‘Earn BA tier points by buying SAF credits’ is now live but not recommended

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

• Nico says:

  3 Apr3 April 09:04

  I really don’t get why BA and Iberia programs are so different, thresholds maybe, rest makes no sense unless they believe people don’t shop around or care about BA vs Iberia status.

  • AJA says:

    3 Apr3 April 09:12

    The mistake is to assume BA and IB are the same. They may be owned by the same parent along with Vueling and Aer Lingus but they are actually competitors (unless they are flying across the Atlantic, in which case they’re sharing revenue along with Finnair and American Airlines). And apparently the Spanish earn less so can’t afford the BA spend thresholds equivalent in Euros.

    • Nico says:

      3 Apr3 April 09:31

      Competitors in the same alliance, not so sure. How many routes in common?
      Yes earnings in Spain are lower and €20k in spain is probably comparative more than £20k in britain, but given benefits are very similar in both, hard to justify the rest.

    • Barrel for Scraping says:

      3 Apr3 April 09:37

      It’s weird the different approach among the three main European airline groups

      AF-KLM: within a couple of years of their merger Flying Blue was set up
      Lufthansa: quickly integrates airlines it acquires into Miles and More
      IAG: a disjointed mess. You can’t directly credit EI flights to IB or VY flights to BA even though they’re all using Avios

      • Nico says:

        3 Apr3 April 09:42

        Exactly, you have to assume there is value in a common approach.

        • JDB says:

          3 Apr3 April 11:01

          IAG has a common approach for things that matter, eg purchasing aircraft and some central functions but keeping the airlines separate is a very deliberate policy and if you look at their investor presentations it makes considerable sense to address the different markets/customer bases differently. There isn’t really a right or wrong approach but certainly the IAG model is a whole lot more profitable than the LH group or AFKL ones.

  • BA Flyer IHG Stayer says:

    3 Apr3 April 09:59

    Different airlines different business model different clientele.

    They may have the same owner but they are still legally separate companies and the agreement when IAG was set up was that would continue and each airline operating separately. And that has been maintained whenever IAG acquires a new airline.

    IAG would take an arms length approach to the two airlines but would coordinate things like buying new planes and provide corporate infrastructure and services and use group resources for capital development.

    And that separation between the companies is why of the 5 airlines within IAG only 2 are members of One World because OW membership doesn’t suit the business models of the other 3. It’s why BA and EI have a deal re lounge access but not IB.

    And that separation is what allows people to be able to chose whether to collect points with IB or BA and not some central IAG scheme because the schemes can have separate eligibility and so on.

    • Richie says:

      3 Apr3 April 12:14

      Do you mean “…5 airlines…. ” or 5 operating air carriers?

• JG says:

  3 Apr3 April 09:42

  Feels that BA missed an opportunity to promote Flying Start here. Would much rather give £1k to a charity for some nTP than whatever BA plan to do with it.

  • Barrel for Scraping says:

    3 Apr3 April 09:51

    If they do decide to give TP for Flying Start in the future then I’m sure they’d do it at a lower rate as BA aren’t gaining anything from it

    • PeteM says:

      3 Apr3 April 11:05

      Is Flying Start a bit like Wish Wings? 🙂

• Michael Lenihan says:

  3 Apr3 April 09:42

  Someone at BA needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

  I used to book and fly twice a month with BA, going out of my way to drive to LHR and LGW when local airports are closer.

  The list flight I booked was in the First Class Lounge at LGW on December 30, half an hour before I received the email about the changes. I haven’t booked another flight since, and will burn through my OnBusiness points and Avios until they are gone.

  I’ve got my Gold status until April 2026 by the looks of it, so will use them until then, but no more.

• F says:

  3 Apr3 April 09:48

  Well, we’re planning to do the 50 segments to retain our silver status. Works out cheaper than any other options.

  • Rob says:

    3 Apr3 April 09:59

    Royal Jordanian would give you BA Gold equivalent if you credit 46 (?) segments to them. Renewal only requires 80 segments over 24 months.

    You also get a free BA Silver equivalent card to give out to a friend.

    • LittleNick says:

      3 Apr3 April 10:43

      With RJ renewal though, could you also do the 46 segments again the following year in one year or does it have to be 80 in 2?

      • Rob says:

        3 Apr3 April 10:49

        Website says 80 over 2 years, no idea what the reality is.

    • Damien says:

      3 Apr3 April 10:46

      So if I joined in September, booked the worst holiday ever just flying multiple connecting IB flights for 46 segments immediately. Then I’d have Gold for 2 years… and if I did 34 more in the next 2 years… then I’d get it for another year?

      • Rob says:

        3 Apr3 April 10:49

        Pretty much, subject to qualifying fare classes etc.

• Novice says:

  3 Apr3 April 10:00

  What annoys me most about all these ff schemes is when you want a flight to a destination you want; there is never availability. I have so many points in all 3 alliances but 95% of time I am still using my own money to book flights in business class.

• Iain says:

  3 Apr3 April 10:07

  I really liked the tone of this article. Treating it with the disdain it deserves.

• Zain says:

  3 Apr3 April 10:12

  RJ are useless at redemptions and no way to use Avios so doing 40 segments on IB might be a better for F rather than BA or RJ

• Elemy says:

  3 Apr3 April 10:59

  I haven’t seen much about this addition to the T&C, ‘All passengers using the hotel and/or car hire must be named on the booking prior to travel, any subsequent additions to passenger mix made locally could result in the booking being deemed ineligible for tier points.’
  Can this vague statement truly be implemented. And what if you booked a BAH prior to them adding this new clause?!

  • Rob says:

    3 Apr3 April 11:13

    There is zero risk of any issue with a car. Hotels are trickier, especially as your room may have been discounted when you booked for one person – this is especially likely if breakast is included. Most hotels will simply charge you for the extra but undoubtedly a few will make a complaint to BAH saying that their IT system is on the blink because they were told only one guest was coming.

    I suppose BAH could claim economic loss because if the room was more expensive for two then it would have made more commission.

    • JDB says:

      3 Apr3 April 11:20

      But it’s the booker seeking to harvest all the TP who is a party to the terms that will potentially be penalised. If BA doesn’t address the issue, it’s going to set an unfortunate precedent re effective transferability of TP or that all TPs on any booking could accrue to the payer/booker rather the individual passenger.

      It seems unlikely to be implemented re car hire bookings but higher value hotel bookings for one pax seem likely to get scrutinised.

  • JDB says:

    3 Apr3 April 11:14

    It isn’t really a new clause so I don’t think it makes a difference. Unfortunately people widely advertised a potential way round the fact that TP on BAH would be shared equally between all the pax on the booking. Initially some said just leave off the BAEC numbers of other pax, but that doesn’t work so then they said book a BAH for one person, but book a suite that accommodates a family that actually pitches up at the hotel although BA has advised them that there’s only one guest.

    BAH doesn’t want to lose the revenue of the other pax and also needs to protect (for BA) that TP are allocated on a personal basis as they always have been and are not transferable as is being attempted here.

    As for implementation/enforcement – are you going to test it? BA will advise hotels accordingly and also say their payment is on the basis of the number of people on the voucher provided. Any changes to be cleared with BA. Hoteliers will support BA on this as BA is the customer and they don’t want the aggro.

    The sorts of bookings this might be affected should also be pretty obvious and a few spot checks and subsequent TP removal should get enough moans to kill the problem.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.