Qantas Platinum One experiences?

[Matt_01]

Oh really? That's interesting. I wonder if P1 members are selling them off (particularly if they don't have a spouse).

I would suggest that the likelihood of a P1 trying to sell a WP membership is low to none. Until the recent changes many could not even give the WP away.

 

[GoldCanyon340]

I arrived for my weekly commute back to MEL, as I entered the the lounge I was informed that the lounge was quite busy and then directed to the CL. I really do not understand why QF cannot just make CL lounge access available as a P1 standard benefit.

I'd have to stop wearing my Collingwood guernsey if that happened

 

[nutwood]

I arrived for my weekly commute back to MEL, as I entered the the lounge I was informed that the lounge was quite busy and then directed to the CL. I really do not understand why QF cannot just make CL lounge access available as a P1 standard benefit.

It's a fair comment. I was in the Melbourne business lounge Friday afternoon. Eventually presumed on an occupied table with an unoccupied chair. Dumped my backpack and headed off for a shower, having been traveling since 5 am. Once clean, I went back into the general airport, found an empty gate and settled down to deal with the missed calls and e.mails. Wasn't a big deal, but from a Qantas point of view, they should be embarrassed. Top tier flier finds it more pleasant to not be in the lounge!

 

[RichardMEL]

Re P1 in CL. I guess QF's thinking is that under normal circumstances the J lounges are fine, and let's say there are 5k P1's there's still likely to be a few flying out of a major terminal at any one time, and they probably do not want thei CL's invaded by them? I do like that they are being better in busy times with IRROPS and the like to allow P1 into the CL - I have never gotten this myself, but it seems like a good way to handle things. I'm a bit envious, but not of the chaos that would have gone on with the weather etc to make this a reality.

 

[nutwood]

Re P1 in CL. I guess QF's thinking is that under normal circumstances the J lounges are fine, and let's say there are 5k P1's there's still likely to be a few flying out of a major terminal at any one time, and they probably do not want thei CL's invaded by them? I do like that they are being better in busy times with IRROPS and the like to allow P1 into the CL - I have never gotten this myself, but it seems like a good way to handle things. I'm a bit envious, but not of the chaos that would have gone on with the weather etc to make this a reality.

Business lounge was pretty full on Friday. There were people who simply could not find anywhere to sit. I was not offered access to the CL. The opportunity was there, when I first entered the lounge and later, when I approached the service desk for a towel. I would have jumped at the opportunity, not because I particularly wished to use the CL, but being perched on a chair as an invader of an occupied table is not somewhere I feel comfortable, hence my retreat from the lounge to an empty gate.
I don't really mind this sort of thing, I take it as the ups and downs of travel but I find it interesting to consider in the context of Qantas hype about the top tier of frequent flyer. Reality is, you still won't find a seat in the lounge!
P1 appears to be based more on the "we'll do our best for you" than any particular entitlements. I wouldn't feel comfortable doing it but I wonder what would have happened had I fronted the service desk and objected strenuously to the lack of appropriate seating for my exalted person. I've a nasty feeling that I probably would have been quietly ushered off to the CL. Alternatively, they might have called security. Either way, not a comfortable way to operate.
CL access could easily be based on the occupancy of the business lounge: "During busy periods, P1 are entitled to request CL access". Alternatively; quantified: "..when lounge occupancy exceeds 80% of maximum capacity, etc".

 

[Matt_01]

This was the first time I have ever been offered this in 5 years and the weather last week caused a few issues in the southern states. @RichardMEL I get the point about the J lounge but durning peak hour these are just to crowded and a completely agree with the comments @nutwood makes and at times find myself heading back out to the terminal if the lounge is to busy. I have been in other CL as a guest and I was surprised at how few people are actually in there so a few P1s would not likely make a difference. As most of my travel is solo I would not even care if they allowed the P1 access but no guesting rights.

 

[juddles]

......... As most of my travel is solo I would not even care if they allowed the P1 access but no guesting rights....

That is a damn good idea.

I respect the desire of most CL's to have some privacy. And although I really love taking my family into the Flounge, etc when we get to travel together, I have no desire for same for the CL.

 

[kermatu]

As most of my travel is solo I would not even care if they allowed the P1 access but no guesting rights.

