QFF Ideas & Suggestions

[sometimeflyer]

Platinums already get a 100% bonus on points for flying. I suppose they could take that away, and give you a 20% cut on redemption cost. Would that be desirable? Or would it just further tilt the field towards people who spend a lot (which seems to be another common complaint here)

I understand platinums already get a 100% bonus for paid flights and ASAs. The suggested reduction in points required to redeem classic awards would be an additional bonus. I apprehend you might say this suggestion is uneconomic for Qantas to implement. It may be, I don't know. All I know is it is likely to make me fly more.

As for your second comment, I suppose it would "tilt" the field more towards platinum flyers who spend a lot. Those people are already, one would think, true frequent flyers, otherwise they wouldn't have platinum. And they are indirectly contributing more revenue to Qantas by racking up points through CCs etc.

I appreciate you have been looking at this thread from a "put yourself in Qantas' shoes and analyse your suggestion before making it" point of view (or something along those lines). That may well be a useful way of responding to RedRoo' post. However, I don't think it is the only way to usefully respond. I was simply indicating, personally, what changes I think might impact on my flying. I think that's the information I can most usefully supply in response to RedRoo's post. Anything further from me would be speculation, and, I think, less useful at this point.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

I am in a similar situation to KLN post 399. Mrs oobi doobi and I now use SIA almost exclusively due to the ease (compared to Qantas) in obtaining business seats on Frequent flyer points. In the last 2 years have travelled to europe twice (including a side trip to Iran) & singapore many times. I now find it very hard to get qantas business out of Perth internationally, hence SIA patronage. I also prefer their lounge in Sing to qantas mainly for the food available.

On 'new' product (that is already old) you have to spend double miles to get anywhere. That excludes any sort of reasonable redemption on any A380 and 777-300ER's which are the main long haul aircraft these days. SIA are a bit of a joke for business redemptions IMO.

 

[dfcatch]

With respect to all the posts about the "economics of QF's point of view", and the "what would you give up to get something new", don't really get the point of a "loyalty" program.

The whole point is what can QF offer (always at a cost one way or the other), that will entice members to fly more (ie. Spend more with QF).

If QF provide additional incentives, and those incentives result in members remaining loyal and directing more spend towards QF, then QF get the payoff.

That's the whole point of the exercise.

 

[PineappleSkip]

When we travel we get to the airport as late as possible (to minimse time in the godawful place).

Some airports are better than others. Some lounges are better than others. Lounge in POM is awful, so yes I avoid the airport till late. Int'l lounges in SYD, CNS and SIN are very peaceful and yes a haven away from the godawful bits. Int'l lounge in BNE is pretty ordinary; too small; not much of an improvement over the terminal cafes.

The trick, Red Roo, is to have the lounges big enough to make them the havens they are billed as. I don't think any of the main DOM lounges really qualifies anymore.

BTW a lounge for bogans may be a worthwhile addition if it kept them out of circulation

Cheers skip

 

[tipsy.skipsy]

Hi again Red Roo

Thanks for the opportunity! I'm noting that your question relates to QFF specifically not QF the actual airline so that is how I've framed my suggestions although they do cross over a bit naturally! My ideas also beef up the value of Gold and Platinum...

1) Confirmed at time of request points upgrades for international domestic flights - (with the ability to also waitlist if unsuccessful at that point in time) for CL, Platinum and Gold members only (all others continue to waitlist until 5 hrs before departure).

2) Priority boarding gate lanes for CL, J class, Platinum and Gold members only. Suggest use the AA domestic solution it works really well!

3) Convince Jetstar to give out 0.5 points and pro-rata status credits per Jetsaver/Light fare mile instead of 0 as it currently stands.

4) Convince Jetstar to give CL, Platinum and Gold members access to 'upfront' and exit rows domestically free of charge.

4.1) Waive exit row charges for Platinum and Gold members flying Qantas internationally.

5) Add more restaurants to the QFF restaurant earn program! Love this part of the program, you need more signed up!

6) Remove award assisted booking fees for Platinum and Gold members - or fix the QFF website so ALL available seats and airlines are available.

7) Increase loyalty bonus to 10,000 - or tier it. EG Bronze/Silver = 5,000, Gold = 10,000 and Platinum = 15,000

8) QFF launch it's own Credit card with great QFF earn rates and Platinum and Gold members have access to it at no annual fee - others pay, or again tier it.



Hope this helps

Thanks

More Restaurants for sure , love it , have got many already signed up in my neighborhood.

Waive $25 Credit Card Surcharge for Platinum Frequent Flyers And only $ 10 for Gold. $25 For the rest . when you travel international.

regards

 

[oz_mark]

Thanks

More Restaurants for sure , love it , have got many already signed up in my neighborhood.

Waive $25 Credit Card Surcharge for Platinum Frequent Flyers And only $ 10 for Gold. $25 For the rest . when you travel international.

regards

Note that the CC Surcharge is $30 from Dec 1.

 

[tipsy.skipsy]

Love this Thread ... Someone should print it and read it a-loud to our beloved Mr.Simon Hickey.

