Qantas Block Partner Earn on Competitor Routes

[Princess Fiona]

Can you mix QR flights with QF flights on a BA ticket?

What about xONEx?

Yes you can

 

[RooFlyer]

I have QR flights on a QF ticket ?
My TA has booked this for me.

No idea, sorry. Just repeating what my TA told me. As I mentioned, usually I just send an e-mail (with FF program wanted for each leg) and a ticket appears

EDIT: Ah, yes, I've had QR flights on a QF DONEX before. Maybe my TA would have just been thinking of a point and return itinerary, such as I've been doing recently.

 

[RichardMEL]

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.
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.

Apologies @serfty - I wasn't clear with what I meant. I wasn't talking about who is getting the money for points/avios (FF) credit, I meant who gets the revenue for the actual tickets being bought.

 

[TripleB]

What's most strange is that the 'rule' is in the QF FF Ts&Cs... which apply to the earning and burning of QF points and don't apply to QR Privilege Club members.

If I am a QR member and get rejected for a QF domestic flight then I rightfully wouldn't care what is written in the Ts&Cs between Qantas and their members - I'd only care what's in the rules as between me and QR.

 

[OldGuy]

Qantas and Qatar are already 'divorced' informally - no Qatar reward seats via Qantas, can't book anything via Doha on the Qantas site, no Qatar seats on RTW classic reward tickets this year, etc etc. The two airlines obviously dont like each other. 'Formal' divorce would wreck 'OneWorld' so the 'dance' continues and FFs seem to be the losers. How long can this continue?

 

[oz_mark]

What's most strange is that the 'rule' is in the QF FF Ts&Cs... which apply to the earning and burning of QF points and don't apply to QR Privilege Club members.

If I am a QR member and get rejected for a QF domestic flight then I rightfully wouldn't care what is written in the Ts&Cs between Qantas and their members - I'd only care what's in the rules as between me and QR.

And QR says

"Accrual on Qantas domestic flights are only eligible when they are in conjunction with an international flight marketed by either Qantas or Qatar Airways on the same ticket."

The only difference is really what happens with a QR marketed international itinerary.

 

[jase05]

How long can this continue?

With both current bosses at the helm nothing will change. Neither have any intention departing anytime soon either IMO so we just grin and bear it.
As they say though, one man’s loss is another man’s gain and those such as myself with VA points to burn are absolutely chuffed at the stoush and hope it continues

 

[RooFlyer]

Qantas and Qatar are already 'divorced' informally - no Qatar reward seats via Qantas, can't book anything via Doha on the Qantas site, no Qatar seats on RTW classic reward tickets this year, etc etc. The two airlines obviously dont like each other. 'Formal' divorce would wreck 'OneWorld' so the 'dance' continues and FFs seem to be the losers. How long can this continue?

Welcome to AFF @OldGuy How long more? Probably for a while. The earliest manifestation I can recall was when QF introduced "Simpler and Fairer" (I think it was then??) in 2014 and it cut QFF earn when on QR flights. No particular reason, but if you flew a distance QR you earned less than a similar flight on BA & the rest.

Besides this silly current tit-for-tat, the main issue is Qantas trying to block QR expanding their service into Australia; in fact going at it quite hard with the Aust govt. Which is pretty galling when you recall that Qantas completely abandoned scheduled international flights in/out of Australia for a year or so, whereas Qatar kept them up.

 

[OldGuy]

Welcome to AFF @OldGuy How long more? Probably for a while. The earliest manifestation I can recall was when QF introduced "Simpler and Fairer" (I think it was then??) in 2014 and it cut QFF earn when on QR flights. No particular reason, but if you flew a distance QR you earned less than a similar flight on BA & the rest.

Besides this silly current tit-for-tat, the main issue is Qantas trying to block QR expanding their service into Australia; in fact going at it quite hard with the Aust govt. Which is pretty galling when you recall that Qantas completely abandoned scheduled international flights in/out of Australia for a year or so, whereas Qatar kept them up.

Thanks for the welcome. Yes, I'm across most of the history. Just find it hard to believe that a) Qantas can treat its FF members so poorly, and, b) that some of our great aviation writers are not calling out the behaviour. Lots of ordinary folks impacted by all of this. So much for 'One World'.

 

[V1V2]

Children.

 

[RichardMEL]

I will restate my point from earlier, which I don't think has been disproven (or proven either), that we don't know if this change is at the behest of QR or QF. I mean yes, QF are the traditional kings of poor treatment of members flying partners they don't get on well for reasons (eg: MH), but I'm still yet to be convinced this move is from the QFF end.

While it makes no difference semantically to what's going on it may be a presumption to blame QF.

All we know is that similar (but not the same) clauses have been added seemingly since the QR/VA tie up. That was clearly a move on QR's part and MAY suggest they drove the change in policy. QFF's terminology is generic, and that is interesting in itself and could be for a number of reasons.

I just wouldn't be quite so quick to blame QF in this case. If it's true I'll be corrected and hold them to account.

It's not like QR don't like picking some big fights with partners they really don't like (hello Airbus!)

 

[justinbrett]

the main issue is Qantas trying to block QR expanding their service into Australia; in fact going at it quite hard with the Aust govt. Which is pretty galling when you recall that Qantas completely abandoned scheduled international flights in/out of Australia for a year or so, whereas Qatar kept them up.

