Red Roo Update

[serfty]

...
With this in mind, my view is AFF may be too slow in evolving into a product which RedRoo/Qantas/Any Airline needs as part of their strategic competitive coughnal. I agree with you - it's likely viewed as a 'blog' or low traffic 'social media' property and as such is compared against Twitter/FB/Snapchat/Whatever-millennials-use-these-days. Such comparison would put AFF towards the bottom of the line item media prioritization list. AFF needs to re-invent the business so that it can't be compared to the other social media sites in the eyes of the airlines. ...

"Too slow", "Needs to"?

Are you really referring to ongoing usefulness of sites such as this and Flyertalk going forward? Or simply to retaining a company presence. If the latter then "Were Too Slow" and "Needed to" would be more appropriate.

In maintaining an "Authenticated" presence, the numbers obviously didn't add up for the corporation on a number cruncher's basic cost/benefit ratio when assessing costs - ergo, therego, red roo.

The bulletin board format is a legacy, but still very much alive - if you really were referring to the former and "getting traffic" then there's not much that can be done.

There is no longer an AFF Tapatalk based app due to the centralisation path taken by Tapatalk - I guess that was done in an effort to combat/cash in on what they perceived was a trend. Unfortunately, that philosophy did not fit in with Admin's.

There are closed facebook groups around, but you need to be aware of them and be 'accepted'.

AFF has facebook and twitter presence as well; but like any open format, postings can be problematic.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

No argument at all, but that when you look at the avgeek set being engaged by some US airlines (as per my example) I'd argue they are not really influencers of that calibre – they're just aviation geeks, planespotters. That's the bit I find odd, compared to actual high-impact wide-reaching influencers of which AFF would have quite a few!

Hey, if I controlled an airline I'd take my buddies up for a joy flight on the new 7x7, wouldn't you?

"Too slow", "Needs to"?

Are you really referring to ongoing usefulness of sites such as this and Flyertalk going forward? Or simply to retaining a company presence. If the latter then "Were Too Slow" and "Needed to" would be more appropriate.

In maintaining an "Authenticated" presence, the numbers obviously didn't add up for the corporation on a number cruncher's basic cost/benefit ratio when assessing costs - ergo, therego, red roo.

The bulletin board format is a legacy, but still very much alive - if you really were referring to the former and "getting traffic" then there's not much that can be done.

Re-read my post but think about AFF as a business instead of as a forum.

 

[serfty]

...
Re-read my post but think about AFF as a business instead of as a forum.

I certainly understand it as being a business.

Given the numbers and Qantas outsourcing as began a year ago the end of having such a forum presence was nigh on inevitable.

My response was in relation to "Too Slow". Given my previous paragraph I was wondering what that was referring to.

 

[OzEire]

If QF (outsourced) a survey about how its customers interacted with the brand on social, the multiple choice list would have Facebook, Twitter, etc. Probably an aggregated choice such as "forum/board" and AFF might get a few mentions in "other" if free text is allowed. So when business decisions are made about Social Team effort allocations, management will deploy accordingly.

Separately, I think the savvy group here is the wrong audience for recent QF PR spin. Almost anything QF announces is torn to shreds here in minutes, the underlying effects and 'enhancements' are revealed with the PR overlay exposed as mere words to pacify the uninformed masses. Eg.

To thank our loyal members we are rolling out a new card with a fresh design by renowned Australian geometric artist Federico Squarr, it will be artwork in your wallet. Impress your friends! This is a great enhancement of the customer experience for our loyal members.

*Redemption rates will also double.

Finally, it irks me that the official position has been so boldly stated as "we aren't going to contribute but happily mine your views".

 

[eastwest101]

OK - the TLR version.

I assume that the authenticated company reps for both Qantas and Virgin are not active on Flyertalk as well as AFF?

Interesting discussion about the pro's and cons of airlines prioritising a "broad" social media prescence over more "narrow" or niche sites such as this, which leads to an interesting discussion about why airlines bother having authenticated company reps monitoring social media at all? What are the loyalty, public relations and customer service roles in this?

Don't need to have an existential crisis just because the official company reps have left, the site here still serves a very useful purpose, but as long as we accept that airlines may still be here to gather information but aren't interested in communicating with their customers here - in other words "go someplace else where we are still active if you need to tell us something". Nothing stopping us from debating what we think are the best/most effecitve methods to approach airlines to communicate with them.