 

[Moody]

Love this Thread ... Someone should print it and read it a-loud to our beloved Mr.Simon Hickey.

Why? It is mostly an embarrassment of self interest with very few objective suggestions.

To state the bleeding obvious the management at Qantas have 2 aims - maximise the return to shareholders and maximise their own quality of life. If it could be proved that scrapping the Chairmans Lounge would be revenue positive then they would do it. Of course that would be inadvisable, as once you remove even an unrealistic dream from the masses the chances of them moving on to a competitor for spite is very real.

This is what may be happening with Anytime Access. It was an illogical benefit whose removal only seemed to have an upside, but if the AFF groundswell can be believed there are many people switching part or all of their business away from Qantas due to the removal of that particular gravy-train, whether they used it or not.

People are not logical beings (which is both a good and bad thing) and Qantas now realise that and hence they are asking their customers what carrots they want. When they have trawled their way through this thread (at least they're getting paid to do so) they will work out which incentives may have the best ROI and these will be the ones that are considered for inclusion.

So if I was smart (and could be bothered) I would start a poll of the top 10 enhancements on this thread, with an additional question about what status the respondants were, and then sell this research to Qantas for a pretty penny. Of course I would skew the outcome by voting early and often for the enhancements I want, but Qantas don't need to know that.

 

[simongr]

Why? It is mostly an embarrassment of self interest with very few objective suggestions.

Umm the question was asked "what would make you fly QF more?" - surely all answers will be about self interest - I would not fly QF more to give someone else a benefit (apart from mrssimongr).

 

[docjames]

Why? It is mostly an embarrassment of self interest with very few objective suggestions.
.

It isnt supposed to be objective, each individual has reasons that might make them fly QF more. I suppose that is 'self-interest" but surely that's the point.


It's up to QF to be objective and decide which ones are economic. Particularly note that QF (Red Roo) asked "what would make you fly more", not "what will make you fly more but is economically rational to Qantas". I'm sure QF are in a better position than AFF members to decide what is economically rational for QF.

 

[drewbles]

It isnt supposed to be objective, each individual has reasons that might make them fly QF more. I suppose that is 'self-interest" but surely that's the point.


It's up to QF to be objective and decide which ones are economic. Particularly note that QF (Red Roo) asked "what would make you fly more", not "what will make you fly more but is economically rational to Qantas". I'm sure QF are in a better position than AFF members to decide what is economically rational for QF.

Totally agree here. Keeping in mind, that if people don't like the QF changes, they can always move to another program.

Saying that QF will just do what they want to maximise their own wallet sizes, is illogical in itself. They realise DJ are going to be ramping up in an attempt to steal business. They've seen the backlash from dilution of benefits since the collapse of AN, and the ATA that's now been removed, may be the straw that broke the camels back. People finally have said 'enough is enough' and with the DJ status match, most the people I know who've taken the match are actually putting money where their mouths are, and are booking stuff on DJ instead of with QF.

As the Chinese proverb/curse says "May you live in interesting times". I'd say there's a few of those coming up in the next 12 months!

 

[graxx]

Qantas ought to know that FF cards have a severe negative side when they take away your status.
I was a Platinum FF for about 12 years when I was flying to Europe 1st Class several times a year. The Plat FF was absolutely no benefit to me for the 12 years I had it, as 1st Class provides all the access and benefits. I was basically loyal to QF or their partners for all that time.
Last year, after only a couple of o/s flights (business, alas, no longer 1st) they took it away. This year, with no platinum card to protect, I was free to compare prices, and found Business fares for two flights on Emirates and BA that were way, way below Qantas' price. BA business was so-so, but Emirates was sensational (esp the A380) with chauffeurs laid on all round the world as a bonus.
So where does that leave my Qantas loyalty? My Life Gold only gets me into the Bus Lounge which is no better than the business lounges on the others (not as good in fact) which come as part of the ticket price.
So where are all my rewards for those years of loyalty? My reaction was quite the opposite to their intentions I would guess. I don't know how Qantas can address this, but it is an anomaly.

 

[justin23]

I have plenty of time to fly and earn status, but not purely to enhance my status.
I fly because i need to go somewhere. So if I'm short by say 100 SC's and QF gave me the option to use points to maintain status, I'd rather do that than fly somewhere just for the sake of retaining status. Sure if I was short 10 or 20SC's I can see the point of having a weekend away somewhere, but I'm amazed that for some people, their hobby is literally collecting SC's.

My suggestion at least is beneficial to both sides. I offered an idea to get rid of execessive points while keeping people happy with retained status.

If you don't have time to fly why do you want status?

ejb

 

[PineappleSkip]

Umm the question was asked "what would make you fly QF more?" - surely all answers will be about self interest - I would not fly QF more to give someone else a benefit (apart from mrssimongr).

+4 or thereabouts

Is it an embarrasment of self interest if I hunt up a cheap fare, or my employer asks me to hunt up BFOD? Similarly, having been asked by QF, I and others would nominate what are the best benefits for me.

