Changes to partner earns on QF

[medhead]

I'd be shocked at anyone flying MH more than QF who credits flights to QFF.
You don't need 4000 nodes of Hadoop to work that out

It's funny. I did a survey for Qantas during the week. It asked to compare my international airlines last year with this year. last year QF was 80% of my international flights, MH 20%. This year QF is 9%, MH 38% and the rest is made up of TK, EY, (JQi), EK and CX. That's a pretty big change, that I'd attribute to simpler and fairer. I wonder what more simpler and fairer will do next year. I don't predict a return to 80/20.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I think there's a fundamental problem underlying all of this.

So the airline spends what... weeks/months/years?... trying to figure out a system to entice/force/encourage you to fly qantas through the awarding of SCs.

What would have been simpler? Instead of taking the 'stick' approach, why not use the 'carrot'? Consistently good service on board, new seats, new planes, improved lounges, better customer service (in the sense of not thinking of every possible opportunity to 'enhance' benefits and services).

That would mean people would want to fly with you, not feel they have no option. I dunno, but I suspect one of the approaches would have longer-term benefits than the other.

'94 reasons to fly' didn't work, so we get penalised into flying them. Nice.

 

[whatmeworry]

I don't think QF has really analysed their punitive changes to QFF. Ok so they save money on one end but how much do they lose to people embracing other frequent flyer programs?

 

[Flying mermaid]

I don't think QF has really analysed their punitive changes to QFF. Ok so they save money on one end but how much do they lose to people embracing other frequent flyer programs?

You would think they would have a pretty good idea from the changes they have implemented over the last couple of years. Presumably they don't feel the consequences were enough to out weigh the advantages?

 

[Kceips]

Some benefit for ADL customers on CX. aDL-HKG on CX in discount y now 25 status credits (up from 15). Interestingly still only 15 from MEL or SYD??
.... Seems like they want Adelaide customers to choose CX before QR.

 

[medhead]

More whinging from me. Another email from QFF received today about the win a share of $50000 by earning credit card points promo. A promo I registered for from the October statement email. This then prompted me to check my Qantas emails. Lo and behold I find 3 emails that are repeats of items listed in the October statement email.

So it's not good enough to trust me to read the October statement email, Qantas have got to spam me with separate emails about Bose headphones, double points with AA and win $50000 for using my credit card. But they don't need to send a separate email about major program changes?

Not to mention that the earning changes have a heading of "earn points with partner airlines". The whole thing stinks.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

I think there's a fundamental problem underlying all of this.

So the airline spends what... weeks/months/years?... trying to figure out a system to entice/force/encourage you to fly qantas through the awarding of SCs.

What would have been simpler? Instead of taking the 'stick' approach, why not use the 'carrot'? Consistently good service on board, new seats, new planes, improved lounges, better customer service (in the sense of not thinking of every possible opportunity to 'enhance' benefits and services).

That would mean people would want to fly with you, not feel they have no option. I dunno, but I suspect one of the approaches would have longer-term benefits than the other.

'94 reasons to fly' didn't work, so we get penalised into flying them. Nice.

I don't think QF has really analysed their punitive changes to QFF. Ok so they save money on one end but how much do they lose to people embracing other frequent flyer programs?

Qantas doesn't need to figure out anything. They have thousands of data models sitting in front of them. Dynamic, living models that show how all types of customers interact with the brand, website/mobile, how this does or does not translate into bookings, points revenue, status and perceived value of the brand. Unsure about QF - but other airlines also have similar models on their competitors, and when you overlay the two - you have a complete 360 degree picture of the industry. This gives near real-time data on weak spots, where your competition is failing and where you can pull certain levers to enact specific results to benefit the company. Im aware of one company that also draws in clean data from third parties which assists in pinpointing the revenue losses caused by each individual marketing campaign.

While each individual department is doing their job in the machine to move forward and do well in their specific area - they are still confined to what the market can bare, budget limitations, creative direction and the overall goals of their division and company. To drive each department to achieve more, they need more resources and the best way to fast-track new initiatives (to make or save cash) is through crisis. Look at the innovation that WW1 and WW2 brought to the world. Qantas is not in crisis. They have a perfect duopoly domestically, a virtual monopoly with the banks and new partners (gocatch etc) continue to drive the brand forward and revenues into the sky. Let a real competitor like SQ operate domestically and you'll see all sorts of cool stuff happen (flat beds on 737s?). Qantas has no true need to innovate in airline product.

