Qantas Block Partner Earn on Competitor Routes

[jase05]

Well at least you'll earn more status credits crediting it to QF than to VA!

Yeah, nah.
ADL-DOH on QR gets 160SC’s crediting to VA but only 90SC’s crediting to QF

 

[SYD]

Yeah, nah.
ADL-DOH on QR gets 160SC’s crediting to VA but only 90SC’s crediting to QF

He’s referring to the QF Dom flights….

 

[Kerrodt]

Is it intended to stop double dipping or picking and choosing between the QF and VA loyalty programs and awarding of points if you take (for example) an international QR flight into Australia and then a domestic leg with VA (marketed by QR under a QR ticket) on a domestic route that QF also fly?

Under the old T&C's wouldn't it have been possible to claim that flight example above for points earn with either VA (because of their bilateral arrangements with QR) or QF(because of the OneWorld rules)? I think it could have been in certain scenarios. If this was the case then I can understand why QF would want to prohibit that (as would VA).

 

[RooFlyer]

Are you suggesting QR PC members who aren't QFF can earn avios on these flights? Of course not.

I don’t think the widest, or even the wildest interpretation of what I said, and you quoted, could interpreted the way you are questioning. This is becoming more and more bizarre.

By saying the other programs points & SCs won't be awarded/earnt/gifted/granted/transferred. I used plain language by saying "not paying".

For the umpteenth time, only ‘earn’ Is in the QFF T&Cs. No matter how many times you say otherwise, that remains the fact and QFF members are bound by the T&Cs as written, no matter how much we may wish otherwise, in various circumstances. But by all means interpret the T&Cs however ever you want - Sort of like Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass

 

[Bundy Bear]

You used to be able to earn VA points flying Emirates until Qantas got into bed with Emirates.
My bet is that Qantas will be asked to drop EK and then QR and QF can be friends again.
Emirates can go back to being friends with VA.

 

[serfty]

there's a slight difference on the international flight bit. QR will allow if on a QR itin or QF "marketed" - QF is more restrictive, Very odd.
...

The QR rule restricts earn to travel when the issued ticket (or a conjunction ticket) also has an international flight marketed by either QF or QR. The QF rule further restricts thise to basically to 081- ticketed international bookings.

It struck me that thse caveats are about who is getting the money for the paid fares - If you're a QR member flying MEL-SYD-YVR, QF gets the $$$ and normal FF service applies. Same with say LST-MEL-DOH-LHR issued by QR - they get the $$ (and pro rata to QF as appropriate, as with normal ticketing).

In oneworld, the marketing carrier pays. They pay for lounge access and they pay for any Frequent Flyer earn.

So with a QR member using their QR elite status to access a QF lounge before a QF marketed flight, Qantas gets no recompense.

As I have mentioned/inferred before in this thread, Qantas would be the one to pay to the oneworld frequent flyer program of the partner which the passenger is crediting their travel for a QF marketed flight. This rule change suggests to me that Qantas simply won't pay in the situation referred to with this new rule.

 

[jase05]

My bet is that Qantas will be asked to drop EK and then QR and QF can be friends again.

I doubt QR and QF will ever be friends again whilst the current bosses are in charge.
Don’t forget that QF are the ones most vocal about denying QR extra slots into Australia

 

[RooFlyer]

So with a QR member using their QR elite status to access a QF lounge before a QF marketed flight, Qantas gets no recompense.

So, by analogy, should Qantas refuse access to its lounges to the QR PC flyer in the circumstances described under the new clause regarding partner earn.? ( real question ).

There are lots of exceptions to the OneWorld rule regarding lounge access reciprocity.

 

[serfty]

So, by analogy, should Qantas refuse access to its lounges to the QR PC flyer in the circumstances described under the new clause regarding partner earn.? ( real question ).

There are lots of exceptions to the OneWorld rule regarding lounge access reciprocity.

This thread is not about lounge access. There is no reference to lounge access in the changes to the QFF rules.

 

[RooFlyer]

This thread is not about lounge access. There is no reference to lounge access in the changes to the QFF rules.

Sure, I was just interested in your opinion on the corollary to the rule change.

 

[Mwenenzi]

From the QR side earning on QF
From the QF side earning on QR

 

[justinbrett]

I don’t think the widest, or even the wildest interpretation of what I said, and you quoted, could interpreted the way you are questioning. This is becoming more and more bizarre.


For the umpteenth time, only ‘earn’ Is in the QFF T&Cs. No matter how many times you say otherwise, that remains the fact and QFF members are bound by the T&Cs as written, no matter how much we may wish otherwise, in various circumstances. But by all means interpret the T&Cs however ever you want - Sort of like Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass

I was making a point about how ridiculous your comments were.

Yes, it's in the QFF T&Cs. I don't know why. It's weird. Don't blame me.

But the effect of this clause only effects PC members, and dual PC & QFF members, it does not effect QFF members who are also not PC members. Therefore, the clause only effects PC members.

The clause is saying PC members can't get loyalty and status for flying QF domestic, when it doesn't connect to an international flight.

QR has now said the same on its site.

It's really not that difficult to understand.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Yeah, nah.
ADL-DOH on QR gets 160SC’s crediting to VA but only 90SC’s crediting to QF

I was being facetious there! Clearly Virgin is getting the better end of the bargain here both in terms of accrual of points/status and award availability. Now Uncle Alan has had enough and wants to punish their partner for taking such actions which quite frankly I can't blame them. It would be one thing if they partnered with Virgin Atlantic, but this is Virgin Australia, arguably the only competition Qantas has, at least domestically.

