Platinum "anytime" lounge Access ceases from 1 February 2011

[Robert K]

I think they should have a 'shower lounge' where there's just a row of showers to use when you arrive.

 

[pshepvic]

I might get caned for this, but personally I don't have a problem with the removal of anytime access.

Firstly, I'm never going to go to the airport just to use the lounge. It's not worth the half hour drive each way and $20 in petrol for a couple of free party pies and a beer.

Secondly, I think that it is absurd that anyone can go through airport security when they're not flying. Very few places in the world can you do that. The US you can't (unless you have a meeting booked in an airport lounge or something, where you have to get a special pass), everywhere in Europe I've been you can't, and in most of Asia you can't. By allowing people through, anyone (including people on the No Fly List) could use anyone elses boarding pass to get on a flight. It also causes un-necessary crowding in the terminals (and therefore lounges). If you want to meet someone at the airport or drop them off, do it outside of security and stop getting in everyone else's way.

Finally, in the event you are flying a different airline, why should QF give you access to their lounge when they're not getting any revenue for that flight? If you want lounge access, pay for it with the airline you are flying (whether by purchasing a single entry or a J/F fare), or buy a Priority Pass Membership. Expecting QF to give you access is ridiculous - it is the ultimate in wanting something for nothing.

As a quick comparison, many restaurants/businesses won't even let you use their toilet if you're not dining/spending money there, so why would QF give you access if you're not flying with them?! You should use the public toilets - ie. the departure lounge!

 

[dajop]

Since February this year, a WP has to be travelling to access a Qantas lounge.

Travelling = travelling on Qantas, oneworld or Jetstar.

 

[dajop]

Expecting QF to give you access is ridiculous - it is the ultimate in wanting something for nothing.

As a quick comparison, many restaurants/businesses won't even let you use their toilet if you're not dining/spending money there, so why would QF give you access if you're not flying with them?! You should use the public toilets - ie. the departure lounge!

You are overlooking the fact that to get that point (before) where anytime access was permitted you probably would have spent a significant sum of money on QF (or oneworld). To use your restaurant analogy, if you dined at the same restaurant twice a week, every week, there's a high probability the staff would know you as a good customer and let you in to use the toilets even if you weren't eating there that particular day.

 

[medhead]

, why should QF give you access to their lounge when they're not getting any revenue for that flight?

Easy answer. Because when you need to fly somewhere that qantas or partners don't service it is a good way for qantas to say to a platinum that they value all your other business. It tells the platinum that they don't need to get lounge access another way, but spending money with the competition, i.e. buy lounge access. Basically, it is a way to build loyalty.

In my case, I used ATA twice. Removal means I now check DJ flights every time and I have more than doubled my flying with DJ, even when qantas cost the same as DJ. So removal of the benefit has cost qantas, in order to save the cost of an English muffin, a pack of butter, vegemite and a machine coffee, on the rare occasions that I would have otherwise used DJ.

Oh and I'm flying more with DJ to maintain status, so removal of ATA has encouraged me to move my spend.

To use your restaurant analogy, if you dined at the same restaurant twice a week, every week, there's a high probability the staff would know you as a good customer and let you in to use the toilets even if you weren't eating there that particular day.

Twice a week for a year.....

 

[Danger]

I might get caned for this, but personally I don't have a problem with the removal of anytime access.

Firstly, I'm never going to go to the airport just to use the lounge. It's not worth the half hour drive each way and $20 in petrol for a couple of free party pies and a beer.

Secondly, I think that it is absurd that anyone can go through airport security when they're not flying. Very few places in the world can you do that. The US you can't (unless you have a meeting booked in an airport lounge or something, where you have to get a special pass), everywhere in Europe I've been you can't, and in most of Asia you can't. By allowing people through, anyone (including people on the No Fly List) could use anyone elses boarding pass to get on a flight. It also causes un-necessary crowding in the terminals (and therefore lounges). If you want to meet someone at the airport or drop them off, do it outside of security and stop getting in everyone else's way.

