The Virgin Status Run Master Thread

[Deleted member 29185]

I just phoned Velocity to confirm BEFORE I book OOL-SYD-MEL-SYD-OOL to make sure.

The lady advised each sector would be classed as separate for SC earning ability.

Hooray, except as I've mentioned before, I was left wondering if the question was understood (ie two bookings with two connecting flights per booking as opposed to four bookings)

 

[drfs]

Any past flights, as connections, have shown up on my statement as two individual sectors, with corresponding value allocated to each one. Therefor I assume this will be the same. ie: each separate flt number will be considered a sector, thereby attracting relevent SC, as per all other FF programs around the world.. Bring on the SC runs with Virgin

That's not how they appear on my statement. Are you sure?

 

[Enigmaraff]

Would this be the same for MEL-SYD-COO-SYD-MEL? Or would going to Perth via Adelaide be better?

 

[concorde71]

That's not how they appear on my statement. Are you sure?

****!!! You are correct. The connecting flights that were booked as individual continuing sectors on the same days due to meetings etc (ie: BNE-SYD, 3 hrs break, next Flt, SYD-CBR, then CBR-BNE were individual. HOWEVER, a recent PER-BNE via SYD and CBR-BNE via MEL only showed as PER-BNE and CBR-BNE.... Maybe some clarification is required here, as "Creative routing" is something that was really a fun aspect of otherwise dull flying when I used QF. (You know what I mean, the thrill of the chase)

 

[antycbr]

A data point which indicates that for formal connections it's origin-destination:

I just had a MEL-SYD-CBR flight booked as a formal connection from Sunday (before the change) at fare cost $175 (=1225 old SC for Gold) post as 10 not 12 or 13. So this seems to indicate that

a) Old Bookings are going through under the new rules.
b) Further, point a is supported by my points earn of 1313 for the booking - which is $175 * 5pt/$ * 1.5 (the 50% Gold Bonus). If the old rules were in place, the points earn would be 1225.
c) The booking didn't post as 20 - and showed up as a single sector MEL-CBR which is consistent with the system's behaviour before.

From this one data point I'm inferring milk runs where connecting flights price the same as direct services, like I originally proposed (OOL-SYD-MEL) are not going to earn any better than an OOL-MEL would.

I suspect the Zone Table is a list of EVERY valid formal connecting flight on Virgin Australia (i.e. if I pick Canberra as an origin, every destination available as a direct connection from Canberra will be listed in the Zone table).

Of course until we have more data points we won't know exactly how the system behaves.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

So this seems to indicate that
a) Old Bookings are going through under the new rules.

Some will be happy with that, others won't I guess. As someone pointed out in another thread, there will be winners and losers.

A data point which indicates that for formal connections it's origin-destination:
c) The booking didn't post as 20 - and showed up as a single sector MEL-CBR which is consistent with the system's behaviour before.

From this one data point I'm inferring milk runs where connecting flights price the same as direct services, like I originally proposed (OOL-SYD-MEL) are not going to earn any better than an OOL-MEL would.

Oh well, easy come, easy go. A pity, I was looking forward to having some fun with connecting flights. This does however, futher support my previous gripe that the Velocity O/S call centre staff do have language barriers when understanding questions. I was specific in asking about connecting flights and even gave the SC tally for OOL-SYD-MEL as 40 for flexi and she confirmed that was the case. It appears not and I'm suspecting that although I mentioned connecting flights on the one booking, she assumed connecting flights made with two bookings.

I can understand the old system points tally for connecting flights, as it was simply based on a dollar spend + status tier bonus so sectors didn't come into it at all. It's only now that this sector issue has cropped up.

I suspect the Zone Table is a list of EVERY valid formal connecting flight on Virgin Australia (i.e. if I pick Canberra as an origin, every destination available as a direct connection from Canberra will be listed in the Zone table).

If we have to rely on the zone tables, VA needs to urgently get someone to do some houskeeping there. It's a pain to read because it's all over the place like a mad dogs breakfast. Take Zone 1 as just 1 example. BNE desitinations are split up, same as OOL destinations and others, meaning we can't just look to althabetical order, we have to search through the lot (and this problem is worse in other zones). As another example, OOL-NTL seems to be at odds. With the recent changes, there appears to be no longer direct flights OOL-NTL (which would have been Zone 1) but now it seems they are all OOl-MEL-NTL which should be Zone 2, but NTL-OOL is listed as Zone 1 . If VA are going to a milage based programme, it surely has to respresent the miles flown, or is there still the odd direct OOl-NTL flight so they can shove it Zone 1 despite the fact we have to usually fly over 1300 miles to get there?

