difference in distance between 'earned' or 'usage' mileage

[wflyons]

Hello, I am wondering if anyone else has noticed something similar on other Oneworld sectors:

There is a discrepancy between the distance QANTAS shows for SEA to LHR on the "points required for travel" table, versus the mileage they and British Airways actually award for the same sector (which is on the daily in BA48 747 service)

When I look at:
http://www.qantas.com.au/fflyer/dyn/program/usingPoints/pointsTables

it shows the points required and details as the following:
Seattle - London 72000points Zone 6 (4803miles) Business Qantas

However, over the last three years I have flown this sector frequently and each time I am awarded 4,783 miles for travel with QANTAS (that's base miles on to which I add cabin and status bonuses). This is also the mileage that shows on my e-ticket receipt. If I decide to earn points against my British Airways Executive club membership they will award me 4,789 miles (which is what they indicate is the base mileage distance). I calculated the Great Circle distance to be 4,798 miles between Seattle and London.

The significance of this is that it seems to indicate that this sector should be in QANTAS' Zone 5 "using points" table and therefore only needing 60,000 miles for business class travel. However, they seem to have calculated the distance for the purpose of using points as 4,803 miles (and therefore 3 miles 'into' zone 6). Essentially, even as a platinum member, I need to purchase one extra business class return ticket in order to earn the extra miles required because of the discrepancy.

I can't understand why there would be a discrepancy in the distance between using and earning points. The QANTAS terms and conditions seem to say they use the Great Circle distance for the purposes of calulating distances.

Just curious if this is common practice to be fluid with distance caluclations....

Thanks, Bill

 

[NM]

Interesting find. There is often a difference between what Qantas calculate as mileage and what other airlines use (and what Great Circle Mappers show). but in this case, you have noted that it pops you over the threshold for the next zone ... by 3 miles!

I would raise this issue with Qantas FF program management, especially since they would only have been crediting status credits based on it being zone 5 (1.e. 120 SCs for business class). So if they want it to be zone 6 for burning, then it should also be zone 6 for earning. In which case you should ask them to credit and adjustment for the SCs for zone 6 travel for your previous flights.

They should not have their cake (credit as zone 5 for earning) and eat it too (charge for zone 6 for burning).

Perhaps start the conversation by asking for clarification for the zone for SEA-LHR (don't mention if its for earn or burn) and see what they say. Then point out the discrepancy and ask for an adjustment for the under-paid SCs or the over-charged award.

 

[wflyons]

Thanks for the great advice!

I'll let you know what they say...it's not just me who would be affected by the "earning" versus "using" discrepancy...it's my wife and kids who have sometimes travelled with me (all QF Gold); my parents; my sister and her family; some friends and a bunch of expat Australians I work with. That's a lot of QANTAS FFs who have been impacted.

 

[straitman]

Thanks for the great advice!

I'll let you know what they say...it's not just me who would be affected by the "earning" versus "using" discrepancy...it's my wife and kids who have sometimes travelled with me (all QF Gold); my parents; my sister and her family; some friends and a bunch of expat Australians I work with. That's a lot of QANTAS FFs who have been impacted.

..... and many others I'm sure. Which makes it all the more important that this is sorted ASAP.

 

[Deeruck]

The points calculator,https://www.qantas.com.au/fflyer/do/dyns/InitialPointsRedeemed, is showing 4783 miles, Zone 5. Has this changed since last night?

 

[wflyons]

I sent an email to the service center and then got a reply overnight. They said that someone would contact me next week. It was a personal reply from "Jackie" not an automated response. I just checked and the mileage required has changed already!

Bill

 

[NM]

I sent an email to the service center and then got a reply overnight. They said that someone would contact me next week. It was a personal reply from "Jackie" not an automated response. I just checked and the mileage required has changed already!

Bill

Good to see they have sorted it out quickly. I doubt it was done on purpose. Just one of those things that happens. Looks like they sorted it in the right way.

 

[aus_flyer]

This might just be me being cynical :? but I doubt we would ever see it happening the reverse way!

ie. earn SC at zone 6, burn at zone 5

 

[oz_mark]

...and if you did see it in reverse, would you tell anyone?

 

[straitman]

...and if you did see it in reverse, would you tell anyone?

Of course he would :!:

Remember the old saying:

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters.
If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters."
--Alan Simpson