You used to be able to earn VA points flying Emirates until Qantas got into bed with Emirates.
My bet is that Qantas will be asked to drop EK and then QR and QF can be friends again.
Emirates can go back to being friends with VA.

I don't see that happening. Quite frankly I think the two airlines get a lot out of the partnership. QF gets access to an unprecedented amount of award availability that lets their customers fly to Europe and for their part EK gets access to key markets in the Pacific. This is to say nothing of the reciprocal benefits for travellers such as lounge access.

I doubt QR and QF will ever be friends again whilst the current bosses are in charge.
Don’t forget that QF are the ones most vocal about denying QR extra slots into Australia

Can you blame them? The more capacity that is added to the Middle East from Australia, the harder it is for Emirates to maintain their fat profits on these lucrative routes!

 

[kpro]

In oneworld, the marketing carrier pays. They pay for lounge access and they pay for any Frequent Flyer earn.

So with a QR member using their QR elite status to access a QF lounge before a QF marketed flight, Qantas gets no recompense.

It was reported a while back that oneworld changed this. Where lounge access is granted based on status, the FF programme will pay.

Who’s paying for your airport lounge access?

Almost every time you enter an airport lounge, an unseen but crucial financial transaction happens in the background. How does it work, and who foots the bill?

mainlymiles.com

In oneworld the operating carrier used to pay if you accessed a lounge based on frequent flyer status, not the frequent flyer programme, however we understand this changed several years ago and is now in line with the way it always worked in Star Alliance / SkyTeam (i.e. the frequent flyer programme pays).

Behind the Scenes: Who's Paying Whom for Airport Lounge Access

Whenever you enter an airport lounge, a transaction is taking place behind the scenes. Somebody is paying the lounge operator.

www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

If you’re travelling in Economy or Premium Economy on any Oneworld airline, and have the equivalent of Oneworld Sapphire or Emerald status with a Oneworld airline, you are entitled to use the lounge based on your status. In this case, your frequent flyer program will pay the lounge operator, according to trippin_the_rift.

 

[RooFlyer]

I was making a point about how ridiculous your comments were.

How droll. Maybe you actually mean something like this:

But the effect of this clause only effects PC members, and dual PC & QFF members,

So, if a flyer is a PC member and not a QFF member, how can "this clause" of the QFF T&Cs affect (not effect - those semantics again! ) them? More Alice in Wonderland stuff.

It's really not that difficult to understand.

I agree, its not. The clause means what it says. No more, no less, irrespective of what its intended to mean or accomplish or what you choose to interpret what it means, no matter how well intended.

Finally, riddle me this: If QR chooses to allow me (a QFF and PC member) to earn on that Qantas flight, irrespective of whether Qantas pays for the Avios or not (given the QR CEO's attitude to Qantas, its not impossible ) , how does the clause in question operate? It says I will not earn. And yet I will. Presumably someone in Qantas Loyalty's head will explode.

 

[serfty]

It was reported a while back that oneworld changed this. Where lounge access is granted based on status, the FF programme will pay.

That information in that article changed after it was published originally. If you check the link to the post you will see it was struck out two years as being incorrect (at the request of the OP).

 

[kangarooflyer88]

So, if a flyer is a PC member and not a QFF member, how can "this clause" of the QFF T&Cs affect (not effect - those semantics again! ) them? More Alice in Wonderland stuff.

I believe Qantas Points Club is governed by the terms of QFF T&Cs!

Joking aside, and I think you are referring to Qatar's Privilege Club, I agree - I don't see how terms that govern QFF which last I checked was a program owned and operated by Qantas impacts Privilege Club which is owned and operated by Qatar Airways.

Finally, riddle me this: If QR chooses to allow me (a QFF and PC member) to earn on that Qantas flight, irrespective of whether Qantas pays for the Avios or not (given the QR CEO's attitude to Qantas, its not impossible ) , how does the clause in question operate? It says I will not earn. And yet I will. Presumably someone in Qantas Loyalty's head will explode.

That's a possibility as well. Perhaps QR will retaliate by simply restricting QFF member's access to QF award flights by putting that in their terms whilst they are at it... oh wait Uncle Alan is already doing that for us - DOH!

-RooFlyer88

 

[kpro]

That information in that article changed after it was published originally. If you check the link to the post you will see it was struck out two years as being incorrect (at the request of the OP).

Ah yes I see that. Would be good if AFF added that as a note on top of the article as well.
Though the mainlymiles article is from 2022 and is still reporting the same thing. It would be good if there was a way to get a definitive answer.

 

[RooFlyer]

Joking aside, and I think you are referring to Qatar's Privilege Club, I agree -

Yes, it's been the 'convention' throughout this thread.

That's a possibility as well. Perhaps QR will retaliate by simply restricting QFF member's access to QF award flights by putting that in their terms whilst they are at it... oh wait Uncle Alan is already doing that for us - DOH!

My tip is that QR will retaliate by doubling the 'earn' in situations described in the clause and then award it . Then sit back and watch.

 

[serfty]

It would be good if there was a way to get a definitive answer.

The answer is as provided to me this week by @trippin_the_rift recently and post #86 reflects that.