Finally, in the event you are flying a different airline, why should QF give you access to their lounge when they're not getting any revenue for that flight? If you want lounge access, pay for it with the airline you are flying (whether by purchasing a single entry or a J/F fare), or buy a Priority Pass Membership. Expecting QF to give you access is ridiculous - it is the ultimate in wanting something for nothing.

As a quick comparison, many restaurants/businesses won't even let you use their toilet if you're not dining/spending money there, so why would QF give you access if you're not flying with them?! You should use the public toilets - ie. the departure lounge!

I respect your opinion but would like to point out a couple of things, already covered in the 1600-odd posts on this thread (thankfully I've followed it from the start so I don't have to set aside an afternoon to read them all!):

1. Many people have argued that while they may not have used the anytime access benefit often, it was nonetheless a very distinguishing feature between Platinum and Gold. Removing it, many have argued, reduces the incentive to strive for top tier.
2. Many people have mentioned that there are occasions when (i) QF/JQ doesn't fly at a particular time necessary for the traveller and (ii) doesn't fly to a destination at all. Anytime access was due recognition of this. It was like QF saying 'We understand that we don't fly to back of Bourke but we understand you've flown the hard miles and shown your loyalty so while on this occasion we can't accommodate you on our aircraft, you're most welcome in our lounge'. In fact, I'm paraphrasing, but I think this wording is along the lines of how the benefit was outlined in the Platinum benefits brochure previously. Many smaller or regional airlines don't offer either lounges to begin with or day-passes if they do, nor premium cabins.

 

[pshepvic]

I didn't say it wouldn't build loyalty, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect to receive lounge access when you're not using their product. There's a big difference in those two statements. People are complaining about not getting something for free, and if you say that's going to change your loyalty then fine, vote with your feet. But don't whinge about it.

There are plenty of restaurants around where even if I went there twice a week, I wouldn't expect to be able to use their facilities if I wasn't dining there. If they offered it, then fine, but if they said no I wouldn't complain about it.

 

[dajop]

I didn't say it wouldn't build loyalty, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect to receive lounge access when you're not using their product. There's a big difference in those two statements. People are complaining about not getting something for free, and if you say that's going to change your loyalty then fine, vote with your feet. But don't whinge about it.

This is been done to death. It is irrelevant that people were getting something for free - that's not what it's all about - after all aren't award tickets/upgrades "getting something for free" as well - let's remove those as well, because why should people expect "something for free". People are so unrealistic to expect something for free. End of story.

What it is about is removing a benefit of loyalty that had been there for many years. And you are right, people should vote with their feet, which is what I did - I've had 10 status credits in the last 6 months (despite flying >80,000 miles). And if a restaurant I went to for twice a week for 9 years and always had let me in to use their toilets suddenly said "sorry sir you cannot use the toilets any more unless you dine here" then I would (apart from being shocked) try hard to find a suitable alternative and let them know why.

 

[nlagalle]

I didn't say it wouldn't build loyalty, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect to receive lounge access when you're not using their product. There's a big difference in those two statements. People are complaining about not getting something for free, and if you say that's going to change your loyalty then fine, vote with your feet. But don't whinge about it.

There are plenty of restaurants around where even if I went there twice a week, I wouldn't expect to be able to use their facilities if I wasn't dining there. If they offered it, then fine, but if they said no I wouldn't complain about it.

You'll find that people didn't use it because they wanted to fly another airline, more that they couldn't use QF or OW to get to where they were going. JohnK had some great examples.

My example was different all together. I used it serveral times to guest in family/friends that were travelling on QF as a bit of a pre flight treat. They are flying QF anyway.

I have also used it when a flight was delayed and had to wait around.