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Would this be the same for MEL-SYD-COO-SYD-MEL? Or would going to Perth via Adelaide be better?

Might pay to wait until we get some qualified feedback (hopefully from VA authorised reps) before getting your hopes up!

But to answer your question, if the sectors are classed as separate for SCs, then the MEL-SYD-OOL-SYD-MEL would be better value with 80 SCs earned for $418 (flexi) or $5.23/SC. On the MEL-ADL-PER-ADL-MEL run, 100SCs would cost around $698 (flexi) or $6.98/SC. But all that now seems like a moot point

 

[oz_mark]

c) The booking didn't post as 20 - and showed up as a single sector MEL-CBR which is consistent with the system's behaviour before.

From this one data point I'm inferring milk runs where connecting flights price the same as direct services, like I originally proposed (OOL-SYD-MEL) are not going to earn any better than an OOL-MEL would.

[...]


Of course until we have more data points we won't know exactly how the system behaves.

It may well be consistent with the way the system behaved before, but does not seem consistent with the explanation on the page Program Update | Velocity Rewards

The following table shows the new earn rates for each sector*

and

*A sector is a direct flight from one destination to another.

I think it is hard to mount the argument that a flight MEL - SYD and then a flight SYD-CBR is anything other than two sectors under the definition given.

 

[Mal]

Hmm, hopefully the rules will be clarified. Have started doing my sums. Best I can see so far is somewhere about $4.30/sc. But my investigations are only in their early stage. Plenty of more work to be done, as well as understanding DJ routes better.

Have also started doing my sums overseas. Not going to comment further (yet).
.

 

[antycbr]

I think it is hard to mount the argument that a flight MEL - SYD and then a flight SYD-CBR is anything other than two sectors under the definition given.

I agree with you! I think that Virgin have redefined "sector" in this context away from what we typically mean (change of flight number a la QF) to mean "Trip" which is basically Origin-Destination direct mileage, with no consideration as to whether it's one flight or two flights booked as formal connections. I think we've been conditioned with the QF definition of sector.

From Virgin Australia's perspective, this is a smart move. Obviously a direct flight MEL-CBR is less costly in operational terms than two formal connection flights MEL-SYD-CBR. This seems by design to stop people gaming the system by looking for connecting flights - this was a feature of the old system being purely spend based, and it appears they've managed to retain it in the new system.

I would recommend that the Velocity website be changed, if this is the case, to say something like "Status credits are earnt per Trip, where a Trip is a direct flight or formal connecting flight between an origin and a destination."

 

[Mal]

I agree with you! I think that Virgin have redefined "sector" in this context away from what we typically mean (change of flight number a la QF) to mean "Trip" which is basically Origin-Destination direct mileage, with no consideration as to whether it's one flight or two flights booked as formal connections. I think we've been conditioned with the QF definition of sector.

I don't agree. A sector is not two connecting flights, it is individual flight segments. Why let Velocity redefine what a sector is?

Either they need to change their IT to meet the requirements of a sector, or they need to change the scheme to reflect better the earning ability.

 

[antycbr]

I don't agree. A sector is not two connecting flights, it is individual flight segments. Why let Velocity redefine what a sector is?

Either they need to change their IT to meet the requirements of a sector, or they need to change the scheme to reflect better the earning ability.

I think if they change the wording on the website, as I proposed further down in my post, then everyone would understand where they are coming from. There's a clear operational efficiency reason why you'd set up your scheme this way.

 

[concorde71]

Just did a quick calculation on an upcoming trip BNE-CBR $459 in premium economy direct earns 30SC. Go flexi BNE-MEL then MEL-CBR, booked as Multi Trip domestic. Cost $474, gaining 50 SC. $15 for 20 extra SC, plus extra lounge visit (2 Beers = $15). Flexi fare is as handy as premium, and have Gold so lounge is free. Just have to make enough time to do it. So there is some way around it, if indeed it is per trip, not per sector as is appearing to be the case. Just a bit dissapointed if the current earning is not just a glitch. You cant have your cake and eat it too, let us be creative.

HOWEVER.... Should we be able to do it PER SECTOR it would be able to be routed BNE-MEL-CBR, PE fare $459 (Only available for the rtn now) and 75 SC each way ... So as stated further back, It really needs to be officially calarified as to what the actual intended rate / sector earn is

 

[oz_mark]

I agree with you! I think that Virgin have redefined "sector" in this context away from what we typically mean (change of flight number a la QF) to mean "Trip" which is basically Origin-Destination direct mileage, with no consideration as to whether it's one flight or two flights booked as formal connections. I think we've been conditioned with the QF definition of sector.

