Emirates Ordered To Pay $8468 USD For Failing To Deliver Advertised Quality Of Business Class

[dairyfloss]

This is all getting a bit silly, are we expecting every single mention of business class to have route and aircraft specific versions tailored to the user?

I think some common sense is required.

Not necessarily, but it wouldn't be hard (if they wanted to) to at least flag that different offerings, aircrafts and products are available, depending on the route. Qantas doesn't say that, or at least not in the area that I jokingly referred to.

 

[justinbrett]

Not necessarily, but it wouldn't be hard (if they wanted to) to at least flag that different offerings, aircrafts and products are available, depending on the route. Qantas doesn't say that, or at least not in the area that I jokingly referred to.

It would be an overraction if they did. Most people who have enough points to upgrade probably understand a route like SYD/CBR doesn't have lie flat beds.

I maintain that this is silly.

 

[Gold Member]

I think some common sense is required.

I maintain that this is silly.

Qantas’ “Simpler & Fairer TM” was neither reasonable or common sense.

Unnecessarily complicated technicalities and details are silly yet ostensibly very important to the Qantas FF program. We have every right to expect it‘s a two way street and hold Qantas to their word, notwithstanding Consumer rights.

 

[Danger]

Luckily, Qantas would never do such a thing…

Wow. Very interesting.

 

[justinbrett]

Qantas’ “Simpler & Fairer TM” was neither reasonable or common sense.

Unnecessarily complicated technicalities and details are silly yet ostensibly very important to the Qantas FF program. We have every right to expect it‘s a two way street and hold Qantas to their word, notwithstanding Consumer rights.

Silly as in a packet of peanuts with a warning saying “may contain traces of nuts”.

Not silly as in a complex change that may not make sense to you or in generally in the customers favour.

I was using silly in the first context.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Silly as in a packet of peanuts with a warning saying “may contain traces of nuts”.

Not silly as in a complex change that may not make sense to you or in generally in the customers favour.

I was using silly in the first context.

So it’s unlikely to confuse someone flying CBR-SYD.

But what about a Singapore national flying BNE-MEL? SQ would be offering full-flats on a sector that length, as standard.

While I think it would be easy to match the picture with the likely offering, if an airline can’t do that, why not default to your lowest common denominator instead of the highest? Why not show the 737 cabin as default, even for international? If an airline is worried they might lose sales showing a 737 to someone putting in for an international long haul upgrade, then perhaps there’s our answer…it’s designed as a sales technique.

If it’s a sales technique, should it not match the product?

 

[justinbrett]

So it’s unlikely to confuse someone flying CBR-SYD.

But what about a Singapore national flying BNE-MEL? SQ would be offering full-flats on a sector that length, as standard.

While I think it would be easy to match the picture with the likely offering, if an airline can’t do that, why not default to your lowest common denominator instead of the highest? Why not show the 737 cabin as default, even for international? If an airline is worried they might lose sales showing a 737 to someone putting in for an international long haul upgrade, then perhaps there’s our answer…it’s designed as a sales technique.

If it’s a sales technique, should it not match the product?

I just wished we lived in a world where we didn’t have to bring everything down to the lowest common denominator.

One would think a frequent flyer knew that aircraft come in all sorts of configurations and even the same aircraft type can be configured with very different seating.

Of course they need to make this information available on their site (and most airlines including QF do) but I really don’t think it needs to be brought up at every mention of business class.

I guess I’ll just eat my peanuts and be on the lookout for those traces of nuts whilst not spilling my hot coffee that may be hot.

 

[Pele]

It is very simple- make sure the product you are advertising is the same as what the consumer will receive when they open their wallet and purchase it.

It's not complicated mate.

And hats off to the kiwi bloke who held them to account.

 

[justinbrett]

Hmm, when I look at the upgrade options I see a disclaimer

 

[Danger]

I just wished we lived in a world where we didn’t have to bring everything down to the lowest common denominator.

One would think a frequent flyer knew that aircraft come in all sorts of configurations and even the same aircraft type can be configured with very different seating.

Of course they need to make this information available on their site (and most airlines including QF do) but I really don’t think it needs to be brought up at every mention of business class.

I guess I’ll just eat my peanuts and be on the lookout for those traces of nuts whilst not spilling my hot coffee that may be hot.

There's plenty of members of the Qantas Frequent Flyer program that aren't frequent flyers. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that the vast, vast majority aren't.

It is very simple- make sure the product you are advertising is the same as what the consumer will receive when they open their wallet and purchase it.

It's not complicated mate.

And hats off to the kiwi bloke who held them to account.

Well said.

 

[dairyfloss]

Hmm, when I look at the upgrade options I see a disclaimer

View attachment 319518

On the disclaimer, it’s not on the mobile site; I just checked that again. But hey, who uses their phone to do stuff anyway, right?

