BA could have enhanced the F and C experience instead of penalizing WT/WTP.
May 2, 2015, 5:19 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 152
BA could have enhanced the F and C experience instead of penalizing WT/WTP.
The more I read about the Avios devaluation the more I think there is no point in being an Executive Club member anymore. Upgrades from WTP to CW from LHR to GIG (the route I fly the most) went from 30,000 Avios return to 66,000 or 72,000 
depending on the peak/off-peak game. The 120% / 140% increase is indecent to say the least. Despite the "affordable" number of Avios needed pre-April 28th availability to upgrade was rare anyway, and that has not changed since the new rip-off scheme came to life.
The average cost of WTP to Brazil sits around £1,300 outside the BA sale - I've seen other airlines offering Business Class to Rio for around £1,500 depending on dates, which would also be the average CW fare ex-EU. Based on that I can't see the point in spending a hell of a lot of money to accrue the colossal amount of Avios I'd need to upgrade these days.
BA could have enhanced the F and C payers overall experience instead by improving hard product, inflight service, food, priority boarding, check-in process, making sure that "priority" luggage is really the first to show in the conveyor belt, and increasing bonuses/lowering Avios needed for that minority who are not Avios hungry and don't need to be anyway... but effectively penalizing the smashing majority who flies WT and WTP seems to have been the easiest route. The message I get is that BA is not at all concerned about loyalty from WT and WTP customers, hence the severe reduction in Avios and tier points.
I heard and read on the rare occasion that some airlines had to rethink their decisions based on overwhelming negative feedback. If only this awful move would somehow backfire, perhaps BA would "listen" and make their frequent flyer program a decent one again.
As it stands, I feel I've been pushed out and am forced to look elsewhere. Just wonder how many out there would be sharing the same feeling.
depending on the peak/off-peak game. The 120% / 140% increase is indecent to say the least. Despite the "affordable" number of Avios needed pre-April 28th availability to upgrade was rare anyway, and that has not changed since the new rip-off scheme came to life.The average cost of WTP to Brazil sits around £1,300 outside the BA sale - I've seen other airlines offering Business Class to Rio for around £1,500 depending on dates, which would also be the average CW fare ex-EU. Based on that I can't see the point in spending a hell of a lot of money to accrue the colossal amount of Avios I'd need to upgrade these days.
BA could have enhanced the F and C payers overall experience instead by improving hard product, inflight service, food, priority boarding, check-in process, making sure that "priority" luggage is really the first to show in the conveyor belt, and increasing bonuses/lowering Avios needed for that minority who are not Avios hungry and don't need to be anyway... but effectively penalizing the smashing majority who flies WT and WTP seems to have been the easiest route. The message I get is that BA is not at all concerned about loyalty from WT and WTP customers, hence the severe reduction in Avios and tier points.
I heard and read on the rare occasion that some airlines had to rethink their decisions based on overwhelming negative feedback. If only this awful move would somehow backfire, perhaps BA would "listen" and make their frequent flyer program a decent one again.
As it stands, I feel I've been pushed out and am forced to look elsewhere. Just wonder how many out there would be sharing the same feeling.
Last edited by LondonFlight; May 5, 2015 at 12:57 pm Reason: Incorrect percentage spotted by Globaliser, now corrected thanks to him!
May 2, 2015, 5:24 am
#2
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: North East
Posts: 207
That's a crazy increase in required avios to upgrade.
As an aside - we have our first First redemption coming up soon on that route; LHR - GIG.... how is the F experience on that route - do you have any experience? or of the First product in general..?
As an aside - we have our first First redemption coming up soon on that route; LHR - GIG.... how is the F experience on that route - do you have any experience? or of the First product in general..?
May 2, 2015, 5:36 am
#3
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ipswich
Posts: 7,543
I just came back from GIG in F. We had a great experience on board. Excellent MF crew.
It's a great route for good F service. Plenty of time to eat, sleep, enjoy breakfast without being rushed but time didn't drag either.
Hope you get lucky with good crews.
It's a great route for good F service. Plenty of time to eat, sleep, enjoy breakfast without being rushed but time didn't drag either.
Hope you get lucky with good crews.
