NZ, CX or BR
 

Hello,

im flying from taiwan to akl in January.

Now I can decide between 3 Airlines:

1. With CI from TPE to NRT and then with AirNZ to AKL.

2. With CX from TPE to Akl over HKG

3. With BR from Tpe direct to BNE and than with Qantas to Akl

Im thinking about AirNZ, even though its one of the worse airline, because it belongs to *A. I need to few miles to get Diamond in OZ.

But ofcourse CX is way better and i havent tried their new Y.

BR is just a taiwanese carrier, i also have miles with them but wont get any status.

so please advice.

Why do you feel that NZ is one of the worst airlines? How long has it been since you tried them? Their Y product isn't bad at all from what I understand.

If you want to retain Diamond with OZ and want to recognized on the NZ portion of the trip, I would definitely pick the TPE-NRT-AKL although the routing seems to be serious backtracking and part of the journey is operated by CI.

For quality / entertainment / service, CX should be your choice.

If you want the fastest option (routing only, not taking into consideration connection time), TPE-BNE-AKL is the best.

Not all fares on NZ earn 100% mileage, so be mindful of that if/when you book. If you are considering taking them, you might check out the NZ forum.

I am puzzled by that as well. While NZ may not be considered one of the top airlines in the world, it's certainly far from the worst from what I have read here. The main reason I haven't tried it is because it's stingy with miles. Many discounted fare classes earn nothing with UA or OZ.

LAX

What do have about ci.

im flying ci for ages now and i dont think they are bad at all in economy.
their economy seats are way better than the fancy sq, mh or oz seats.

CI's service is alright, but it is one of the most unsafe airlines in the world.

Some other suggestions if you want Star Alliance Status:

TPE - SIN - AKL (on SQ)

TPE - (on UA or ANA instead) NRT (on NZ) - AKL

The safety probleme has been solved like ages ago. infact they have like one of the youngest fleets in the world. and its only the flights to japan and hkg with problemes. the flights to europe or america are save as.

already tried to look for sq but they are always fully booked.

i also can choose UA for the tpe-nrt route but its full already and i have like so many ci miles that are gonna expire.

I'm not sure why you would say that the CI seats are better than SQ, MH or even OZ? For sure, SQ and OZ have far superior IFE (Panasonic ex2) while MH has one of the best legroom in the airline industry. I'm not really saying that CI is bad in my first post, I just wanted to point out that you will have to go in the reverse direction to get to NRT and part of the journey (CI) will not earn miles with *A.

Regarding safety, it's not really about the destinations - it's about the safety overall with CI. The aircraft that crashed several years ago are also operated to Europe / America. Their fleet isn't that young either and definitely not one of the world's youngest - an average of 7.9 years (http://www.airfleets.net/ageflotte/China%20Airlines.htm) compared to Singapore Airlines at 6.5.

What do you want from an airline?
- Seat pitch, width, recline, comfort?
- Catering?
- IFE?
- Service in the air?
- Service on the ground?
- Frequent flyer benefits?

Plus if you are flying Y then the shorter the trip the better.

NZ would easily be up with any of the others in all of those categories you list in Y. The only airline with gate to gate IFE (watch movies the moment you sit down to the moment you get off the plane.

You can also fly NZ HKG-AKL if you can get a decent connection/fare. The tradeoff with NZ is what you earn in terms of FFPs.

Another out of the way *A option could be TG depending on the day you want to travel. Bear in mind New Zealand in January is peak season (being school and university holidays throughout and mid summer), so fares are likely to be not too cheap in any case.

I just flew from germany to new zealand with sq's 77W and 747 and they sucked. the leather was so hard, that you couldnt be comfortable. Not to mention the 380 which is worse.

IMO i dont think the SQ IFE is good at all. in the over 22 h flight I was dreakin bored, because the movies were from the last centuries. Its true that there are a lot a movies, but no good ones or new ones.

regarding safety: CI never had any accidents on Europe or America routes.
Most of the accidents are in TWN, JPN and HKG.