STATUS HOLD? (Unable to fly due to operation)!

[KitKat]

Is the 3 year averaging unofficial rule still current? Haven't heard much success recently - maybe not posted here. Just wondering if QFF have ditched this with the points offer to maintain status nowadays..

 

[RichardMEL]

The problem I see is that Qantas have an annual transactional view of loyalty.

Agreed.

However this is the model for most "loyalty" systems as already discussed. Also as Pushka has outlined, having LTG (plus Silver) and ongoing loyalty bonuses do go some way to rewarding ongoing patronage of the brand. Sure, others do it better (eg: BA GGL) and offer more, but it is something of value (many see Gold as the "sweet spot" of QFF)

What would you propose?

 

[RichardMEL]

Is the 3 year averaging unofficial rule still current? Haven't heard much success recently - maybe not posted here. Just wondering if QFF have ditched this with the points offer to maintain status nowadays..

There is anecdotal evidence posted here that suggests there may be SOME vestige of it around, but it does seem that the status "comp" has largely, but not fully, disappeared. QF has clearly decided to go to the payment system for status renewal rather than the 3 year rule, but as I say there were still posts in recent months from people claiming they had been given a free comp. It's possible that QF have much more focused benchmarks for when they will provide this.

I think it's safe to assume that it's not the norm it once was and certainly not something to assume would happen, unfortunately.

 

[Seat0B]

Agreed.

However this is the model for most "loyalty" systems as already discussed. Also as Pushka has outlined, having LTG (plus Silver) and ongoing loyalty bonuses do go some way to rewarding ongoing patronage of the brand. Sure, others do it better (eg: BA GGL) and offer more, but it is something of value (many see Gold as the "sweet spot" of QFF)

What would you propose?

I started a new thread so as not to hijack the OP thread. But how about a loyalty certificate after every extra x thousand SC that could be used at a time like this to retain status? Or an application of all the excess credits I’ve had over the qualifying/requalifying limit even if only 50% counted - or a reduced requal limit in compassion circumstances or a status hold like offered for pregnancy? Open to other good ideas too.

 

[juddles]

I think that the very fact that so many try to have the rules bent to give them status shows just how attractive the entire notion of status is. Hence it is completely understandable that a business will not cave in..... why on earth would they??

 

[Pushka]

I think that the very fact that so many try to have the rules bent to give them status shows just how attractive the entire notion of status is. Hence it is completely understandable that a business will not cave in..... why on earth would they??

Because in this case it’s likely that a favourable response from them would mean that a consistently loyal patron stays that way?

 

[juddles]

Because in this case it’s likely that a favourable response from them would mean that a consistently loyal patron stays that way?

Pushka, I dislike the fact that my following contribution will probably get you off-side - sorry in advance

A "consistently loyal patron"?? We are talking getting comped silver status. As I have pointed out in other threads, airlines are not exactly a money-spinning industry. The profit that QF makes out of a silver member would not exceed a couple of hundred bucks a year. Absolute max. It is a frequent flyer program. If I only fly once each decade only with Qantas, and with noone else, should they value me as an intensely loyal customer??

If I make the economic decision to do a status run or fly with QF as opposed to another airline, to renew my silver membership, do I really want QF gifting it to others who fall short?

Frequent flyer programs are important to the airline. In an industry with such low margins, this is an area where they actually make more than they lose. Do people want them to undermine that small positive part of their business??

The OP feels it is unfair that there is provision for pregnant women but not for people with medical issues. If they made exemptions for medical issues, surely then people who cannot travel because their pet was sick should also get such flexibility and favoritism? Or someone who cannot travel because they have to work, or pray, or cannot afford a passport? Where does that end?

A particularly difficult area of the OP's post is that they want a "medical exemption", yet they are travelling to the other side of the world in the same period???? If they went PE or J they would qualify for their silver status. So it is NOT sheerly a medical issue - they want the status but do not want to spend the money that would be required.

Harping on as I always do about such things, can someone tell me what other industries give an equivalent to what the OP desires? Does Woolies give you cheaper prices when you are unemployed or sick? Does the local servo give you cheaper fuel??

Sorry for the venom - am in withdrawals....

 

[Pushka]

Pushka, I dislike the fact that my following contribution will probably get you off-side - sorry in advance

A "consistently loyal patron"?? We are talking getting comped silver status. As I have pointed out in other threads, airlines are not exactly a money-spinning industry. The profit that QF makes out of a silver member would not exceed a couple of hundred bucks a year. Absolute max. It is a frequent flyer program. If I only fly once each decade only with Qantas, and with noone else, should they value me as an intensely loyal customer??

If I make the economic decision to do a status run or fly with QF as opposed to another airline, to renew my silver membership, do I really want QF gifting it to others who fall short?