PrincessFiona - thanks for your reply and explanation on how Facebook groups do seem to work - I will need to look into this further and may PM you - sounds like it works.

TrippintheRift makes the point that maybe this site and Flyertalk act as a "super connector" in that for a low-med time user such as me - I have been able to pick up the basics or be aware of the big issues that affect loyalty schemes and frequent flying without having the time to participate in subgroups of other "broader" social media sub-groups. In other words - if its a big "enhancement" or change to QFF or Velocity it will be picked up by all social media/specialist sites but maybe not the mainstream media, at least with the community here there will be links posted to other relevant discussions and opinions connecting this to say Flyer Talk to Australian Business Traveler etc.

OzEire makes the point about this is the wrong audience for PR spin type announcements as users here will always be looking for the * and will dissect the announcement differently than a Facebook post about a new card design that may garnet 30K+ "likes" and "Oh how pretty are the new cards!" comments but the "What about the redemption rates?" questions may be lost in the sheer volume of posts made on the Qantas Facebook page. I expect that the feeling of being "irked" by the official position of taking but not contributing to this forum is a pretty common opinion here on AFF.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Don't need to have an existential crisis just because the official company reps have left, the site here still serves a very useful purpose,

AFF hasn't changed at all. The airline rep's role wasn't to contribute towards FF knowledge.

 

[CaptJCool]

That's probably what it comes down to, we are savvy and know how to extract the best value, and thus our PCV's are lower. But we still represent a fair spend at the same time. It's an interesting balancing act.

And because we are savvy, we know Qantas has a stranglehold on the domestic business market and we know the tricks of the trade mean using other airlines programs internationally to get more for less. (Well, until changes happen there) and we know about credit card churning for extra points.

As trippin_the_rift said about big data
QF know a lot about each flyer, often how they operate, self employed or who they work for, FIFO, (Parliamentarians, miners and so on) with connected family (those family upgrades and pause of status have a whole new meaning) and points earning credit cards and across loyalty programs, there's a lot they know. Heck they even know (some of the time, if you fly with the opposition, or given your income why would it be you slowed stopped the travelling you do with them, who pays you or other people's money (business, hobbies, organisations) when you move to that Point Piper address or change phone number, more than is first obvious. http://www.actuaries.asn.au/Library/Events/FSF/2012/AnalyticsOfLoyalty3BChandlerTubman.pdf

for mine whether you favour window or aisle (can only imagine what that says about your psychological stature) is the cherry on top ..... What your choice of plane seat really says about you | Daily Mail Online. so why is Malcom in the middle ? LMAO

 

[samh004]

If QF (outsourced) a survey about how its customers interacted with the brand on social, the multiple choice list would have Facebook, Twitter, etc. Probably an aggregated choice such as "forum/board" and AFF might get a few mentions in "other" if free text is allowed. So when business decisions are made about Social Team effort allocations, management will deploy accordingly.

While AFF may end up with few mentions compared to mainstream social media – and this may be just because the survey takers see Facebook or Twitter and select it out of habit – I would hope they are also looking at status level, status credits and PCV (among other things) of where those votes are being cast. I would imagine that the vast majority using regular social media, and I'm not talking about some of the Facebook groups, have a lower status and PCV than the users of say, AFF, Flyertalk, etc... regardless of how savvy they are compared to the former group.

Separately, I think the savvy group here is the wrong audience for recent QF PR spin. Almost anything QF announces is torn to shreds here in minutes, the underlying effects and 'enhancements' are revealed with the PR overlay exposed as mere words to pacify the uninformed masses.

I think this is something they could utilise if they really thought about it. Focus groups (assuming they even care) with regular people may work most of the time, but the regular people are likely the ones who won't notice the changes in a big way. Someone who flies domestically twice a year will not notice if the points change fee increases, firstly because he can never get a points booking, either through lack of trying or not high enough status; but secondly, if they have to change their flight half the total number, it's only once! Compare that to the Platinum or higher level frequent flyer who is away each week... if they have the same percentage of changes to their flights, they're being slugged a lot more points, but not getting any extra services from the company for this increase in fees.

