british airways
May 5th, 2007, 08:04 AM
#41
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Janisj - it may not be a secret, but it is a shame. I have not encountered this in other alliances - if I fly Air Canada I get FULL mileage to my UA account. I also can fly Lufthansa to Europe on UA miles or Air France on Delta miles ( not BA for AA miles)
I prefer AA frequent flyer program to others and that almost excludes BA for me ( other than outside of US for miles)
I prefer AA frequent flyer program to others and that almost excludes BA for me ( other than outside of US for miles)
May 5th, 2007, 08:23 AM
#42
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like BA. The baggage allowance at two 50 lb. bags per international passenger was better than most. The food is not bad and free liquor and wine with dinner puts it way ahead of American carriers. It also offers reasonably priced travel insurance. We have had to overnight en route home a few times and have found BA hotels to be a good value. The only drawback was that we arrived in Malaga, Spain but our luggage did not...for three days that is. However, we have flown them three times in the past years from Tampa to Spain and the service and flights are fine.
One problem, though, is the frequent flyer club. We can never join because we use their economy flights!!!
One problem, though, is the frequent flyer club. We can never join because we use their economy flights!!!
May 5th, 2007, 08:51 AM
#43
I don't really fly enough to make many comparisons, but on several flights to South Africa over the past decade I have preferred Air France to BA.
None of my experiences with BA have been terrible, just the odd irritation. An example would be the "few or no" FF points on economy flights.
I have a FF card courtesy of my credit card, but while I get airmiles on flights (at the rate of about 30% of full value), I will never move from the lowest class of membership as I cannot afford to fly on flexible fares.
On our last flight on BA the flight crew were a little "offish" - particularly to a nearby passenger who was having a terrible flight, and asked several times for more airsick bags.
My biggest gripe recently was about the "24 hours before check in" online booking. At Terminal four on the night of our flight, the queue for bag drop off was considerably longer and slower than the "normal" queue.
I had also been surprised when I went online 23 hours and 50 minutes before the flight, that I had a very limited choice of seats. It appeared (and I could be wrong) that the majority of "good" seats had been prebooked by the numerous "codesharing" AA passengers.
I was somewhat "peeved" that as a primary customer of a "Flagship" airline flying out of its main airport, that I should be left with the dregs in terms of seat choice.
None of my experiences with BA have been terrible, just the odd irritation. An example would be the "few or no" FF points on economy flights.
I have a FF card courtesy of my credit card, but while I get airmiles on flights (at the rate of about 30% of full value), I will never move from the lowest class of membership as I cannot afford to fly on flexible fares.
On our last flight on BA the flight crew were a little "offish" - particularly to a nearby passenger who was having a terrible flight, and asked several times for more airsick bags.
My biggest gripe recently was about the "24 hours before check in" online booking. At Terminal four on the night of our flight, the queue for bag drop off was considerably longer and slower than the "normal" queue.
I had also been surprised when I went online 23 hours and 50 minutes before the flight, that I had a very limited choice of seats. It appeared (and I could be wrong) that the majority of "good" seats had been prebooked by the numerous "codesharing" AA passengers.
I was somewhat "peeved" that as a primary customer of a "Flagship" airline flying out of its main airport, that I should be left with the dregs in terms of seat choice.
May 5th, 2007, 08:53 AM
#44
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason one can't get AA miles when flying BA from US to London and also can't get BA miles when flying AA from US to London is more of a governmental interference than anything else. Both are the founding members of OneWorld Alliance, the first airline alliance in the world. Both airlines tried to get closer operational ties back in the late 90's but both were threatened with certain penalties if they did so. The 2 airlines control about 80-85% of the US-London slots and the 2 governments, fearing a possible monopoly on these routes told the airlines that they would have to give up a substantial number of the coveted landing slots at LHR if they decided to work closer together. The landing slots in LHR are worth million$ each and neither airline wanted to give them up.
Of course now days it may have seem like a brilliant move (at least for AA) as more and more passengers are abondoning the dreaded airport for other, more civilized European airports. LHR is simply becoming too large for it's own good and combined with the totalitarian and ridiculous security requirements, it is quickly becoming a joke. I will be flying into LHR in few days (hopefully the last time for a long time), but I'm flying back from LGW, somewhat more civilized airport.
BA beats AA in 2 depts only, afaik, and it's their business class and free drinks in economy. AA has them beat in first class, economy class comfort, customer service and ff program. If flying in economy I'll take a free domestic flight for every 2.5 European r/t flights over couple of cheap glasses of wine. YMMV.
