Possible lounge overcrowding remedy

[FrustratedQP]

Okay putting on helmet and awaiting incoming.


There seems to be a problem with overcrowding in the various lounges, requiring in most cases, major infrastructure changes. There is also a lot of criticism regarding the wearing of fluorescent and/or dirty clothing usually, but not always, worn by FIFO workers.


If Qantas where to allow companies to collect points instead of individuals (and not allocate SC's to pax) companies would benefit by spending less and Qantas would reduce their need to regularly build bigger lounges because there would be less SG's & WP's.


Obviously the purchaser of the ticket, if a company, could decide whether they elected to keep the points or allow the employee to retain the current benefits.


If Virgin did not follow suit, most companies would fly exclusively with Qantas for the overall savings. Qantas would keep those customer who pay with their own money because nothing would change for them other than less crowded lounges.


I don't believe that Qantas would lose money as a result of companies ensuring that they combine and use all of their points verses points not being used by individuals as most QFF members are more educated in this day and age and use them to their best advantage.


I would then suggest that instead of First and Business/QP lounges, they could be changed to a First/Business lounge and a Status only lounge.


Why shouldn't those who pay reap the rewards?


FQP

 

[nlagalle]

So what about paid Qantas Club membership? Ditch that too?

 

[Blinky]

But company flyers pay too - at least I do. The points and lounge access so towards (but do not fully compensate for) the 4.30am alarms and 8pm arrivals home, which is the lot of most business flyers I know.

 

[simongr]

Similarly if they gave paid QP members the flick the lounge would be less crowded for the highly profitable flouro brigade.

 

[opusman]

Yes the answer to all our problems is to make sure everyone who's not me is excluded from the lounges, why didn't I think of this before!

 

[medhead]

I'm not even going to get involved in this other than to say you're all wrong.

And that is about the most useful contribution that this thread can illicit, IMO


Sent from the Throne

 

[spentan]

Bahaha, I'm fine with this as I'm a self-made WP (Personal flying only).

But yeah I think that this is not a great idea, as someone above said, the points/SCs (only SCs for me as I travel as part of the WoAG Arrangements), are a bit of compensation for the early starts/late finishes.

 

[EuroFlyer]

If you travel every week for work (as I do now) having lounge access during this travel and when you travel for personal reasons is a small compensation for the early rises and late arrivals home. If a airline was to do this then simply put people would buy lounge access and expenses it back to the company anyways, that's what i would do at least.

 

[Joshua]

Easy answer for me is as a self funded, just travel outside peak hours and you avoid the bulk of the poor sobs shuffling for work. I infrequently witness crowded lounges, there is seldom a person sat next to me (J or Y) and if you are going discount Y it is probably cheaper. Really not rocket science, just like any public transport system avoid the peak/rush hours if you can.

 

[harvyk]

The answer for lounge overcrowding is simple, QF should build bigger lounges...

Lounge access is one of those things, you've either been loyal to QF (or OW), or you've pay specifically for access, and let's face it, the number of people who will pay $670 to enter the lounge only twice a year would be very small, which again means that paid QP members are loyal customers.

Removing a benefit which a person already has and has gained through brand loyalty is a very good way of losing customers, as QF found out with the no J check-in for PS debacle a year or so ago.

 

[ajw373]

If Qantas where to allow companies to collect points instead of individuals (and not allocate SC's to pax) companies would benefit by spending less and Qantas would reduce their need to regularly build bigger lounges because there would be less SG's & WP's.

Qantas already does something like this for federal gov (Pollies excepted of course). Public servants don't get points, the government is meant to get cheaper rates as a result, though they still get status credits, so wouldn't help with your grand plan. Now having said that though these people are still flying and are still earning so why shouldn't they get access?

If you really do want to crack down then the easiest and fairest way is to make qualification harder. I've said this in other threads, but the qualification is now not as 'exclusive' as it once was and that is the reason why many of the 'benifits' seem to be erroding and why new levels such as P1 now exist. So that is the 'core' problem.

