I wonder had JASA's continued ...

[samh004]

Re: I've felt the sting of the QFF Loyalty Middle Finger

A minimum spend requirement to achieve status would straighten that out. And given the number of people in this thread concerned about "cheapo" Platinums, I suspect they'll get right behind this enhancement when it is introduced

Unfortunately, that's the kind of thing that'd make me switch... I could probably re-qualify purely on cheap tickets on QF and occasionally JQ... but if I then hadn't hit the minimum spend I'd be very upset

eg. If I take the numbers from Delta's program for "Platinum" and assume that's a comparable level to WP... I could probably earn WP on flexi's OOL-SYD-MEL for about ~$8k... but Delta would have me spend $9k USD so I'd imagine QF would expect a little bit more. If I'd flown the miles, all on QF, then I'd be disappointed that they excluded me based on spend. Using the same calculations I reckon I could spend under $4k for SG, but Delta wants $6k USD

If you're reading this QFF, it's a bad move as that'd be the straw that broke the camels back

 

[JohnK]

Re: I've felt the sting of the QFF Loyalty Middle Finger

Seeing as we're all saying different things and no one has to agree with each others personal opinions on the subject of "cheap status", I'd like to publicly state that I don't think Qantas needs any customers who fly around on CX through Asia, nor do I think they need customers who criss-cross the US on YUPP's/KUPP's. I think they need customers who are at least flying their metal (predominantly) but then, that's just my opinion, and no one needs to agree.

Good point. In a way Qantas has already taken care of that by decreasing earning rates on partner airlines.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Re: I've felt the sting of the QFF Loyalty Middle Finger

...I'd like to publicly state that I don't think Qantas needs any customers who fly around on CX through Asia, nor do I think they need customers who criss-cross the US on YUPP's/KUPP's. I think they need customers who are at least flying their metal (predominantly) but then, that's just my opinion, and no one needs to agree.

And I'd agree... IF (and it's a big if) Qantas could deliver a product that made people want to fly with them.

Talking internationally, for too long Qantas has been flying an outdated business class product all around Asia. Even its seating on the A380 isn't ideal unless you're traveling as a couple (in business) or as a single (in First).

They don't fly to many places, and their frequency is poor compared to their competitors.

They have inconsistent crews, and at times, an on board offering that doesn't hit the mark.

So people have chosen to fly OW partners.

What Qantas has done with its raft of measures such as simpler and fairer is say 'ok, if people don't want to fly us as first choice, we'll compete not on quality product, but make you fly us because it's so unappealing to fly someone else'.

Qantas tells us that we should waste a whole business day to fly with them to Asia wehn CX offers an overnight flight both ways, with a proper bed, to allow an extra day's work. But Qantas penalises us for taking that option.

 

[SQ421]

Re: I've felt the sting of the QFF Loyalty Middle Finger

What Qantas has done with its raft of measures such as simpler and fairer is say 'ok, if people don't want to fly us as first choice, we'll compete not on quality product, but make you fly us because it's so unappealing to fly someone else'.

Qantas tells us that we should waste a whole business day to fly with them to Asia wehn CX offers an overnight flight both ways, with a proper bed, to allow an extra day's work. But Qantas penalises us for taking that option.

Nailed it.

 

[moa999]

Are you loyal to Qantas though... Just because Qantas is a member of oneworld doesn't mean you are showing frequency of loyalty by flying CX...

By all means choose to join Asia Miles if that suits you better

Qantas are not penalising you, that are just rewarding you more if you fly with them

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Are you loyal to Qantas though... Just because Qantas is a member of oneworld doesn't mean you are showing frequency of loyalty by flying CX...

By all means choose to join Asia Miles if that suits you better

Qantas are not penalising you, that are just rewarding you more if you fly with them

But isn't it Qantas and oneworld? That's why QF is a member of oneworld. If you're not going to play ball, and you're going to tie up with a non-oneworld partner (Emirates), why not just pull out? I suspect because they want the benefits of belonging to OW? (Or maybe they will pull out?)

I would argue it is a penalty for flying OW - otherwise QF could have increased earning for QF flights as a bonus.

