RSA MEL F Lounge Qantas Official Response (Refused Drinks)

[RooFlyer]

IIRC the first insult is from an ex-mod. The hatred is evident in every key stroke - that story must be a ripper! LOL

I had a thought that he may be the "un-named" guest on Buzz's tour, in which case there would be rich sport, all day !!

I might just wander over there now and see if there's any amusement in the offing.

 

[Princess Fiona]

I had a thought that he may be the "un-named" guest on Buzz's tour, in which case there would be rich sport, all day !!

I might just wander over there now and see if there's any amusement in the offing.

I can say he's definitely not the un-named guest unless we are all in a dodgy re-make of that atrocious Nicholas Cage movie Face Off

 

[Mr_Orange]

I can say he's definitely not the un-named guest unless we are all in a dodgy re-make of that atrocious Nicholas Cage movie Face Off

Was that an atrocious Nicholas Cage film, or an atrocious John Travolta film?

 

[opusman]

DN was on AFF when I first joined, and seemed very grouchy. No idea what led him to leave but I'm sure it would be an interesting story.

Truth be told, the BA lounges are probably too busy dealing with food poisoning to worry about RSA policy

 

[kpc]

DN was on AFF when I first joined, and seemed very grouchy. No idea what led him to leave but I'm sure it would be an interesting story.

Truth be told, the BA lounges are probably too busy dealing with food poisoning to worry about RSA policy

Black or White with no shades of grey...rubbed many here the wrong way and left with bat and ball in hand...

 

[RooFlyer]

I can say he's definitely not the un-named guest unless we are all in a dodgy re-make of that atrocious Nicholas Cage movie Face Off

Dash. I though 'samurai swords' = Noble One = dual, punning meaning (OK, too many cryptic crosswords). But I hope some-one can share the story on the bus.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Was that an atrocious Nicholas Cage film, or an atrocious John Travolta film?

It was so atrocious I think they may both have been in it

 

[boomy]

The number of passengers accessing the Flounge via J*d would be minuscule (excluding AFF piss ups) compared to the general Flounge clientele.

True, but I suspect this minuscule number is highly represented in this forum

 

[amaroo]

True, but I suspect this minuscule number is highly represented in this forum

[video=youtube;TFePVulqYSc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFePVulqYSc[/video]

...........

 

[woodborer]

I had a thought that he may be the "un-named" guest on Buzz's tour, in which case there would be rich sport, all day !!

There's always the tantalising proposition that you may have been half right.

 

[serfty]

DN propones minimal time at airports, often counseling against 1 hour+ lounge stays on FT and I do not believe consumes alcohol, certainly not when flying.

So, given that, and to keep this on topic, any opinion he would have on this thread would be generally irrelevant.

(Aside from being unlikely to ever be seen on a Wine Tasting tour ... )

 

[medhead]

DN propones minimal time at airports, often counseling against 1 hour+ lounge stays on FT and I do not believe consumes alcohol, certainly not when flying.

So, given that, and to keep this on topic, any opinion he would have on this thread would be generally irrelevant.

(Aside from being unlikely to ever be seen on a Wine Tasting tour ... )

Yet he seemed to always bang on about his AA OWS not getting him into Qantas Domestic Business lounges when on AFF.

 

[offshore171]

New theory:

Maybe the OP has what I call "crazy eyes".

You know those people whose eyes swivel and dart and have this permanent look of being "substance affected" when they are in fact not.

A definite challenge for bar staff!

 

[medhead]

New theory:

Maybe the OP has what I call "crazy eyes".

You know those people whose eyes swivel and dart and have this permanent look of being "substance affected" when they are in fact not.

A definite challenge for bar staff!

I know you're talking tongue in cheek, sorry to get serious.

But it should not be a challenge for the staff. The requirement as posted by Serfty is for there to be reasonable grounds for believing that it is the result of consumption of liquor.

3AB What is intoxication?

(1) For the purposes of this Act, a person is in a state of intoxication if his or her speech, balance, co-ordination or behaviour is noticeably affected and there are reasonable grounds for believing that this is the result of the consumption of liquor.

That reply was bulldust!

Here's the act:

www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/LTObject_Store/LTObjSt7.nsf/DDE300B846EED9C7CA257616000A3571/01506E44A91C8614CA257B4200031872/$FILE/09-134sr010bookmarked.pdf

Here the pertinent definition:



Here's the actual regulation:

There is nothing i can see regarding anticipation of a guest becoming intoxicated ... nor of counting drinks.

 

[tuapekastar]

Black or White with no shades of grey...rubbed many here the wrong way and left with bat and ball in hand...

If ever the term 'flounced out in a huff' was apt...

 

[k_sheep]

Hmm last month I was in SYD trying to get a spa appointment on a JQ flight (though it was international) when they mentioned they were "trying to look after the QF81 passengers first" and would get back to me. They managed to scrounge up an appointment for me, but not the Mr - and when I tried to give him my slot, the staff said I had to take it as I was "booked in". Discrimination against JQ AND the non WP guest?

Just to add more fuel to the fire

 

[turtlemichael]

At the risk of being Mr. Alone, DN was the most helpful to me of all people who posted here in my early days. I gained a great deal from him and I continue to appreciate his assistance.

 

[tuapekastar]

At the risk of being Mr. Alone, DN was the most helpful to me of all people who posted here in my early days. I gained a great deal from him and I continue to appreciate his assistance.

You are not alone.

He was good enough to give me 30 minutes of his time one day long ago (for the price of a coffee), which I have previously acknowledged (in another thread/s). I had already gleaned most of what he told me from reading the forum, but still got one or two useful things for which I was most appreciative.

He still flounced out of here in a huff though, and put many people offside while he was here. His post on the BA thread (#2) re this one does him no credit at all. A shame, given his undoubted knowledge of many things airline/airfare.

 

[RichardMEL]

Hmm last month I was in SYD trying to get a spa appointment on a JQ flight (though it was international) when they mentioned they were "trying to look after the QF81 passengers first" and would get back to me. They managed to scrounge up an appointment for me, but not the Mr - and when I tried to give him my slot, the staff said I had to take it as I was "booked in". Discrimination against JQ AND the non WP guest?

Just to add more fuel to the fire

I do believe the spa treatment slots have always been given as priority to actual F passengers, while others on a "space available" system.

Indeed AusBT seems to agree

Passengers booked in Qantas first class out of Sydney and Melbourne receive a phone call the day before they fly, offering their choice of treatment and session time.
For everybody else visiting the Qantas First Lounges – including Platinum-grade Qantas Frequent Flyers and travellers on Emirates and Oneworld partner airlines (including British Airways, Cathay Pacific and Malaysia Airlines) – the treatments are available on a 'first come, first blissed out' basis.

Qantas First Lounge spa: new treatments, more preflight pampering - Australian Business Traveller

(I am unable to find in a quick search an actual policy on this on the QF website though)

Certainly I've always had a phone call the day before asking if I want to book a spa time. Amusingly the last time I was flying in QF F and got the call prior to QF9 last year when I checked in at MEL the staff there again said "Are you SURE you don't want a spa treatment this evening sir?" which was quite funny. That's not my cup of tea personally so I politely declined.

 

[unnamed]

I can say he's definitely not the un-named guest unless we are all in a dodgy re-make of that atrocious Nicholas Cage movie Face Off

As per usual Fiona you are correct... sorry to disappoint the masses who were hoping I was someone else