well yes and no. the comment seemed to be why am i not getting better treatment as a star gold - after all i fly xx miles a year on star and 70k miles on SQ Y itself.

some subsequent responses have been to point out that SQ recognises status differently, not just by miles flown, but class of service paid.

Just on the seat pitch vs. ISV argument. I think this is really up to personal taste and you can't define one carrier as good or bad in a generalised way when you use specific and subjective criteria to judge. What I mean is that I find it hard to sleep in Y on longhauls, so I like ISV, so my personal choice is to select an airline with ISV to entertain me when I know I can't sleep. Yes, seat pitch is important too, but you can't always put the two together.

Someone above (sorry I don't have the thread open to get the name) said they prefer TG for pitch, and in general I'd agree with you - that is if you're flying on a 744 with nice 33-34" pitch (I've flown this a/c from MEL-BKK in the past and enjoyed it, even without the ISV). I have then flown TG A330's and MD-11's with much tighter Y seating (in the manner of UA's Y- product) and thus given the choice between a TG M11 and a SQ 744 or 777, I'd go SQ.

This of course is totally off topic of the original post so I'll just suggest that the comfort debate is subjective to everyone and can't be applied universally.

Well my 2 cents, anyway!

------------------
RichardMEL, UA 1K
A Star Alliance Member.

I believe they sell J and Y (but no F). The F cabin is used for paid J, the C cabin for *G paying for Y.

------------------
The Star Alliance Award Comparison Chart

Completely agreed. I was merely stating my personal preference. For example, if travelling Y, I would normally chose TG over SQ when possible because of the leg room. Someone else might well make the opposite choice. Certainly not a matter of right or wrong.

------------------
The Star Alliance Award Comparison Chart

My point was that as a star Gold I was expecting a little more out of SQ, something in the vain I recieve on other Star A carriers.

The mileage referance was made to point out the huge differance between Star Gold at 35K and what one flies.

Maybe its time for Star A to have another tier, at 100k

Afterall 100k flown miles is the same on all airlines.

Maybe it should be Star Platinum..?.

I have always felt that OW had a better arrangement with three distinct tiers. I think a lot of the *A lounge access issues, etc. would begin to fade away with this approach.