Lunch with Lesley

[zainman]

Qantas are a founding member of Oneworld. IMHO, they're very very very unlikely to depart it (where would they go? But that's a topic for a different thread..).

Founding member doesn't mean much now that they are punishing QFF members for flying OW. I agree that the discussion would be more suited to another thread though.

The changes are more likely designed to drive more revenue from partners. Remember, when you earn points or SC's on a Oneworld partner, QF are paid for it. Changing it is quite clearly designed to bring more cash into their coffers.

We all have our opinion as to why they have introduced these SC earn changes on OW, mine is that they are designed to push more traffic onto the QF/EK alliance. Sure it makes sense from a business perspective but not exactly in the spirit of the OW alliance that they are a "founding member" of. Anyway, that's just my opinion.


My questions to RedRoo were of a similar nature

 

[vitagen]

Wonder when winners will be announced? Need to plan for next Tues haha

 

[drron]

Qantas are a founding member of Oneworld. IMHO, they're very very very unlikely to depart it (where would they go? But that's a topic for a different thread..).

So was Canadian.

 

[drewbles]

So was Canadian.

Which merged with Air Canada, who were Star, so it's not really a valid comparison (when it's a merger, all bets are off).

 

[JohnK]

Founding member doesn't mean much now that they are punishing QFF members for flying OW. I agree that the discussion would be more suited to another thread though.

Punishing? Extremely harsh. Every FF program goes through changes. Jusk ask kpc if he was happy with SQ changes a few years ago?

And I am still trying to work out why you care! Don't you chase points? Manufactured spending? Is that what you call it? Churn credit cards for signon bonuses? It's not like you are losing anything out of your pocket? Is it?

 

[drron]

Which merged with Air Canada, who were Star, so it's not really a valid comparison (when it's a merger, all bets are off).

Being a founding member though does not mean it cant leave.
EK might not like them being a member of OW especially with QR being in OW.
I really don't think anything with QF is impossible.

 

[samh004]

Being a founding member though does not mean it cant leave.
EK might not like them being a member of OW especially with QR being in OW.
I really don't think anything with QF is impossible.

This isn't the thread for speculation, but if EK were to pressure QF to leave OW you'd think they might need to offer up something of value... like cash

 

[penegal]

It is a little disappointing to read so much cynicism regarding this event, although some of the tongue-in-cheek comments did get a laugh from me.


FWIW, I see this event as a type of focus group. The traditional focus group usually involves an incentive (cash payment) for the time participants give up. In this case the incentive is the opportunity to "meet important executives" and a free lunch. QF would have a loyalty marketing budget and this event would presumably fall under that budget. I don't see this event as being different from engaging a market research company to run a series of focus groups and report back the results. The difference here is that you are cutting out the middle-man.

Although "AFF" is a small subset of QF customers, we are generally highly-engaged customers and span across traditional customer segments (We have road warriors, business travellers, holiday-makers, students and SFSCs across a wide range of ages and socio-economic demographics). Established AFF members have great knowledge (and opinions) which they have gained from extensive personal experience, research, engagement with the brand, and "socialising" with other customers (including AFFers). I honestly believe that QF do learn a lot, and gain some real insight from what is said at these events. If QF are smart they will select a range of attendees with different questions, opinions and experience. And yes, it is a good PR exercise, although frankly this isn't really publicised at all outside AFF.


My only complaint about this event (and other such events) is the timing. The nature of my work (and regular travel) has made it difficult for me to confirm availability for this event and previous events.

Hopefully I will get along to one of these at some stage.

 

[JohnK]

It is a little disappointing to read so much cynicism regarding this event, although some of the tongue-in-cheek comments did get a laugh from me.

Totally agree.

Hopefully I will get along to one of these at some stage.

Ha!

 

[Pushka]

So now I can celebrity spot NP in HK?

 

[RooFlyer]

I can't believe some people are so negative about attending this lunch.
I wonder if they will also decline a visit to the F lounge or refuse to get a free upgrade on their next QF flight because it may impair the ability to criticise Qantas...
Hypocrisy anyone???

