I would like to see a unified Star Alliance FF program. I'd like to not have to worry about which *A program to accrue miles to. I'd like to not have to setup my UA reservations with my M+ number in order to get a decent seat and then have to try to change it at the gate (which is often not done correctly) to the program where I want to accrue the miles.

Specifically, I'd like to see:
*S for 50K miles, *G for 100K miles per year,
25% bonus for *S, 50% for *G which don't count toward status,
100% bonus for paid business class (and US/UA domestic F) which count toward status,
200% bonus for paid first class (except US/UA domestic F) which count toward status.

Then each airline would be free to offer additional status and perks to high revenue passengers on their own metal like LH HON, SQ PPS, or UA UGS.

Interesting idea.

Would it be a single FFP or instead each airline has its own FFP but with common standards? Both may be problematic.

I think more than one * Alliance carrier would have an issue with either such set-up. Short of those airlines which have a financial equity holding in another airline, which airlines have such a jointly-operated program today? The closest I can recall was the Qualifyer program, but that broke up.

I'd rather see a single unified FFP, but any move to common standards would facilitate unification in the long run. Already several carriers use Miles and More e.g. LH, OS, LO and a few of the regional members.

I don't think you'll ever see a unified FFP because everyone looks for different features in a FFP, thus the need for airlines to differentiate themselves from each other. What works best for you, doesn't work best for me.

The alliances wish to avoid internal competition amongst the alliance members. Less competition results in higher profits.

But any business has multiple products for different buyers. An automaker maker doesn't make just one car model. A television manufacturer doesn't make just one T.V. model. Likewise even if it's an airline alliance, you need multiple products that are targeted to different consumers. If you tried to make a one-size-fits-all FFP, you'd have a mass exodus from *A to the other alliances.

And don't forget anti-trust issues... unless airlines hold significant cross holdings (like OS/LH/CL/EW/LX/LO or BD/SK/JK/KF/BN/WF) they are not allowed to share revenue, load factor and other pax demographics. Marketing/code share agreements already push the limits of what is allowed. LH/UA, AA/BA and NW/KL had quite a battle till they were allowed what they currently do.

*Laugh* I'd like to see M+ members working under the rules that let's say SQ would want to lay down for any unified scheme. There'd be a riot.

I wouldn't like to see that. I will get *G from SK for 55K (and in some other countries it's only 45K). I believe AC has a comparatively low threshold for *G status and other schemes might as well. Moreover, your proposed bonuses for status and paid ticket class aren't all that attractive, either.

cheers,

Henry

And don't forget the segment hoppers--with ANA (and AC?) it is possible to get *G with 15K and 50 segments.

-Kush

You mean like First, Business, and Economy classes?

So in your opinion, SIN-KUL in F counts for 200% bonus while JFK-LAX/SFO counts for only 100% bonus? That just doesn't make sense to me.

No, I don't mean that. First, Business, and Economy are airline products, not FFP products.

I don't think this is likely. FFPs are strategic marketing tools used by airlines to manage demand in their markets. Each market has its own constraints, competitive forces and demographics. Unifying all *A airlines into one program reduces each's (sic) ability to use their FFP as a marketing tool in their primary market - eg US market FFPs are substantially different to other markets due ot more competition.