 

[mannej]

But isn't it Qantas and oneworld? That's why QF is a member of oneworld. If you're not going to play ball, and you're going to tie up with a non-oneworld partner (Emirates), why not just pull out? I suspect because they want the benefits of belonging to OW? (Or maybe they will pull out?)

I would argue it is a penalty for flying OW - otherwise QF could have increased earning for QF flights as a bonus.

To be fair the non-oneworld partners were around before the EK deal, so hardly new in the scheme of things.

 

[wandering_fred]

Re: I've felt the sting of the QFF Loyalty Middle Finger

And I'd agree... IF (and it's a big if) Qantas could deliver a product that made people want to fly with them.
Talking internationally, for too long Qantas has been flying an outdated business class product all around Asia. Even its seating on the A380 isn't ideal unless you're traveling as a couple (in business) or as a single (in First).
They don't fly to many places, and their frequency is poor compared to their competitors.
They have inconsistent crews, and at times, an on board offering that doesn't hit the mark.

So people have chosen to fly OW partners.

...

And then there is international flying out of Perth (or ADL or DRW) to consider. And the remaining options.

I don't think on this one I need to be wandering

Fred

 

[Deleted member]

I'm (still) "loyal" to QF. And sometime this afternoon I will fall across the line (with 5 SC's to spare ) and will Re-Qual WP. My instincts were to not bother, however with some potential long haul travel in the offing in the next 12 months , it's a no brainer. I am also closing in on another milestone in the form of LTS. However I suspect my overseas travel patterns will change to OW partners, whilst using QF domestically. I have LTQP as a fall back position and will look at BFOD for J tickets. Thus rendering status redundant

 

[dfcatch]

I think a bunch of you are totally forgetting that mASAs came from Classic Award buckets. They were totally Inventory-Controlled.

QF received precisely the points currency that they wanted for those seats, and they received a higher co-pay in consideration of providing points and SCs for that redemption.

IF, and ONLY IF - those people redeeming mASAs would have otherwise purchased a REVENUE J or F fare would the argument espoused above hold true.

I posit that in most cases - that would simply not be true. Those that could afford to purchase revenue J/F fares were already doing so.

Those that weren't, and you could argue, would not have otherwise earned quite as many SCs - would have otherwise been more frugal with their pennies (ie. not spend as much with QF).

BUT - most of the "status runners" were taking gratuitous flights "just for hell of it". IE. it was free money for QF.

Yes they got status - but to get any of those status benefits requires continuing to fly QF... ie. QF continues to gain "handcuffed-loyalty-income".

For my own part - of course I did runs - but you know what, I did them because they were fun. I qualified for WP on my own steam with no runs and no promotions. I requalified WP every year on my own steam as well - in fact I've over-shot significantly every year. Any runs I did were not necessary.

I had very few DSC or "SC x 1.5" promos, but I, like everyone else took advantage of the Xmas DSC. Had I not have done so, I still would have qualified P1 (I finished my year with 4,500 SCs that year), but I possibly wouldn't have managed to also achieve VA WP at the same time (as I would have directed a little extra to QF to hit the target).

BUT - if I didn't have my goal to hit, I would have spent FAR FAR LESS.

I just did a quick calculation - I'm on around 8,500 SCs in the last 3 years, or around 13,000 in the last 5 years. I've also been averaging 90-100 sectors each year.

I came late to the mASA party. I was fine before, and I am fine after. But the fact is that QF received a lot more $$$ from me in both points and hard currency as a result of me taking QF flights that I didn't need to.

mASAs are not the reason I'm breaking up with QF (or at least "some time apart"), but their removal has caused me to cease donating free extra cash to QF.



- Simpler & Fairer;
- Poor value redemptions;
- Fuel taxes on redemptions;
- The JQ'ing of CNS routes;
- Sub-standard P1 experiences (plural);
- And tightening ( to the point of ridiculousness ) award availability;

are all factors that have led me to move 90% of my domestic spend to VA, and am now seriously and genuinely "on-the-market" for a younger and better looking model (FF Program)

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I think a bunch of you are totally forgetting that mASAs came from Classic Award buckets. They were totally Inventory-Controlled.

QF received precisely the points currency that they wanted for those seats, and they received a higher co-pay to in consideration of providing points and SCs for that redemption.

This.

And - as you point out, classic award inventory is generally only seats which an airline has determined it won't be able to sell otherwise. That's why they can offer it as an award.

Every cash fare we buy contains a component set aside for the points we earn. Which are then redeemed for this seat which would otherwise go out empty. Qantas has simply been paid 'in advance'.

QF is not giving away anything. In fact they go a step further, and unlike US carriers, impose a fuel surcharge. The ASA seat was paid for by points earn, fuel surcharges, and an additional surcharge for the SC component (the 'bundle' if you like).

 

[SQ421]

Are you loyal to Qantas though... Just because Qantas is a member of oneworld doesn't mean you are showing frequency of loyalty by flying CX...

I fly Qantas (and maintain QF Platinum) mainly because Qantas is a member of OneWorld Alliance. If they were to cease being part of that Alliance, I'd re-consider my participation in their loyalty program. Routes I fly are serviced much better by their OneWorld Partners than by Qantas, both from a product, and value perspective.

By all means choose to join Asia Miles if that suits you better

No, I'm fine using the quirks of the QFF Program to keep Emerald from my flying. I can reasonably do that at least to December 2017. After that, well, who knows what the Loyalty Scenario will be looking like then.

Qantas are not penalising you, that are just rewarding you more if you fly with them

No, by reducing the SC earn on partner airlines (when it used to be the same before), they are penalising fliers for not flying Qantas. Rewarding flyers for flying Qantas would be increasing the SC earn for QF flights from the baseline in place before "simpler and fairer".

And that is their prerogative. I don't have a problem with it. They make the rules, I play the game.

 

[samh004]

Re: I've felt the sting of the QFF Loyalty Middle Finger

TD I believe that the person in question may have had a DSC offer AND a comfort seat.

DSC Offer + Comfort Seat + JASA? I thought I felt my ears burning.....

Actually I think that person might've only done the DSC/comfort seat thing on paid fares in whY within QLD - I don't think they did it on a JASA.

If you're discussing me, I never used DSC on a comfort seat or Y booking. I did use 1.5SC on a Y booking once though. Comfort Seats got me across the line to Platinum. I predominantly booked my JASA's when DSC was offered, hence the rise to P1, but to echo a few here, had I not received DSC, the vast majority of my bookings wouldn't have been made. My points balance would still be a 'liability' and the cash component (which those that flew them might remember wasn't small) would still be in my bank account. In short, while I paid significantly less than full fare, I believe they made money off my flights, as I wouldn't have taken them otherwise and there's have been zero income from me.

 

[samh004]

No, by reducing the SC earn on partner airlines (when it used to be the same before), they are penalising fliers for not flying Qantas. Rewarding flyers for flying Qantas would be increasing the SC earn for QF flights from the baseline in place before "simpler and fairer".

And that is their prerogative. I don't have a problem with it. They make the rules, I play the game.

Realistically, if they'd increased the earn on QF services (disregarding flexi business earning 5-10SC more) they'd have also had to re-jig the whole program to account for flyers earning status faster (eg. all the levels would have needed increased qualifications)...

 

[OATEK]

I'm (still) "loyal" to QF. And sometime this afternoon I will fall across the line (with 5 SC's to spare ) and will Re-Qual WP. My instincts were to not bother, however with some potential long haul travel in the offing in the next 12 months , it's a no brainer. I am also closing in on another milestone in the form of LTS. However I suspect my overseas travel patterns will change to OW partners, whilst using QF domestically. I have LTQP as a fall back position and will look at BFOD for J tickets. Thus rendering status redundant

mASAs are not the reason I'm breaking up with QF (or at least "some time apart"), but their removal has caused me to cease donating free extra cash to QF.

Whenever the discussion about mASAs re-opens, it brings out some very common themes quite apart from the whole status run issue. I am another who came late to the scene on mASAs, but took a few for the fun. never as a strict status run, and always with a journey in mind. I have no doubt that status chasing through mASAs led to the ultimate downfall, I am not convinced by those who say that QF knew exactly what it was costing them before they were cut, and exactly how much they have lost since that decision. It is almost impossible to disentangle the mASA cut from all the other token promises and the whole "simpler, fairer" campaign that most on here seem to acknowledge is not so, even if they remain rusted-on loyal to QF.

So back to the themes, which I feel will eventually hurt QF because those that travel most, such as AFF members, are changing their patterns of booking:
- QF does not understand loyalty, and therefore rewards it less now than it once seemed to, subjective I know but a common theme here
- QF entered a fare and capacity war that led to more frequent flyers adopting BFOD in the face of not liking "simpler and fairer" in all sorts of aspects
- Many QFFers see far more options when spending the big money than staying with QF, DESPITE having their SC/Pts earn cut dramatically on OW partners.
- QF are more interested in the big numbers, around volumes, capacity etc and are becoming increasingly like their junior LCC partner and I am not convinced that QF know exactly what mASAs were costing or what the damage to QFF loyalty and cost to business from breaking their promise amongst other "simpler fairer" changes.
- Award availability is viewed as shrinking proportionally to the increasing number of people earning sufficient points for the big overseas award seats (F/J) now that sign-on CC bonuses are driving up the points earn
- Being forced to transit DXB to Europe with no via-Asia options

On the whole it seems to me that these are quite common themes repeated in various forms on many threads, and that as a result QF status is becoming less prized. Many of the perks of status can just as easily be enjoyed through U awards, QP members are wondering of renewal is worth it given how little they seem to be using it, and internationally CX, BA, AY and others are actually getting quite a lot out of the anti-DXB transiters.

Now you might say that just because I am not currently using the QP membership my firm and I pay hard money for, by increasingly using U awards, and also by increasingly using via_Asia options on OW partners in J and enjoying them, that I am just stating my own views. While I agree absolutely that this is the case, my feeling is that it is emblematic of a wave of response to QF following a raft of "simpler, fairer" changes of which removing mASAs after saying they would stay is just one. It all points to a loss of trust in QF, that will I believe eventually require them to rebuild loyalty or lose more of FF business.

 

[samh004]

mASAs are not the reason I'm breaking up with QF (or at least "some time apart"), but their removal has caused me to cease donating free extra cash to QF.

This is exactly me.

The past few years they've been making way more money out of me. I do want to spend, and I'm not someone that refuses to fly Y (on the contrary, I'm perfectly fine in Y). But a little bit of J is nice too, and mASA's were a great reason to spend, which I don't have anymore.

 

[SQ421]

Booked a string of AA Domestic flights today. Should see me retain Platinum under AUD 6500 this year with 1100 SC' on OneWorld Carriers.

Not bad in the post "simpler and fairer" world, even if I do say so myself.

 

[RichardMEL]

Some really great conversation on this topic over the last few days. I've really enjoyed the various viewpoints and given a lot of areas to think about.

Like a bad dog, I'll stray off topic of MASA a bit to address some things above - please forgive


- QF Loyalty

.. is a business with the aim to make money. With that in mind ALL the various movies, if in response to people like "us" or not, are designed to increase that yield. For example, poorer earnings on partners - which in theory will direct more to book on QF services *or* QF codeshare services, increasing revenue to QF over "partners" (CX, EK, BA etc). QF is hardly the first airline to do this, reduced earnings on partners have been around for years. I remember the "bad old days" when SQ flying on AN was only credited if you flew full-Y or F/J) and various foreign partners of all the US carriers (UA/AA/DL) have reduced earnings on various fare classes and have had for years.

- DSC's etc

... to me, the DSC offers of the past were born for a number of reasons, but I would say 2 main objectives: 1. induce "extra" spend on QF in a short timeframe(as defined by the offer) to give short term revenue, and 2. Yes, increase the elite levels (Silver, Gold, Plat) with the intent to "give a taste" of higher status, and then have pax want to pay for it in future - thus have a hit from the costs of DSC's and higher elite levels, recouped by increased future revenue from those that pay to keep their status. Remember the financial times for QF when many of these offers were around - things were far more red than black, and there was a cash flow squeeze. People have noted over the past year-18 months many of the DSC offers have gone, and it's been more targeted +50% SC offers and the like; QF don't need this tactic quite so much. Another reason to have such offers is to stimulate demand for a low performing route - hence the "Double SC to USA" offer around now. Why? I'd say the massive decline in the AUD vs USD has seen a fall off in leisure bookings on those routes for QF. Here's one way to try and stimulate some extra demand from those wavering on if they should go or not. Probably little overall cost to QF since your once a year flyer won't care (and even if they did, they wouldn't get enough to make Silver anyway), and those who would potentially be swayed by an offer probably already have status, so have a reason to spend to retain it - in the end probably little additional cost to QF still for some revenue and bums on seats. I think we may see more of this sort of thing in the future.

- Making changes because of the "AFF/FT/Facebook crowd"

... I think it's probably not fully the deal but certainly part of it. Obviously once something has been identified and is "in the wild" then an analysis would be run on it and decisions made. I'd say some of the things that have transpired (eg: "cheap" P1 status) are more the "law of unintended consequence" and the company responds to this. I don't see it as QF "whining" about the program features being used in this way as published and provided, but responding as they need to by making changes.

- is it "abuse" of the system to "take advantage" of (past) MASA, or YUPPS, or whatever

.. to me, no it is not. As I wrote earlier it's a game of sorts.. perhaps chess-like. Each has their strategy to maximise return. When one is making full use of a published system within the defined conditions, it can't really be abuse because you're not doing anything illegal. Now, can some extreme travel patterns or whatever be considered "outside the spirit" of the program? sure? but who is to blame? QFF for having these things open and available. As systems and processes get more complex you can find cases for things to be more easily worked out (eg: so QF can determine the difference between P class on a LAX-LAS vs P class on a LAX-LHR on an AA flight) but also open up other areas for potential advantage. (I don't want to use the word "exploitation" because that goes against my notion that using a system within it's conditions is not "abuse").

I also think that the idea that our little community, even in the thousands, is still a drop in the ocean and ignores the likely bigger number of pax flying on business fares, paid full Y and the like - most of whom have no idea (and don't care) about such things. I've sat in J cabins and seen used BP's in the pocket with no FF markings on them at all which implies either staff travel(but I suspect that may be marked NRSA or similar) OR a fully paid fare for someone/a company that doesn't care. Or witness the recent "Sunrise" episode where Kochie and the like claimed they had no idea you could credit to AA or seem to have any clue about the details of the FF scheme. Many don't care. Your weekly road warrior businessman flying MEL-SYD on full Y fares likely sees it as a chore and doesn't care.. company pays and she goes where she's sent. Obviously many DO and keep track, and some do extra for their own benefit (such as here) but I bet you the majority of QFF flyers are very "vanilla" in their earning and spend (eg: company sends you xyz, maybe a few family trips, redeem classic awards again for family, maybe a fee toasters). QF will have, and continue, to do the math on all of this and have a fair idea just how much various sectors of their customer base are both spending and what sort of revenue they are giving them.


Just some random thoughts. I had others but I forgot

again, enjoying the debate.

 

[JohnK]

I think a bunch of you are totally forgetting that mASAs came from Classic Award buckets. They were totally Inventory-Controlled.

QF received precisely the points currency that they wanted for those seats, and they received a higher co-pay in consideration of providing points and SCs for that redemption.

What you are saying Qantas were on a money spinner in any seat awards and prematurely terminated it?

Just out of interest what was the additional co-payment on an any seat award TSV-BNE-DRW over classic awards? Also how many did that earn? And when you do your calculations did you also take into consideration that any seat awards on that route were cheaper than the identical flights as a classic award?

Why did Qantas get rid of any seat awards when they were making a killing out of it?

 

[esseeeayeenn]

So as the abolition of MASAs JASAs and the rest of the alphabet soup, and the reduction in SC earn through "simpler and fairer", have their desired effect and reduce the number of people with high status, we should logically see the restoration of the full status benefits. Or at least, no further "enhancements" and none of this "platinum is the new gold" talk ...