As possibly the original 'negative one', may I hazard a reply? I am grateful for mods to allow this free-swinging discussion. It IS about (most of our) favourite airline and how it interacts with its customers and what we thing about that. AFF shouldn't be just a fan club. I do think there should be a bit more humor when our debating gets heated, and I confess to poking fun at Qantas here but I am also happy to believe there are greater crimes.


The original issue I put forward was that it would be nice to have the responses by Lesley and her staff to questions put by attendees either transcribed (in suitable edited form) and posted here, or an audio file posted. I've seen no indication that that was favourably received by RedRoo (I may have missed a post, though), and coupled with some pretty strident opposing views from people here who were past attendees and apparently putting in for going again, that is a point of criticism of the event for me, and 'negativity'.


The second issue was whether or not, if Qantas really wanted feedback from AFFers and was responding to it, why Red Roo couldn't merely solicit 3 questions, from whoever wanted to participate, then put these to Lesley and her team and have the responses posted, obviously combining answers to similar questions. Exactly the same interaction would be achieved but with the advantages:

* All AFF would benefit from the knowledge, not just the lucky few attendees;
* Questions would be received from a far wider spread of AFFers (ie not just those who are able to be in or travel to Sydney that day);
* it would be cheaper for Qantas and, time wise, for attendees.
Again, I haven't seen any discussion here saying why that's a bad idea (again, apologies if I've missed a specific post) so I'm cynical about the 'nice lunch at Rockpool' concept.


The third issue is that I believe that having the session at Rockpool and a nice lunch, and other Qantas hospitality, it is 'managing' people and will inevitably influence the discourse. No, I've never been to such an event, and I don't doubt people do ask 'difficult' questions and Qantas gives considered, honest replies to these. But if you (I mean that generically) don't think there is a 'science' to managing unhappy customers, then I suggest you are fooling yourself. I am probably a bit older fashioned than most, but if I receive generous hospitality from some-one, I think it would be just rude to bite the hand that's feeding me. Others may not be so inhibited but I reckon Qantas knows this aspect pretty well. Another reason why I am cynical about this event.


The forth issue is the selection process. Qantas is paying, so they can choose how and who they like. But if they MUST have a nice lunch, how about asking for self nominations on who can attend EITHER 1) Lunch in Sydney on "this day" OR 2) Lunch in Melbourne on "this day" (both events will be held), then Red Roo picks attendees at random, but imposing a quota on say, status and geography, so that a NB from Perth has an equal chance of attending as a WP from Sydney. Will take a bit more selection (but not much) but its a much "fairer" selection process (to use a word de jour) and would produce a better spread of thoughtful, keen, appreciative attendees.


So, those are my reasons for being negative and cynical. I love to have my opinions asked. I love a nice lunch. I love that Qantas is interacting with the punters. But I believe there are a number of aspects of this current 'do' that cause legitimate cynicism and cause for negative comment.


Clearly there are 2 camps here (judging by 'likes' of the various proponents). Its not clear cut one-way-or-the-other. I do hope Red Roo (who, as I said upthread has ben gracious in the face of my cynicism) can take the comments on board, and if they can be bothered. Maybe even respond here.


Thank you to those who have read through this without putting a fist through the screen. "Please consider."


BTW Boomy, if you have gotten this far - honestly, yes, I would refuse a Flounge visit or an upgrade if I felt it would inhibit me expressing a view that the host may not appreciate. But I do confess to being a bit old fashioned. There are ways to obtain honest, forthright feedback from customers, and it needn't involve schmoozing people. Corporate schmoozing of clients is as old as business itself. Why do you think corporates schmooze customers? Isn't it to make the customer think nicely about the business rather than what's bad about the business?

 

[djfuzz]

I haven't trawled through the back and forth in this thread, but I'm honestly surprised that anyone has given the impression that there's any sort of confidentiality or exclusivity of the information discussed at these events. By way of example, I was fortunate enough to attend the last lunch and here are my notes following the discussion.

http://www.australianfrequentflyer....-bar-grill-lunch-qff-47980-35.html#post780100

As far as I can recall, it was pretty much open season on posting / tweeting what was being discussed, and putting additional questions to the panel. I also recalled that there was no holding back on the questions put to them either, and fair (if not perfect) responses to these.