I don't doubt that having points calculated on the cost of the trip, and then having SC's calculated per sector is problematic from an implementation perspective, we can only go with what they have described on the website. That is SC's are calculated per sector and that is defined in terms of direct flights.

I would recommend that the Velocity website be changed, if this is the case, to say something like "Status credits are earnt per Trip, where a Trip is a direct flight or formal connecting flight between an origin and a destination."

Certainly the statement of how it works, and the implementation of how it works should coincide.

 

[JB007]

So does this mean that if I book my upcoming US trip as Melbourne to New York through V Australia, I will only get 50 SC's (in Discount Economy) rather than the 60 because of having to change to another flight with a different carrier?

This doesn't encourage booking through to your final destination, I would be better off booking a return ML - LAX and then a LAX - JFK through Delta (or VX until the joint venture comes through)

I imagine the same would also be true for those flying to LHR and other European destinations which requires one stop but only receives one lot of status credits.

 

[Hilius]

I think it's more likely that the description on the site (SCs accrue on each sector) is right, and the reports of SCs only accruing on the whole trip are teething problems or something arising from the changes to the computer system. I find it hard to believe that whoever wrote the description got the method of calculation completely wrong, and no one picked up the error before the site went live, and no one has realised the error in the days following and changed it.

If the SCs-per-trip method is the system they're going with, they'll want to change the website quick smart to avoid false advertising issues.

 

[concorde71]

So does this mean that if I book my upcoming US trip as Melbourne to New York through V Australia, I will only get 50 SC's (in Discount Economy) rather than the 60 because of having to change to another flight with a different carrier?

This doesn't encourage booking through to your final destination, I would be better off booking a return ML - LAX and then a LAX - JFK through Delta (or VX until the joint venture comes through)

I imagine the same would also be true for those flying to LHR and other European destinations which requires one stop but only receives one lot of status credits.

I think these questions are best addressed by someone within VA. Please share the responses with us, as we would all like to know the outcome,.
The program has had many changes, and I think it needs a bit of tweaking, and possibly implementation has some glitches, however, its best to talk to the horses mouth, so to speak, and get the correct answers. May I suggest Velocity rewards PM, as it seems the call centre staff have no idea ATM. Im sure once it all settles down things will be clear. It certainly seems its gone from drip feed to full on flood with new stuff from VA, which is good, but they probably should get the wording right on their websit re SC etc, especially when we all have our own ideas on what we expect / want. Whatever the result, we are already trying to work out ways to maximise SC. Unfortunately, I think its been too well thought out, so there will be no real loophole, which from a business perspective is a solid decision, but we will all whinge and cough that we cant fit through the loophole Myself included Bottom line, even if we get the equivelent SC as the red rat, then we are in front, because the service, and basic offering is superior in all ways (Thats My Opinion only obviously, please dont flame me )

 

[777]

I know people get flamed for mentioning environmental concerns around FF forums however i'm just going to jump in and say this...

I think a system that *doesn't* reward flyers extra for taking circuitous and inefficient routes from A-B is a better system in a world where fuel is scarce and greenhouse gas pollution is a serious concern.

Yes, I know that the "loophole" would be something we'd all probably exploit if it existed but i think from an operational, financial and environmental point of view i'd prefer that it didn't.

<flame suit on for Frequent Flyer apostasy>

 

[oz_mark]

I know people get flamed for mentioning environmental concerns around FF forums however i'm just going to jump in and say this...

I think a system that *doesn't* reward flyers extra for taking circuitous and inefficient routes from A-B is a better system in a world where fuel is scarce and greenhouse gas pollution is a serious concern.

Yes, I know that the "loophole" would be something we'd all probably exploit if it existed but i think from an operational, financial and environmental point of view i'd prefer that it didn't.

<flame suit on for Frequent Flyer apostasy>

I don't disagree with you, but I do think that things should work the way they are stated to work.

Whether you change the description of how it works to match the implementation - or change the implementation to match the description is a choice for VA to make.

 

[777]

I don't disagree with you, but I do think that things should work the way they are stated to work.

Whether you change the description of how it works to match the implementation - or change the implementation to match the description is a choice for VA to make.

I agree with you entirely on that.

As it stands from what is posted on the web site i don't have a clue how it works or how it is supposed to work and that really should only take someone adding a few extra sentences to the section of Status Credits. It really can't be that hard.