Of course now days it may have seem like a brilliant move (at least for AA) as more and more passengers are abondoning the dreaded airport for other, more civilized European airports. LHR is simply becoming too large for it's own good and combined with the totalitarian and ridiculous security requirements, it is quickly becoming a joke. I will be flying into LHR in few days (hopefully the last time for a long time), but I'm flying back from LGW, somewhat more civilized airport.
BA beats AA in 2 depts only, afaik, and it's their business class and free drinks in economy. AA has them beat in first class, economy class comfort, customer service and ff program. If flying in economy I'll take a free domestic flight for every 2.5 European r/t flights over couple of cheap glasses of wine. YMMV.
May 7th, 2007, 05:14 AM
#47
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 17,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"and combined with the totalitarian and ridiculous security requirements...'
You mean like <b>not</b>having to take your shoes off to go through Security Theatre as we do in the "less totalitarian" US airports, AAFrequentFlyer?????
You mean like <b>not</b>having to take your shoes off to go through Security Theatre as we do in the "less totalitarian" US airports, AAFrequentFlyer?????
May 7th, 2007, 07:02 AM
#48
Shoes off at LHR is more the norm now than not. To make it worse, it appears to be optional on the part of the screener supervisors, so you don't know you have to take them off until you're near the front of the queue, and when asked it jams up the works big time. Plus the "one carry-on" rule seems to require constant interpretation and clarification, further slowing things down.
Considering that flight transfers are Heathrow's bread and butter, you'd think that they'd make it easier; however they seem intent on making it harder. Combined with aging and grubby terminals, dismal landside conditions, the shameful Hoppa system of shuttles, and constant operational delays, I'm 100% with AAFF - it's the transfer point of last resort.
Unfortunately, owing to summer plans that are fixed, I'll be passing through LHR six or seven times in the next 3 or 4 months. The one thing I am doing is ensuring that I don't have any 24h+ stays there, so at least I can avoid the new departure tax extortion.
Considering that flight transfers are Heathrow's bread and butter, you'd think that they'd make it easier; however they seem intent on making it harder. Combined with aging and grubby terminals, dismal landside conditions, the shameful Hoppa system of shuttles, and constant operational delays, I'm 100% with AAFF - it's the transfer point of last resort.
Unfortunately, owing to summer plans that are fixed, I'll be passing through LHR six or seven times in the next 3 or 4 months. The one thing I am doing is ensuring that I don't have any 24h+ stays there, so at least I can avoid the new departure tax extortion.
May 7th, 2007, 09:01 AM
#51
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One problem we had recently on two different BA flights was their sneaky way of deciding who may carry on what.
We had our 21” carryons approved by check in personnel, who had us put our bags in the sizing box to verify that they were fine, and again by the boarding agent as being an acceptable size, then as we arrived literally at the door to the plane another agent was pulling people out of line and telling them they had to check their bags as they were too large.
We saw people ahead of us in line with bags of equal size or large and they were allowed to keep the bags as carryons.
When we were told we had to check the bags I was scrambling trying to transfer my medicine and expensive items to my purse, which was very small because I had the carryon.
The agent objected when I wanted to take my valuable camera bag out of the suitcase they were making me check saying I already had one carryon (my small purse) and that was all that was allowed. I told her I had to have my medications and they wouldn’t fit in my purse so I was putting them in the camera bag. Only when I asked if BA would pay for the emergency prescriptions on arrival if my bag was delayed was I “allowed” to pack my camera bag with my prescriptions.
Watching others putting their bags in the overheads it was obvious that many people had bags the same size so it was totally arbitrary as to how they chose which passengers had to check bags. After that we decided to try to avoid BA for our flights to Europe.
First they tell you not to pack valuables & prescription medications in a checked bag, then they tell you, you can’t carry them on either. So what are we supposed to do??
We had our 21” carryons approved by check in personnel, who had us put our bags in the sizing box to verify that they were fine, and again by the boarding agent as being an acceptable size, then as we arrived literally at the door to the plane another agent was pulling people out of line and telling them they had to check their bags as they were too large.
We saw people ahead of us in line with bags of equal size or large and they were allowed to keep the bags as carryons.
When we were told we had to check the bags I was scrambling trying to transfer my medicine and expensive items to my purse, which was very small because I had the carryon.