 

[pshepvic]

This is been done to death. It is irrelevant that people were getting something for free - that's not what it's all about - after all aren't award tickets/upgrades "getting something for free" as well - let's remove those as well, because why should people expect "something for free". People are so unrealistic to expect something for free. End of story.

What it is about is removing a benefit of loyalty that had been there for many years. And you are right, people should vote with their feet, which is what I did - I've had 10 status credits in the last 6 months (despite flying >80,000 miles). And if a restaurant I went to for twice a week for 9 years and always had let me in to use their toilets suddenly said "sorry sir you cannot use the toilets any more unless you dine here" then I would (apart from being shocked) try hard to find a suitable alternative and let them know why.

I think what's been done to death is all the complaining. It's nice to actually have some people agree with me (numerous likes, comments and PMs here and on the other thread with the complaining about QF), and probably many more out there. Same old story - when someone is happy, they tell 1 person, when they're unhappy they tell 10.

Have to disagree about "free" seats too - award tickets/upgrades are NOT free. They have been paid for with cold hard dollars. All the points you earn are either built into the price of the flights you paid for previously, or have been paid for by your credit card company through the merchant fees that have been paid for by the places you shop. Or whereever you earnt them. These seats are anything but free. That's one of the reasons LCCs are actually lower cost - they don't have to build the price of the points into the price.

 

[medhead]

I didn't say it wouldn't build loyalty, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect to receive lounge access when you're not using their product. There's a big difference in those two statements. People are complaining about not getting something for free, and if you say that's going to change your loyalty then fine, vote with your feet. But don't whinge about it.

There are plenty of restaurants around where even if I went there twice a week, I wouldn't expect to be able to use their facilities if I wasn't dining there. If they offered it, then fine, but if they said no I wouldn't complain about it.

• Yes this has been done to death. but the last few posts summarise the main arguments - might save someone reading 1600 posts.
• did not say anything about your views on building loyalty
• offered building loyalty as a reason why it is reasonable
• supported that with personal example of how removing ATA to not give the competition a free kick, has in fact given them a free kick
• platinum status is not free!!! The associated benefits are not free
• discussing how a change tends to reduce my loyalty in an effort to force more loyalty and considering how I will respond is not whinging
• IMO trying to shut down that discussion by accusations of whinging is a form of bullying

On the restaurant:

• your expectations about using restaurant facilities are not the same as what they are prepared to offer,
• I use to have lunch at a pub 3 or more times a week. On one occasion the glassy hassled one of us about riding a skateboard inside. The manager kicked out the glassy and apologised with a free round of drinks. Not expected, but that is how being a CL at that pub was rewarded.

 

[medhead]

Have to disagree about "free" seats too - award tickets/upgrades are NOT free. They have been paid for with cold hard dollars.

Then apply your standard consistently. Platinum benefits are not free and have been paid for with cold hard cash, as well.

 

[pshepvic]

Ok if everyone is voting with their feet so much, then I'll happily keep the lounges to myself.

And I didn't mention any specific names or accusations about who was whinging. I said people shouldn't whinge about it. If you have a valid argument, then more than happy for you to present it constructively. But that's not what has been happening with a large number of comments around here. Once again to be clear, I'm not directing that at anyone specific.

I still haven't really seen a genuine argument for why they SHOULD provide it. There are lots of complaints about losing it, and I understand that people might be disappointed about losing something they had before. Make a point and move on. If it hurts that much that you can't move on from the issue, then go to a different airline. If QF doesn't provide flights or times or destinations that suit, well then that's just tough. Once again, go to a different airline. But this constant attitude of anytime access being an entitlement is just wrong.

 

[pshepvic]

Then apply your standard consistently. Platinum benefits are not free and have been paid for with cold hard cash, as well.

And if QF decide that the amount paid does not match what they are providing, they have the right to change the program. Either they could increase fares to cover it (and to cover expansion of lounges due to the crowding) or they could remove something from the program. It pretty clearly states that program benefits may change from time to time.