Cheers skip

 

[djfuzz]

I have plenty of time to fly and earn status, but not purely to enhance my status.
I fly because i need to go somewhere. So if I'm short by say 100 SC's and QF gave me the option to use points to maintain status, I'd rather do that than fly somewhere just for the sake of retaining status. Sure if I was short 10 or 20SC's I can see the point of having a weekend away somewhere, but I'm amazed that for some people, their hobby is literally collecting SC's.

My suggestion at least is beneficial to both sides. I offered an idea to get rid of execessive points while keeping people happy with retained status.

Interesting idea when you take it a bit further - say you are within 10% of a status tier, you could buy SCs with the number of points required for a corresponding standard JASA (eg 20,000 points for 40SC - so 500:1 etc). The maximum you could use it for would be for PG, namely 240SC for 120,000 points between 2160 and 2400 (and the smallest would be 30SC / 15,000 points for PS, between 270 and 300).

That seems like a relatively fair trade-off where QF benefits from reducing its points liability in a fairly substantial way (which presumably was the commercial imperative for ASAs in the first place) without the cost of providing a seat to a paying passenger, while the time-poor member is able to retain status in a more flexible manner (while still having to fly for at least 90% of their retention requirements).

Pie in the sky I know, but not as out there as I thought on first blush.

 

[Oneworldplus2]

Sure if I was short 10 or 20SC's I can see the point of having a weekend away somewhere, but I'm amazed that for some people, their hobby is literally collecting SC's.

LOL
Good post, but, this is AFF, not knitting.com.au

You might have some hobbies which some members here don't see the point in either.

Happy travels.

 

[tipsy.skipsy]

Just watching a movie , got an idea , you should get QFF points for movie tickets. They should tie up with hoyts / village cinemas. What say ??

 

[equus]

This suggestion will no doubt attract howls of protest, but directly addresses "what changes to the FF program would make you fly QF more" (albeit, a "fly QF more in preference to our OW partners").

As I see it, the current method of gaining status via SC is not so much a QF loyalty program, as a OW loyalty program - as for the most part (excepting some non-earn fare classes at the bottom end), the SC earn is the same on a OW partner as on QF. If there is a choice of QF or BA/CX/AA etc, then there is little incentive from the FF program (other than the status bonus FF point earn, which doesn't apply to NB anyway), to choose QF.

To encourage more flying of QF rather than OW partners, then perhaps differential SC tables should be established for QF and OW (with less SC awarded for non-QF, say around a quarter to a half, but doesn't need to be the same ratio for all bands).

Earning more SC on QF (but still earning on other OW) would provide more encouragement to use QF, but still acknowledges the alliance and the fact that QF don't fly everywhere. This would also tie in with better correlating status with QF earning from the travel (rather than extensive use of YUP or KUP on AA for example gaining status on QF), removing the need to fiddle with the number of QF sectors required etc., which has been suggested previously in this thread.

Making QFF status more directly (but not exlusively) related to QF loyalty rather than OW should enable the continuation (and increase) of benfits such as anytime access, since getting the status would necessarily imply a much greater QF share of the travel to achieve it orignally (for probably a significant proportion of higher tier members), but also an ongoing incentive to travel QF where possible.

 

[drron]

This suggestion will no doubt attract howls of protest, but directly addresses "what changes to the FF program would make you fly QF more" (albeit, a "fly QF more in preference to our OW partners").

As I see it, the current method of gaining status via SC is not so much a QF loyalty program, as a OW loyalty program - as for the most part (excepting some non-earn fare classes at the bottom end), the SC earn is the same on a OW partner as on QF. If there is a choice of QF or BA/CX/AA etc, then there is little incentive from the FF program (other than the status bonus FF point earn, which doesn't apply to NB anyway), to choose QF.

To encourage more flying of QF rather than OW partners, then perhaps differential SC tables should be established for QF and OW (with less SC awarded for non-QF, say around a quarter to a half, but doesn't need to be the same ratio for all bands).

Earning more SC on QF (but still earning on other OW) would provide more encouragement to use QF, but still acknowledges the alliance and the fact that QF don't fly everywhere. This would also tie in with better correlating status with QF earning from the travel (rather than extensive use of YUP or KUP on AA for example gaining status on QF), removing the need to fiddle with the number of QF sectors required etc., which has been suggested previously in this thread.

Making QFF status more directly (but not exlusively) related to QF loyalty rather than OW should enable the continuation (and increase) of benfits such as anytime access, since getting the status would necessarily imply a much greater QF share of the travel to achieve it orignally (for probably a significant proportion of higher tier members), but also an ongoing incentive to travel QF where possible.

Might have the opposite effect-I can earn the same status on AA flying QF as with AA.So if QFF did this maybe more people would jump ship to other FF programs and hence not care whether they flew QF,CX or JAL out of Australia.

 

[simongr]

Might have the opposite effect-I can earn the same status on AA flying QF as with AA.So if QFF did this maybe more people would jump ship to other FF programs and hence not care whether they flew QF,CX or JAL out of Australia.

I agree this would be detrimental to not just QF but OW as I would then switch my flying to *A as much as i could.