Alliances compared – for frequent flyer benefits

I have mentioned loungebuddy on here a few times before – a great little app of which I am very fond (note I have no connection with loungebuddy other than as a user and an occasional, unpaid, contributor)

Recently I stumbled across their guides to the three alliances – and if you scroll down to the table of benefits the differences are quite significant. Here are the links:
http://www.loungebuddy.com/oneworld-ultimate-guide
http://www.loungebuddy.com/star-alliance-the-ultimate-guide
http://www.loungebuddy.com/skyteam-ultimate-guide/

IMHO oneworld benefits are the best – not only because they have three tiers, but also because the second-tier benefits are quite significant, including lounge access. Top-tier members get certain additional benefits (first class check-in and lounges, and fast track at some of the world’s busiest airports).

Star seems to me the worst, since second-tier members get nothing very much, and first-tier benefits do not include access to first class lounges, nor do they offer anything that isn’t available to top-tier members in the other alliances.

SkyTeam seem to be somewhere in the middle of the two, with no lounge access for second-tier members and no first-class services, but a useful ability (for the business traveller who can’t always plan far ahead) of guaranteed seats even on sold-out flights.

Of course, people’s priorities are very different. However, it seems to me that for the frequent traveller who often flies business class, oneworld gives access to certain first-class treatment which would genuinely improve their experience. For the business traveller who needs trips at short notice on busy routes, SkyTeam offers a clear advantage. I suppose Star’s strength is the size of its network, but I don’t see much else to distinguish it from the other two.

Thoughts, anyone?

Thanks Ian, interesting topic. I think making comparison is tricky because one either seeks to equate the benefits received or the ease of earning status – though as the latter can vary widely within alliances, probably best to stick to the former.

Personally, I would characterise it slightly diffierently – each alliance has a lower level tier that does not include lounge access. Star and Skyteam each have one premium tier (Gold and Elite Plus respectively), which includes all benefits, including lounge access – while oneworld has two such tiers (Sapphire and Emerald) with some benefits held back for the latter. So, I would compare these four tiers against each other.

Oneworld’s subdivision of its premium tier passengers can work both ways. If flying extensively, oneworld’s Emerald tier grants more exclusivity and provides access to some swish First Class lounges and Fast Track at selected airports. To be fair, how much difference there is between the lounges available to Emerald and Sapphire tier members varies substantially from carrier to carrier.

Skyteam has fewer carriers with First Class but when there is a First Class lounge, that’s sometimes available for its Elite Plus members. Similarly, its SkyPriority is much more widespread and consistently available to all Elite Plus members. I have less experience of Star Alliance, though I know that in some cases, the First Class lounge is only available to the airline’s own top elites.

But I agree with your basic conclusions – oneworld offers more of an incentive to frequent Business Class passengers that they would get access to a lounge they would otherwise not get. I do find SkyTeam has done most to provide a consistent offering – including SkyPriority and the Guaranteed Reservations on long haul flights.

Tom, as for the domestic access to lounges, I think oneworld and Star Alliance win hands down over Skyteam. Each alliance had to decide what to do about those airlines who, in their domestic markets, offered a paid-for lounge service (primarily the USA and Australia). Oneworld and Star Alliance decided to include domestic flights in the lounge access policy, but exclude UA, US, AA and QF status members flying domestically on their home carrier (but not status passengers of alliance partners flying on the same flights). Skyteam’s approach was to exclude all domestic-only itineraries from lounge access.

travelsforfun, I agree with what you say bar one sentence: “To be fair, how much difference there is between the lounges available to Emerald and Sapphire tier members varies substantially from carrier to carrier.” In fact, I think you may have meant to say that the difference between the lounges varies from airport (terminal) to airport (terminal), given that under the oneworld system, whether one qualifies for lounge access by virtue of travel class or status, one can use a lounge operated by any oneworld carrier (of the appropriate class, of course) – although this doesn’t always seem to be understood by many of the passengers. Thus, a business class AA passenger flying out of LHR can use any of the J lounges offered by AA, CX or BA – of course their invitation says the AA lounge, but there is nothing to stop them using either of the others – and yet most of them end up in the AA lounge, which is pretty miserable (IMHO).

Similarly, as I have mentioned on here before, when I fly out of LHR – usually on CX or AY – I tend to use the BA F lounge (as an emerald) even though my invitation specifies the CX lounge. When I have flown out of HKG on BA or AY, I use the CX F lounges, although my invitations specify the QF lounge (if on BA) or the Premium Plaza lounge (if on AY). Of course in some airports the terminal factors in as well – for example, in some US airports it is relatively easy to get from a lounge in one terminal to a departure gate in another, whereas in other airports it is impossible or impractical.

