QF social media team being really vindictive

[Daver6]

For interests sake, what date is the flight?

This coming Saturday.

I hope QF social media don't see this and spit in my food too

 

[drron]

The time to get really p***** off with QF is when you are on the flight and there are indeed 9 empty J seats.
We did the J RTW awards in the past.Could not get J seats on the JFK-LAX sector.Only Y available we were told.On the flight we saw lots of empty J seats.Told that only 14 total in J and F-was still old F in those days.
P***** was an understatement.So I joined Aadvantage.

 

[vetrade]

The time to get really p***** off with QF is when you are on the flight and there are indeed 9 empty J seats.
We did the J RTW awards in the past.Could not get J seats on the JFK-LAX sector.Only Y available we were told.On the flight we saw lots of empty J seats.Told that only 14 total in J and F-was still old F in those days.
P***** was an understatement.So I joined Aadvantage.

Yes, that type of experience where J seats are obviously going to waste and you are denied the opportunity to use them is good reason to be p1ssed. FWIW we flew LAX - MEL in J last week (A380) and J was like a ghost town. I could not believe that so many J seats were empty given the generally high demand for this sector (all J award availability was gone soon after release 353 days out). I wonder how many pax were denied an upgrade on our flight?

 

[JohnM]

This coming Saturday.

I hope QF social media don't see this and spit in my food too

Still showing quite a lot of J (and PE) inventory.

I've never done a RTW 280K award, so I'm wondering how they handle the situation when no U is available at time of booking and the customer opts for Z (or - horrors - as for drron​ pre-PE, X.) Maybe that means you effectively forfeit the J cabin option and, because of being on the 280K award, it puts you out of the game for a points UPG?

All speculation, but maybe one of the gurus can shed some light?

 

[N860CR]

12 seats up the front. I guess by the time the classic and bid now upgrades are in, that will probably be full

 

[RichardMEL]

Actually 9 is the minimum, not the maximum

Maybe, maybe not. It indicates a number a carrier is willing to sell in the particular fare bucket in one particular transaction. In reality yes it probably means 9+, but remember in the instance of something like J9 D5 I2 U0 one could probably reasonably think that seats are going, but it's far from full, and the airline would wish to limit sales of discounted (in this example, I) inventory. If that I2 goes, it doesn't mean J will go to 7.

(I recently spent most of a dinner sitting across from a VP of Revenue Management at a fairly large US airline and had some very interesting conversations )

 

[Kangol]

Yes, that type of experience where J seats are obviously going to waste and you are denied the opportunity to use them is good reason to be p1ssed. FWIW we flew LAX - MEL in J last week (A380) and J was like a ghost town. I could not believe that so many J seats were empty given the generally high demand for this sector (all J award availability was gone soon after release 353 days out). I wonder how many pax were denied an upgrade on our flight?

In case you weren't aware, there are other reasons why an airline does not release extra premium award seats even if there are some available. eg. exclusivity and making money (gasp). The US routes have been profitable ones for QF for some time...
I also wonder how many pax were denied upgrades (could be zero) and how many requests were put in (could be a small number). No one besides those privy to such info at QF know...

Still showing quite a lot of J (and PE) inventory.

I've never done a RTW 280K award, so I'm wondering how they handle the situation when no U is available at time of booking and the customer opts for Z (or - horrors - as for drron​ pre-PE, X.) Maybe that means you effectively forfeit the J cabin option and, because of being on the 280K award, it puts you out of the game for a points UPG?

All speculation, but maybe one of the gurus can shed some light?

All classic awards, 280k or not, are not eligible for a points upgrade... in the commonly accepted sense of the word (ie. buying a revenue fare in a lower class and using points to upgrade).
Changing from a lower cabin award category to a higher cabin is technically "upgrading", but it isn't a points upgrade as above. My understanding is if availability opens up at a later date, the change can be made.

Maybe, maybe not. It indicates a number a carrier is willing to sell in the particular fare bucket in one particular transaction. In reality yes it probably means 9+, but remember in the instance of something like J9 D5 I2 U0 one could probably reasonably think that seats are going, but it's far from full, and the airline would wish to limit sales of discounted (in this example, I) inventory. If that I2 goes, it doesn't mean J will go to 7.

(I recently spent most of a dinner sitting across from a VP of Revenue Management at a fairly large US airline and had some very interesting conversations )

"a number a carrier is willing to sell in the particular fare bucket in one particular transaction" is a minimum. If they are willing to sell 9, then 9 is the minimum
Interested in your dinner conversations - any points you'd like to share?

 

[Danger]

Far apart from the experience Daver6 had with QF, as a WP I'm actually concerned that a SG can request seats. That benefit is supposed to be exclusive to WP and above. While I understand that at the time of booking the passenger was WP, does that mean that when it comes to travel day he or she can access the F lounge, because when they booked they had access to it?

And on the subject of empty seats, while I'm fairly indifferent when it comes to giving away free upgrades (I see pros and cons) I think it's ridiculous to fly empty seats when you've got FFs willing to part with their marginally valuable points.

 

[blackcat20]

Far apart from the experience Daver6 had with QF, as a WP I'm actually concerned that a SG can request seats. That benefit is supposed to be exclusive to WP and above. While I understand that at the time of booking the passenger was WP, does that mean that when it comes to travel day he or she can access the F lounge, because when they booked they had access to it?

And on the subject of empty seats, while I'm fairly indifferent when it comes to giving away free upgrades (I see pros and cons) I think it's ridiculous to fly empty seats when you've got FFs willing to part with their marginally valuable points.

Lounge entry is based on status at the time of flight.

