QF/EK FF benefits revealed

[otis]

The baggage allowance is aligned with the exception of sporting goods and infant allowances.
So when traveling on EK your golf bag and shoes will be in addition to your checked baggage and on QF, they will be part of your checked baggage allowance.

Thanks, appreciate the reply Red Roo.

cheers
otis

 

[simongr]

I might have an interesting question for them coming up. I am planning to fly DXB-LCA in J travelling with wife and son in J (if I can book an EK award otherwise paid whY) and my parents in whY - in theory I should be able to take my mum in as my guest and my dad as my wife's guest to the J lounge. I just wonder what will happen at the lounge...

 

[anat0l]

I tend to agree with you, but the point is whether anyone has seen that sentiment in writing anywhere yet considering that EK does not mention "guest" on its page.

Not sure why EK doesn't mention guests on their page. I know that EK Golds had lost their ability to guest before, but this benefit is coming back - maybe that is why.

EK Platinums should be well and truly entitled to have one guest, whether they decide to use the J or F lounges.

I might have an interesting question for them coming up. I am planning to fly DXB-LCA in J travelling with wife and son in J (if I can book an EK award otherwise paid whY) and my parents in whY - in theory I should be able to take my mum in as my guest and my dad as my wife's guest to the J lounge. I just wonder what will happen at the lounge...

Seems legit here. I wouldn't expect issues; if not, just walk into the lounge in pairs.

I've had to negotiate entry by reconciling the number of elites and guests at the MEL T1 QF J Lounge before... reasoning seemed to work here, and those lounge receptionists can be dragons. Surely at DXB they cannot afford to be that thick, because they will be dealing with a whole heap of guests pouring in.

On the other hand, since you are a Platinum, you have access to the F Lounge, however if your wife is not a Platinum as well, you may have trouble getting all into the F Lounge, so you may have to settle for the J Lounge if you all wish to be together.

 

[Red Roo]

I might have an interesting question for them coming up. I am planning to fly DXB-LCA in J travelling with wife and son in J (if I can book an EK award otherwise paid whY) and my parents in whY - in theory I should be able to take my mum in as my guest and my dad as my wife's guest to the J lounge. I just wonder what will happen at the lounge...

Will depend on your/ your wife's travel class/ status (noting you are P1).
if you are both in J and your parents in Y then yes, your could each guest one of your parents.
jrsimongr may not be considered a guest depending on age so allowed in.

 

[serfty]

I tend to agree with you, but the point is whether anyone has seen that sentiment in writing anywhere yet considering that EK does not mention "guest" on its page.

I believe it's in writing on the information emailed to Emirates Skywards members this week.

 

[simongr]

Will depend on your/ your wife's travel class/ status (noting you are P1).
if you are both in J and your parents in Y then yes, your could each guest one of your parents.
jrsimongr may not be considered a guest depending on age so allowed in.

We should be in J (incl. boygr) so it should be fine - I am just wondering if the lounge dragons in DXB will be like the AAngels or BA Dragons...

 

[legroom]

I believe it's in writing on the information emailed to Emirates Skywards members this week.

This is one example where AJ could put in practice his pledge 'higher benefits apply'.

 

[codash1099]

This is one example where AJ could put in practice his pledge 'higher benefits apply'.

Always assuming AJ has any real say in any of this

 

[docjames]

No, not delusional - they just didn't read the very clear info distributed by QF at the start of the whole deal ages ago, when it was clearly stated that to get SCs, you would need to fly on a QF flight number. Equally clear was that flying on an EK flight number would get you points, but not SCs. You can hardly blame QF because people didn't read the available information, and then because of that, jumped to an incorrect conclusion.

I read the information and had the same opinion at the time - lack of SC earn on EK flights MASSIVELY diminishes the value in this partnership that QF says will be "life saving" for QFi. I can fly BA on a BA code and get SCs, I can fly AA on an AA code, AY on an AY code etc and get SCs. Surely QF could have offered the same with their "life saving" deal with EK. It also goes against "full alignment of benefits" IMO.

The concept is actually very basic, I'm sure we all get that, it's the amount they want for the priviledge that is totally absurd and that's where many of us are balking..!!!

This is certainly a factor, although i'm prepared to wait until they have ACCC approval to co-set pricing with EK to make that judgement.

Anyone who thought they'd get SCs on EK flight numbers was clearly dillusional.

Thanks for the insult - I'm not debating that QF said they would give it, i was making the point they could have if they had really wanted to.

 

[Must...Fly!]

Thanks for the insult - I'm not debating that QF said they would give it, i was making the point they could have if they had really wanted to.

On reflection though, impractical. Such a policy would mean that a loyal EK flyer could do not so much flying on cheap EK-coded, ex-cheap destinations such as Northern Africa or some Eastern European nations, gaining OWE status very easily...then presuming they continue to credit to QFF, QF are up for a lot of payments regarding lounge access. And they have maybe sold 4 deep discount Y flights to satisfy the ~ requirement!

 

[samh004]

Thanks for the insult - I'm not debating that QF said they would give it, i was making the point they could have if they had really wanted to.

You mean, had they wanted QFi to completely fail (because no one would pay the absurd QFi prices if they could just go with the EK ones)... sure, they could have given SC on EK.