These latest changes - while surprising, some were certainly justified to bring the program in to line with the market expectations and where other programs were clearly much better value for frequent flyers. These changes appear to be well thought out (although made far more complex than it needs to be) and designed to engineer the program in such a way that it modifies purchase behaviour of key member segments.

At the end of the day everyone has a choice. Anyone who is against the changes needs to stop crediting flights to QFF and stop earning QFF points. All the stories, decisions and top level strategic goals are based on numbers and market perception. Anyone who continues to credit to QFF is essentially saying the changes - while painful - are still acceptable to them. It's like writing to your local MP to express your concerns over policy matters. It might be read and you might receive a reply - but to have it enacted upon you need to vote them out and someone else in to replace that spot. QFF is betting members won't pack up and leave and this is further proof that the changes are acceptable.

 

[wandering_fred]

The changes in partner programs will have far more effect on the high value (international) fliers than almost anything that QF can implement in the QFF program. That assumes no really off the wall changes to QFF - Fairer and simpler may be an oxymoron, but it's not off the wall.

I wonder if waiting for partner changes to be implemented is the "real" reason we haven't (yet) seen changes in the AA program.

YYMV while while wandering

Fred

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Qantas doesn't need to figure out anything. They have thousands of data models sitting in front of them. Dynamic, living models that show how all types of customers interact with the brand, website/mobile, how this does or does not translate into bookings, points revenue, status and perceived value of the brand.

...

These changes appear to be well thought out (although made far more complex than it needs to be) and designed to engineer the program in such a way that it modifies purchase behaviour of key member segments.

Uh huh - that's why QFi was losing hundreds of millions of dollars until this year when they were saved by lower fuel and sacking thousands of staff. Because people were flocking to buy their product at the prices they needed to sell it at.

Modifying the purchase behaviour - exactly. But rather than offering the carrot - a product good enough that everyone wants to fly it (SQ five x daily from SYD, 4 x daily from Melbourne), they have to use the 'stick' of locking you via poor earn rates on their FF program if you choose to use a OneWorld partner.

When I fly economy on Cathay Pacific, I get an excellent product, with excellent service. Everyone is treated almost exactly the same, except elites get a bottle of water as part of their welcome.

On QF economy, the service can indeed be spectacular... if you're a platinum. Then you get a shadow, the best pick of the seats, business class head sets, PJs, business class food and wine. Why is that necessary? As a regular economy flyer I'm not impressed by missing out. I don't like to feel 'second class'. So I fly another carrier. On SQ I don't need to be PPS to get generous meals, coughtails, and consistently excellent service that appreciates my choice to fly with them.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

Modifying the purchase behaviour - exactly. But rather than offering the carrot - a product good enough that everyone wants to fly it (SQ five x daily from SYD, 4 x daily from Melbourne), they have to use the 'stick' of locking you via poor earn rates on their FF program if you choose to use a OneWorld partner.

Remember, each department has it's own way of tackling things. This is QFF turning the screws just like they did with locking banks/consumers into exclusive direct sweep cards. The air product team no doubt is working on new concepts, finding innovative industrial designers etc to roll out the carrots.

When I fly economy on Cathay Pacific, I get an excellent product, with excellent service. Everyone is treated almost exactly the same, except elites get a bottle of water as part of their welcome.

Elites (Oneworld Emerald too) get first choice of meal, cappuccino, cheese, champagne.. practically anything but it's all on demand just like biz/first.
Also without fail there is at least senior purser introduction, or manager if you're in luck.

So I fly another carrier. On SQ I don't need to be PPS to get generous meals, coughtails, and consistently excellent service that appreciates my choice to fly with them.

How much activity are you sending QFF?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

How much activity are you sending QFF?

Not for lack of trying - but very little. Aside from the USA (no choice for F), QF can't compete at the moment to places like Asia with high fares, a high probability of MK1 skybeds, and schedules which take a whole day flying rather than an being able to fly overnight. For wholly premium travel, MK1 is too big a risk just for the extra SCs.