The agent objected when I wanted to take my valuable camera bag out of the suitcase they were making me check saying I already had one carryon (my small purse) and that was all that was allowed. I told her I had to have my medications and they wouldn’t fit in my purse so I was putting them in the camera bag. Only when I asked if BA would pay for the emergency prescriptions on arrival if my bag was delayed was I “allowed” to pack my camera bag with my prescriptions.
Watching others putting their bags in the overheads it was obvious that many people had bags the same size so it was totally arbitrary as to how they chose which passengers had to check bags. After that we decided to try to avoid BA for our flights to Europe.
First they tell you not to pack valuables & prescription medications in a checked bag, then they tell you, you can’t carry them on either. So what are we supposed to do??
May 7th, 2007, 09:16 AM
#52
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 34,863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen that happen, also. Last time I flew BA (and last I will unless I have no other choice), I saw a guy allowed on-board with a carryon about twice the size and weight as allowed. He was some business traveler and had tons of reports, etc. in this thing. I have no idea how he was allowed on board when others were not -- this wasn't business or first-class, either, just coach. I had no problem, myself, but would have been mad if someone else.
I couldn't belive the OP saying that he has heard "nothing but positive comments" about BA. It seems to me the majority of comments I've heard about them are negative--including posts on this forum. They are cheap, but I find their flights more uncomfortable than most, but you can't get FF miles on them, either, for the transatlantic part. I don't see what the govt. had to do with it, or landing slots. It seems to me that since FF miles are just some private perk companies make up the rules about, they could do anything with them they wanted.
I could be wrong, but I personally don't see the reasoning with the landing slots things, etc.
I couldn't belive the OP saying that he has heard "nothing but positive comments" about BA. It seems to me the majority of comments I've heard about them are negative--including posts on this forum. They are cheap, but I find their flights more uncomfortable than most, but you can't get FF miles on them, either, for the transatlantic part. I don't see what the govt. had to do with it, or landing slots. It seems to me that since FF miles are just some private perk companies make up the rules about, they could do anything with them they wanted.
I could be wrong, but I personally don't see the reasoning with the landing slots things, etc.
May 7th, 2007, 09:23 AM
#53
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are wrong <b>Christina</b>...
I will try to pull up the US Dept. of Justice finding on this deal.
Monopoly is feared by any government in a capitalist system. Why do you think MaBell was broken up? and many many more big corps were "forced", whether by force, or by threats to do just the same thing.
I will try to pull up the US Dept. of Justice finding on this deal.
Monopoly is feared by any government in a capitalist system. Why do you think MaBell was broken up? and many many more big corps were "forced", whether by force, or by threats to do just the same thing.
May 7th, 2007, 09:24 AM
#54
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May 7th, 2007, 09:27 AM
#55
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May 7th, 2007, 09:35 AM
#56
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May 7th, 2007, 11:06 AM
#57
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AAFrequentflyer - I am with you on many things ( about BA) but your MaBell example is ridiculous. They were broken up ( presumably to break a monopoly, create competition & better prices). Then they were slowly gobbled up one by one by the larger "BabyBells" untill we again have ATT. My PacBell became Southern Bell then ATT again. All along we paid more & more. But I digress....
Back to BA - they do live up to their acronym "Bloody Awful" as I mentioned before on this post. I see no reason to fly them - others might.
Back to BA - they do live up to their acronym "Bloody Awful" as I mentioned before on this post. I see no reason to fly them - others might.
May 7th, 2007, 11:24 AM
#58
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't disagree with you, I was just trying to show how powerful out government(s)can be.
I believe if MaBell was still around we would not have been put through the ringer like we did in the last 20-25 years by all the "new" communication companies.
And you are correct, it's pretty much back to the old business plan with communications companies.
I believe if MaBell was still around we would not have been put through the ringer like we did in the last 20-25 years by all the "new" communication companies.
And you are correct, it's pretty much back to the old business plan with communications companies.
May 13th, 2007, 11:20 AM
#60
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just purchased ticket on BA. Got what I felt was a decent fare. I did the transaction through their agent, since, I couldn't pull up what I wanted. Anyway, after, I've handed out my credit infor etc - I realize I am paying $400 in taxes on one ticket !!! I know about 911, gas etc - BUT $400 ! I want to know, is this because, London in general is so hi-priced etc. I double checked after the tranaction and if I had done Delta, it said my taxes would have been $89. Any light you could shed on this, would ease my mind. Thank you
