Should frequent flyer status be easier or harder to earn?

[Mattg]

In general, do you think airlines should make it easier, harder or the same as it is now to earn status?

On one hand, it's nice when status is easy to earn because it's more accessible. On the other hand, when more people have status, the benefits can become diluted, lounges get overcrowded and airlines will inevitably take away benefits because they cost too much to provide to a larger amount of people.

I suspect that most people would like the threshold for earning status to be just below the amount of status credits they personally earn. But when thinking about frequent flyer programs generally - what do you think?

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Airline status never forefront in my mind - those thoughts are totally consumed by ‘How do I cultivate and harvest sufficient FF pts in various programs so I can weasel into pointy end on any flight I choose to fly?’ Clearly others hooks totally diff views and chase status like it’s the holy grail - good thing we don’t all like the same girl or boy huh?

 

[RooFlyer]

Current thresholds are OK I think. Crowding etc issues has been exacerbated recently due to over generous status extensions coupled with the surge in post-C flying.

To get rid of the crowding at HBA QP, you'd have to double the qualification hurdles.

 

[Bundy Bear]

If you are life time gold or close to it then you want it harder. If you are a long way off and say nearly silver you want it easier.
Just over 2100 SCs to go you can guess what i might have voted.

 

[levelnine]

Isn't the answer always 'easier for me, harder for others'?

I'm not sure it's the right question to ask in the current environment, however.

It's relatively clear that the world is moving towards revenue-based programs. American Airlines are all the way there — you can now earn top tier status without setting foot on a plane if you're willing to put enough spend through an AA credit card. Many other airlines are on the same trajectory even though they have not gone as far as AA yet — AF/KL, BA, DL, UA, etc etc etc.

Therefore, I think the more pertinent question is whether you think frequent flyer status should be based on how profitable you are to the airline (ie revenue) or how much you have flown on the airline and its partners (ie distance).

One privileges financial/shopping tricks to get to elite status (eg manufactured spend, credit card sign-up bonuses, shopping portal offers) while the other privileges routing/booking tricks to get to elite status (eg gaming DSC offers, status runs, indirect routings etc).

 

[CaptJCool]

Because lounge access is not solely tied to status as one can buy a Club membership or be a friend of the member, overcrowding is inevitable
You can just buy your way in
Or
You can hustle your way (double status credits) or be a FF Points Earner and J or F in (oh the glory days of JASA & FASA)
You can elect your MP or Senator in (Chairman’s lounge)
Once a time ago You could govt employee your way in (Virgin lounge Canberra)
Or you can Sliver your way in with 2 comps for Silver

The airlines have known lounge accesses delivers loyalty

At 10 SCs a regular single leg Syd-Melb commuter needs 4 terms of weekly trips (35) to qualify for SG
AND 70 to qualify for WP

If that’s at rede deal pricing that’s at minimum spend of $129 $18,000
Realistically more like $300 = $42,000

If aft flexi fare $615 for 20 SC
$43,000

J @ $981 x 35 = $34,355
Wow financially easier
Either way, that puts the bar at such a high cost level as to be unachievable for a self funder
For a business well, you’re not paying, they are

Of course DSC halves the cost
And smart status runs on DSC halves and halves again
The magical $2,500-$4,000 figure to reach WP For an international series of flights

Domestic J dog legs were lil more expensive at say $7,000 for WP

So for the SC game players it’s fairly simple to get a better deal
For the pay your own way, at the SLOW earn rate it’s too high

And then there’s the LTG Crowd clogging up the lounges on the career earnt my boss paid most of the fares freebie …..

 

[justinbrett]

Regular DSCs are a joke. It just means you can get status at half the rate if you can be organised with bookings.

I‘m not saying get rid of them, but make them unpredictable to the extent you can’t rely on them.

 

[bPeteb]

I'm one of the few saying slightly easier. Discussed on another thread is starting each year with some recognition of your life time status. Maybe 50%? Approx 3k from LTG. Work travel is now zero. I'd also like QF to offer family sc pooling.

 

[exceladdict]

Isn't the answer always 'easier for me, harder for others'?

I was going to say something similar. I crossed WP for the first time (1400) initially thanks to 210 rollover and 300 or so DSC. But now it's looking like i'd have come close without either of these, so if/when the lounges are full I'll all of a sudden resent the fact these leg-ups made it easier, while still wanting the option of benefiting from them in future years. How perspectives change!

Regular DSCs are a joke. It just means you can get status at half the rate if you can be organised with bookings.

I‘m not saying get rid of them, but make them unpredictable to the extent you can’t rely on them.

They're kind of like price promotions in a retail context - once customers become use to them, they're very hard to snap out of. I feel like this year it attracted more attention than previously from people otherwise less interested in status.

I'd also like QF to offer family sc pooling.

I fear this would only be introduced if tier thresholds were also increased at the same time.

 

[Flyfrequently]

I'm one of the few saying slightly easier.

I'd also like QF to offer family sc pooling.

Agree on both counts @bPeteb.

Always been self funded for work and also funded leisure over the decades with the now well travelled Flyfrequently offspring!

Only in (pre covid) retirement have we achieved SG.
Never really took much notice of status credits, focused on points accrual. To be fair though, we have been fortunate with F&J CR.

Good topic for discussion thanks @Mattg

 

[downgraded]

self funded for work

A bit of an oxymoron under Australian tax regime.