 

[katiebell]

It's funny. I did a survey for Qantas during the week. It asked to compare my international airlines last year with this year. last year QF was 80% of my international flights, MH 20%. This year QF is 9%, MH 38% and the rest is made up of TK, EY, (JQi), EK and CX. That's a pretty big change, that I'd attribute to simpler and fairer. I wonder what more simpler and fairer will do next year. I don't predict a return to 80/20.

My flying is similar: previously >50% long haul on QF with QF ticket. No long haul with QF ticket this year… Punitive changes to QF FF will not make me fly on routes that I do not like, on EK codeshare and via DXB. It would take a large incentive to encourage me back on to QF long haul (e.g. not via DXB, good schedule/route/aircraft, markedly cheaper fares than competitors etc).

 

[RooFlyer]

Interesting by TtR and M-T, thanks.

For me MEL_Traveller is the more persuasive on this one.

When I think of the QFF program and experiences on QF its mainly negative - program cuts/shavings; poor communication (sneaky/hidden announcements of 'enhancements'); dilution of the benefits of accruing points by flooding the market with 'partner' points (increased difficulty in getting Award seats). Recently I got complacent and just assumed there would be Mk2 Skybeds on a revenue HKG-MEL flight. MK1 - yer kidding, right?

They are driving their customer's behaviour more by the stick than the carrot.

Airlines like SQ, QR, AY and yes, even AA and their FF programs get positive feelings from me. Yes, SQ's program is 'tight' but I know the product when I get it is worth it. Many of these airlines have great hard product (eh B777; A350; B787) and in-flight service a quantum above QF long haul. Driving customer behaviour by the carrot.

My long haul QF has been declining from about 100K km pa 2010-2012; 60K 2013; 41K 2014. I was surprised to find it at 86K YTD this year - most of that was client flights to LAX and YVR.

 

[dfcatch]

So.. finally getting around to reading the latest Dyslexic Enhancements (apologies to any dyslexics who take offence) - but that is the only logical way to explain how QF Loyalty has managed to sign off on two consecutive years worth of Simpler and Fairer'ing that was obviously written by a 12 year old work experience kid with ADHD after consuming 3 kg of sugar......

anyway - some initial observations... I'll add to them as I go through my notes:

- Route Definitions....
Finally, some common sense has prevailed. Since WTF someone would describe DFW or IAH as West Coast USA has all the logical sense of a Japanese tourist forgetting his camera at a dwarf-throwing competition. I mean just try telling someone from Orange County that they're from LA!! No wonder the Texans revolted.

Anywho - some common sense region definitions have finally found their way to the necessary tables (Of course you need multiple PhDs in Neuroscience and Quantum Physics and a telescope to locate the necessary information on the QF site, let alone understand it). I currently have 6 discrete windows open, god help the average member of the program.

Back on-topic - I hope someone was sacked and that this version of the program has actually been designed by someone at QF with an IQ higher than 3. So far - I'm giving the benefit of the doubt.

- There was an opportunity to get rid of the stupid superfluous Short/Medium/Long haul tables - and QF botched it with the kind of performance usually reserved only for career federal public servants.

PRO TIP for QF - A simple three lines:

"Domestic Short - Under 750 Miles
Domestic Medium - Between 751-1500 Miles
Domestic Long - Over 1500 Miles"

OMG - how simple was that!!??!!?? (PS. Qantas - next time that will be $20,000 for that advice - you can have that one on the house).

WAIT - What's that Skip?? That looks and sounds like the old distance zone earning tables that were uber-super-easy to read..?? Yes Skip, it does!

And YEP - The "Other" table could have simply been:
"Int Zone 1 - up to 750
Int Zone 2 - 751-1500
etc etc".

Yes Skip, I don't know either how they could be so stupid as to overcomplicate the simplest things in life..??

- The "Earn Categories" is not bad... It actually is Simpler to understand and simply allocates a descriptive term to fare classes. This table is an improvement.

- The QF/JQ Earn Table is ... no there are no complimentary words.... sigh.

