10,000 bonus points per 20 transactions

[Platcard]

There is no "one" answer.....as it depends on where you want to fly etc..(and flying is generally the better value as opposed to gift vouchers goos etc...though recently I gained a mobile phone worth $500+ for only 10,000 points each).

Other variable include which FF Airline program you use as not all are equal...and again particular routes can be particularly good with some programs..and not so with others.

However sweeping statements (and there are lots of exceptions and if/buts)are:

* Long haul International flights provide better value than domestic flights (which are often lousy - but there are exceptions)

*Upgrades can be great value (ie say 6cents per point) BUT without status can be hard to get.

* Business Class redemptions are often next. Say 4ish cents per point.

* The RTW Onewold award at say $3000-ish for 140,000 points.

* Then long haul international domestic at say 1.5 + cents / point on some routes.

* Then domestic redemptions....


However things can change (ie Amex could change there transfer rate etc...) and it may takea few years to burn the points from this promo.....and so for aquiring tx in this promo I set a value of 1 cent per point (though I would be confident of actually redeeming at 2 to 4 cents per point).

Thnaks for your response and everybody elses.

It seems general consensis is that upgrades and long haul flights are good value.

What do you mean by 'status' when refferring to upgrading to business class?

 

[AnonymousCoward]

While that may be true, is it not the case that by their participation in the ombudsman scheme, the participants have agreed to be bound by the decisions?

Maybe someone who has more experience in constitutional law can chime in here, but I don't believe that anything you sign in this respect is legal. Any government or executive body attempting to bring this in would soon find it ruled unconstitutional by the High Court IMHO, as if effectively tries to circumvent Boilermakers via the backdoor (i.e you can't have a licence unless you agree to a scheme that bypasses the separation of powers doctrine).

 

[AnonymousCoward]

What do you mean by 'status' when refferring to upgrading to business class?

Many top tier airlines have "status" schemes. If you fly more often or on more expensive fares, then you gain a higher status. For QANTAS see: Frequent Flyer - About the Program - Status Credits (QANTAS has Silver, Gold and Platinum status, in addition to the Bronze status that everyone gets when they join).

In QANTAS' case, requests for upgrades on a particular flight are processed in order of status (all Plats first, then Golds, then Silver, then Bronze), and then by date requested (in the case of multiple people of the same status requesting an upgrade).

For unpopular routes, or times when business/first class isn't full (e.g. school holidays) then you can probaby get an upgrade regardless of status. For more popular routes (e.g. SYD-LAX or SYD-LHR), it's difficult to get an upgrade unless you have a higher level status.

 

[Platcard]

This really depends. Booking via Amex website gives you some kind of gauranteed value for your points.

If you transfer to QFF (for example) then 282,500 points gets you a 35,000 mile, 5 stop-over, business class ticket. You could fly SYD-HKG-SIN-London-New York-Los Angeles-SYD on that. 422,500 points would get your a first class ticket.

But there are limited seats that QANTAS makes available for redemption. So you'd need to call ahead, verify that the flights are available. QANTAS can put the ticket on hold for a few days whilst you transfer the points. You'll still need to pay the "extras" (e.g. taxes).

Those types of tickets would be worth $10k or so.

Thanks champ, I value your help. I think I will wait until they are all credited before I start spending them!! LOL It has been awesome promo. I wish it lasted forever. It was like every transaction was worth $10.00.
Thanks AMEX!

 

[AnonymousCoward]

I think this was my only point. Pedantics prehaps but ASIC (and EPA) can make decisions that are legally binding. The court only decides the matter on the facts - i.e. Is ASIC competent in the area, has it acted beyond its legislation, etc. - The court reviews the decision already made.

Actually, I'm the one being a pedant here

The decision by the EPA isn't legally binding. The EPA might go to a competant court, and the court hands down a decision, and it is only the court's decision that is legally binding.

If someone ignores the EPA's decision there is no power of penalty that the EPA can invoke.

However, once the court has made a decision, then if you ignore *that* decision, then you can be penalised (via contempt of court findings, or by whatever penalties might exist in the original Act).

So, the EPA can make a decision. But only a court can decide the legal rights between parties in dispute. The EPA must apply to a court to have its decision upheld and only if a court hands down a decision that agrees 100% with the EPA's determination does the EPA's original determination have force of law.

In most cases this is a much of a muchness - i.e. nothing. But to say that a FOS decision is legally binding isn't really correct.

 

[Platcard]

' case, requests for upgrades on a particular flight are processed in order of status (all Plats first, then Golds, then Silver, then Bronze), and then by date requested (in the case of multiple people of the same status requesting an upgrade).

For unpopular routes, or times when business/first class isn't full (e.g. school holidays) then you can probaby get an upgrade regardless of status. For more popular routes (e.g. SYD-LAX or SYD-LHR), it's difficult to get an upgrade unless you have a higher level status.

So if you book an economy fare and request an upgrade to business class it is free or cheaper than booking a business class flight in the first place?

 

[AnonymousCoward]

So if you book an economy fare and request an upgrade to business class it is free or cheaper than booking a business class flight in the first place?

With the QANTAS system, it is cheaper (points wise) to request an upgrade than book a confirmed ticket in business (for most awards):

Points required for a confirmed ticket:
Frequent Flyer - Using Points - Qantas & Partner Classic Awards - Points Tables

Points required to upgrade fares:
Frequent Flyer - Using Points - Flight Upgrades - About Flight Upgrades

Note in the first link the Oneworld Partner awards at the bottom of the page. This provides the opportunity for some business/first class redemptions that are cheaper than booking an economy ticket and upgrading each sector (e.g. 282,500 points for a 5 stop business class ticket). This is the only exception I know of to the general rule than upgrades are cheaper than confirmed business/first award tickets.