Thus, using members from a site like this to examine potential program changes would be a smart move, as they might work out the best ways to put a positive spin on the changes. Members may even suggest ideas that QF hadn't even thought of, and best of all it's free for them to use now.

Just my opinion.

 

[dajop]

Probably the right decision. Did helping out customers here have any effect on travel decisions of AFF members? For me, no. Even in high profile (on AFF cases), for example downgrading at LAX departing to Australia, OK RedRoo stepped in to help out,but there was no acknowledgement (and never could be in this sort of forum) that QF did wrong by the customer, and they would have a more satisfactory approach in the future when someone gets a few hundred dollars for being downgraded involuntarily from J (discount) to Y (full fare).

There were numerous other occasions where a fix has been granted to an individual customer but the root cause remains - to this end RedRoo was on a hiding to nothing. Combine that with announcing sometimes unpopular changes can understand why responding to threads (instead of just browsing) was futile.

 

[RooFlyer]

I don't think the role was ever about helping individuals, but that was a great byproduct.


I believe RRs historic help was a way to promote the company - show to a mouthy lot that Qantas 'looked after people' ( notwithstanding most of the help followed from Qantas stuff ups).


RR was always about handing out the sweeties; but when it came to difficult issues, RR inevitably disappeared.


Frankly won't be missed by me.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Even in high profile (on AFF cases), for example downgrading at LAX departing to Australia, OK RedRoo stepped in to help out...

I'm not familiar with the case where they stepped in to help? in the case of EmilyP I don't think QF was able to help at all? They would not explain how QF calculates a refund in these circumstances.

 

[Pleb Status]

I personally do not miss any of the company reps on AFF. If now official, at least some of the threads/posts trying to troll a response from them should hopefully disappear.

If I have a real issue or comment to make, I will go straight to the offending airline, as I will most likely have to disclose personal details anyway.

Sites like this are all about maximising benefits and loopholes whilst minimising expenditure. I take pride in now being a high revenue but very low margin customer. The airlines (and all businesses) would like to foster the opposite behaviour in their customers. Therefore, any marketing/social media spend is being redirected to 'influence' those with less knowledge of any loopholes etc to increase/maintain overall profit margin.

Trying to convince me (and others via AFF) to spend more to get less is a lost cause. Trying to convince me that their 'simpler and fairer' FF scheme is actually simpler and fairer is a lost cause. Trying to convince me that the QF 789 is a 'game changer' is a lost cause. However, less knowledgeable audiences lap up the QF press releases and then pay the inflated prices that keep their profit high.

 

[Pushka]

I'm not familiar with the case where they stepped in to help? in the case of EmilyP I don't think QF was able to help at all? They would not explain how QF calculates a refund in these circumstances.

I think they did but a confidentiality clause in place.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I think they did but a confidentiality clause in place.

That's speculation isn't it? EmilyP requested the thread closed in December 2014 (wow... 2 years ago!!). No update was provided. AFFers speculated there may have been a confidentiality clause in place, but there's no reason why there should be...

Thread is here: http://www.australianfrequentflyer....rom-business-class-63686-145.html#post1164377

 

[Pushka]

My memory related to pm's. I have no details.

 

[Simo]

Very sad to see RR having a break....

 

[JohnK]

That's probably what it comes down to, we are savvy and know how to extract the best value, and thus our PCV's are lower. But we still represent a fair spend at the same time. It's an interesting balancing act.

I think you'll find the majority of Golds/Platinums on AFF represent no value to Qantas or very little value.

I don't have exact numbers but I'd expect a QF Silver with one international trip to Euope/USA and one trip to say Asia every year mixed in with some domestic flying would spend upwards of $5,000/year. A Gold would spend close to $10,000 and Platinum upwards of $10,000 depending on the mix of travel.

When you visit the AFF QFF forum there is a sticky at the top with the best value status runs. Then when you look at the threads themselves the majority of posts have been on the double SCs offer this month with well over 500 posts.

When you notice the discussion is focused on how one can achieve Platinum status from scratch for ~AUD3,000 you can see why a Silver member or even Bronze member on Twitter is more important to Qantas. I would nit be surprised if the PCV of those Silver/Bronze members is higher than AFF Platinums/Golds.

Sad to see Red Roo go but one can totally understand the reason(s) why.

