simongr
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2006
- Posts
- 14,307
Before I start this can I point out THE SKY IS NOT FALLING IN. This is just interesting idle speculation. There has been a change in how businesses are required to account for customer loyalty programs as follows:
Ok – now I know not all of you are accountants so this may not be of that much interest but bear with me. Companies often make operational decisions on not just a direct cash in vs. cash out basis but also on how the information is presented in their financial statements.
There are two interesting elements here – the deferring of revenue and the valuation of that deferral.
Ok so now if you buy a $10,000 ticket and earn 25,000 points – that basically gives you say 1½ return flights to Melbourne – say $500 worth of value. So QF now recognises $9,500 in its accounts and punts the other $500 into the future. The main change is that the value of this is based on the value to you rather than the cost to QF. You might argue that previously QF should only carry a liability for the additional cost of carrying you plus the profit lost by not carrying a revenue PAX. This increases the liabilities of QF if it still owns the FFP.
So now if QF sell QFF in theory they no longer have the liability – the FFP does – so this improves some ratios for QF. So obviously they will sell off the FFP as a result of this
S
The ASB said:Interpretation 13 Customer Loyalty Programmes
Interpretation 13 was recently released by the Australian Accounting Standards Board. It is effective for annual financial periods commencing on or after 1 July 2008, i.e. for 30 June 2009 financial years.
It requires that the fair value of revenue be allocated between sales and rewards credits i.e. a portion of revenue will be deferred until the rewards have been redeemed. The deferred revenue is based on the fair value of the reward to the customer NOT the fair value of the cost of providing the reward. As there are no specific transitional provisions included in Interpretation 13, any change in accounting treatment comprises a change in accounting policy and you will be required to retrospectively restate your 30 June 2008 comparatives included in your 30 June 2009 financial statements.
Ok – now I know not all of you are accountants so this may not be of that much interest but bear with me. Companies often make operational decisions on not just a direct cash in vs. cash out basis but also on how the information is presented in their financial statements.
There are two interesting elements here – the deferring of revenue and the valuation of that deferral.
Ok so now if you buy a $10,000 ticket and earn 25,000 points – that basically gives you say 1½ return flights to Melbourne – say $500 worth of value. So QF now recognises $9,500 in its accounts and punts the other $500 into the future. The main change is that the value of this is based on the value to you rather than the cost to QF. You might argue that previously QF should only carry a liability for the additional cost of carrying you plus the profit lost by not carrying a revenue PAX. This increases the liabilities of QF if it still owns the FFP.
So now if QF sell QFF in theory they no longer have the liability – the FFP does – so this improves some ratios for QF. So obviously they will sell off the FFP as a result of this
S