A rude and devious roo.. why would you bother?

[burrco]

Really hate the Y/J booking issue.

However I once had a family of 'roos living behind me. The father decided that our yard was an open buffet and would often hop over the fence for a feed. After extending the height of the fence he started to dig his way in - so to me that is really a rude and devious roo!

 

[oz_mark]

And once again, I did agree with the OP that the J/Y awards fubar is not good. I even said that I've sent Qantas a lengthy email describing this failure. I would gladly do it again, every week, until it is fixed.

Hell, I'll even write a physical snail mail letter and send one every week. Look out on a new thread coming your way soon........

[..]

In saying that, we both see the same problem with the search engine. (We meaning both seasoned AFFers and Joe Bloggs.) In this light, we both don't like what we see and we both agree that it needs to be fixed.

[..]

As for the rest of the argument, well again it comes down to realising how the system works. Not knowing of it or the frustration thereof forms a perception but it is not the truth; yes, I know perceptions can be a big deal. Anyone is free to hold a perception, and anyone else is free to explain the truth.

[..]

I don't see this as good enough. It's a relatively tedious process if you have to "test" all the combinations of flights presented only to find most are of the J/Y bug kind. And after you mentally block out all the "bad" options, it really begs to reason how many "real" options you have left (sometimes none).

The intent of QF is probably not malicious (i.e. they didn't actively intend to deceive) but it is a problem. I can understand glitches happen, but no one can deny that they may have consequences. Also, the mere fact it is "just a glitch" doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed.

I'll start off by saying that the behaviour is annoying as hell, but to get it fixed you would need to be able to prove it was a bug, and I think you would stumble at this point.

If we view the booking engine as basically a rules engine, that enforces a bunch of rules, then we need to look to the rules to understand its behaviour. So we look to the rule book and we find:

14.4.3 Where mixed-class travel is booked on a Trip, the Points required for that Trip will be calculated using the Points level for the highest class of travel flown on that Trip.

So this leaves you with the question - is your problem with the booking engine, or with the rules that you have agreed to.

The problem with the rule is that it was likely devised for cases where there was a smallish component of lower cabin component, and this is just a side effect of that rule. The problem then is to devise a rule that allows a component in lower cabins (such as if your first segment was a regional flight on a dash 8), but it does not become main part of your journey. I suppose you could look to the baggage MSC rules for inspiration and come up with something like a Most Significant Sector rule, but you do lose some simplicity in that case.

Annoying as it is, I think Qantas have got their backsides covered:
1) It is what the rulebook says
2) They do advise that the travel is in Y class.

Bottom line. The problem is with the rule, rather than the booking engine.

 

[medhead]

I can't see any poster justifying the QF "J/Y combo at full J points" issue. Of course this is not fair and needs to be fixed. However, some balance is needed:

* the booking engine does tell you quite clearly that one of your flights is in Y, rather than J, and you have to accept this to proceed
* I don't accept that this practice is "devious" - specifically designed to deceive. It's a stupid glitch, not attempted larceny!

The OP's language and attitude are really what seem to have irritated people - the references to "the rude roo" make me think of stones and glass houses ........

Of course, if you read the OP, the complaint on this point was not about being trapped, it was about the multiple fruitless searches that are required. On your other point see below.

You've got the disadvantage of inexperience. My main gripe with the OP was everything else but the J/Y awards fubar. I'm not convinced that the entire OP was supposed to be harping on this very point. (There seems to be a perception that this is the case, i.e. the entire argument of the OP was really only to point out this particular problem, whereas I saw multiple points of contention). Then there was the colourful language (to put it nicely) with no backbone to justify it.

Trouble is that the only valid gripe in the OP was the J/Y award situation. All the rest is nothing but fluff, that is not deserving of a response.

Well, as you know it is difficult to take someone seriously if they are going to use choice words without a suitable backup.

And once again, I did agree with the OP that the J/Y awards fubar is not good. I even said that I've sent Qantas a lengthy email describing this failure. I would gladly do it again, every week, until it is fixed.

