New baggage policy

[simongr]

I don't think Markis will mind me saying that he doesn't struggle to "get online"

Perhaps I could offer that while away on business, Markis now has to bring home an extra item - he now knows that it will cost him $12 irrespective of what it weighs (up to 23kg/32kg of course). Previously he would have turned up to the airport not knowing if it weighed 20kgs or 26kgs, where he would have had no options open except to pay the excess at $15 per kg.

I own a set of scales and know how much my luggage weighs. I have no interest in opting to pay extra for baggage- I will work to my limits. I don't fly LCCs because I do not want to pay for extras and a bunch of other reasons.

Giving me the option to pay to arrange my luggage how it works for you would not make me interested in flying on DJ int'l.

 

[greenfish]

Markis is just a little bit sad that there is now one less reason to fly Virgin over QF when he runs through those reasons with his non Virgin flying peers in the business community.

Agreed, particularly as the need to pay for baggage on saver fares already had Virgin at a slight disadvantage when compared to QF....

 

[darrend]

A few of you have commented that "this is a silly move, and while it won't affect me directly" ... "I don't check bags but...." - can we say, we have done our homework and found that there is a small part of the population that this will affect.

If it is only a small amount of the population this will affect and as you have stated the status members on the whole carry less baggage then why reduce the baggage allowance for status members. Why not enhance it, after all it is not used and the perceived benefit is worth a stack more than the reality of the lost benefit which this is.

For my part - and you can check on your system to confirm, I often travel with my partner, we are both Platinum and on typical flights we barely check-in 20kg between us. On one occasion we checked in just on 100kg but that was a camping holiday and we took the lot with us. Point being Virgin is in credit 1000's of kg just on the two of us. - based on entitlement we have not used and now it wants to bite the hands that feed it.

These enhancements are not helping VA's cause and any amount of rhetoric to the contrary is nothing more than hyped up sales parlance which is seen for the BS it is by those on this site.

 

[Virgin Australia]

Giving me the option to pay to arrange my luggage how it works for you would not make me interested in flying on DJ int'l.

These changes only apply to domestic and short-haul int, not long haul international.

 

[awilcockson]

Spin? what's that!
Using your example, previously you would have a third bag that weighs just 5kg? (as no bags can go over 32kgs - total 64+5=69kgs total)

Nope, previously I could have had 4 bags, each being 16 Kgs. Now I don't have that option, and instead I would have try and cram all that stuff into 2 x 32 Kg bags.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

If it is only a small amount of the population this will affect and as you have stated the status members on the whole carry less baggage then why reduce the baggage allowance for status members. Why not enhance it, after all it is not used and the perceived benefit is worth a stack more than the reality of the lost benefit which this is.

I was thinking the same thing. I note VA didn't quote and respond to the suggestion of luggage allowance banking! I can't speak for anyone except this little black duck, but 99% of my flying is NIL checked bags (actually nil carry on too, all I usually have is a folder), but for the occasional family holiday a bit of leniency would go a long way. EG.....had I booked that family ski holiday to ZQN, both Lisa and I both have our own skis and boots along with the very bulky, but light ski clothing (even the kids have that). So extra luggage pieces would be very handy. Maybe something like every 100SCs, a lounge guest pass and an extra 32kg/one piece baggage allowance!

 

[Moopere]

I was thinking the same thing. I note VA didn't quote and respond to the suggestion of luggage allowance banking!

Yes, heh. I suspect though thats its a slippery slope from that idea to one where smaller or lighter passengers will want a credit to be used against baggage because of their lighter build. ie; I might weight 50KG, but bring 10KG of extra baggage ... the next guy in line might weight 100KG but bring no luggage. I pay extra for my over weight luggage, he pays nothing.

I read an interesting comment in another thread. Perhaps we should head to a truly fair system, where you essentially pay for space and weight as freight does. Per cubic cm and per kg required for myself + baggage.

 

[darrend]

I read an interesting comment in another thread. Perhaps we should head to a truly fair system, where you essentially pay for space and weight as freight does. Per cubic cm and per kg required for myself + baggage.

The only difference between us and freight on LCC's (and Qantas) is that freight is carried on whereas we walk on. Pilots often speak of the "walk on freight". Let us try and preserve some dignity and at least pretend we are not freight to the airlines.

I guess the issue is weight incurs a real cost to transport and we need to cover that cost - hence the charges for freight. I can only imagine the uproar if airlines started charging some "more than adequate" individuals based on weight and "less than adequate" individuals based on a cubic measurement. But perhaps in this user pays society we live in the idea has merit.

 

[straitman]

Why not enhance it,

In the Qantas sense of the word it has been enhanced ;!:

The only difference between us and freight on LCC's (and Qantas) is that freight is carried on whereas we walk on. Pilots often speak of the "walk on freight". Let us try and preserve some dignity and at least pretend we are not freight to the airlines.

The term is actually 'self loading freight'

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Yes, heh. I suspect though thats its a slippery slope from that idea to one where smaller or lighter passengers will want a credit to be used against baggage because of their lighter build. ie; I might weight 50KG, but bring 10KG of extra baggage ... the next guy in line might weight 100KG but bring no luggage. I pay extra for my over weight luggage, he pays nothing.

One minor (major?) difference there.......luggage can't file a discrimination action. Some people are petite, some huge........ Dj can't discriminate against either of them.

 

[darrend]

In the Qantas sense of the word it has been enhanced ;!:

The term is actually 'self loading freight'

Self loading freight it is - you are most correct.