May 2, 2015, 5:42 am
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 152
Some people refer to BA First as the best business class in the sky. Flew First from AUH to LHR and was underwhelmed - steak had the gravy served in foil. Seat feels more private for sure but having flown Lufthansa First I would say BA is subpar. That does not mean it's not better than Club and I hope you will have a tremendous flight, and a great time in Brazil.
May 2, 2015, 5:50 am
#5
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: EDI
Programs: AA: Life time PLT; HH Diamond
Posts: 336
BA Executive Club reverting to old model
[QUOTE=London Flight;24753974]The more I read about the Avios devaluation the more I think there is no point in being an Executive Club member anymore.
Indeed! IMO, BA is simply reverting to a Business client model as they originally had. I really don't think they ever intended to get into an American type set up of 'valuing and rewarding' leisure and low fare passengers. They will want to shed the low income ones who are clogging up the lounges, particularly at LHR, and 'reward' if that's the accurate word, the high spending corporates. But as others have stated, criticism of BA on this forum has a number of BA followers rushing to 'defend' many of these devaluations...
Indeed! IMO, BA is simply reverting to a Business client model as they originally had. I really don't think they ever intended to get into an American type set up of 'valuing and rewarding' leisure and low fare passengers. They will want to shed the low income ones who are clogging up the lounges, particularly at LHR, and 'reward' if that's the accurate word, the high spending corporates. But as others have stated, criticism of BA on this forum has a number of BA followers rushing to 'defend' many of these devaluations...
May 2, 2015, 6:46 am
#6
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
It's all about business plan. BA does not want to clog up premium classes with leisure travelers when it can sell those seats to people who will actually pay for them (whether business or leisure travel).
This is largely a function of a vastly improved worldwide business climate. The goal of F & CW awards is not to give the seats away, but to acclimatize people who ordinarily fly WT/WT+ to the better aspects of air travel.
Now that people are paying for the F/CW seats, there is less incentive to give them away. That may cycle back should the economy revert.
The goal after all is not to sell WT/WT+ as a means of an UG to F/CW, but to sell F/CW in the first place.
This is largely a function of a vastly improved worldwide business climate. The goal of F & CW awards is not to give the seats away, but to acclimatize people who ordinarily fly WT/WT+ to the better aspects of air travel.
Now that people are paying for the F/CW seats, there is less incentive to give them away. That may cycle back should the economy revert.
The goal after all is not to sell WT/WT+ as a means of an UG to F/CW, but to sell F/CW in the first place.
May 2, 2015, 7:30 am
#8
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
It's all about business plan. BA does not want to clog up premium classes with leisure travelers when it can sell those seats to people who will actually pay for them (whether business or leisure travel).
This is largely a function of a vastly improved worldwide business climate. The goal of F & CW awards is not to give the seats away, but to acclimatize people who ordinarily fly WT/WT+ to the better aspects of air travel.
Now that people are paying for the F/CW seats, there is less incentive to give them away. That may cycle back should the economy revert.
The goal after all is not to sell WT/WT+ as a means of an UG to F/CW, but to sell F/CW in the first place.
This is largely a function of a vastly improved worldwide business climate. The goal of F & CW awards is not to give the seats away, but to acclimatize people who ordinarily fly WT/WT+ to the better aspects of air travel.
Now that people are paying for the F/CW seats, there is less incentive to give them away. That may cycle back should the economy revert.
The goal after all is not to sell WT/WT+ as a means of an UG to F/CW, but to sell F/CW in the first place.
I believe the OP's reference to 'frequent flyer programme' is a bit of a misnomer as the airline is really looking to recognise and reward premium/high value flyers, not necessarily frequent flyers who may or may not be of value.
May 2, 2015, 8:06 am
#10
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 152
Completely understand wemyss, Often 1 and sorp222 but I don't believe that seats were ever given away, but released according to occupancy, yield/revenue management. Clogged lounges could have brought yet another source of revenue by charging access for those on "award" tickets or upgrades, leaving them free for CW/F paying guests. CW paying guests or on award tickets without a Gold card can't access the First lounge anyway - I would have considered paying a fee for access the First lounge instead of the Business ones. Would you be surprised if BA starts offering paid for access to lounges for WTP?
Have you guys seen this?
http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...ne-group-elfaa
I've been an Executive Club member for a while and have never bought a WT ticket, always CE, WTP and CW when possible. If I could always afford paid CW or F I would not be bothered by the changes, of course. That's what I meant with my post - "benefits" have been enhanced to the ones who don't need them, when there are other ways to recognize and award the full paying ones.