Martyn, I was specifically looking at frequent flyer benefits under alliance systems rather than mileage rewards (which are more airline-based, despite the ability to earn and burn across alliances), although your point is well taken. I haven’t tried the new CX lounge in BKK yet – so please do send in a report! Mind you, you should come to HK and try the new CX F lounge at The Pier. It isn’t huge, but it is delightfully quiet compared to many of the other lounges, the dining is superb, and it has a truly luxurious feel. The only downside of it compared to The Wing F (IMHO) is at breakfast, since there is no buffet so all food has to be ordered and it can be a bit slow. Also, the ambience of the restaurant doesn’t quite seem to work in daylight – but in the evening it is gorgeous. Well worth schlepping all the way up to the far end of the terminal building even if you are flying BA!

Indeed, Swissdiver, but I was really only focusing on benefits offered at the alliance level – which would exclude airline (or airline group) “super-levels” such as BA’s Gold Guest List, Concorde Room Card and Premier, or CX’s Diamond Plus. And of course I was also not talking about additional benefits that may apply to “ordinary” levels within the airline (or airline group) actually giving the status, such as the fact that as a CX Diamond I am able to access any CX-operated business class lounge (with guests) even if I am not flying a oneworld airline.

I think, as some have eluded to, that the benefits depend where you are originating from (for me, LHR) and where you fly to most regularly (Africa, Asia and Europe mostly). My main two memberships are Oneworld with BA (currently Gold) and Star Alliance with LH (currently Gold). I was silver with Skyteam (KLM) for a while but it had little benefit other than business class check-in and fast track boarding (you had to pay for lounge access!).

For me, Star Alliance Gold has some very important and good features, but also some issues: that you get two years membership on top of the year you qualify is great and a significant benefit compared to OW. Also since my short haul is in economy, the priority boarding is very important so that you don’t get on the plane when there is no cabin space left. Gold compared to sliver, now that the new T2 is open at LHR, you would get lounges on three of four legs if you are flying on a connection with LH or one of the M&M partners (but don’t get the priority boarding) so there is not so much difference between gold and silver (particularly since lounges in destination airports in developing countries are often not of much value). Also the half price partner awards is very good. One of the big things I don’t like about LH M&M (SA) is that you don’t get any additional bonus on you miles (status and tier) for being gold compared to silver. There are probably many more features I have missed but these are the most important to me.

For Oneworld, the bonus mileage accruals is now fair and better than SA (they have now modified it so that gold is differentiated from silver). I think too many people have priority boarding with BA (Gold, Silver and Bronze) but I tend to fly long haul where cabin baggage space isn’t usually so much of an issue. As with SA I think the lounge access differential is quite significant in OW between Silver and Gold – I would hate to have to use the Business Lounges in T5 again, they seem to be constantly downgrading the food and beverages, and are overcrowded particularly in A terminal. BA also has the Amex Card which is generous in terms of miles (particularly for BA bookings) and the companion voucher which is invaluable. SA doesn’t have this benefit, but as above does have the half price companion price for airmiles bookings.

Generally it appears there is better reward flights availability in premium cabins on SA than on OW (this is LH compared to BA).

On upgrades (complementary) probability correlation to status, it’s difficult to tell. I have had a lot with BA (15-20 in the last 7 years) but only one with LH. Again this is affected by routes.

So, a difficult one but on balance I think I would rather put effort into retaining gold on SA that BA.

Guys I agree that OW far outweighs Star Alliance, especially in the middle tier, I am silver on SA having only moved to SG at the beginning of the year, I still maintain my Emerald BAEC as I tend to fly CX here in region to maintain it as well as getting far better treatment

Friends and colleagues who have lived here for years and maintain Gold Status on SA with SQ will always moan that their status gets them nothing compared to me!

I am not sure if this is SQ in particular or the difference between the two alliances but I am glad I am top tier with OW

Definitely ,* A does not offer much unless you are Gold ,which is indeed hard to reach nowadays after most M & M carriers reduced their accrual rates ;however I discovered recently that the least attractive Star Alliance FFP is indeed Miles and More ,moreover it offers the lowest value-for-money compared to other Star Alliance carriers FFPs ..You need to clock up 100,000 miles per calendar year to reach the Gold status ( Senator ) with Miles and More whereas you just need a fraction of this amount of miles to reach the Gold status with many other ( non M & M ) Star Alliance carriers .

Skyteam might not be brilliant in all features but they do two things brilliantly : Sky Priority is working well in most countries and staff nowadays are doing their best to enforce it .At the same time ,Skyteam is the best alliance in Customer Relations and communication: i do get very regular ,on /in time newsletters and notifications about promos ,etc before they are due while *A is always lagging and do sen d their newsletters belatedly .

Oneworld is indeed the most ” consistent ” Alliance that ,as well said by all of you offers tangible benefits starting from the first tier up ( Silver ) ,which is a big plus .

I noticed that the new fourth alliance was not mentioned by anybody in this thread : Etihad Partners ..any comments so far ??