 

[RichardMEL]

"a number a carrier is willing to sell in the particular fare bucket in one particular transaction" is a minimum. If they are willing to sell 9, then 9 is the minimum

yes, absolutely. I would say though in practice, with QF in mind right now, that when your availability drops below the 9 level in your "highest" bucket for a particular cabin (eg: F/J/Y buckets) it's a fair bet that that's also a practical maximum. Obviously not always, but usually the case. It's certainly an indication that, say, J3 suggests there's only a few seats left to sell. This ignores your oversales situation which is a whole other issue.

Interested in your dinner conversations - any points you'd like to share?

Even if I could remember specific examples I think it would be inappropriate to share, other than the general principles behind revenue management and yield management being such a complex art with so many factors involved from a route/sector perspective to O&D perspective to seasonal aspects and historic data, booking trends, how often a flight is reassessed based on it's bookings, but also on its bookings in context of connections or even things like you may want to offer a fare on AAA-CCC which goes via BBB, but how do you control the inventory on AAA-BBB and BBB-CCC to alow for sector pricing. And then how all of that planning can be thrown a massive spanner when people like marketing decide to come out with a big sale or some other promotion (and I thought it was just the marketing types who screwed up where I work endlessly! ).

I'd also note this particular bloke I was talking to (amongst many others) is an absolute genius. This guy could be talking about his own airline's pricing models then be thrown a question about LCC trends in Europe and switch conversation mid stream, then 3 minutes later give a detailed rundown on the Mexican aviation scene. Absolutely fascinating. Future CEO material I'm certain.


PS: no offence to any marketing peeps reading this. You're all wonderful I'm sure. BUT If you change our corporate font again I swear I'll come at you with a broken bottle of Taittinger!!

 

[Spongbob]

Far apart from the experience Daver6 had with QF, as a WP I'm actually concerned that a SG can request seats. That benefit is supposed to be exclusive to WP and above.

I think the request simply means some seats are opened for SG (and WP) which are not available to PS and NB.

 

[Danger]

I think the request simply means some seats are opened for SG (and WP) which are not available to PS and NB.

If that's the case it's a change of policy.

 

[blackcat20]

If that's the case it's a change of policy.

SG have always had better access to reward seats compared with NB/PS....but thats not being able to request a seat.

 

[Danger]

SG have always had better access to reward seats compared with NB/PS....but thats not being able to request a seat.

My reading is that the SG was permitted to request a seat, repeatedly:

IBackground: OWE J 280k trip has been booked. At the time of booking my wife was WP and myself SG. There were only Y+ seats for the SYD to JNB sector (30th May). A WP release request was put in but no seats could be released. We were told that we can and should keep trying up until the flight. I mentioned that my wife will no longer be WP but was told they can still do it as at the time of booking she was.

 

[blackcat20]

My reading is that the SG was permitted to request a seat, repeatedly:

Only because she was WP at time of booking, and it seems that was not the case anyway.

 

[RichardMEL]

but the OP specified at the time of booking they were WP and were assured that they could put further requests in and (I presume) be treated as WP even if the status later dropped....

 

[Daver6]

Yes as a SG, who was WP when booking, made the release request was made (but no actual release). This was only done because at the time of booking we were advised that it could be done. When the requests were denied we were encouraged to keep trying. Then the social media team got spiteful and added the note to our booking to say don't allow them to do this again.

Does that clarify things?

 

[Danger]

Only because she was WP at time of booking, and it seems that was not the case anyway.

But if she was WP at time of booking but at not at time of the subsequent requests, it would be a change to policy.

but the OP specified at the time of booking they were WP and were assured that they could put further requests in and (I presume) be treated as WP even if the status later dropped....

This is how I've read it.

Yes as a SG, who was WP when booking, made the release request was made (but no actual release). This was only done because at the time of booking we were advised that it could be done. When the requests were denied we were encouraged to keep trying. Then the social media team got spiteful and added the note to our booking to say don't allow them to do this again.

Does that clarify things?

As far as I understand, yes. You (she) was WP at the time the initial award seat release request was made but subsequent requests were made when status had dropped to SG.

Again, I'm not having a go at you here, just the process and policy.

 

[blackcat20]

But if she was WP at time of booking but at not at time of the subsequent requests, it would be a change to policy.



This is how I've read it.



As far as I understand, yes. You (she) was WP at the time the initial award seat release request was made but subsequent requests were made when status had dropped to SG.

Again, I'm not having a go at you here, just the process and policy.

I think the problem is that QF told them they could make a request later even as SG because it would be taken into account that they were WP when the booking was made. ie they were lead astray by incorrect infomation.

 

[vetrade]

In case you weren't aware, there are other reasons why an airline does not release extra premium award seats even if there are some available. eg. exclusivity and making money (gasp). The US routes have been profitable ones for QF for some time...
I also wonder how many pax were denied upgrades (could be zero) and how many requests were put in (could be a small number). No one besides those privy to such info at QF know..

My thinking on this is that QF points represent a contingent liability for Qantas through their FF program which I understand is quite massive if you were to quantify it in $$ terms (don't ask me for numbers because I don't have any). So I think of it as a wasted opportunity when QF has excess supply but (seemingly) makes no effort to reduce that contingent liability by getting FFers to cash in their points for seats that otherwise will go empty. If they have a reasonable expectation they can sell the seats it's understandable that they don't hand out upgrades etc but, given the J cabin was only half full on QF94 on 18th May (LAX - MEL), it seems likely that they would have known some time before the flight that all the spare J seats wouldn't be sold. Of course, as you wrote, maybe nobody wanted an upgrade.........we'll never know!