What for me was the highlight of the program (upgrading with Avios) has been destroyed by such unjustified, overly inflated upgrade fees. A 20, 25% increase would have been less hard to swallow but 240%? I know airlines have the freedom to even shut their loyalty programs altogether but such increase should be illegal.
Perhaps the majority here on flyertalk is very wealthy and I am just a moaning misfit.
but I don't believe that seats were ever given away, but released according to occupancy, yield/revenue management. Clogged lounges could have brought yet another source of revenue by charging access for those on "award" tickets or upgrades, leaving them free for CW/F paying guests. CW paying guests or on award tickets without a Gold card can't access the First lounge anyway - I would have considered paying a fee for access the First lounge instead of the Business ones. Would you be surprised if BA starts offering paid for access to lounges for WTP? Have you guys seen this?
http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...ne-group-elfaa
I've been an Executive Club member for a while and have never bought a WT ticket, always CE, WTP and CW when possible. If I could always afford paid CW or F I would not be bothered by the changes, of course. That's what I meant with my post - "benefits" have been enhanced to the ones who don't need them, when there are other ways to recognize and award the full paying ones.
What for me was the highlight of the program (upgrading with Avios) has been destroyed by such unjustified, overly inflated upgrade fees. A 20, 25% increase would have been less hard to swallow but 240%? I know airlines have the freedom to even shut their loyalty programs altogether but such increase should be illegal.
Perhaps the majority here on flyertalk is very wealthy and I am just a moaning misfit.
May 2, 2015, 8:18 am
#11
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Yorkshire, UK / Pasadena CA
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 1,311
At present you feel you're being pushed but in retrospect you may find yourself wishing you had jumped sooner. Adhering to a loyalty programme can become a form of servitude. Conversely, it's quite liberating when there is nothing to stop you from choosing on the open market. After years of privileging BA I'm certainly looking forward to sampling the pleasures - or otherwise - of other carriers.
May 2, 2015, 8:41 am
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,644
If you look at peak UuA prices for WT+ to CW, they've basically doubled (or increased by 100%) to the same price as the old price for CW to F (which is still the current peak UuA price for that). So using peak prices, it costs you the same to UuA from WT+ to CW as it does to UuA from CW to F.
That's not an illogical starting point, especially considering the difference between WT+ and CW is arguably much greater than the difference between CW and F - and hence the argument that WT+ to CW UuAs have been woefully underpriced (= a real bargain) for years.
May 2, 2015, 8:44 am
#13
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BA, U2+, SK, AF/KL, IHG, Hilton, others gathering dust...
Posts: 2,552
You are right that they are heading this way, but FFP is a well-entrenched term in the industry and BA still positions BAEC that way too ("Fly more to gain more" as the tag line for gaining status says nothing about flying more as a high value flyer), so it's hardly surprising that people think/react in this way, even if the reality is heading in the direction you mention.
May 2, 2015, 8:52 am
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,644
Improving the lot of any category of passenger (whether those in F or CW or anyone else) wouldn't achieve that aim.
May 2, 2015, 9:13 am
#15
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 152
66,000 is a 120% increase from 30,000; 72,000 is 140% more. Otherwise, your comparison to "a 20, 25% increase" goes all wrong.
If you look at peak UuA prices for WT+ to CW, they've basically doubled (or increased by 100%) to the same price as the old price for CW to F (which is still the current peak UuA price for that). So using peak prices, it costs you the same to UuA from WT+ to CW as it does to UuA from CW to F.
That's not an illogical starting point, especially considering the difference between WT+ and CW is arguably much greater than the difference between CW and F - and hence the argument that WT+ to CW UuAs have been woefully underpriced (= a real bargain) for years.
If you look at peak UuA prices for WT+ to CW, they've basically doubled (or increased by 100%) to the same price as the old price for CW to F (which is still the current peak UuA price for that). So using peak prices, it costs you the same to UuA from WT+ to CW as it does to UuA from CW to F.
That's not an illogical starting point, especially considering the difference between WT+ and CW is arguably much greater than the difference between CW and F - and hence the argument that WT+ to CW UuAs have been woefully underpriced (= a real bargain) for years.
Good for you that you may have not been affected but the changes.