The only one very informal request (mainly because it was only put quietly to some and filtered it's way through) was not to post photos of the Chairman's Lounge, which most of us adhered to out of respect for the privilege of being able to check it out - which they could just as easily leave out in the future, as it has nothing to do with the purpose of the session in the first place.

There may be a lot that we could be critical about QFF - but these sessions seem generally to be a fair exchange of views and insight, made available on reasonable terms to this particular community. The lunch is certainly far from 'free' and not exactly a cynical marketing exercise - and Qantas Loyalty must see the value in it as well by continuing to run them despite the significant public concerns raised in light of the recent changes.

 

[drron]

Totally agree Rooflyer.

With medicine this type of event was a regular occurrence in the past.It is now banned.And I bet all of you know why.


Personally I am disappointed with those who cant tolerate those who make negative comments in these threads.For heavens sake we are all different.It would be a very boring place if that were not so.And some of us are just bigger cynics than others.That is our cross to bear and I am happy in myself to accept that is the way I am.

 

[djfuzz]

Totally agree Rooflyer.

With medicine this type of event was a regular occurrence in the past.It is now banned.And I bet all of you know why.


Personally I am disappointed with those who cant tolerate those who make negative comments in these threads.For heavens sake we are all different.It would be a very boring place if that were not so.And some of us are just bigger cynics than others.That is our cross to bear and I am happy in myself to accept that is the way I am.

drron, I think it's important to make the distinction that people attending this forum aren't bring selected for their capacity to prescribe / sell / market Qantas product - dare I say that there are far more impactful and cost-effective ways to do that. I respect the fact that you're still cynical - honestly, had I not been to one I might feel the same. But I came away from that last session feeling like it was at least a genuine attempt to engage with the community and get some insight, and felt that our feedback was at least taken on boats to some extent. We can never exert enough commercial pressure to get the changes we'd really want, but we can at least try to make the current system slightly more geared to our preferences.

 

[samh004]

The original issue I put forward was that it would be nice to have the responses by Lesley and her staff to questions put by attendees either transcribed (in suitable edited form) and posted here, or an audio file posted. I've seen no indication that that was favourably received by RedRoo (I may have missed a post, though), and coupled with some pretty strident opposing views from people here who were past attendees and apparently putting in for going again, that is a point of criticism of the event for me, and 'negativity'.

In the past I believe (haven't fact checked as I'm lazy) they were opposed to sharing video publicly of them answering questions for some reason. Probably because they didn't want to accidentally get something wrong and the negativity of then backtracking on it, especially if caught on tape.

The second issue was whether or not, if Qantas really wanted feedback from AFFers and was responding to it, why Red Roo couldn't merely solicit 3 questions, from whoever wanted to participate, then put these to Lesley and her team and have the responses posted, obviously combining answers to similar questions. Exactly the same interaction would be achieved but with the advantages:

* All AFF would benefit from the knowledge, not just the lucky few attendees;
* Questions would be received from a far wider spread of AFFers (ie not just those who are able to be in or travel to Sydney that day);
* it would be cheaper for Qantas and, time wise, for attendees.

Again, I haven't seen any discussion here saying why that's a bad idea (again, apologies if I've missed a specific post) so I'm cynical about the 'nice lunch at Rockpool' concept.

It's a good idea, but barring how much it costs to put on the lunch, people like to win competitions, go places etc. There are many competitions available at any given time, such as "tell us in 25 words or less" that end with a free flight somewhere, should these be scrapped too and a forum opened for feedback with nothing to be gained by those submitting responses?

I agree it's an inconvenience that not everyone can get along to these... I haven't been able to attend for the past 3 years!

The third issue is that I believe that having the session at Rockpool and a nice lunch, and other Qantas hospitality, it is 'managing' people and will inevitably influence the discourse. No, I've never been to such an event, and I don't doubt people do ask 'difficult' questions and Qantas gives considered, honest replies to these. But if you (I mean that generically) don't think there is a 'science' to managing unhappy customers, then I suggest you are fooling yourself. I am probably a bit older fashioned than most, but if I receive generous hospitality from some-one, I think it would be just rude to bite the hand that's feeding me. Others may not be so inhibited but I reckon Qantas knows this aspect pretty well. Another reason why I am cynical about this event.

