91 reasons to fly with us

[Must...Fly!]

Don't 91 (or 80 or 79 etc) reasons/changes just roll off the tongue and stay in your memory...

I think a fewer, more substantive ones might have achieved more...

I haven't read the page, but hopefully they are at least grouped into several high level ones?

There is a reason 91 was chosen...

How old is QF...

 

[Supersonic Swinger]

coughmon guys, some people here seem to just hate whatever Qantas does... I agree that everything in this list is old news but that doesn't mean that everything is bad: Just as one example, the quick check in at the poles is awesome in my eyes and QF leads the way even on a global scale with those RFID bag tags and frequent flyer membership cards. I's hard to believe that one can find anything bad about it, really...

They may all be valid benefits, but they lose a lot of impact when Qantas has for almost been a decade been shrinking the routes these apply to by pushing as much off onto Jetstar where most of the list does emphatically not apply.

 

[ajw373]

Very disappointing and a waste of my time trying to find anything new in there. Plus- selling the refurb of old and tatty 747s as a benefit rather than getting the remaining A380s is just misleading in my eyes :evil:

Reading this and another thread you really have a bee in your bonnet of the 747 refurb program. You seem to be forgetting however that the ones they are doing are the 6 ER's which were delivered 2002/2003 and the 3 youngest non ER's that were delivered in 1999/2000. So hardly old and certainly far to young to retire.

 

[JohnPhelan]

Reading this and another thread you reall have a bee in your bonnet of the 747 refurb. You seem to be forgetting however that the ones they are doing are the 6 ER's which were delivereid 2002/2003 and the 3 youngest non ER's that were delivered in 1999/2000. So hardly old and certainly far to young to retire.

You're just letting the facts stand in the way of a vitriolic rant!

I'm much happier on a 747 of any age ....... they tend not to go into uncommanded dives, for a start ......

 

[simongr]

I think the 747 refurb shows a lack of faith in the future of he airline and a lack of confidence resulting in the deferral of the A380 deliveries.

 

[Must...Fly!]

I think the 747 refurb shows a lack of faith in the future of he airline and a lack of confidence resulting in the deferral of the A380 deliveries.

I think it shows a lack of confidence in filling an extra 100 seats on routes like SYD-NRT and BNE-LAX. Although there are, of course, other routes.

 

[casanovawa]

Ah, well if they needed to get 91 items just to tie into the airlines age, no wonder they needed to rack their brains to come up with all sorts of nonsense and contrived points (including double counting and not even achieving the goal seemingly of 91 actual individual points)...

I thought there was a sensible rationale for the exercise in terms of noting actual, meaningful benefits/reasons and seeing what the number added up to...

Still stand by the assertion that 91 reasons/changes/points is a totally forgettable exercise in terms of taking away things to think well of QF as is 91 years probably not being a particularly meaningful anniversary... Unless every year of survival is cause for a celebration..

 

[drewbles]

I think the 747 refurb shows a lack of faith in the future of he airline and a lack of confidence resulting in the deferral of the A380 deliveries.

I think it reflects the delay to the 787 program, which has massive knock-on effects (Due to the 787's first going to JQ to allow A330's to flow back to QF). The longer range 787's which were destined only for QF have also been pushed out substantially, meaning they have to keep the 767's and 747's in service longer than they wanted. As mentioned, the youngest 747's are only 10-12 years old, and still have a lot of life left in them yet.

 

[Berlin]

Reading this and another thread you really have a bee in your bonnet of the 747 refurb program.

I just personally love traveling on an A380 and find the 747 far inferior to it, regardless of how old. I know that lots of people disagree with it, but I always hated the 747 with its ugly hump on the top which looks like some cancer sore on an otherwise fine airplane. :shock:

Compare to that the beauty and technological masterpiece that an A380 is with its better cabin air and the hardly to be heard engine noise... Anyway. How boring would the world be if everyone had the same opinion on things

 

[anat0l]

coughmon guys, some people here seem to just hate whatever Qantas does... I agree that everything in this list is old news but that doesn't mean that everything is bad: Just as one example, the quick check in at the poles is awesome in my eyes and QF leads the way even on a global scale with those RFID bag tags and frequent flyer membership cards. I's hard to believe that one can find anything bad about it, really...

I agree with your comments about NGCI and I do like them.


That said, this exercise is a waste of money. If you were running a company and you told them to design a site saying what is good about your company, and they produced this, you would be silly not to write them a one-way pink slip out the office door before you have them prosecuted for white collar crime.


Marketing is incredibly expensive and the implications even more so. This is worse than the #QantasLuxury fiasco and you're telling me that this is hating Qantas for the sake of hating Qantas? I'm surprised the news outlets haven't taken a field day on this, let alone why Virgin Australia hasn't picked up an easy free kick by creating a quick response page simply stating that there are 91 reasons not to fly QF, amongst one of them, they can't ****** count!


Qantas, stop pi**ing on my shoe and telling me it's raining.

There is a reason 91 was chosen...

How old is QF...

Right. So if 91 was chosen then at least give us 91, preferably changes as stated on the page itself (not in the HTML title!). Not 79 or 80 or... 2!


Qantas essentially suffers from at least three fundamental promotional faults: one, they have a waaaaaaay too passive marketing presence; two, they are milking whatever accolades or achievements they've had for far too long and far too much; three, what they say and what they do has severe disparities, and/or it takes a kicking-and-screaming approach or an ice age to pass before anything happens. Whilst Qantas still has some great benefits which make them decent in and of itself to fly, their marketing is absolutely horrible. If the colour of Qantas was red for a reason, it's because their marketing couldn't be more embarrassing. And just like humans, the only difference between an embarrassed face and a bloody one is only the fragile skin.