 

[dandandan]

I was thinking the same thing. I note VA didn't quote and respond to the suggestion of luggage allowance banking! I can't speak for anyone except this little black duck, but 99% of my flying is NIL checked bags (actually nil carry on too, all I usually have is a folder), but for the occasional family holiday a bit of leniency would go a long way. EG.....had I booked that family ski holiday to ZQN, both Lisa and I both have our own skis and boots along with the very bulky, but light ski clothing (even the kids have that). So extra luggage pieces would be very handy. Maybe something like every 100SCs, a lounge guest pass and an extra 32kg/one piece baggage allowance!

I agree with some sort of policy along those lines. If the focus group research showed that the frequent flyers, most likely higher status members as well (did anyone here participate in the focus group? seems not) actually fly with less baggage than most, then why would they not be rewarded with an exception to the rule for say up to 4-6 times a year you can take double the bags you are allowed in your weight allowance, give or take depending on status level. Silver 2, Gold 4 and Plat 6 times for example.

 

[dandandan]

Actually I suppose that will probably be a waste of time and money to set up a system to monitor that since frequent flyer and higher status members fly with less baggage than most. What is less baggage than most?

Maybe this change has been to enhance check in times, why would you try and alienate a Business paying customer at check in saying sorry please pay us more to check that 3rd bag even though your bags fit inside your weight allocation. I don't think this is JB's best sign off.

This really does not affect me but it is sort of a dud change, I can understand if you go over your weight allocation.

 

[greenfish]

Just pondering the change, and it strikes me as a bit pointlessly mean for status pax.

I'll probably do more than 50 (mostly flexi) flights with Virgin this year, and will not check luggage on any of them. Now, I'll have to pay for baggage for my (saver) leisure flights with the kids where previously the 69Kg was more than sufficient to cover 4 checked bags.

 

[dandandan]

Exactly for those few times a year I might need the 3rd bag, possibly Xmas, extended holiday it seems stupid having to pay for an extra bag if I fit inside my baggage weight allocation.

 

[dfcatch]

A few comments (sorry can't multi quote on the iPhone).

(OT - why do redeyes always seem like a great idea on the itinerary......).

1/ I'm not worse off as I have no moral objection to 32kg bags.

2/ It's rubbish to suggest it's too heavy. Trust me - it's not. And I've watched the luggage handlers in Australia and overseas toss my 32kg bags around with the same lack of care and vertical projection as the umbrella loading next to it.

3/ So Markis (it could be anyone - sorry for picking on you) previously checked 1 x 20 kg, 1 x 15 kg and at the last minute had to take 1 x 5 kg.

Seems to me Markis only has to place the 5kg item into one of his existing bags. If this happens regularly - perhaps he should purchase a slightly larger bag to accommodate such occurrences.

FWIW - I arrived here in LOTFAP with 1 x 23kg bag checked in (I'm learning to travel lighter). It was my Antler Zero INSIDE a larger bag to give me flexibility in case my credit card gets lost at the mall.

4/ Whilst the concept of checked baggage charges is responsible for problems with cabin baggage - I don't concur that QF's last bout of changes caused big dramas in that area.

The mentality caused by DJ and JQ in having baggage charges period - that's was caused a change in mentality in the traveling public in Australia.

QF used to allow everyone to have 1 x 32kg bag. QP/status received additional bags.

I spent many years traveling domestically using my QP allowance of 2 x 32 kgs (as did many of you).

Then QF went to the weight system and required you to sell your children to cover the 2 kgs over in excess fees.

Then they changed back to the piece system 18 months back (albeit more restrictive than it originally was).

Let's not forget that this site almost universally advocates for HLO - so let's pause before we complain about the riff raff carrying on bags. Maybe we should practice what we preach.

For the record - DJ needs to drop baggage charges and provide 1 x bag free to ALL pax. Otherwise they're just another LCC.

5/ Simon - I'm not suggesting you don't leverage your allowance when traveling with family. But when you travel on QF you don't check in everything and have your family members check nothing.... They check their one bag each and you check the extras with your allowance (or something like that).

In the discussion above - the complaint was that the FF allowance was no longer high enough to check the kitchen sink without the travel buddy actually having to check a bag. Unreasonable complaint IMHO.

6/ The DJ platinum allowance is the same now as the QP allowance was 10 years ago (and equal to the current WP allowance) - you're all used to it, have done it a million times. It's NOT the end of the world, it's not difficult to do.

7/ It is a true QF-style "enhancement" and I suspect this is really what we're all getting excited about.

But in fairness - the FF allowance was exceptionally generous and I don't think it's unreasonable that it got mildly enhanced.

So whilst it is a reduction in flexibility - no doubt - let's keep the criticism in perspective.

Otherwise we all just come across as a bunch of whiners that an incredibly generous allowance has been reigned in.



PS. I do recognize that some feel they will incur a tangible loss here (rather than just a benefit "enhancement"), but let's keep perspective and hold the energy for when DJ truly do need a clip over the ears.

 

[serfty]

I'm sure the focus groups came up with a close enough envisagement to what the bean counters wanted. Even if they did not directly, the coordinator summarising the results would have come to 'correct' conclusion.

 

[markis10]

Try putting the average pull up banner into most suitcases ( its the most common thing I get asked to carry at last minute), it rarely fits, yes I can repack to a point, but my point is business travelers are going to be hit by this, the very market DJ are trying to attract. And what about musicians, QF have just relented.....

 

[dfcatch]

Try putting the average pull up banner into most suitcases ( its the most common thing I get asked to carry at last minute), it rarely fits, yes I can repack to a point, but my point is business travelers are going to be hit by this, the very market DJ are trying to attract. And what about musicians, QF have just relented.....

How do u deal with the pull up banner on QF?

Musicians - same as any specialist/sporting allowance - there should be one.

 

[markis10]

How do u deal with the pull up banner on QF?

Musicians - same as any specialist/sporting allowance - there should be one.

Very simply, until today I flew DJ because I knew that I did not have to worry about pieces, only weight, in future, it's carry on I suspect.