 

[justinbrett]

On the disclaimer, it’s not on the mobile site; I just checked that again. But hey, who uses their phone to do stuff anyway, right?

I was on the iOS app

 

[dairyfloss]

I was on the iOS app

Qantas IT for the win! Consistently inconsistent, once more.

 

[justinbrett]

Qantas IT for the win! Consistently inconsistent, once more.

Just like their business class offerings

Some of us just expect it and work with what we’ve got.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I just wished we lived in a world where we didn’t have to bring everything down to the lowest common denominator.

One would think a frequent flyer knew that aircraft come in all sorts of configurations and even the same aircraft type can be configured with very different seating.

Of course they need to make this information available on their site (and most airlines including QF do) but I really don’t think it needs to be brought up at every mention of business class.

I guess I’ll just eat my peanuts and be on the lookout for those traces of nuts whilst not spilling my hot coffee that may be hot.

Ok. But why not just put a picture of a 737 business?

Points Club would have lots of people with lots of points. Some may fly rarely.

 

[justinbrett]

Ok. But why not just put a picture of a 737 business?

Points Club would have lots of people with lots of points. Some may fly rarely.

Of the people putting in upgrades for business - what’s the proportion on widebodies do you think?

I would think more than 50%. A lot of people don’t want to waste on short domestic flights.

Do hotels show the worst room in the hotel?

Do pictures of hamburgers feature a typical hamburger as you’ll get on your plate - or is it carefully constructed to look as good as it can be?

If you expect every advertisement and publication is exactly what you’re going to get, you have a lifetime of disappointment ahead of you.

 

[Gold Member]

Do hotels show the worst room in the hotel?

Do pictures of hamburgers feature a typical hamburger as you’ll get on your plate - or is it carefully constructed to look as good as it can be?

If you expect every advertisement and publication is exactly what you’re going to get, you have a lifetime of disappointment ahead of you.

The analogies you’ve used don’t stack up.

For any given regular hotel room category, the vast majority of hotel rooms are identical if not very close with the exception of floor and view. That is to say, the hard product (the room) is very close to what can be expected as advertised in the picture. If it clearly is not the same room you booked, you can talk to the front desk and ask them to do something about it. Escalate to the Duty Manager or chain Loyalty etc if the outcome isn’t appropriate. The difference here is that there are many reasonable avenues to address the issue with a hotel then and there in a professional and responsive manner. The same can’t be said for Qantas or their call centres.

No one is going to disagree with you about the how Hamburgers are advertised/presented in reality. But for $5-10 are you really suggesting we should also take this matter to their Head Office/courts and claim false and misleading advertising? I’ve got better things to do with my time than chase $5 over a burger. But if we‘re dropping $2-3K for domestic and $10K+ International on the expectation of a fully flat business suite (vs 737 recliner) then yes, there’s everyone reason to pursue the matter. The disparity of advertised product matched with the eye watering prices are a 1-2 combination that few would stomach.

If you accept and defend every misleading and falsely advertised product or service that you consume or purchase, then your are exactly the sort of Lifetime Customer that Big Business wants.

 

[justinbrett]

If you accept and defend every misleading and falsely advertised product or service that you consume or purchase, then your are exactly the sort of Lifetime Customer that Big Business wants.

Actually this is right back at you. You’re the one taking advertisements 100% literally and expecting an exact replication.

I’m saying they do not reflect reality, and they don’t across most industries - everyone is going to put their best foot forward. The hotel room with the best view, the restaurant meal perfectly plated, models who have been photoshopped - it’s all hyped to get your attention.

The difference is I expect advertisements to be a hyped version of reality and I seek out the actual product I’m getting. I don’t take advertisements at face value.

I think you are the kind of person every advertiser wants.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Actually this is right back at you. You’re the one taking advertisements 100% literally and expecting an exact replication.

I’m saying they do not reflect reality, and they don’t across most industries - everyone is going to put their best foot forward. The hotel room with the best view, the restaurant meal perfectly plated, models who have been photoshopped - it’s all hyped to get your attention.

The difference is I expect advertisements to be a hyped version of reality and I seek out the actual product I’m getting. I don’t take advertisements at face value.

I think you are the kind of person every advertiser wants.

Ah, but if I go to a Michelin starred restaurant, to a [self-proclaimed] ‘6 star’ hotel, or travel in a suite on a Cunard liner then I’d expect the photo to match the price paid!

 

[Happy Dude]

Except it doesn't, at least for the route in question anyway, according to the article and barring IRROPS.

I'd say that's pretty common too. This here forum is lousy with well-travelled boffins that know which SQ flights to avoid/target, for example.

Bit a birds nest for the advertisers though but a bigger problem for the booking team who just need to provide links to the cabin/seats.