Yes, I see your point perfectly (I think so anyway!) and I don't think it's naive at all.
I see it a little differently myself.
From the perspective of the high tier member (WP or P1 let's say) you're going to broadly have two categories of members - those who are mostly doing it for work and aren't toally engaged, or those true road warrior P1's doing full fare triangle routes week in/week out and the last thing they want to see is another plane. I've also met Platinums who seriously had almost zero idea of the benefits of the status or what it meant (even lining up in Y queues for example). The other kind is the more engaged kind (and probably a member of a forum like AFF!) - who aim to get the most out of it, know many of the tips and tricks and their way around the system and have incentive to make that extra effort to keep the status (aside: I wonder how many P1's let alone Plats even know about the reward seat release request option?).
Now from the point of view of an engaged medium(gold) or top(Plat+) tier flyer then yes, your ideas work very well and would provide some incentive to move up (assuming that something like a seat release request - which I think can never be guaranteed for obvious reasons) is something that's desired).
Some thoughts though:
- what if reward seat release is not a primary feature desired by a passenger?
- what if it isn't enough for someone's requirements? If that Plat can have, for example, 2 of them - but they have a family of four they want to get seats for? Is that helpful or not? As a solo P1 though, it would be pretty sweet!
And here's the bigger one for me when I try and think of the bigger picture that isn't just about the "bubble" of higher tier members (and remember right now QF has a huge image issue they are trying to repair).
Say you're a Bronze or even Silver. You do a bit of flying, but not a huge amount. Where is the REAL incentive or positive change for you? It takes a lot of effort (even with DSC) and $$$ to attain Gold, Plat etc and many either can't do this, or simply don't have the need for all that flying or spend(even if they do). I'm thinking here of your VFF type flyer, every so often a visit to an aunt in Adelaidr, or take the family to the Gold Coast during school holidays (and hates the price increase that comes with it). The kind of pax who is far more price sensitive than loyalty minded? None of this gives them ANY incentive in my view.
In fact, even for less price sensitive and those willing to accrue a modest number of points, and possibly low status but with a goal to save up to "take the kids to...." OOL, Disneyland, Bali, whatever.... they're looking for ways to use those points they may have accrued over a number of years.
If I'm one of those types of customers and I see QF giving out all these perks to the elites - which is a goal I probably can't reasonably attain, then it just probably makes it look even more unfair, and that the airline thus doesn't care about their more casual flyers (which is likely a reality, but I'm talking about image).
Remember QF has what 15m members allegedly? the actual VAST VAST majority of these are not Golds and above.
Granted, the levels of engagement are far far less for the majority of those "members" (eg: my sister is a LTB who maybe flies every 18 months if that and I think has her woolies linked, but honestly would just as soon fly VA or JQ if cheaper - yet she's well aware of what engagement can bring as she knows all the travel I do).
Consider the various threads about how difficult it is for lower or no status folks to get access to the "better" reward seats when elites have traditionally had access 353 days out, vs 330 or whatever (I do realise that recently the reward release schedule has changed somewhat). While this has been good for the elites, it definitely makes it less useful for the non status members - and while for a few this may be incentive to move up the ranks (specially when a DSC comes along), the reality is that this is probably not very practical or desirable for most.
If QF is serious with any supposed changes that will please the members then they need to at least have the appearance of doing things for the majority of pax imo. Otherwise it means very little to most people, and the value proposition for these folks is even less, and that would drive them even further to lower cost options like VA, Rex, Bonza etc. The last thing they want to do, I would think, is make changes to reduce the usefulness (or at least the optics of it if not in fact) for the average punter.
@Rooflyer
- could you give a short summary of the key points please