Well ok then backup:

Well impressions count. Especially without the benefit of face-to-face interaction, I thought you'd be sensible enough to realise that if you say something that strong that you'd have backbone to defend your words and deal with the consequences.

"Colourful vernacular"? I'm not familiar with the common practice of calling someone 'rude' or 'devious' unless they really are deserving of those words.

The highlighted statement here doesn't seem to be limited to any particular gripe in the OP. Therefore, it must be all inclusive. Hence the J/Y situation is not deserving of being called devious. This issue is relatively new(i.e. it has appeared recently and is not the way it has always worked), it has been raised a number of times via fora with official Qantas participation (AFF, Facebook, feedback to Qantas(?)) such that it can no longer be considered a simple unnoticed glitch. No doubt it was unintended but the lack of a fix suggests some level of unwillingness to correct the situation.

 

[medhead]

Annoying as it is, I think Qantas have got their backsides covered:
1) It is what the rulebook says
2) They do advise that the travel is in Y class.

Bottom line. The problem is with the rule, rather than the booking engine.

The problem is not with the rule, IMO, it has a reason for existing. The main problem is how the booking engine implements the rule and/or not having an option to exclude certain things - dumb implementation of the rule.

 

[oz_mark]

The problem is not with the rule, IMO, it has a reason for existing. The main problem is how the booking engine implements the rule and/or not having an option to exclude certain things - dumb implementation of the rule.

Indeed, the rule has a reason for existing, and the behaviour being discussed here is a side effect of that rule. The result is correct based on that rule.

 

[serfty]

... I'll start off by saying that the behaviour is annoying as hell, but to get it fixed you would need to be able to prove it was a bug, and I think you would stumble at this point.

...

Annoying as it is, I think Qantas have got their backsides covered:
1) It is what the rulebook says
2) They do advise that the travel is in Y class.

Bottom line. The problem is with the rule, rather than the booking engine.

Some years ago, the online booking tool would indeed do a pro-rata point calculation.

Maybe Qantas though that was a bug and fixed it. :shock:

 

[oz_mark]

Some years ago, the online booking tool would indeed do a pro-rata point calculation.

Maybe Qantas though that was a bug and fixed it. :shock:

Pro-rating would seem to me to be a fair solution (but is that pro-rated on miles, or sectors )

 

[medhead]

Indeed, the rule has a reason for existing, and the behaviour being discussed here is a side effect of that rule. The result is correct based on that rule.

Yes the result satisfies the rule. The charge is correct but IFF you have a mixed class result. But you don't have to be blind Freddy to realise that the result should not be returned in the first place. Having a rule that says you will be charged for the highest cabin class does not mean that all mixed class options have to be returned when searching. The behaviour is a side effect of some one being too stupid to realise that 15 hours in Y is not an acceptable result when someone is looking for a business seat. That is before you even need to consider how such a booking would be charged; before you even need to invoke the rule.

And to delve into it further these dodgy bookings appear mostly when I search on a different city pair, that then throws up a heap of options via other capitals. Why can't I exclude the multiple connections from my search? That would be another way to return search results that do not invoke that rule.


Sent from the Throne (80% chance) using Aust Freq Fly app

 

[tgh]

Qantas' misguided Twitter tantrum | Technology Spectator

 

[mannej]

Qantas' misguided Twitter tantrum | Technology Spectator

Just waiting for thewinchester to have his say.

FWIW, the example they used of the price going up, that is tough luck, sob story or no sob story there isn't much a twitter account can do I'd imagine

 

[nlagalle]

Qantas' misguided Twitter tantrum | Technology Spectator

I'm wondering how you would feel if someone was parodying your company (if you owned one). I'm sure you would object too.

 

[Storyteller]

... Snip ...

You have to log on , do a search, and then sort backwards and forwards over and over and over as the search engine offers you business awards with one or both long haul legs in Y.
You have to do this daily, and the tune gets a bit boring.
Yes there are other ways.. but the way I'm doing it is as the roo intends..so I assume the irritation and the frustration is also intended.

I think this is just plain crazy..a deliberate ploy to annoy from my perspective.. who the hell does a J search wanting to pay J award rates in Y ...?????

... snip...
.