That's a good point, and I believe it would take a strong willed person, such as yourself, to be honest with them, despite them footing your bill. At the end of the day, they may want to influence the discourse... but they also want real feedback and to work with you. If you're not prepared to give that honesty because of the lunch, so be it. Some are though.

The forth issue is the selection process. Qantas is paying, so they can choose how and who they like. But if they MUST have a nice lunch, how about asking for self nominations on who can attend EITHER 1) Lunch in Sydney on "this day" OR 2) Lunch in Melbourne on "this day" (both events will be held), then Red Roo picks attendees at random, but imposing a quota on say, status and geography, so that a NB from Perth has an equal chance of attending as a WP from Sydney. Will take a bit more selection (but not much) but its a much "fairer" selection process (to use a word de jour) and would produce a better spread of thoughtful, keen, appreciative attendees.

I recall in the past there have been lower status members attending too. Is thewinchester still around? He was Silver the first time he went I think.

So, those are my reasons for being negative and cynical. I love to have my opinions asked. I love a nice lunch. I love that Qantas is interacting with the punters. But I believe there are a number of aspects of this current 'do' that cause legitimate cynicism and cause for negative comment.

Clearly there are 2 camps here (judging by 'likes' of the various proponents). Its not clear cut one-way-or-the-other. I do hope Red Roo (who, as I said upthread has ben gracious in the face of my cynicism) can take the comments on board, and if they can be bothered. Maybe even respond here.

Thank you to those who have read through this without putting a fist through the screen. "Please consider."

BTW Boomy, if you have gotten this far - honestly, yes, I would refuse a Flounge visit or an upgrade if I felt it would inhibit me expressing a view that the host may not appreciate. But I do confess to being a bit old fashioned. There are ways to obtain honest, forthright feedback from customers, and it needn't involve schmoozing people. Corporate schmoozing of clients is as old as business itself. Why do you think corporates schmooze customers? Isn't it to make the customer think nicely about the business rather than what's bad about the business?

I would raise to you the point that the level of negativity (that wasn't all you) last night got to the stage where it seemed if Qantas were paying attention to AFF, they'd likely give up and not bother anymore. This might please some in the sense they think QF shouldn't be offering free lunches, but ultimately it's the rest of AFF that loses out because of what would be a few bad apples. It's not just your view or my view, there's a real benefit in the level of interaction right now for everyone and it seems to be that some want to ruin this benefit for everyone.

If you can't be honest at the lunch, so be it, but there's certainly no reason to go on talking about it and continue being negative, all that results in is 100+ posts where people think the community here is cough, which isn't true. There's a great community, we have tons of fun at social gatherings, guesting strangers into lounges and trying to get the inside scoop on all the latest FFP developments.

 

[Pushka]

Having attended one of the RP lunches I don't feel in any way that QFF has bought or tried to buy, my loyalty. I've probably expressed my angst at Qantas over a few issues over the years and this hasn't changed since the last lunch.

I am far from status. I am a lowly silver. Although partner is WP but don't think he was at the time of selection. Maybe they just liked my questions?

And I haven't entered this one. I was having too much fun on a ship.

 

[dk4]

The third issue is that I believe that having the session at Rockpool and a nice lunch, and other Qantas hospitality, it is 'managing' people and will inevitably influence the discourse.

In the military they use a similar tactic called "embedding" to try and influence media reporting.

 

[JohnK]

With medicine this type of event was a regular occurrence in the past.It is now banned.And I bet all of you know why.

Not all of us know why!

 

[blackcat20]

I recall in the past there have been lower status members attending too. Is thewinchester still around? He was Silver the first time he went I think.

I was an NB last time I attended one of these.

 

[EmilyHoward]

I was first invited in Nov 11 when I was about to become a WP1. Missed out 2012 but invited 2013. Not sure what will happen this time, but I genuinely believe that Qantas want serious questions and surely they would not put this on if they weren't prepared for some flak!

EH