience. In most places - certainly in East and Southeast Asia - OWE unlocks better lounges than *G.

lokijuh

I'd disagree with that. HKG & SIN it does (if QF F is open at the time you're travelling), and I presume HND, KUL & NRT. Not sure about other parts of East and SE Asia though. Does OWE lock better lounges in MNL, TPE, CGK, BKK, HAN, SGN, PEK, PVG than *G? Even in somewhere like MEL, the QF lounge is outstanding, but a priority pass accessing the Marhaba lounge gives reasonable comfort, similar view, some reasonable alcohol - all that is missing is the quality food. If it's a by-product of travel you'll do anyway - worthwhile, but if you have to spend $$$ and go out of your way, I'm not so sure.

It really all depends on individual circumstances. If travelling from Australia to Malaysia and Thailand a lot, and apprehensive about MH, then SQ and TG would be logical choices and SQ is going to be quicker than CX and have a whole deal more options available (in terms of destinations and frequencies) than going with QF/3K. \

SilverChris

There's much to discuss about lounges, though the OP's situation isn't entirely clear. We don't know what the OP's flying pattern is, where exactly in Malaysia/Thailand they're going to, or how far they'd get in a program like KF/PPS. To some people, lounges don't matter, and I can appreciate that some people feel that way. But without knowing more about the OP's circumstances, it's hard to recommend one over another.

terbangalways

First Lounges do sound nice on paper. And it varies across cities and how generous the airline is in its offerings.
For example, I am based in SIN. SQ First or TPR food offering is fancy with lobster laksa etc. But the liquor selection is very underwhelming as compared to LX in ZRH and LH FCT/FCL in FRA. And i travel few times a month to CGK where *G has got the option to take a meal voucher at designated restaurants (far more superior IMO) instead of plaza premium. Put it bluntly, that SQ lobster does not impress me. I would rather have a simple schnitzels and a wide range of adult beverages. All these "soft products" vary across each person and they have their own liking, preferences, etc.

AnttiV

If you are thinking OWE vs. *G, OWE is definitely better no matter what the loyalty program or airline you use within each alliance.

RayG

All things being equal, I would agree with this -- much better recognition across carriers within the ow alliance compared to *.

Ozchinois

I've been using KUL as a base mainly because I have family there and visit during certain festivals (eg mooncake/tomb sweeping) and durian season. CX is convenient when we visit China sometimes. Maintaining my top tier has been exhausting despite flying comfortably in J and sometimes F so thinking of giving up my Emerald status. SQ is not as convenient but the fact that they have SYD to SIN flights in F is very tempting. The option of flying F and F lounges are important to me.

RayG

I agree with you — it’s not worth maintaining status for status sake, particularly if it is too exhausting to begin with.

Based on what you said, as long as you fly revenue SQ in J and F, PPS might be a “natural” consequence — depending on how much you spend on your tix.

I would not necessarily think about it in terms of benefits across * Alliance carriers but more in terms of benefits a higher airline status within that particular * Alliance airline could get you. Even more so if you are planning on giving your business to one carrier within * Alliance only.

In the case of SQ T/PPS, this means double luggage allowance on SQ, access to first/business lounge in SIN and SYD, potentially better award availability, TPPS partner card if you hold the highest tier.

Ozchinois

Thanks. Just that I am so used to OW airlines and also being based in Sydney, it has suited me well.