 

[nlagalle]

There is also the point that many more people are traveling now than ever before, so naturally more people will gain status. Hence the need for larger lounges.

 

[harvyk]

There is also the point that many more people are traveling now than ever before, so naturally more people will gain status. Hence the need for larger lounges.

All you need to do is look at how cheap flying has become... It's now cheaper for me as a solo person to fly from CBR-SYD vv than drive. 10 to 15 years ago that same flight would have cost several times the cost of the petrol for the car, these days by the time you factor in petrol and parking, it's not until you start getting a larger group together that driving again becomes cheaper.

 

[RooFlyer]

Very dim and distant memory, but isn't a reason that FF benefits (points) were designed to accrue to the pax rather than the entity paying, because of some tax issue? That is, if the benefit accrues to a company, the company being all responsible would declare the benefit in its tax assessment? If accruing to the pax, then its their issue. Obviously the government can 'go around' the tax issue, so it grabs the points rather than the public servants.

But as I said, its just a distant memory, from the Ansett Golden Wing days.

 

[nlagalle]

Very dim and distant memory, but isn't a reason that FF benefits (points) were designed to accrue to the pax rather than the entity paying, because of some tax issue? That is, if the benefit accrues to a company, the company being all responsible would declare the benefit in its tax assessment? If accruing to the pax, then its their issue. Obviously the government can 'go around' the tax issue, so it grabs the points rather than the public servants.

But as I said, its just a distant memory, from the Ansett Golden Wing days.

Yes there are/were potential taxation issues so it's been left alone for a long time. The government doesn't collect any points either, just the fares don't acrue any points, only SC's.

 

[ajw373]

Very dim and distant memory, but isn't a reason that FF benefits (points) were designed to accrue to the pax rather than the entity paying, because of some tax issue? That is, if the benefit accrues to a company, the company being all responsible would declare the benefit in its tax assessment? If accruing to the pax, then its their issue. Obviously the government can 'go around' the tax issue, so it grabs the points rather than the public servants.

But as I said, its just a distant memory, from the Ansett Golden Wing days.

Actually it is the otherway around. If an employee uses points from work travel for personal travel then in theory the company that paid for the travel where these points where earned has provided a fringe benifit. How the tax office proves this is another issue. If the company were to reveived and use the points then there would be no issue, likewise at present an employee using company earned points for company travel isn't an issue. As for the government, the government is actually subject to the same fringe benifit laws so cannot get around the laws as you put it. Having a zero earn is their way of avoiding possible FBT issues and stops public servants accuring official points.

 

[richie9x]

Where are lounges overcrowded? The only ones I am aware of are Perth domestic and Singapore. By the sounds of it Perth is being expanded. For Singapore once the construction and LHR flights going via Dubai will see things change. Of course some lounge get crowded during disruptions but that is to be expected and relatively rare.

 

[simongr]

Where are lounges overcrowded? The only ones I am aware of are Perth domestic and Singapore. By the sounds of it Perth is being expanded. For Singapore once the construction and LHR flights going via Dubai will see things change. Of course some lounge get crowded during disruptions but that is to be expected and relatively rare.

I know I sit in the J lounge so maybe I am shielded from over crowding but I dont experience overcrowding except when there is irregular ops (like when MEL gets closed due to itty bitty storms) - obviously SIN and PER are exceptions to this and I rarely go to either location.

 

[dk4]

The answer for lounge overcrowding is simple, QF should build bigger lounges...

With the old QF CBR terminal being the prime example/best case study: With a QP, JL & CL, the amount of floor space & seating that QF devoted to lounges (at its half of the old CBR terminal) far exceeded the amount of space in the general gate area - presumably commensurate with the number of people flying out of CBR with some sort of lounge access.

 

[medhead]

Where are lounges overcrowded? .

During peak times SYD T3 can be crowded and T2 I believe. BNE J lounge. BNE QP has been hard to get a seat. MEL QP.

SYD T3 J lounge is pretty good except during irrops.


Oops just broke my self imposed ban on this thread.