It's plain to see why they went this route, and from the airline earning table it looks like SC's are only earned on OneWorld partners, not other partners (excluding those they have money in), so seems consistent (though I only had the briefest of looks, because that's a long table).

 

[docjames]

On reflection though, impractical. Such a policy would mean that a loyal EK flyer could do not so much flying on cheap EK-coded, ex-cheap destinations such as Northern Africa or some Eastern European nations, gaining OWE status very easily...then presuming they continue to credit to QFF, QF are up for a lot of payments regarding lounge access. And they have maybe sold 4 deep discount Y flights to satisfy the ~ requirement!

But this is also possible via other OW airlines. So i dont see a difference.

You mean, had they wanted QFi to completely fail (because no one would pay the absurd QFi prices if they could just go with the EK ones)...

sure, they could have given SC on EK.

It's plain to see why they went this route, and from the airline earning table it looks like SC's are only earned on OneWorld partners, not other partners (excluding those they have money in), so seems consistent (though I only had the briefest of looks, because that's a long table).

As above - they dont fail elsewhere.

How does it hurt QF to offer SCs on flights that there isnt a QF code - it keeps the customer loyal to QF.




I dont think i'm going to win anyone over on this (not that that is really the point) so perhaps it's better I just bow out of this thread.

 

[simongr]

On reflection though, impractical. Such a policy would mean that a loyal EK flyer could do not so much flying on cheap EK-coded, ex-cheap destinations such as Northern Africa or some Eastern European nations, gaining OWE status very easily...then presuming they continue to credit to QFF, QF are up for a lot of payments regarding lounge access. And they have maybe sold 4 deep discount Y flights to satisfy the ~ requirement!

When oi credit a flight to QFF and flying on a partner the operating airline pays QFF for the benefits. This could have included SCs.

You mean, had they wanted QFi to completely fail (because no one would pay the absurd QFi prices if they could just go with the EK ones)... sure, they could have given SC on EK.

It's plain to see why they went this route, and from the airline earning table it looks like SC's are only earned on OneWorld partners, not other partners (excluding those they have money in), so seems consistent (though I only had the briefest of looks, because that's a long table).

But the other non owned non OW partners are not as closely aligned through a JSA.

 

[katiebell]

What would you have done before? Got two taxi's? I mean to say the 'limit' is a physical limitation of the car boot. I have absolutely no doubt if you had 4 small bags and they fitted in the boot they wouldn't care, all the two bags is trying to show is how big the boot is.

FYI the business and first allowances (which are more than allowed in the chauffuer car) do fit in a std family sedan which is smaller than the type of car used fr chauffeur transfers. Also, you are allowed more bags (in the same car )if you pay extra (so they must fit in the xhauffeur car)

ALso, it seems stupid to promote a certain baggage allowance for a given ticket type and offer a wonderful gratis chauffeur drive but hide the fact that the latter precludes the former unless you pay extra for the 'free' service

 

[katiebell]

Katie, this will depend on your oneworld status. If your oneworld status is either Emerald or Sapphire, you get access to oneworld airlines' lounges, so you're fine to use the BA T3 lounge - provided that BA continues to have a lounge in T3.

I am asking specifically about spa (and not lounge) access. This is not a universal OW benefit. At present it is offered to BA and QF pax with suitable OW tier and flying BA or QF in J or F. It is not available to OWE flying CX etc. I would like to know if this will be lost now the JSA is finishing and if this will be another 'enhancement' to the QF product

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

No, QF did not replace flat with sloping J bed AFAIK.

The reference was to Asia where many (most) 744 and 388 services have been 'enhanced' to A330s with skyslopes (Skybed mk1).

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

How does it hurt QF to offer SCs on flights that there isnt a QF code - it keeps the customer loyal to QF.

It's called revenue. Look it up.

 

[ajw373]

The RJ J product looks a little sub-par, how is it in reality?

Have flown RJ in J (actually it was Z so no bloody points or status credits grrr) from BKK-AMM and it was fine. The seat was a bit like SQ's regional bed product on their A330's, service was ok, meal ok, IFE ok, plus you get a sky Marshall along for the ride. I also flew in an A320 (or maybe 321) AMM-BGW in business and for what it was it was top notch. Great big seat, food good, coffee good (IIRC it was a choice of Nespresso), certainly much better than the TK 737 that I then flew to IST and onwards to ISB. Would have preferred the RJ seat on the long IST-ISB sector.

Having said that looking above the flight suggested is on an A340 which I believe has a completely different seat (sit up unless updated recently) and IFE system.

 

[Deleted member 18152]

So First Class lounge isn't 100% reciprocal, in Asia for example?

I get the impression an Emirates Platinum doesn't get access to say the Qantas First lounge in HK when flying an EK coded EK flight?

This seems to not be covered particularly clearly...

 

[oz_mark]

So First Class lounge isn't 100% reciprocal, in Asia for example?

I get the impression an Emirates Platinum doesn't get access to say the Qantas First lounge in HK when flying an EK coded EK flight?

This seems to not be covered particularly clearly...

I'm not sure it is up to Qantas to explain what EK members get?