mt4789
Intern
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2021
- Posts
- 53
FF schemes are much more than a bargain basement for unwanted tickets. For example BA spun out Avios as its own company, it is hugely profitable ($150million in 2021). Frequent Flyer programmes are hugely profitable. I agree they are 100% used to get rid of inventory cheaper than the company want to sell in cash but they are also much more.I think some people aren't understanding the fundamental economics. Supply of award seats is low, price is low (the value of the classic rewards seats is what, around 5-10% of the cash price?); as a result it's a hugely in-demand product. There are always going to be lots of people left out even with reasonable availability, as these seats will almost always be snapped up right away. This whole thread seems to be one person's sour grapes that they were left out this time, when in reality most people are left out at most times, like a lottery. If you don't win the lottery you don't normally ask the lottery agency to improve the odds, you just recognise that you didn't win this time and consider whether it's worth it to play again, right?
The reason the perk exists at all is to try to increase the perceived value of miles to entice people to earn them through various means, it's not something that makes money for Qantas on its own. As long as there is huge demand to redeem these flights, they are clearly doing that, so why would they release more seats and reduce their profitability? If you want to pay what they're actually "worth" there's always points+pay. The vast difference to those two prices should be a clear indicator that demand would be high for the classic rewards, and thus availability limited.
I think if Qantas aren't going to release seats on some routes for 4+ months of the year to the majority of customers, they should be transparent about it, or else yes, sour grapes. IMHO BA/Avios didn't want to be transparent so they opted for guaranteed seats, I think Qantas could do the same.