QFF attribute all points not sold to partners as being paid by "marketing budget" in the slide above.
That slide only referred to points being sold to partners (which would include anywhere revenue is earned from points, including QF Wine, Insurance, Hotels etc. and any one else paying for points - which I am sure includes partner airlines). The only marketing references are actually to revenue, not cost.
The only thing sitting on the balance sheet is the revenue received in advance (for points sold), the points themselves do not. When no revenue is received (i.e. points issue by Qantas directly, for flights on QF metal etc) then there is nothing that can realistically be recorded. The accounting occurs when the points are redeemed - there may be some revenue (fuel fines etc.), but mostly cost of the redemption. As there is no segregation of how points were paid for in the first place, some of the overall revenue received in advance is taken as income (in effect, the fair value attributed to each point that makes up that pool is diluted by the points issued without contributing to the pool). Hence "profit" is generated even when points issued by QF for nothing are redeemed.
As profit is taxed (and expenses incurred reduce profit), there is no way that issuing points for nothing would be allowed to generate an expense to reduce profit. Just like a certain portion of the income received from points sold is recognised as revenue received in advance (and held on the balance sheet as such) and not taxable, any future liability for the redemption of points is only a potential future cost - which is not ascertainable. The cost could be nothing (breakage), or very little if the points are devalued by QF at some stage.
The only real gripe about marketing (and within QF), is the shift of profit to Loyalty because of the low "cost" attributed to seats being sold - i.e. Loyalty gets to make the profit, not the flying side. No doubt, in the past, this was appropriate, as the only seats being offered as rewards were those not expected to be sold - so the cost was simply that incremental cost of catering, baggage handling and some fuel). With the growth in the sale of points, I suspect more valuable seats that might have been sold are being included to keep the punters interested, but no doubt only be "purchased" by loyalty at the old low rates. With P+P and CR+, however, where the seats are being purchased based on an effectively fixed conversion rate based on an actual fare - which yield management are expecting to be able to achieve for the seat, there is no logical reason that the flying side should not be receiving that "revenue" from Loyalty. All a bit moot, until and unless someone decides to "sell" the loyalty business (as has been done elsewhere). At that point, opaque internal cost allocation will not be possible, and the value of loyalty that is being spruiked now would be revealed as not necessarily realistic.