 

[dajop]

Have to disagree about "free" seats too - award tickets/upgrades are NOT free. They have been paid for with cold hard dollars. All the points you earn are either built into the price of the flights you paid for previously, or have been paid for by your credit card company through the merchant fees that have been paid for by the places you shop. Or whereever you earnt them. These seats are anything but free. That's one of the reasons LCCs are actually lower cost - they don't have to build the price of the points into the price.

Same as other "free" benefits, such as lounges, priority luggage etc. All benefits - including the status benefits and award seats - have been paid for with cold hard dollars. To paraphrase - that's one of the reasons LCCs are actually lower cost - they don't have the "benefits of status" built into the price either.

 

[pshepvic]

Same as other "free" benefits, such as lounges, priority luggage etc. All benefits - including the status benefits and award seats - have been paid for with cold hard dollars. To paraphrase - that's one of the reasons LCCs are actually lower cost - they don't have the "benefits of status" built into the price either.

Totally agree. And if that means the cost to provide those services starts to exceed the revenue achieved, then something has to give.

 

[Robert K]

The number crunchers at Qantas probably worked out that pleasing the gold members would make them more money even if the WPs go somewhere else.

There's probably a lot more SGs then there are WPs

 

[dajop]

Totally agree. And if that means the cost to provide those services starts to exceed the revenue achieved, then something has to give.

Yes I agree too. But this wasn't really about the cost of providing those services, it was more about competition. And it really wasn't about providing a free kick to competitor(s) plural - as it happily coexisted with SQ, EK, NZ etc for years. It was about ensuring people do not use QF lounges when they fly the reinvigorated DJ/VA. "You're with us or against us". Which is sensible/logical, and brings QF into line with most (if not all other FF programmes).

But it is one less point of differentiation between Platinum and Gold, and between QF and other programs. Anyway just here for the sake of a good argument, as I indicated I have moved on from QF and really not that worried any more (plus time spent sitting around various domestic airports in Indonesia, Vietnam and Philippines over the last year and I've learnt that all you need is an i-something with headphones, a laptop or good book and a trivial amount of money and you can find a quiet corner in the airport and have a drink or two and pass away the time quite comfortably without airport lounges! ).

 

[medhead]

Ok if everyone is voting with their feet so much, then I'll happily keep the lounges to myself.

And I didn't mention any specific names or accusations about who was whinging. I said people shouldn't whinge about it. If you have a valid argument, then more than happy for you to present it constructively. But that's not what has been happening with a large number of comments around here. Once again to be clear, I'm not directing that at anyone specific.

I still haven't really seen a genuine argument for why they SHOULD provide it. There are lots of complaints about losing it, and I understand that people might be disappointed about losing something they had before. Make a point and move on. If it hurts that much that you can't move on from the issue, then go to a different airline. If QF doesn't provide flights or times or destinations that suit, well then that's just tough. Once again, go to a different airline. But this constant attitude of anytime access being an entitlement is just wrong.

I'm not going to bother to quote your multiple posts. Sorry. (genuinely)

I do hope you enjoy the lounge because I've seen no difference in the crowds.

Whether or not you labelled specific people as whingers, it is not a constructive post. That was good advice you provided - be constructive

This has all been discussed over the last 1600 posts. You seem to be the one who can't move on. Your points have been raised, lots of people have put in numbers. Just read the thread if you really feel the need to go on about it now, 7 months later

 

[Robert K]

(plus time spent sitting around various domestic airports in Indonesia, Vietnam and Philippines over the last year and I've learnt that all you need is an i-something with headphones, a laptop or good book and a trivial amount of money and you can find a quiet corner in the airport and have a drink or two and pass away the time quite comfortably without airport lounges! ).

EXACTLY! J lounges are really bit pointless. foods never that great and i don't drink alcohol. Always seem crowded, anyone can get in these days. Doesn't make you feel special. The only thing i find useful are the showers.