Potential changes to QF awards - amount of points and cash needed, & number of award seats released

[dsotm]

I would be cautious about what they tell you without seeing 'the fine print'.

A bit like the new AmEx 2-for-1 points structure which are "improvements" and "enhancements".

 

[Kangol]

Oh shoot sorry yes, you're right - conflated classic flight rewards and actual paid xONEx tickets. Have edited.

The 280k oneworld award is not a RTW either

 

[Saltywings]

The 280k oneworld award is not a RTW either

Now I'm confused.

 

[Pierre_a]

[

Justin23's post is why I have to respectfully disagree, Limewood. I can totally see the day when it's simply the Qantas Points Program and redeeming for flights is no longer the centrepiece. Until then, though, the program simply must reward frequent flyers, which is I why I'm not particularly pleased with the survey in the first post. I could probably stomach what's being survey but only if Golds and above receive more (i.e. preferential) access to FF seats. That could be by only making some seats available to those tiers or releasing award inventory one month earlier for the than other tiers (I think I'd prefer the former). As it stands, if I've understood the survey correctly, the potential up to ten times increase in flights (which, I agree, is pie in the sky) benefits everyone. What about rewarding those who epitomise the name of the progra?

I would argue that high value customers are rewarded; by virtue of higher earn rates according to status, by access to targeted offers, by access to lounges, by access to award inventory 50/60 days in advance of lower ranked members (297 now I think), by the ability to request the release of additional award seats.

Because Qantas program is such an important contributor to overall revenues they have to operate a program that, is perceived at least, to serve the needs of all its members. And, as others have noted above Qantas (or anyone else) can't run its business model without the mass market low value customers.

 

[Kangol]

Now I'm confused.

There is no requirement to go RTW in a particular order of continents with the 140/280/420k oneworld award.

It is purely on distance and using two OW airlines other than QF. You can go on QF but there is no requirement to.

This is a misunderstanding that has filtered through, well.. society.
See here:

Wiki - "oneworld" award (140K/280K/420K) Planning - The Definitive Thread

 

[evilbrian]

Presumably this increase in redemption cost will apply to partner awards? For example I would expect EK awards in premium cabins to increase in points cost by a corresponding amount. If this is the case we will see an increase in points cost for no corresponding increase in partner availability, assuming of course Qantas are unable to influence their partner to release more availability.

My personal redemption profile (bronze, traveling exclusively to Europe during school holidays) sees me unable to access Qantas premium cabins anyway. I have been able to successfully get my family of three to Europe and back in J on a number of trips now - but exclusively on partner airlines. The effect to me therefore is a simply an increase in points cost.

Of course, I may be wrong and partner cost and availability will remain the same. But I am skeptical.

In my experience, EK and QF awards prices haven't operated in synch in the past. For instance, in the time when there were 3 daily EK flights across the Tasman, you could purchase an F award to AKL using around 56K QF points, when it also cost 72K EK points. You have to remember that EK is a truly worldwide airline, while QF is nothing more than a regional player now, with the Kangaroo route thrown in. For the most part, I doubt that EK gives a rats cough as to how QF price their awards.

 

[GoldCanyon340]

Pretty sure the concorde was all business too when it was flying.

Not only was BA Concorde First Class but you booked into a separate selling class 'R'. The rumour was it stood for Royal, although I suggest that's apocryphal.

 

[Steve B]

For me this all comes down to trust, and I DON'T trust Qantas to do anything to benefit customers. As a family with two platinum members we have moved most of our business to other airlines. Old equipment, poor service and constant cuts to food and beverage in business class it's more like a budget carrier at a premium price. Improved FF benefits, I think not.

 

[Berlin]

Old equipment, poor service and constant cuts to food and beverage in business class it's more like a budget carrier at a premium price.

I simply disagree with that. With few exceptions, Qantas offers the best onboard service, food and drink selection of any Australian carrier. While far from perfect, Qantas is a pretty damn good airline compared to many other "Western" legacy carriers. And some benefits like the amazing Flounges in Sydney and Melbourne are second to none on a global scale.

Yes, Qantas is not perfect. But to claim it's a "budget carrier at a premium price" is total non-sense in my eyes.

