Qantas Award Charges Outrageous

[travelislife]

We go together so above turns us right off... like 2.5k for two plus 560K points in J, no bloody way would we pay this anymore. So while Q rack up M$ in profits we keep getting the raw prawn, anyway you look at it its wrong.

Well I can't afford (nor would pay) $10,000+ each for a business class around the world ticket. I am happy to pay 2.5k every couple of years to go around the world in J. Essentially we got $17,500 value out of our 560k points so just over 3 cents per point if I have done the calculation correct. The way I look at points is it allows me to travel in the pointy end for the price of an economy ticket, I am happy with that.

 

[JohnK]

Still, I agree that we are being overcharged, but hey, QF is profitable. Why would they choose to be less profitable when they can get the once a year flyer to spend hundreds of thousands of points on Y redemptions with $600 co-pays?

Profitable but at what cost? What happens when oil prices rise again? Increase fuel surcharges more?

As a frequent flyer I am very disappointed with Qantas. It was only recently they decreased minimum earn on domestic flights from 1,000 points to 800 points plus a whole lot of changes on international flights. At the same time fuel surcharges increased to the level they are now and there is no relief in sight.

I have been slowly moving points earn away from Qantas to Virgin, AAdvantage, KrisFlyer and recently MileagePlus. That can't be good for Qantas.

 

[Limewood]

Looks like Alan is really not all that concerned about our plight - PALM BEACH

He's probably too busy to help us out of this problem, down at KMart choosing furniture

 

[trixydoza]

Well I can't afford (nor would pay) $10,000+ each for a business class around the world ticket. I am happy to pay 2.5k every couple of years to go around the world in J. Essentially we got $17,500 value out of our 560k points so just over 3 cents per point if I have done the calculation correct. The way I look at points is it allows me to travel in the pointy end for the price of an economy ticket, I am happy with that.

Couldn't agree more. (Well, I disagree slightly with the valuation if you would never pay the full price, but still...)

I don't think there's any realistic prospect of Qantas suddenly taking an award that costs (say) 72,000 points + $500, and making it 72,000 points only. We will just have the stealth devaluation achieved via fuel fines replaced with a more explicit devaluation where that same award costs considerably more points. And I would rather have the ability to pay a portion in cash, as I already have that in the bank. Generating additional points at short notice is not as easy.

 

[medhead]

We have also had the stealth devaluation where earning zones have been adjusted to longer distances, with lower minimum points, but redemption zones have remained the same

 

[trixydoza]

And those of you whining about costs might like to take up this opportunity to combine the "outrageous" charges with a two-thirds point discount:

http://www.australianfrequentflyer....onfused-about-prices-points-amount-74257.html

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The government has no place meddling in consumer frequent flyer programs. If you don't like the terms and offer as presented, you are welcome to leave the programme. You will also find the award co-pay is not just fuel surcharges, there are other service fees in there as well which allow them to get away with it.

Still, I agree that we are being overcharged, but hey, QF is profitable. Why would they choose to be less profitable when they can get the once a year flyer to spend hundreds of thousands of points on Y redemptions with $600 co-pays?

i would argue the government has just as much place to regulate frequent flyer programs as it does any other product offering.

if an airline increases costs under the guise of higher fuel, but then fails to lower those prices when fuel drops, why shouldn't the government investigate? have consumers been misled? is there a case to answer regarding conduct? (I don't have a firm view, but those could be starting points for an investigation).

government do get involved overseas... fuel surcharges aren't allowed in Brazil, and are regulated in Hong Kong. while not directly related to FF programs, those bans have follow-on effects on FF programs.

 

[Limewood]

And those of you whining about costs might like to take up this opportunity to combine the "outrageous" charges with a two-thirds point discount:

http://www.australianfrequentflyer....onfused-about-prices-points-amount-74257.html

From what I see to ASIA is not to bad for the QF award charges but try OZ to USA in J, different story.

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

i would argue the government has just as much place to regulate frequent flyer programs as it does any other product offering.

if an airline increases costs under the guise of higher fuel, but then fails to lower those prices when fuel drops, why shouldn't the government investigate? have consumers been misled? is there a case to answer regarding conduct? (I don't have a firm view, but those could be starting points for an investigation).

government do get involved overseas... fuel surcharges aren't allowed in Brazil, and are regulated in Hong Kong. while not directly related to FF programs, those bans have follow-on effects on FF programs.

Consumers haven't been misled as the terms of the program state they can change it at anytime they like to anything they see fit. Not saying that's right, but that's how it is.

I don't believe they call the co-pay on awards a "fuel surcharge", they call it "taxes and charges". Taxes are one thing but "charges" is wide open to interpretation. Carrier "charges" are really just a smokescreen for an additional fare and can be imposed for whatever reason whenever they like.

The consumer has a choice. They can redeem their points for toasters if they like. Or leave the program. QF don't seem to care. In fact I'm sure they make much more on toaster redemptions than they do on flights.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Consumers haven't been misled as the terms of the program state they can change it at anytime they like to anything they see fit. Not saying that's right, but that's how it is.

I don't believe they call the co-pay on awards a "fuel surcharge", they call it "taxes and charges". Taxes are one thing but "charges" is wide open to interpretation. Carrier "charges" are really just a smokescreen for an additional fare and can be imposed for whatever reason whenever they like.

The consumer has a choice. They can redeem their points for toasters if they like. Or leave the program. QF don't seem to care. In fact I'm sure they make much more on toaster redemptions than they do on flights.

Just because terms and conditions state something doesn't mean those terms and conditions are valid. Terms and conditions allowing unrestricted change at any time may be subject to challenge.