 

[pauly7]

I think it’s completely case by case dependent on the airline. Some airlines are far too easy in my opinion. Some I think are strangely hard.

 

[Mattg]

One of the things that inspired me to start this thread is that I've done a lot of flying this month on Lufthansa Group airlines and Air Astana. On both of these carriers, top-tier status is quite difficult to earn (or it's not that common that people living in these countries would earn it), so the numbers of people with tiers like HON-Circle or Air Astana's Platinum status are low. But conversely, the benefits are very good and these people get looked after well. So it seems like making status harder to earn could be a nice thing for those who earn it.

On the other hand, Velocity status is relatively easy to earn but the benefits are limited once you leave Australia (compared to, say, Qantas or Star Alliance status).

 

[levelnine]

so the numbers of people with tiers like HON-Circle or Air Astana's Platinum status are low

Do we know that? LH has a near monopoly over non-stop premium international travel in a country that would have large numbers of very frequent travellers (especially business travellers). If that's the case, LH sets the attain/retain threshold so high simply to avoid the program becoming overwhelmed.

It is all about demand and supply. Velocity has to set the status thresholds so low because there is such little demand for it. If VA were part of *A, for example, they'd have pretty much every business & frequent traveller in Australia beating down their doors to get status. Of course, one of the reasons there is such low demand for Velocity status is that it offers so little in the way of benefits. It is, therefore, a bit of a catch-22.

 

[MooTime]

such little demand for it

not sure about Velocity having so little demand for it, I mean have you seen some of the lounges, sardines comes to mind.

it offers so little in the way of benefits.

so little in terms of benefits, hmm Economy X delivers plenty of leg room, something QF don't offer, row 4 on QF yeah right, been bumped from there at the gate more often than bumps in an Origin match.

IMO the whole status to premium tiers revolves around how much cash it takes to get there. from own pocket if one's to spend ~$2.5k for Velocity Platinum during DSC well so be it. QF would be more of course, some will know a figure, I don't.

As many have said it's generally heading towards revenue spend to tier status.

 

[tdimdad]

What would this question sound if turned a little sideways: what'd be suitable ratios of FF members at each tier?

Using QF as an example because they have an extra tier inside the top level, would something like this be fair:
Plat 1 = top 1% of the members,
Plat = top 5%,
Gold = top 15%,
Silver = top 30%,
Bronze = the rest of FF members?

What would that look like in comparison to the membership in a program and mean in the utilisation of the benefits?
The ratios would quite naturally trigger gradual shifts in thresholds to keep the groups similar relative to each other over time.

 

[Mattg]

Do we know that? LH has a near monopoly over non-stop premium international travel in a country that would have large numbers of very frequent travellers (especially business travellers). If that's the case, LH sets the attain/retain threshold so high simply to avoid the program becoming overwhelmed.

It is all about demand and supply. Velocity has to set the status thresholds so low because there is such little demand for it. If VA were part of *A, for example, they'd have pretty much every business & frequent traveller in Australia beating down their doors to get status. Of course, one of the reasons there is such low demand for Velocity status is that it offers so little in the way of benefits. It is, therefore, a bit of a catch-22.

The supply & demand argument makes sense.

I have no data on the number of HON-Circle members - I've just noticed after doing a lot of flying on Lufthansa/Swiss/Austrian/Brussels Airlines that there are very few people using the special benefits reserved for HON-Circle members. For example, the roped-off section for HON-Circle members in the BRU lounge was empty when I visited. And when priority boarding for HON-Circle/F is called, there generally don't seem to be many people coming forward. Just little things like that. Of course, things could be different at a place like BRU when European parliament is sitting

I do think that Velocity would need to increase the thresholds for earning status if it joined Star Alliance. The upshot is that the status would also be worth more

 

[levelnine]

not sure about Velocity having so little demand for it, I mean have you seen some of the lounges, sardines comes to mind.

All that indicates is that they've been successful at giving status away for peanuts. They wouldn't have family pooling, recurrent DSC offers, SC earn at Coles, free lounge access with Amex Plat, etc etc if people were busting down the doors for Velocity status.

so little in terms of benefits, hmm Economy X delivers plenty of leg room, something QF don't offer, row 4 on QF yeah right, been bumped from there at the gate more often than bumps in an Origin match.

No one wants to attain top tier status with an airline then have to consult the depths of a website to work out their benefits on each carrier then beg & fight for those benefits at the start of their trip. That's what suppresses demand for Velocity's program.

 

[SeatBackForward]

Remember when Frequent Flyers were because they frequently flew? Now these programs are much more about revenue, of which none needs to be from flying at all. Perhaps they need to revert to a tiered system that rewards for flying, vs different category of rewards for revenue?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I have a slightly different take. No issues with the ease - or otherwise - of FF status accrual. But… have an issue when that accrual dilutes premium cabin benefits.

For example some ‘general lounges’ have such a wide eligibility threshold that the service offering is priced at the lowest common denominator… economy class.

similarly in some first class lounges with a broad eligibility, the service offering is pitched lower than would otherwise be reflective of the class the lounge is aimed at.

Happy for a status-based lounge, but it should be differentiated from class-of-service lounges. Examples: KrisGold lounge in Singapore as a status-based lounge. And at the other end - concorde room, First class terminal, SQ Private room.

Some airlines do their general lounges really well, like AA’s flagship lounges offering full and extensive meals together with premium beverages and champagne. CX comes about half-way… things like champagne, but the food isn’t as good.