G'day. Late to the party, as usual!

This searching is something my Travel Agent used to do for me.
Same as the search to match up my times, destinations, preferred airlines & classes for any itinerary purchased with money. She would take a complex array of instructions from me & return a couple of itineraries to me for my selection, a few days later.

A good Travel Agent is well worth the relatively small fee they charge to sort through the jungle.

 

[11sjw]

I can't believe there are like 40 odd posts defending qantas' habit of returning Y fares when people search for J awards! (I haven't actually bovvered to read all the posts so that 40 is just a guess based on the early posts). Oh well, looks like the group think is that the practice isn't devious. Here I was thinking it was highly dodgy to sell a J award but only give people a J seat on the short domestic hop. I stand corrected NOT!


Sent from the Throne (80% chance) using Aust Freq Fly app

From my reading I don't see that at all, more so there are other parts of the OP's post that were taken to task.

Pretty sure plenty of people acknowledged the J/Y issue as being a dud by Qantas.

The OP was lampooned over his/her whine re award seat availability etc.

 

[medhead]

Pretty sure plenty of people acknowledged the J/Y issue as being a dud by Qantas.

Not everyone, however.

 

[11sjw]

Not everyone, however.

However, more than enough to show that the majority agreed.

In any case enough to make me feel like I didn't have to comment on it any further.

 

[medhead]

However, more than enough to show that the majority agreed.

In any case enough to make me feel like I didn't have to comment on it any further.

Of course, I never said anything about the majority on that one point. Perhaps you might not have commented at all if you had of noticed that.

I'm not going to single any one post out, but there are a number of attacks on the OP in general (effectively questioning the validity of the original post in its entirety) and there is one post that questions the validity of using 'devious'. That's as far as I got before replying.

I also suggest that 12 out of 50 is not a majority. Come to think of it "plenty of people" is not a majority either.

Got out of bed on the wrong side today?
50 replies as off this minute.12 support the OP in saying the Y on long haul when booking a J award is a bad thing.
And sorry but i can not find one disagreeing with the OP on that issue.

 

[drron]

Of course, I never said anything about the majority on that one point. Perhaps you might not have commented at all if you had of noticed that.



I also suggest that 12 out of 50 is not a majority. Come to think of it "plenty of people" is not a majority either.

Ah but of course my comment was there were 12 against the J/Y ruse and zero for.12 zip to me is a pretty overwhelming majority.

 

[deejo77]

Thanks all for this thread - didn't realise there was some tension between the status groups (silly me - should of realised its a dog eat dog world) - I have to agree though that those of us (me who don't mind flying "Y") would have no clue about 90% of the stuff you go on about. I think of my two round the world trips (I know you will have a code for this also but honestly too lazy at 10.48pm to go look it up) with Q and think about the "missed" SC/Point or some such. I have flown J on two sectors with Q internationally (they upgraded me) - and honestly for the extra $$ I would rather spend it at my destination.

 

[11sjw]

Really? :| The majority of the few posts I read took the OP to task for calling qantas devious on exactly this point. Maybe not an explicit defense of the practice, but it does imply a certain level of acceptance.

Please show one post that does this. I could only find posts agreeing with the OP on this point with another pointing out it is in their award rules.

Looks like others agree..

From my reading I don't see that at all, more so there are other parts of the OP's post that were taken to task.

Got out of bed on the wrong side today?
50 replies as off this minute.12 support the OP in saying the Y on long haul when booking a J award is a bad thing.
And sorry but i can not find one disagreeing with the OP on that issue.

Of course, I never said anything about the majority on that one point. Perhaps you might not have commented at all if you had of noticed that.

No but you state "The majority of the few posts I read took the OP to task for calling qantas devious on exactly this point" I like others couldn't find one post that does this. Perhaps if you had read the entire thread you wouldn't have commented.

I also suggest that 12 out of 50 is not a majority. Come to think of it "plenty of people" is not a majority either.

drron beat me to it, 12-zip is convincing.

 

[The Rok]

Several posts were deleted by moderators due to language/behaviour/attacking another poster. I think this is where the confusion may be coming from.