When the 'charges' were introduced it was made clear they were in response to the rising cost of fuel. That was explained to us in emails and appeared in the media.

I wouldn't think it is unreasonable to have drawn a conclusion that the charges were temporary in nature for as long as the fuel issue remained. That's now gone.

 

[travelislife]

Couldn't agree more. (Well, I disagree slightly with the valuation if you would never pay the full price, but still...)

Yea I agree with your valuation comment. In reality my valuation is not a $$ cost but intangible in the comfort side of things. I.e. I would be doing the trip anyway and it would be in economy if paid for with 100% cash, but points generally let me do it up the front for the same cost.

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

Just because terms and conditions state something doesn't mean those terms and conditions are valid. Terms and conditions allowing unrestricted change at any time may be subject to challenge.

When the 'charges' were introduced it was made clear they were in response to the rising cost of fuel. That was explained to us in emails and appeared in the media.

I wouldn't think it is unreasonable to have drawn a conclusion that the charges were temporary in nature for as long as the fuel issue remained. That's now gone.

Do please challenge the terms and conditions in a court of law and let us know how you go.

Suggesting a loyalty program is subject to consumer law is a bit of a stretch IMHO. It is a voluntary opt-in program. You can opt out at any time. Points do not have a fixed cost or value.

I agree that the fuel charges are excessive but you only inferred they were temporary. I'm not sure QF said as such at the time but they've been around so long I've probably forgotten if they did.

I'm really struggling to understand what coughing and moaning on this thread is going to do to the frequent flyer cash co-payment, which, as discussed, is a taxes and charges component, not necessarily any link to the fuel surcharges.

 

[trixydoza]

Do please challenge the terms and conditions in a court of law and let us know how you go.

Suggesting a loyalty program is subject to consumer law is a bit of a stretch IMHO. It is a voluntary opt-in program. You can opt out at any time. Points do not have a fixed cost or value.

I agree that the fuel charges are excessive but you only inferred they were temporary. I'm not sure QF said as such at the time but they've been around so long I've probably forgotten if they did.

I'm really struggling to understand what coughing and moaning on this thread is going to do to the frequent flyer cash co-payment, which, as discussed, is a taxes and charges component, not necessarily any link to the fuel surcharges.

Because too much common sense is never enough.

People believing Qantas spin is hardly a problem for Qantas.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Do please challenge the terms and conditions in a court of law and let us know how you go.

Suggesting a loyalty program is subject to consumer law is a bit of a stretch IMHO. It is a voluntary opt-in program. You can opt out at any time. Points do not have a fixed cost or value.

I agree that the fuel charges are excessive but you only inferred they were temporary. I'm not sure QF said as such at the time but they've been around so long I've probably forgotten if they did.

Fuel surcharges were temporary. That's what they were 'sold' to us as. The passage of time, and that people might have forgotten, is not really relevant.

Airline FF programs, just as any other consumer product, are subject to any applicable laws. The terms and conditions state that.

points may not have a 'fixed' cost of value, but they do have a value. And the passenger/program member has paid for those points either through flying or other spending in the program.

Consumer protection laws apply even if you don't have any skin in the game. We can complain, for example, about false advertising, or component pricing even if we don't buy a product. Even with the ability to 'opt out' we can still challenge terms and conditions - the 'penalty' clauses for credit card late payment is an example. The consumer can easily avoid the charge (by paying on time), they can cancel their card at any time, but that doesn't mean the clause itself is immune for challenge.

Most companies go to great lengths to keep these issues out of court, and for very good reason.

 

[Limewood]

Well yes, fuel surcharges were temporary and still we award wanters are wacked from every direction in regard to these so called fees. as Alan said we are a World Class Airline but left out we hit our award flyers like no tomorrow.

 

[travelislife]

Well I dunno if I stumbled across a sweet spot today. Just booked BKK-NGO-CTS business class on JAL using 53,000 QF points per person and only $37.20 in taxes fees and charges! Unheard of!

 

[awkwardpaws]

Well I dunno if I stumbled across a sweet spot today. Just booked BKK-NGO-CTS business class on JAL using 53,000 QF points per person and only $37.20 in taxes fees and charges! Unheard of!

Good job! Agree - I find the way to pay lesser taxes when using QFF is to book on partner airlines, like CX etc

 

[madrooster]

Well I dunno if I stumbled across a sweet spot today. Just booked BKK-NGO-CTS business class on JAL using 53,000 QF points per person and only $37.20 in taxes fees and charges! Unheard of!

JL has zero YQ. That's why.

 

[Deleted member]

What better value? 300,000 QFF points for 2 people to fly the same route in business? That's not value. That's a waste.

That's a matter of opinion. Some may think that's fair value.

 

[Deleted member]

Profitable but at what cost? What happens when oil prices rise again? Increase fuel surcharges more?

As a frequent flyer I am very disappointed with Qantas. It was only recently they decreased minimum earn on domestic flights from 1,000 points to 800 points plus a whole lot of changes on international flights. At the same time fuel surcharges increased to the level they are now and there is no relief in sight.

I have been slowly moving points earn away from Qantas to Virgin, AAdvantage, KrisFlyer and recently MileagePlus. That can't be good for Qantas.

You do have a choice Johnk. If you don't care for their methods or product, you can make a choice.
That's the great thing about a competitive market place.
I for one forgive them their small transgressions. And even some of their large ones.
It's the overall experience and product I'm looking at.
I detest VA , but others here think they're the best. "Horses for Courses" I say.