That is a damn good idea.

Completely agree. Great suggestion.
I've been guested into CLs about a dozen times and they have been nearly empty every single time. (CBR and SYD mainly) . Obviously that is part of the attraction.

 

[RichardMEL]

Agree totally when J lounges are overflowing (I tend to avoid the Mon AM/Fri PM peaks for these reasons, thoug any time there's a big weather delay it can be a challenge - even in SYD which has a fair amount of space I've been in there on a Sunday arvo with weather and it's been chokkas). Personally I'd love an oasis like the CL to just be quiet in. I could care less if Eddie McGuire or some Pollie was in there (I wouldn't recognise them anyway ) so do agree with the notion that it should be offered.

I do appreciate the proactive nature that clearly it's up to the station manager(or maybe lounge manager) to decide OK now it's so bad we divert P1 to the CL - given this seems to have happened during IRROPS in MEL and SYD (that I am aware of anyway) it seems to be a company policy of some sort rathe rthan one particular station doing their thing.. and I think it's a great initiative.

Now I wonder is this where QF is missing an opportunity to reward P1? Either by offering CL guest passes (for the P1 member only during travel) to access?

How would members feel if a P1 with say 5000 SC earn+ be granted CL access rights (a P1+ status if you would). I mean we already consider that there's "tiers" of P1 within QF in terms of members experiences (very anecdotal of course)....

Would you consider this fair and reasonable? Or unreasonable?

 

[nutwood]

I would think unreasonable in the sense that it's almost creating a defacto CL at 5000 SC. Qantas might like it as it gives P1's who've hit their 3600 an incentive to keep earning instead of settling down to earn with the opposition.
A clear cut and stated policy of allowing P1 access in busy periods would be preferable. I'm not sure about others but I like a bit of certainty in my travels. Enough random stuff happens to keep it interesting regardless, so when it comes to lounge access, it'd be nice to know that I'm always going to get a comfortable seat, irrespective of how busy the lounges are. That would be a definite P1 perk.

 

[Hvr]

How would members feel if a P1 with say 5000 SC earn+ be granted CL access rights (a P1+ status if you would). I mean we already consider that there's "tiers" of P1 within QF in terms of members experiences (very anecdotal of course)....

One of the benefits of CL is the use of a lounge where you can have a quiet time without interruptions.

I imagine that potential CL members are vetted for their behaviour within the lounge. Would a WP1+ be subject to the same vetting? If not there is the potential for the CL lounge to lose its cachet and even the possibility of certain undesirable types to seek to attain access to the CL lounge to get access to CL members.

If CL members felt that there was the potential for them to be disturbed by other guests it may mean they no longer value their CL status as much as QF wants them to.

At the very least the lounge staff would need to be very proactive in ensuring CLs are 'protected' from people they may not want to interact with, and that the high level of confidentiality is retained.

 

[RichardMEL]

I would think unreasonable in the sense that it's almost creating a defacto CL at 5000 SC. Qantas might like it as it gives P1's who've hit their 3600 an incentive to keep earning instead of settling down to earn with the opposition.
A clear cut and stated policy of allowing P1 access in busy periods would be preferable. I'm not sure about others but I like a bit of certainty in my travels. Enough random stuff happens to keep it interesting regardless, so when it comes to lounge access, it'd be nice to know that I'm always going to get a comfortable seat, irrespective of how busy the lounges are. That would be a definite P1 perk.

You must absolutely LOVE the Qantas mantra of "Consistently Inconsistent"(tm) then!

Seriously though I think that's a fair point.

I definitely was thinking though of QF possibly wanting increased incentive to keep punters flying post 3600 mark. Imean the points bonuses? Kind of ho hum really. I reckon most of us who have reached P1 once, or multiple times, would be pretty points rich.. an extra 50k or 100k might be nice sure, but would that be worth extra travels? Probably not if there's a choice in carriers (I mean why keep earning on QF if maybe I can spread my spend to another alliance for example).

The only quibble I might have with the notion of "busy periods" is that while they would be set times (QF definitely defined these periods during the MEL lounges renovations when specific limits were placed on guests andguest passes during defined "busy" times) but by the same token wouldn't the CL potentially have more people in there at those times, as it's likely the peak travel times are likely when these people would want to travel too.

