Background The best management of basilar artery occlusion (BAO) remains uncertain. The BASICS (Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study) and the BEST (Basilar Artery Occlusion Endovascular Intervention Versus Standard Medical Treatment) trials reported neutral results. We sought to understand physicians’ approaches to BAOs and whether further BAO randomized controlled trials were warranted. Methods We conducted an online international survey from January to March 2022 to stroke neurologists and neurointerventionalists. Survey questions were designed to examine clinical and imaging parameters under which clinicians would offer (or rescind) a patient with BAO to endovascular therapy (EVT) or best medical management versus enrollment into a randomized clinical trial. Results Of >3002 invited participants, 1245 responded (41.4% response rate) from 73 countries, including 54.7% stroke neurologists and 43.6% neurointerventionalists. More than 95% of respondents would offer EVT to patients with BAO, albeit in various clinical circumstances. There were 70.0% of respondents who indicated that the BASICS and BEST trials did not change their practice. Only 22.1% of respondents would perform EVT according to anterior circulation occlusion criteria. The selection of patients for BAO EVT by clinical severity, timing, and imaging modality differed according to geography, specialty, and country income level. Over 80% of respondents agreed that further randomized clinical trials for BAO were warranted. Moreover, 45.6% of respondents indicated they would find it acceptable to enroll all trial‐eligible patients into the medical arm of a BAO trial, whereas 26.3% would not enroll. Conclusion Most stroke physicians continue to believe in the efficacy of EVT in selected patients with BAO in spite of BEST and BASICS. There is no consensus on which selection criteria to use, and few clinicians would use anterior circulation occlusion criteria for BAOs. Further randomized clinical trials for BAO are warranted.