Heads up about program changes

[mannej]

AA partners with EY

Same point - EY don't belong to OW, and are fairly close to QR geographically.
I understand the cynicism towards QF as of late, however a lot gets glossed over when other airlines do similar.

 

[Anna]

not really viable if already LTG.

Why do you say that?

 

[JohnK]

How is one able to book a higher class airfare than the one offered via the Qantas website? Travel agent and Qantas reservations are the only options? I am guessing Qantas reservations would want to slap on a assisted booking fee.

Anyone with any experience?

Why? If others find your opinion ridiculous they have the same right to an opinion and the right to express that opinion as you do!

If it makes you feel better then go for it.

 

[BD1959]

I have been trying to work out why QF suddenly decided to degrade OW earning so much at this point in time. Some thoughts that come to mind:

The change to DXB/EK code share has been so unpopular that they are trying to push pax back on to QF rather than CX etc. To support this hypothesis I have found it impossible to book discount J on CX since the QF move to DXB and can now book discount J of QF all the time. Pre-DXB it was 100% the other way around

QF is thinking of leaving OW so is trying to ease us out of OW airlines and on to QF so we stay with them rather than OW post-split.

It makes no sense to degrade the attractiveness of a FF programme, especially for a virtual international airline and when the partner airlines will be paying QF for points

Although formalised across the OW alliance effective July 1, QFF has been gradually introducing changes to OW earn since last year; far fewer points on MH where the routing "competed" with QF (even though they don't fly to KUL) and the removal of the OW earn for the loyalty bonus. The lesser point earn was then included when QR joined OW. The lowering of the SC earn is just the next "simpler" step.

I believe this will eventually lead to QF withdrawing from OW - I see the fact that QF is the only major alliance partner operating within Australia being another catalyst toward this, not a reason to not withdraw.

If QF were *really* serious about leveraging off OW, then I would have expected them to:

- Codeshare on MH flights into KUL and SE Asia
- Coordinate flights/codeshares off the (increased) BA flights into HKG and (increased capacity) SIN. Who do BA/AY passengers transiting SIN into PER and ADL fly with?? Even with NZ, QF appears to be marginalizing it's own Jetconnect.

QF's plan seems to be to use JQ JVs for Asia and EK for all points west of that. If we look eastwards, AA and LAN. Those can be serviced via individual agreements outside of OW. Airlines wishing to leverage off QF for Australian Domestic can continue to do so.

QF then loses the overhead of having to integrate systems each time OW gains a new partner; can agree lounge expenditure for individual lounges (LAX) rather than across the network and drop the requirement to treat OW elites as it would it's own.

Regards,

BD

 

[codash1099]

Same point - EY don't belong to OW, and are fairly close to QR geographically.
I understand the cynicism towards QF as of late, however a lot gets glossed over when other airlines do similar.

And these "out of alliance" arrangements are nowhere near the extent of the QF-EK deal and nor does the outside partner have such an influence on the activities of the alliance airline.

 

[mannej]

And these "out of alliance" arrangements are nowhere near the extent of the QF-EK deal and nor does the outside partner have such an influence on the activities of the alliance airline.

What about Air Berlin? Does that not go above and beyond the extent of what the QF-EK deal is?

 

[codash1099]

What about Air Berlin? Does that not go above and beyond the extent of what the QF-EK deal is?

I'll give you that one. Now find me one of the size of the QF-EK deal.

 

[FrankC]

I'll give you that one. Now find me one of the size of the QF-EK deal.

Must the other party independent of alliance or simply not in OW?
If latter then, how about CX & CA?

 

[codash1099]

Must the other party independent of alliance or simply not in OW?
If latter then, how about CX & CA?

And exactly how is the agreement with CA dictating what routes CX can or cannot fly?

 

[FrankC]

And exactly how is the agreement with CA dictating what routes CX can or cannot fly?

Sorry, I did not know that EK dictate the operation of QF, you are probably right

Do they also appoint board members into QF?

Apparently CA has 4 non executive directors in CX
Management Team - Cathay Pacific Australia

 

[ajw373]

And exactly how is the agreement with CA dictating what routes CX can or cannot fly?

And how is the agreeemnt between EK and QF dictaing what routes Qantas can fly?

 

[medhead]

And how is the agreeemnt between EK and QF dictaing what routes Qantas can fly?

Doesn't it include a non-compete requirement or something?

 

[ajw373]

Doesn't it include a non-compete requirement or something?

What have you seen the text! Didn't realise you were high up in EK or QF. So guess it is just conjecture in that case.

 

[medhead]

What have you seen the text! Didn't realise you were high up in EK or QF. So guess it is just conjecture in that case.

Just going from my vague recollection of the announcement. I seem to recall some restrictions on qantas not using asia to europe, or some such.

 

[Awesom Andy]

CA owns 30% of CX, so it's not a fair comparison.

 

[FrankC]

CA owns 30% of CX, so it's not a fair comparison.

I thought we are talking about the special relationships between OW carriers and non OW carriers, with examples provided: EK & QF, EY & AB

So I guess you mean CX & CA don't count because CA owns 30% of CX?

 

[katiebell]

What about Air Berlin? Does that not go above and beyond the extent of what the QF-EK deal is?

that is because EY owns a big chunk of AB

 

[mannej]

that is because EY owns a big chunk of AB

And your point?

 

[katiebell]

Why do you say that?

Perhaps not the best choice of words. What i was trying to say was that the earn required of OWE status with CX seems to be a lot higher with CX than many other OW carriers. Therefore it is more likely that a QF WP will end up OWS with CX and not be able to reach OWE status. Thereofre if already LTG with QF there is no advantage to being OWS twice and, therefore, better to look elsewhere for top tier status

 

[katiebell]

And your point?

it explains why they have an out-of -alliance tie up which is what I understood your post to be about.