As for CL getting poitentially upset at their peace and quiet being distrubed.. let's say 3 P1 enter a CL during an hour and sit quietly have some food or do work or whatever.. how the heck is that going to disturb anyone else? Further, how would they KNOW that those pax were not also CL unless they asked or knew them personally? That to me is more a lounge management thing.. though I can absolutely see if I was a CL the notion of allowing "extras" in from the Great Unwashed would be unwanted.

I wonder how CL members feel about the policy of (sometimes) allowing P1 into the CL during IRROPS.

Since QF has set a precedent already this is where things become murky. Or, dare i say, "Consistently Inconsistent("(tm)

 

[nutwood]

The obvious solution would be to present P1 access as a privilege subject to behaviour. I can't imagine many P1's would be interested in molesting CL members but I suppose there might be some. Can't the point myself; after all they've made you leave your lethal weapons at security.....

 

[TonyHancock]

..there is the potential for the CL lounge to lose its cachet and even the possibility of certain undesirable types to seek to attain access to the CL lounge..

I thought sitting MPs already have CL status, so that ship has already sailed...full of undesirables.

 

[RichardMEL]

The obvious solution would be to present P1 access as a privilege subject to behaviour. I can't imagine many P1's would be interested in molesting CL members but I suppose there might be some. Can't the point myself; after all they've made you leave your lethal weapons at security.....

Based on behaviour? Seems like the (stupid) dress code all over again.... very subjectiive criteria there imo.

 

[nutwood]

Based on behaviour? Seems like the (stupid) dress code all over again.... very subjectiive criteria there imo.

Very true, if you tried to define a code, but surely most P1's would respect a simple request to remember that they are a guest in another lounge?
Dangerous to generalise I know, but on the whole I find most people I cross paths with in the business lounges are polite and well mannered. I think the old adage of travel rubbing off rough corners is very true.

 

[RichardMEL]

So I just got my renewal....

as usual zero excitement in the "pack" as it is.. but I did not expect anything...

but what I did expect, oh foolish me, was for the information to be correct

oh oh no.. Qantas's Consistently Inconsistent(tm) strikes again.. and far out.. can they get ANYTHING right?

On the cover letter dated 8 August, "signed" by Alan Joyce, it mentions PARTNER PLATINUM with a footnote referring to, yep, spouse or defacto partner living at same address....

yet the pre=printed "Continue to enjoy the benefits of Platinum One" correctly refers to gifting Platinum to a family member or friend.

How can this be? How can the form letter still contain information so out of date? It's not rocket science... (and confusing to members!)

and to add insult to (mock) injury.. the new card's design seems even cheaper flimsier than last year - I mean it has no sparkle that last year's roo had?!

C'mon QF.. get a proof reader to check out your templates!!!

 

[juddles]

RichardMEL, I absolutely agree that sort of failure to the detail is a big irritation with QF, even if it is technically not that impacting. (As an aside I laughed today while looking at flights from BNE to Perth - every time I typed in "PER" in the "flying to" field, Perth comes up as the 3rd choice - in my carelessness I accidentally selected Cuzco, PERu a couple of times!! - details again in their website)

I am steadfast still in my abandonment of QF this year for anything but necessary domestic travel. But I bet you that come next year I will be fighting back as quick as possible to regain P1. On the bright side, it may feel nice to actually attain, rather than retain, P1 again

 

[Happy Trails]

and to add insult to (mock) injury.. the new card's design seems even cheaper flimsier than last year

I didn't think it could get any cheaper looking, or flimsier - they must have a special team working on that.
But, having said that, I suppose it does match the benefits.

C'mon QF.. get a proof reader to check out your templates!!!

Or, better yet, a proofreader.

 

[RichardMEL]

While my rant was mostly tongue in cheek, the fact that QF just doesn't check details and leaves things like this out there seems very common through the company - I mean this is the same sort of thing that lets typos go out in marketing emails and on the website.. it just seems like the details don't really matter sometimes.. And while it seems pedantic, because I *know* what the benefits are, it's also so frustrating because for me it seems to sum up a cultural issue that QF has, that is all part of the Consistently Inconsistent(tm) standard. It's just sloppy.