 

[ajw373]

I just personally love traveling on an A380 and find the 747 far inferior to it, regardless of how old. I know that lots of people disagree with it, but I always hated the 747 with its ugly hump on the top which looks like some cancer sore on an otherwise fine airplane. :shock:

Compare to that the beauty and technological masterpiece that an A380 is with its better cabin air and the hardly to be heard engine noise... Anyway. How boring would the world be if everyone had the same opinion on things

Don't disagree actually, though the 747's have a place to use on the routes that are too small for the A380. However if you argue against something with your facts wrong or twisted to suit your argument (ie call the 747's that Qantas are refurbing as old when they aren't) then you are going to get pulled up as that is not a different opinion but an incorrect assertion.

As for Qantas keeping the 747 unless I am very much mistaken keeping the 9 youngest was always the plan even without the 787 delays and A380 deferrals. What is a result of this however is the fact that the withdrawal of the OLD 747's (ie not the 9 they are keeping) is going to take longer than originally planned.

 

[TonyHancock]

@TonyHancock - I think the fact that they have recently put through 500 of their most experienced crew through improved customer experience training reflects that they understand things have slipped.

When the CEO and Chairman of QF treat customers with complete disdain, as they did when Joyce grounded the fleet, one can hardly expect the QF staff to treat customers any differently. The attitude, example and vision has to come from the top. Sending staff customer service courses is not getting to the root cause of the problem. There are still a lot of good staff out there despite the poor leadership.

 

[anat0l]

The attitude, example and vision has to come from the top.

So to the top I say off with their heads! :evil: It's clear that unless drastic action is taken, they aren't moving out of their positions any time soon, and meanwhile we're paying these ethically-challenged imbeciles how many millions each year whilst the company bleeds? Doesn't help that several faceless corporations of questionable ethics themselves own the majority of QF shares.

I will state that I support what AJ did re: the grounding, but that said it doesn't take away from my position on the aforementioned quote.

There are still a lot of good staff out there despite the poor leadership.

I agree with this, and I do feel for those staff.

Equally so there are some staff who are being idiots on their own volition and whilst vicarious liability says that is a top-down issue I maintain that those wayward staff cannot deflect the majority of that fault and should be equally disciplined.

 

[Berlin]

Don't disagree actually, though the 747's have a place to use on the routes that are too small for the A380. However if you argue against something with your facts wrong or twisted to suit your argument (ie call the 747's that Qantas are refurbing as old when they aren't) then you are going to get pulled up as that is not a different opinion but an incorrect assertion.

Perfectly fine and accepted. It was actual not intentional, I was seriously under the impression that those things were older. To me, any 747 feels somehow old but I'm happy to be corrected on my mistake

 

[burrco]

I've always admired anat01's ability to deliver a restrained yet informative message.
I will however respond to one point re the office shredder. Body parts or even whole bodies mean that the shredded paper is no longer suitable for recycling. Please don't ask how I know. :mrgreen:

Also, it is very hard to get a replacement shredder at short notice, and of course you always need to get rid of documents at short notice.

That's why every office should have one of these:





They do appear to have missed #92: Our newly refurbished A380 is designed to teach our business class passengers better bladder control.​

 

[JohnK]

The Q-card reader (on the the post) thing doesn't ask any questions, just checks you in.

Flight? Seat? Checked bags? Dangerous Goods?

It's referring to the podium check-in JohnK

Podium check-in? Shows you how much I know.

Don't you have the Q bag tags John? Or have yours been 'lost in transit'? l've only got 1 of 2 left.

Q bag tags? What are they? No idea where they are now.

 

[anat0l]

Flight? Seat? Checked bags? Dangerous Goods?


Podium check-in? Shows you how much I know

Select your seat at T-80. Provided the equipment doesn't change, you'll keep that seat.

When you select your seat online, there is a small notice at the bottom of the seat selection page where you must answer in advance whether you will have DGs or not.

No need to check anything again until you get to the airport*. Turn up at the airport, tap the card against the pole, and you're checked in. Done.


If you have checked bags, you'll still need to visit the injectors, or use a kiosk to get a paper bag tag first if you don't use Q Bag Tags. So yes in these cases there's not a lot of streamlining.


That said, when I've travelled with hand luggage only, the NGCI system is brilliant (except rare domestic priority boarding :evil.


* Excludes odd surprises: flight bumps, equipment changes, etc.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using AustFreqFly

 

[oz_mark]

No need to check anything again until you get to the airport*. Turn up at the airport, tap the card against the pole, and you're checked in. Done.

...and hope the SMS has the same seat number you had selected!

 

[Fantic125]

Online checkin, tapping the pole, q-tags, etc are all well and good if you're only flying domestic.

Even with carry on, I still need to queue and get a boarding pass for all my flights as I'm always heading OS.

No real difference to me except the queues are maybe slightly shorter.

 

[anat0l]

...and hope the SMS has the same seat number you had selected!

As I said, barring some silly things - usually bumps, some flow forwards or equipment changes - things usually pan out OK.

At least in my experience it has.

Online checkin, tapping the pole, q-tags, etc are all well and good if you're only flying domestic.

Even with carry on, I still need to queue and get a boarding pass for all my flights as I'm always heading OS.

No real difference to me except the queues are maybe slightly shorter.

Again, another case where its not so streamlined.