Qantas can't block anything - only the government can. Every commercial entity is entitled to make submissions for a new/changed commercial entrant. Doesn't mean the government has to listen to them. It's probably reckless for an airline not to make a submission for a matter like this.

VA has also made countless submissions over the years to block things - some were held up and others were ignored (not necessarily because of VA, because again, airlines have no power).

The reason EK and EY have greater freedom than QR flying into Australia is the Air Services agreement signed between the Australian & UAE governments. The UAE granted 5th freedom to Australian airlines to fly on to London, which QF did for a time.

 

[RooFlyer]

Qantas can't block anything

No, but they can try - which is what I wrote. Dunno if I'd describe it as reckless not to try via submissions, though. Corporately negligent perhaps?

I also don't know what VA, EY and EK have to do with it, except as a distraction. We know QF and QR are corporately at loggerheads; have been for years. Qantas currently defending its margins by trying to prevent a competitor from increasing its services into Australia, and good luck to 'em. They may succeed via lobbying the government, but they wouldn't on price and service head-to-head . Market should decide.

 

[RichardMEL]

The IASC (International Air Services Comission) determines allocations and such. All parties lobby with various interests when capacity availability opens up, or trying to persue a new route. It's been like this for years. In effect they regulate the filling of capacity under rights set out in bilateral agreements between Australia and other countries - the idea is, or at least it is supposed to be, to ensure fairness and competition. Of course some agreements are "open skies" which is a free for all and they don't get involved, and the market does decide, but others stipulate set capacity and possibly even route/city pair restrictions. Just depends.

this has always been my understanding of how it works.

 

[justinbrett]

I also don't know what VA, EY and EK have to do with it, except as a distraction.

Because you're making out that it's exceptional for QF to lobby against this.

This is just what airlines do. Take a look at Rex. VA has tried to block just about every international agreement QF has proposed.

It's just the way of the world.

 

[jase05]

Because you're making out that it's exceptional for QF to lobby against this.

This is just what airlines do. Take a look at Rex. VA has tried to block just about every international agreement QF has proposed.

It's just the way of the world.

I guess the big difference is that QF are trying to block out a so called fellow alliance member.
We have seen for many years how QF treat other alliance members which to me kind of defeats the purpose of being in an alliance

 

[justinbrett]

I guess the big difference is that QF are trying to block out a so called fellow alliance member.
We have seen for many years how QF treat other alliance members which to me kind of defeats the purpose of being in an alliance

Not really much of a difference. Alliances by themselves mean nothing to the regulators.

QF/QR don't codeshare, in the eyes of the government they are competitors.

In fact, as you put it, if QF had a deal with QR (and VA did not), you can be damn sure VA would be lobbying against it.

 

[Paddio]

Hi,
Slightly off topic but seems to show misalliance between Qantas and Qatar: I have been chasing Qantas status credits and FF points from three quarters of a flight from Brisbane to Roma via Doha with Qatar. One quarter of the flight, from Bris to Doha, was awarded, the other three legs were rejected. Twice from an online application. I went to FB and private messaged and was told to ring Frequent Flyers. I have not been able to get through to FF on the phone since October. Finally spoke to a human today who said ring Qatar. Who said it's not their problem. Seriously??? Is there an ombudsman for false and misleading claims in terms and conditions of loyalty operating programs?

 

[Vic]

I will restate my point from earlier, which I don't think has been disproven (or proven either), that we don't know if this change is at the behest of QR or QF. I mean yes, QF are the traditional kings of poor treatment of members flying partners they don't get on well for reasons (eg: MH), but I'm still yet to be convinced this move is from the QFF end.

While it makes no difference semantically to what's going on it may be a presumption to blame QF.

All we know is that similar (but not the same) clauses have been added seemingly since the QR/VA tie up. That was clearly a move on QR's part and MAY suggest they drove the change in policy. QFF's terminology is generic, and that is interesting in itself and could be for a number of reasons.

I just wouldn't be quite so quick to blame QF in this case. If it's true I'll be corrected and hold them to account.

It's not like QR don't like picking some big fights with partners they really don't like (hello Airbus!)

Again, the problem with this speculation is the suggestion that Qantas agree to a change requested by QR that has the potential to hurt QF.

 

[RichardMEL]

Again, the problem with this speculation is the suggestion that Qantas agree to a change requested by QR that has the potential to hurt QF.

Reasonable point for sure. All we have is speculation and this forum is great at it

I guess QF may not have been given a choice in the matter - in respect that QR sets up QR/VA and puts in their stipulation regarding earn on QF domestic flights ONLY if on a QR marketed international flight itin. Sure, that's QR's choice to do and clearly driving the revenue to them. Probably designed for the routes that VA doesn't serve - so if you book, I don't know, Athens to Armidale on QR ATH-DOH-SYD and the only interline (and "partner") option is SYD-ARM, then yeah we'll let you earn because VA doesn't do it. OK.

I guess given QF's T&C have been updated some months AFTER QR/VA and the QR policy re QF domestic flights (again, I was unable to confirm when that change came in, or if it's always been a condition?) that it's reactionary to QR's move. Further QR's conditions are very specific, while QF's are generic, which to me is a coverall for this and other situations.

Which came first? chicken or the egg? well... only QFF can really answer imo.