On a side note: Am I the only one who finds it strange that there are so many "newbies" who seem to do nothing more than outright bashing Qantas for apparently being a bad airline?

 

[GoldCanyon340]

For me this all comes down to trust, and I DON'T trust Qantas to do anything to benefit customers

It's a pity you don't use the domestic lounges on departure and/or arrival, the QF and oneworld First Class lounges, the improved seat selection and superior allocation of award seats. But if you don't want to take advantage of the benefits QF gives to Platinum travellers then that's your choice.

 

[mannej]

For me this all comes down to trust, and I DON'T trust Qantas to do anything to benefit customers. As a family with two platinum members we have moved most of our business to other airlines. Old equipment, poor service and constant cuts to food and beverage in business class it's more like a budget carrier at a premium price. Improved FF benefits, I think not.

Playing devil's advocate, has the average age of the fleet not decreased in recent years considering the retirement of the 747/767's from the fleet?

 

[stm1sydney]

Qantas marketing dept at it again with promises of future improvements...

 

[trippin_the_rift]

Qantas marketing dept at it again with promises of future improvements...

There's a lot of smart folks at Qantas Loyalty. They're loyalty focused and genuinely want to invest in the members.

It's the finance heads we need to worry about.

 

[Daver6]

Qantas marketing dept at it again with promises of future improvements...

Or perhaps not.... Redundancies made at Qantas in marketing restructure - AdNews

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Not only was BA Concorde First Class but you booked into a separate selling class 'R'. The rumour was it stood for Royal, although I suggest that's apocryphal.

It was marketed, for a long time, as 'Supersonic Class' (all the time tables marked the cabin as such, and distinct from First Class on subsonic jets).

The 'R' designator possibly used as it was (still is?) a fairly unique booking code and not confused with codes widely in use my most airlines for first, business and economy classes (which take up a fair share of the alphabet).

For tax purposes Concorde was at the lowest, economy level, as it was single class (and the tax only attaches to cabins other than the lowest cabin on a plane... although I don't know if that still affects BA1 today?)

 

[amaroo]

[



I would argue that high value customers are rewarded; by virtue of higher earn rates according to status, by access to targeted offers, by access to lounges, by access to award inventory 50/60 days in advance of lower ranked members (297 now I think), by the ability to request the release of additional award seats.

Because Qantas program is such an important contributor to overall revenues they have to operate a program that, is perceived at least, to serve the needs of all its members. And, as others have noted above Qantas (or anyone else) can't run its business model without the mass market low value customers.

QFI is operating a long way away from the masses .... what's its market share these days <20% - 25% ??? Most comments on here are about redeeming long haul flights.... looks like QF know exactly what they are doing IMO.

 

[TripleB]

Not that I'm saying they're easy to spend, but I find 280k OWE RTW to be pretty damn easy to do, especially if you have a TA.

My problems are that (1) I need to find multiple seats on the same flight (2) I tend not to have too much flexibility on when I can fly and (3) I can't book 340 days in advance. The unholy trinity when it comes to using points really! So a few more seats might really make a difference to me.

Retired members of my family have been using my points for J class to Cairns... but then the midday Tuesday flights to/from leisure destinations are usually always available..

 

[Hvr]

Qantas marketing dept at it again with promises of future improvements...

Or perhaps not.... Redundancies made at Qantas in marketing restructure - AdNews

Maybe the redundancies are the improvements? Looks like their positions have been enhanced, Qantas style.

 

[drron]

It's a pity you don't use the domestic lounges on departure and/or arrival, the QF and oneworld First Class lounges, the improved seat selection and superior allocation of award seats. But if you don't want to take advantage of the benefits QF gives to Platinum travellers then that's your choice.

Except I do get to use QF domestic J lounges and QF and OW F lounges as I am still have OWE status without having to pay higher prices to fly on QFi flights.
And interesting mrsdrron as a QF WP has never had an op up on QF whereas I have when an AA EXP.And I have a much superior choice of award seats from AA and BA than the measly numbers on QFF.

 

[serfty]

For tax purposes Concorde was at the lowest, economy level, as it was single class (and the tax only attaches to cabins other than the lowest cabin on a plane... although I don't know if that still affects BA1 today?)

HM UK revenue have introduced seat pitch determinants into the equation; with over 40", BA1 is at the higher rate.