Okay - So a Discount Economy QF flight has a minimum points guarantee of 800 points. So..... anyone with an IQ over 10 would have put "800^" in the relevant position on the Earning Table for the Domestic Short/Medium sections.

Seriously??? It's not difficult. How stupid can people be??

QF used to list earn (that was affected by minimum points guarantee) exactly as I've described. Why this new approach on the table? I constantly underestimate the ability of people to impress me with new levels of idiocy.


- HOLY **** BATMAN!!

Yes Boy Wonder - We can travel to other planets, we can harness the power of the atom - but WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW ON GOD'S EARTH a simple "QF Marketed International Flight Earning Table with 7 simple mileage zones" requires 8 SEPARATE CONFUSING TABLES to say THE SAME THING!!! (Well close enough to the same thing, yes there are slight differences, but I personally would have simply rounded them all down to the earnings in the 7 zone table - yes I know this would be an enhancement in QF's favour - but it makes more sense).

Seriously - was there a competition for who can take a simple 7-zone table and turn it into the most complicatedly possible set of tables known to man??

I am totally lost for words (despite the evidence to contrary) as to how unbelievable moronic this is..?? Was this actually approved for publication?? Was it actually signed off on by a Group Executive???

How much MONEY was wasted with this???????

How much was spent on updating ALTEA to accommodate this..??..??

- Easy answer - you'll earn significantly less points on the AA code to the USA vs the QF code.


SUMMARY:
- Look - QF are the best in the industry at RM, and I promise you that their pivot-tables say that the individual route tweaking represents the optimum allocation of points/SCs for various partner agreements, interlining and marketing codes. (As opposed to a simple zone based table).

BUT - those models are all based on assumptions of behaviour that are flawed.

QF can easily move to a zonal-based earning table (as per the final table) instead of the old point-per-mile basis, and still come out ahead whilst keeping things simple.

It shouldn't be this way - but any fool can make something complex but making something simple is difficult.

And QF clearly has no shortage of fools

 

[RooFlyer]

So.. finally getting around to reading the latest Dyslexic Enhancements (apologies to any dyslexics who take offence) - but that is the only logical way to explain how QF Loyalty has managed to sign off on two consecutive years worth of Simpler and Fairer'ing that was obviously written by a 12 year old work experience kid with ADHD after consuming 3 kg of sugar......

anyway - some initial observations... I'll add to them as I go through my notes:

<snip for space>

I've just got back from a trip, so have put off actually looking at the tables in detail till I got home. Well, that post has put paid to that!!

<snip>

And QF clearly has no shortage of fools

Clearly.

 

[dfcatch]

I've just got back from a trip, so have put off actually looking at the tables in detail till I got home. Well, that post has put paid to that!!



Clearly.

Look - as QF themselves say - the only way to deal with it is to take your desired route that you have in mind - and run it through the calculator, then decide how you want to book and through whom.

And QF's position on this would be quite simple..... "No-one except you idiots actually look at the tables (and we'd get rid of them completely if we could - they're so yesterday), but for the small number of normal members that did - we've put paid to that..... Just go and use the calculator - that's what we call SIMPLER"

 

[MEL_Traveller]

QF can easily move to a zonal-based earning table (as per the final table) instead of the old point-per-mile basis

Replace the 'zo' with an 'a' and I'd say they're already there.

 

[JohnK]

So if they're only going to award Economy SCs on certain "Business" class flights, does that mean you only need to redeem at the Y rate too?

Yes we do know the answer to that one. You will redeem at the First class rate while only earning on the economy rate. Makes sense to some. :mrgreen:

 

[dajop]

It was the monthly newsletter - hardly an "unrelated email". People who complain that they didn't know something because they didn't read the newsletter that was sent to them are fools.

Assumes you get a monthly newsletter. QF do not deem it necessary to send some members a monthly newsletter. I don't get them (I did for a little while when I experimented and moved my address back to AU, but moved it back to SG again and it stopped again.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Assumes you get a monthly newsletter. QF do not deem it necessary to send some members a monthly newsletter. I don't get them (I did for a little while when I experimented and moved my address back to AU, but moved it back to SG again and it stopped again.

Seems odd. Surely they'd just send it to the email address on file irrespective of your country of residence??