 

[mviy]

I spent over 10K on QF flights to get WP including some flights getting DSCs and to retain it I'm probably spending nearly 10K including (some flights with DSCs). Yes we can try and work the system but some more than others.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

My response was in relation to "Too Slow". Given my previous paragraph I was wondering what that was referring to.

The core AFF product is a forum and has not changed in over a decade (far as I can tell). While it's not my business and I don't have the insight - I'll take a wild unfounded stab in the dark and suggest the value of the business may not be in the forum but in something much deeper. I know for a fact that FlyerTalk has a very strong and incredibly rich underlying product of which the forum is simply a conduit for them to achieve. But AFF may already be dabbling in this area, I don't know (Can't go into more detail for obvs reasons).

My point is that Qantas and other airlines may maintain a different style of presence here if they could quantify the value. It's hard to measure an ROI from forum interaction, and the easiest way, as a business to solve this problem is to invent a new product which does address these pain points, so that airlines will continue to stick around. Infact, I would have charged Qantas to be part of the community.

I think you'll find the majority of Golds/Platinums on AFF represent no value to Qantas or very little value.

I don't have exact numbers but I'd expect a QF Silver with one international trip to Euope/USA and one trip to say Asia every year mixed in with some domestic flying would spend upwards of $5,000/year. A Gold would spend close to $10,000 and Platinum upwards of $10,000 depending on the mix of travel.

Interesting discussion point. I'm of the opinion that AFF members ARE representative of the greater FF member base, it's just that active AFF/FT members are more granular in their thinking and analysis than most folks. Looking at pure airline spend - I bet AFF represents higher ARPU and member activity than 90% of Qantas FF members.

In addition to this, there are different types of members on this forum.

- Active, regularly posting members
- Registered, active read but inactive post
- Non-registered, views and absorbs information

Hiding behind an avatar on AFF is easy. You don't know who is really watching or who someone is. The site has been around enough where anyone who has done any reasonable amount of flying has stumbled across the site at some point.

Then, looking at the partner loyalty side of the business - I'll bet my first born the -active- AFF base have a higher propensity to take-up new products and earn points than non-AFF members. Thus the AFF base would not be representative of the typical QFF member, but much more valuable.

When you visit the AFF QFF forum there is a sticky at the top with the best value status runs. Then when you look at the threads themselves the majority of posts have been on the double SCs offer this month with well over 500 posts.

When you notice the discussion is focused on how one can achieve Platinum status from scratch for ~AUD3,000 you can see why a Silver member or even Bronze member on Twitter is more important to Qantas. I would nit be surprised if the PCV of those Silver/Bronze members is higher than AFF Platinums/Golds.

Mumbrella calls this genius loyalty marketing. Fact is that status runs fill otherwise empty seats, creates new positive trip reports/content on the web about the airline, creates a happy engaged member, and has almost zero hard cost to the host loyalty program.
The only issue is with oldskool airline people who think it's somehow a lost revenue opportunity for a flight that person may/may not have taken to which I call BS on their logic.
https://mumbrella.com.au/take-14-hour-flight-nowhere-thats-genius-loyalty-marketing-429952

 

[junbugging]

Probably a good opportunity for contemplation about why people stop engaging with this forum.

The signal to noise ratio is crazily low. Which is not necessarily a problem if it's just a club for moderators and their friends and a few like-minded people, but does come home to roost when you attempt to portray yourselves in terms of the number of SCs behind you as a bloc or other ostensible measures of consumer power. I'm guessing the "Verified Status" hasn't amounted to a whole lot in the end. (In addition, other travel companies often offer perks or “special deals” to proven “high value” travellers. By having your existing status readily on-hand we can facilitate this process.)

On the Red Roo issue, QF and QFF were on a hiding to nothing. The number of times people would blurt out "Red Roo?" with some sense of entitlement to an immediate response about absolute monkey-nonsense was just embarrassing. And there was more than one occasion when people would pile on the bandwagon of what really should have just been left as a problem between QF and the individual concerned.

Most of the best tricks probably aren't on AFF any more, but that is also unlikely to have been a huge draw for QFF, seeing people try to exploit every last loophole.

It's a pity there is so little on offer here for people who really love flying, and who do it frequently.