 

[vet]

Actually, I'm the one being a pedant here

The decision by the EPA isn't legally binding. The EPA might go to a competant court, and the court hands down a decision, and it is only the court's decision that is legally binding.

If someone ignores the EPA's decision there is no power of penalty that the EPA can invoke.

However, once the court has made a decision, then if you ignore *that* decision, then you can be penalised (via contempt of court findings, or by whatever penalties might exist in the original Act).

So, the EPA can make a decision. But only a court can decide the legal rights between parties in dispute. The EPA must apply to a court to have its decision upheld and only if a court hands down a decision that agrees 100% with the EPA's determination does the EPA's original determination have force of law.

In most cases this is a much of a muchness - i.e. nothing. But to say that a FOS decision is legally binding isn't really correct.

Look at the terms of ASIC's financial services licence granted to Amex and then look to standard terms of mediation and arbitrations. I think you'll find that Amex agrees to be bound by the independent arbiter. I think you'll find the standard clause permitting, if Amex defaults, a Registrar or Prothonatory to enter default judgment without a Judge going anywhere near a case. Of course if the Corporations power was wrongly referred by the States to the Commonwealth so the Cwth could dispense with the old Companies Codes of Vic, NSW etc, maybe Amex has grounds to go to the High Court, but til then, I think the sewerage regulator's laws aren't remotely relevant.

 

[lovestotravel]

Amex sure are slow at opening their mail, coming up to 2 weeks and they haven't even read my letter yer, nor received it!

 

[vet]

Amex sure are slow at opening their mail, coming up to 2 weeks and they haven't even read my letter yer, nor received it!

I gave Amex 7 days and then just went to FOS and settled. I again suggest using the fax number for Exec Services - and FOS give it out - and lodge a copy of your complaint letter with FOS. Yes some Amex guy said they want a GPO Box used instead, but I really don't care what Amex want. Do you want to risk not getting bonii in time for Velocity's or anyone else's next 'bonuses on transfered Amex bonii' promo???

 

[lovestotravel]

I gave Amex 7 days and then just went to FOS and settled. I again suggest using the fax number for Exec Services - and FOS give it out - and lodge a copy of your complaint letter with FOS. Yes some Amex guy said they want a GPO Box used instead, but I really don't care what Amex want. Do you want to risk not getting bonii in time for Velocity's or anyone else's next 'bonuses on transfered Amex bonii' promo???

I will give them 21 days ,and call them to see if they have my letter or if there are any notes on my account. If nothing then off to FOS I go!

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Look at the terms of ASIC's financial services licence granted to Amex and then look to standard terms of mediation and arbitrations. I think you'll find that Amex agrees to be bound by the independent arbiter. I think you'll find the standard clause permitting, if Amex defaults, a Registrar or Prothonatory to enter default judgment without a Judge going anywhere near a case. Of course if the Corporations power was wrongly referred by the States to the Commonwealth so the Cwth could dispense with the old Companies Codes of Vic, NSW etc, maybe Amex has grounds to go to the High Court, but til then, I think the sewerage regulator's laws aren't remotely relevant.

Referal of corporations power is irrelevant. The High Court has ruled that there is a strict separation of powers in this country, and that no body exercising a power of arbitration can also exercise a judicial power.

Any arbitrator has no judicial power to enforce any decision that they may make. And any decision by an arbitration panel can be appealed as being an error in law, lacking in due process and any number of other reasons that courts allow to bring executive decisions within the purview of the courts.

The courts in this country take a very dim view of any attempt by Parliament or the Executive to try to ouster (put beyond legal review) decisions.

Even in countries like the UK, where there is no written/explicit constitutional separation of powers decisions like Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission allow the courts to review decisions (under the complaint of being ultra vires - beyond power) even when the relevant Act of Parliament says that no decision made by the commission is reviewable or appealable in any court. In that case the House of Lords said that the provisions of the Act notwithstanding, the decisions are still appealable to the courts.

 

[medhead]

Actually, I'm the one being a pedant here

The decision by the EPA isn't legally binding. The EPA might go to a competant court, and the court hands down a decision, and it is only the court's decision that is legally binding.

If someone ignores the EPA's decision there is no power of penalty that the EPA can invoke.

The court's role is to interpret the legislation in place. The EPA makes it decision and that is legally binding because of the legislation. If there is a dispute, the court is only interpreting the legislation (and common law and lots of things actually) to determine if the decision was lawful or not.

Some EPAs can actually invoke a power of penalty independant of a court. But then they are independant authorities not subject to executive control.

 

[vet]

I thought Judgement by Consent is a Court Order.

And Sewer laws are relevant only if Amex's QC first needs a EPA licence for verbal diahorrea.

 

[simongr]

Yeah - about as relevant as the Virgin promo you bleat about...

 

[straitman]

This thread is fast becoming more OT that the Off Topic thread :!: :shock:

 

[vet]

Yeah - about as relevant as the Virgin promo you bleat about...

I'm not saying a word. How's you line of argument progressing?

 

[simongr]

As previously stated, Amex have until 2 Feb to resolve and then the FSO will take it further.

 

[medhead]

Sorry for the constant OT pedantic points. As I said I didn't get the promo


btw EPA wouldn't licence verbal diahorria, more likely the health department

 

[straitman]

Sorry for the constant OT pedantic points. As I said I didn't get the promo


btw EPA wouldn't licence verbal diahorria, more likely the health department

They would probably all want their two bobs worth. The EPA would be in there as they would be involved in the clean up :!: