Is it legal to use air 'miles' in Australia?

[Melvin]

Hi, been a QFF member for years, and I remember one of their major restructuring programmes some years ago. What sticks in my mind was the fact that they went from awarding one point per km travelled to one point per mile travelled.

I've no idea what other airlines within Australia do, but I wonder if this is strictly legal? I mean, when metrication became compulsory in the 1970's, non-metric measures had to become illegal for official usage.

Let's not get confused, if something is 'described' in non-metric, like 6x4 inch photos or a 30 inch t.v., that is one thing, but it wouldn't be legal to sell something by the inch. Therefore you can call a pub 'The ten mile post' or something, but a mile couldn't be written into law for any official purpose.

So, I wonder if Qantas are allowed to use miles to work out how many points to award, or even officially say one point per mile etc.

What do others think?

Melvin

 

[straitman]

Hi, been a QFF member for years, and I remember one of their major restructuring programmes some years ago. What sticks in my mind was the fact that they went from awarding one point per km travelled to one point per mile travelled.

I've no idea what other airlines within Australia do, but I wonder if this is strictly legal? I mean, when metrication became compulsory in the 1970's, non-metric measures had to become illegal for official usage.

Let's not get confused, if something is 'described' in non-metric, like 6x4 inch photos or a 30 inch t.v., that is one thing, but it wouldn't be legal to sell something by the inch. Therefore you can call a pub 'The ten mile post' or something, but a mile couldn't be written into law for any official purpose.

So, I wonder if Qantas are allowed to use miles to work out how many points to award, or even officially say one point per mile etc.

What do others think?

Melvin

Melvin,

Remember that the primary unit of measurement for travel in aviation is the nautical mile which is 6080ft and also equals one minute of latitude on the earths surface.

Measurement of aircraft speed is in knots which is nautical miles per hour.

I would therefore expect that using the term 'miles' is quite acceptable.

 

[serfty]

... Remember that the primary unit of measurement for travel in aviation is the nautical mile which is 6080ft and also equals one minute of latitude on the earths surface.

Measurement of aircraft speed is in knots which is nautical miles per hour.

I would therefore expect that using the term 'miles' is quite acceptable.

Even though Qantas give 1 base point per Statute Mile (5,280 feet or 1,609.344 metres), I agree with straightman.

I guess to point is moot anyway; since if someone tried to make this an issue, QFF could simply amend to T&C's to award 0.62137119223733396961743418436332 QFF points per Km.

 

[NM]

Also note that at the time of, and several times since, adjusting the earning rate from 1 point per km to 1 point per mile flown, QF has adjusted the points value or burning rates, there is no continuing justification for complaints about reduced earning rate/value due to the change from km to miles.

I also believe Qantas has been very careful to retain the term "points" when referring to frequent flyer account balances, as opposed to using the term "miles" as used by many overseas airline's programs.

And straitman, don't give Qantas any suggestions on how to further "enhance"their program by adjusting the earning rate to nautical miles in stead of statute miles :shock:.

 

[straitman]

Also note that at the time of, and several times since, adjusting the earning rate from 1 point per km to 1 point per mile flown, QF has adjusted the points value or burning rates, there is no continuing justification for complaints about reduced earning rate/value due to the change from km to miles.

I also believe Qantas has been very careful to retain the term "points" when referring to frequent flyer account balances, as opposed to using the term "miles" as used by many overseas airline's programs.

And straitman, don't give Qantas any suggestions on how to further "enhance"their program by adjusting the earning rate to nautical miles in stead of statute miles :shock:.

NM,

I'm quite sure they have thought of that already without your or my help :!:

 

[NM]

NM,

I'm quite sure they have thought of that already without your or my help :!:

Yep. I guess so. At least they seem to have discounted the use of Light Years as a measure of flight distance :shock:

 

[Platy]

there is no continuing justification for complaints about reduced earning rate/value due to the change from km to miles.

NM, I must respecfully disagree since IMHO this is incorrect. In some cases burn rates came down (eg economy to London down to 120,000 pts) - but in most cases burn rates went UP as well as earning rates going DOWN so QF scr&w&d loyal frequent flyers at both ends of the equation. This was especially evident for domestic business class redemption rates. I did a thorough analysis of this at the time tabulating a suite of examples comparing before and after, which I mailed to the then GM of Customer Loyalty.

At the time of the changes QF used the excuse that they needed to bring the FF scheme into alignment with the BA scheme.

In reality, major changes became possible because of the demise of a certain other famous Aussie airline meant that the FF scheme no longer needed to be as "generous" for competitive purposes.

The revised scheme was very much geared so that you had to be Platinum, (or maybe Gold) NOT to be significantly worse off under the changes.

QF included one or two improved rates of value (eg the SYD-LHR in Y) so that they could hammer the same one or two positive examples through a gullible media and through their own marketing avenues (web site, leaflets etc).

Melvin, you must realise that QF and other airlines can and do change their FF schemes so it is not possible to assume that current definitions will prevail for any more than 6 months (the lead time for members to be advised of significant changes) into the future. So we must all make our choices accordingly!

 

[Dave Noble]

The terms and conditions state that they award 1 point for each 1.609 Kilometres flown. They are not awarding on miles, just happens that 1.609 Km is about a mile

I can't see how there can be anything illegal

Dave

 

[NM]

NM, I must respecfully disagree since IMHO this is incorrect. In some cases burn rates came down (eg economy to London down to 120,000 pts) - but in most cases burn rates went UP as well as earning rates going DOWN so QF scr&w&d loyal frequent flyers at both ends of the equation. This was especially evident for domestic business class redemption rates. I did a thorough analysis of this at the time tabulating a suite of examples comparing before and after, which I mailed to the then GM of Customer Loyalty.

The point I was trying to make is that there have been so many other adjustments (enhancements??) since the change from awarding 1 point per km to awarding 1 point per 1.609km that any change in the value of points as a result of that change is no longer relevant. The program earn and burn rates are revised from time to time and the km-?mile change was so far back in the change process that its no longer realistic to view that as a devaluation of points. There have been so many other changes since then that have affected the earn/burn rates of QF FF points. And each change seems to be bring both higher and lower values to the points depending on the specific methods of earning and the awards being redeemed.

With or without that change, in my opinion the QF earn/burn rates are among the worst of the major FF programs around the world. And I don't see that changing any time soon.

I don't know the facts, but would expect there are more QF FF points earned these days through credit card spending than through miles flown. Compared with FF members of programs in the USA, earning points per A$ spend is more attractive than earning points per US$ spend. So imagine if QF applied the same logic to credit card points as they did for standardising flying earning into miles :shock:. Now that would represent a devaluation of future points earning for a lot of people.

 

[Melvin]

Interesting stuff, I haven't lived in Australia since 2002, so there must have been lots of changes to the QFF programme since I left!

The last major changes (apart from the mile), was a 'one way equals return' policy that meant that if you flew (domestic at least) it would take the same amount of points to fly there whether you came back or not!

I think that must have changed now. I can't be sure, but I think that redemption flights used to be 'free', these days the tax amounts to half of the flight which means that QFF redemption flights are more or less a half-price flight.

Lastly, people seem to accept that for aviation, feet and miles are acceptable. If something were to be written into Australian law, it would have to be expressed in SI units to be official. Dave mentions that QF award one point per 1.609km flown which would indicate they are aware of this and although strictly following the letter of the law, it's not exactly in the spirit of things (by cheating with miles). I still think it's questionable using the term miles, especially for use within Australia as a unit of measurement....

Melvin

 

[trooper]

Imperial units "not allowed" for official use?

Well then.. don't tell anyone what the RAN does...

Knots and nautical miles are just the start of it......

Cables (200 yards) are a routine distance measurement.. fathoms for depth of course... chains (22 yards) for (anchor) cables.....

Shhhh....................:mrgreen:

 

[Skyring]

Yep. I guess so. At least they seem to have discounted the use of Light Years as a measure of flight distance :shock:

The official definition of One Light Year, according to Wikipedia - the encyclopaedia anyone can edit - is "a long way to walk in an afternoon".

Pete, handy in a trivia team

 

[Evan]

The official definition of One Light Year, according to Wikipedia - the encyclopaedia anyone can edit - is "a long way to walk in an afternoon".

Pete, handy in a trivia team

And if its after a big lunch in the pub with way to many beers you may not even realize you walked such a long way
E

 

[oz_mark]

The terms and conditions state that they award 1 point for each 1.609 Kilometres flown. They are not awarding on miles, just happens that 1.609 Km is about a mile

I can't see how there can be anything illegal

Dave

On the other hand, Status credits are based on zones defined in miles.

 

[Platy]

And each change seems to be bring both higher and lower values to the points depending on the specific methods of earning and the awards being redeemed..