Frequent flyer programs are important to the airline. In an industry with such low margins, this is an area where they actually make more than they lose. Do people want them to undermine that small positive part of their business??

The OP feels it is unfair that there is provision for pregnant women but not for people with medical issues. If they made exemptions for medical issues, surely then people who cannot travel because their pet was sick should also get such flexibility and favoritism? Or someone who cannot travel because they have to work, or pray, or cannot afford a passport? Where does that end?

A particularly difficult area of the OP's post is that they want a "medical exemption", yet they are travelling to the other side of the world in the same period???? If they went PE or J they would qualify for their silver status. So it is NOT sheerly a medical issue - they want the status but do not want to spend the money that would be required.

Harping on as I always do about such things, can someone tell me what other industries give an equivalent to what the OP desires? Does Woolies give you cheaper prices when you are unemployed or sick? Does the local servo give you cheaper fuel??

Sorry for the venom - am in withdrawals....

Actually, I thought this thread was the one started by Ruth Bayley who has been WP for many years, and WP1 for several years during that time and unable to travel this year due to illness and death of her father so my comments were not relevant.

 

[blackcat20]

The problem with allowing a pause for illness is deciding where to draw the line. How sick is sick enough to be granted a pause?

 

[RichardMEL]

The problem with allowing a pause for illness is deciding where to draw the line. How sick is sick enough to be granted a pause?

It's a very slippery slope as juddles suggested. Where does one draw the line?

A "pregnancy pause" at least is a known and defined event. Just about all humans deliver at 9 months give or take a month or so. So it's a known thing.

I was grounded for 5 years due to medical stuff... I neither got nor expected any kind of status pause or comp durng that time.

However my aged cat is sick and actually has curtailed some of my travel...

 

[Pushka]

The problem with allowing a pause for illness is deciding where to draw the line. How sick is sick enough to be granted a pause?

Against medical advice to fly?

 

[Seat0B]

Because in this case it’s likely that a favourable response from them would mean that a consistently loyal patron stays that way?

That's exactly the point Pushka - thank you. I have been very loyal, and as I more towards semi-retirement, will be doing a lot more premium cabin overseas flying (have family living overseas and a BAAAAD skiing habit!). I would put that spend with with Qantas, because as someone else said, status does have its attractions. And now I probably won't. However, looking on the upside, I will now be very free to spend that money with other airlines.

 

[Pushka]

That's exactly the point Pushka - thank you. I have been very loyal, and as I more towards semi-retirement, will be doing a lot more premium cabin overseas flying (have family living overseas and a BAAAAD skiing habit!). I would put that spend with with Qantas, because as someone else said, status does have its attractions. And now I probably won't. However, looking on the upside, I will now be very free to spend that money with other airlines.

Sometimes when one cabin door closes on you another much better one opens up. Well, that’s what I’m hearing on these boards anyway. I must try that out.

 

[Flying mermaid]

Interesting article in AFR on Alan Joyce today, He mentions that he reversed a decision, where someone undergoing cancer treatment asked for a pause and was refused. he is quoted as saying he changed the policy - I suspect it means he changed that decision and allowed a status hold for that person.

 

[RichardMEL]

That's a great gesture by AJ but opens the door to everyone else and sets potential expectation (and thus likely disappointment) ".. but Alan Joyce gave that person with cancert a pause.. what abou tme?"

as much as I love him using his discretion to assist one person I do not love the greyness this now sets up in terms of what QF will or ll not allow and the poitential for.. guess what.. INCONSISTENCY to occur....

 

[love_the_life]

Interesting article in AFR on Alan Joyce today, He mentions that he reversed a decision, where someone undergoing cancer treatment asked for a pause and was refused. he is quoted as saying he changed the policy - I suspect it means he changed that decision and allowed a status hold for that person.

The cynic in me says that this was not poor average Jo or Joanne with cancer.

 

[Flying mermaid]

The cynic in me says that this was not poor average Jo or Joanne with cancer.

Maybe, maybe not - he says he saw the email and stepped in.

 

[fall502]

Approx 3 years ago I underwent back surgery which took nearly 12 months to recover from. I asked my doctor to provide a letter saying that I could not travel due to this and then forwarded this letter and a request to put my Platinum status on hold till I recovered - Qantas acceded to my request.

 

[Pushka]

Approx 3 years ago I underwent back surgery which took nearly 12 months to recover from. I asked my doctor to provide a letter saying that I could not travel due to this and then forwarded this letter and a request to put my Platinum status on hold till I recovered - Qantas acceded to my request.

Some receive it others don’t. Consistently inconsistent.

 

[mrsterryn]

I have to say I would much prefer consistent rules
For example:
NO comping of Platinium. However if you have done X we will automatically offer you WP for X points
No comping of Platinium. How ever if you have done X we will offer automatically offer a challenge.

It is the inconsistencies that make it difficult to work out if you have a chance or not so to speak.