Mrs. Darlox and I have done 3 RTW trips in the last decade, and are starting research on a 4th. Having now 4 data points spread out over 10 years, I've seen some patterns forming, and am curious if there's any prevailing wisdom on how airlines or alliances price their RTW offerings...
My curiosity is driven by the fact that a single business-class RTW fare will often launch someone to mid-tier Premier/Elite status all by itself. Combined with other business and personal travel, the years we've taken RTW trips have easily put us into the top-tier elite category of whatever airline we chose to credit the RTW miles to. So a single RTW itinerary can have a significant impact on other travel decisions and loyalty/habits for year(s) afterwards.
What I've discovered is that consistently, for the last decade, CO, UA and *A have always ended up being significantly more expensive on RTW fares than the competition.
* In 2003, during the height of the CO/NW alliance, CO and UA both had inferior RTW partnership offerings to NW's private partnerships, and were several thousand dollars more expensive for the same itinerary. Winner: NW
* In 2005, CO and NW both were part of SkyTeam. However the same situation as above was still true -- NW's RTW option was superior and less expensive than CO. (UA and *A were still about the same too...) Ironically, the NW RTW had full access to any CO flight, but was over $3k less expensive than buying the ticket through CO. Winner again, NW.
* In 2009, CO had just joined *A. The CO/UA and *A offering was even MORE expensive, and still had significant gaps in Asia and other regions. DL and NW had merged, and their offering suffered a bit -- though possibly due to the merger difficulties. AA/OneWorld had a superior offering for our purposes at about the same price as DL. Winner, AA and CX.
Now MH has joined OW, significantly boosting their RTW options. The other RTW partnerships still seem fairly easy to deal with and lack most of the additional Business-class surcharges of *A members like SQ, and the RTW offerings of the other alliances (and individual airlines) are still considerably less expensive than UA's.
So! My question is why UA, and *A in general, don't seem to be interested in competing on RTW fares? For reference, business-class DL and AA RTW fares are both in the neighborhood of $9500 right now. While the cheapest offering from UA (or, as far as I can tell, any *A carrier) is currently over $11,000 -- and if SQ is in that itinerary, you can count on several thousand more in equipment-specific surcharges.
This is clearly a strategic decision, since it has been true (in my direct experience) for a decade now. Since, as noted, a RTW C ticket (with class bonuses) is basically an instant admission to elite status -- with a fair expectation of some future loyalty as a result -- I'd expect this to be one area where pricing was in lockstep between the 3 alliances?? Between ST and OW carriers, that's pretty much true. *A is the outlier on price and restrictions, and UA seems to be one of the only airlines that doesn't additionally have its own "private partnership" RTW ticket on offer either.
Has UA's strategy just been to cede RTW tickets to other alliances, or do they believe that their product/alliance is just that much superior??
My curiosity is driven by the fact that a single business-class RTW fare will often launch someone to mid-tier Premier/Elite status all by itself. Combined with other business and personal travel, the years we've taken RTW trips have easily put us into the top-tier elite category of whatever airline we chose to credit the RTW miles to. So a single RTW itinerary can have a significant impact on other travel decisions and loyalty/habits for year(s) afterwards.
What I've discovered is that consistently, for the last decade, CO, UA and *A have always ended up being significantly more expensive on RTW fares than the competition.
* In 2003, during the height of the CO/NW alliance, CO and UA both had inferior RTW partnership offerings to NW's private partnerships, and were several thousand dollars more expensive for the same itinerary. Winner: NW
* In 2005, CO and NW both were part of SkyTeam. However the same situation as above was still true -- NW's RTW option was superior and less expensive than CO. (UA and *A were still about the same too...) Ironically, the NW RTW had full access to any CO flight, but was over $3k less expensive than buying the ticket through CO. Winner again, NW.
* In 2009, CO had just joined *A. The CO/UA and *A offering was even MORE expensive, and still had significant gaps in Asia and other regions. DL and NW had merged, and their offering suffered a bit -- though possibly due to the merger difficulties. AA/OneWorld had a superior offering for our purposes at about the same price as DL. Winner, AA and CX.
Now MH has joined OW, significantly boosting their RTW options. The other RTW partnerships still seem fairly easy to deal with and lack most of the additional Business-class surcharges of *A members like SQ, and the RTW offerings of the other alliances (and individual airlines) are still considerably less expensive than UA's.
So! My question is why UA, and *A in general, don't seem to be interested in competing on RTW fares? For reference, business-class DL and AA RTW fares are both in the neighborhood of $9500 right now. While the cheapest offering from UA (or, as far as I can tell, any *A carrier) is currently over $11,000 -- and if SQ is in that itinerary, you can count on several thousand more in equipment-specific surcharges.
This is clearly a strategic decision, since it has been true (in my direct experience) for a decade now. Since, as noted, a RTW C ticket (with class bonuses) is basically an instant admission to elite status -- with a fair expectation of some future loyalty as a result -- I'd expect this to be one area where pricing was in lockstep between the 3 alliances?? Between ST and OW carriers, that's pretty much true. *A is the outlier on price and restrictions, and UA seems to be one of the only airlines that doesn't additionally have its own "private partnership" RTW ticket on offer either.
Has UA's strategy just been to cede RTW tickets to other alliances, or do they believe that their product/alliance is just that much superior??