Whilst I broadly agree with you, NM, I can't think of any "enhancements", which have increased the value of the QF FF for my personal travel profile. My perception is that all changes have been retrograde from the customer's point of view. I am hanging in there in the hope of reaching lifetime Gold before they remove it or incraese the qualification level. Once LTG all bets are off!

 

[Dave Noble]

Whilst I broadly agree with you, NM, I can't think of any "enhancements", which have increased the value of the QF FF for my personal travel profile. My perception is that all changes have been retrograde from the customer's point of view. I am hanging in there in the hope of reaching lifetime Gold before they remove it or incraese the qualification level. Once LTG all bets are off!

I do disagree that none of the changes has been good, though for you they may not have been

when they 1st switched from Km to Mi earning, the improvements I saw were
International Upgrades
Domestic upgrades from all fares rather than just the expensive ones
Upgrade credits earned at 1 per 250 SCs

Also, international upgrades were pretty decently priced. iirc, a J-F from UK-Australia cost 30,000 points ( or was it 25,000 )

Also, of course, managed to get a one off UK-Oz upgrade from discount economy - business for 6,250 points thanks to the way paper certificates were switched to upgrade credits

I didn't find the old Km reward table that good ( other than the tour australia in J for 37,500 points ) and found the new 5 zone system pretty decent

Also, iirc, it was at the same time that the number of points needed for top status dropped from 1700 SCs to 1400 which may have been a great benefit to some people and ,iirc, renewal dropped from 1400 to 1200

Also some Sc earnings increased; e.g. SYD-MEL in discount Y increased from 8 to 10

Another improvement ( though dont know if it was at the same time ) was K,H,B fares becoming eligable for full economy SCs

Subsequent changes to the QFF scheme all seem to have reduced its value

Dave

 

[NM]

Whilst I broadly agree with you, NM, I can't think of any "enhancements", which have increased the value of the QF FF for my personal travel profile. My perception is that all changes have been retrograde from the customer's point of view. I am hanging in there in the hope of reaching lifetime Gold before they remove it or incraese the qualification level. Once LTG all bets are off!

Each person's situation is different. I guess the benefits of any enhancements depend on the routes and fares you travel. Overall, I have found the enhancements to be negative, especially in terms of burn rate and the requirement of FF redemptions to pay fuel surcharges, which is why I have not earned a single QF FF point from flying or credit card spend for well over two years.

 

[medhead]

The national measurement act and regulations is a wonderful thing. while it would seem that a mile is not a legal unit of measurement. There doesn't seem to be anything that says miles can't be used. (But there could be an argument that the SC earn table based on miles, is against the Objects of the Act)

A conversion factor is given for miles to metre (the legal unit of measurement for length) which is 1 mile = 1609.344 m. So based on points being earned on 1.609 km QF are in fact giving 1 point for 0.344 m less than a mile.

Also nautical mile, inch and foot are all legal units of measurement.

 

[Platy]

I do disagree that none of the changes has been good, though for you they may not have been

when they 1st switched from Km to Mi earning, the improvements I saw were
International Upgrades
Domestic upgrades from all fares rather than just the expensive ones
Upgrade credits earned at 1 per 250 SCs

Also, international upgrades were pretty decently priced. iirc, a J-F from UK-Australia cost 30,000 points ( or was it 25,000 )

Also, of course, managed to get a one off UK-Oz upgrade from discount economy - business for 6,250 points thanks to the way paper certificates were switched to upgrade credits

I didn't find the old Km reward table that good ( other than the tour australia in J for 37,500 points ) and found the new 5 zone system pretty decent

Also, iirc, it was at the same time that the number of points needed for top status dropped from 1700 SCs to 1400 which may have been a great benefit to some people and ,iirc, renewal dropped from 1400 to 1200

Also some Sc earnings increased; e.g. SYD-MEL in discount Y increased from 8 to 10

Another improvement ( though dont know if it was at the same time ) was K,H,B fares becoming eligable for full economy SCs

Subsequent changes to the QFF scheme all seem to have reduced its value

Dave

Yes, Dave, you are entirely correct in the observation that the cost benefit analysis of any change depends on the individual. We are agreed that subsequent changes have seen a value reduction, which, IMHO, has set a worrying negative trend over a number of years without any sign of that trend being reversed.

 

[Platy]

Each person's situation is different. I guess the benefits of any enhancements depend on the routes and fares you travel. Overall, I have found the enhancements to be negative, especially in terms of burn rate and the requirement of FF redemptions to pay fuel surcharges, which is why I have not earned a single QF FF point from flying or credit card spend for well over two years.

Well that says it, really, doesn't it!