Would you still fly Qantas if it had no frequent flyer program?

[Quickstatus]

BFOD does not necessarily mean "cheapest". There are several factors involved, including operating airline, hard product, soft product, timing, connections, price, and even for that matter FF benefits

"BFOD even with FF program" merely suggests that other factors other than FF program are possibly more important in the calculations.

 

[Easy Tiger]

BFOD for sure. Great thought provoking question Matt!

 

[eastwest101]

BFOD does not necessarily mean "cheapest". There are several factors involved, including operating airline, hard product, soft product, timing, connections, price, and even for that matter FF benefits

"BFOD even with FF program" merely suggests that other factors other than FF program are possibly more important in the calculations.

Yeah - I guess BFOD would describe the choice as only being 3-3 Y class with 30" or 31" seat pitch and assuming all soft products are the same and route network and frequency would be similar across competitors, a sort of quasi-Areoflot situation. In a competitive market, its unlikely that airline seats would become an interchangeable standardized commodity, and different airlines would experiment with different seat pitches/baggage inclusions and soft products like food and drink to differentiate themselves from their competitors.

If there was no variation in the product then BFOD and convenience/timing would be the main deciding factor.

But I think the rather hypothetical question originally posed was that if you removed all the FF benefits and status from the domestic airlines as they currently operate, and with their current fleet and cabin fit-out as they currently are, then I expect that Qantas might be able to maintain a very thin premium over the middle of the market with things like free food and some free drinks, the middle of the market being Rex and then Virgin, and I would expect that Jetstar would have to reduce its prices. This is a very hypothetical question as the cost base for Qantas would might possibly be lower without having to run large lounges but their cashflows from the frequent flyer business would also cease to exist, but if the labour costs and industrial landscape remain unchanged then Qantas would still have higher costs than its competitors and would have difficulty without a frequent flyer program, especially since they operate the older and less fuel-efficient aircraft and Jetstar operate the newer and more fuel-efficient aircraft.

Aviation has high barriers to entry but fortunately, most markets are competitive, and market participants are inventive in working out how to differentiate their products from their competitors.

I think a more troubling but unlikely hypothetical would be - if you removed all the safety standards of seats and seatbelts and aircraft evacuation rules with the current fleet of aircraft in use and in production, how dense a configuration would the market turn up and how many people could the accountants fit in a B738 or an A320? And at what price point would people be prepared to pay for a seat or even for leg-room?

 

[Daver6]

For international, highly unlikely I'd stick with QF. Work travel is essentially Y or if I'm lucky Y+. However, flying QF gives me an opportunity to play the upgrade lottery. Take that away and then what's the point?

If I was paying for J fares, QF would need to be cheaper than the international competition since their product is generally inferior.

 

[bashworth]

Although I have been a Qantas member for 25 years (currently Gold) I always look at the entire package.
For example the last time I bought a business RTW it was with Lufthansa.
When doing my assessment of the package in the past I tended to value each Q point at 2-3 cents. Since COVID, and much less availability for premium seats on points, I now put a value on them of one cent.

 

[Quickstatus]

And at what price point would people be prepared to pay for a seat or even for leg-room?

I think there are several price points. The market segments in a way to provide choices for everyone. However there are virtual chains which modify consumer behaviour and increases consumer stickiness (loyalty). One virtual chain is the FF program

A FF program artificially increases prices - QF loyalty for example is one of the top performers (if not within the top 1 or 2) within the QF group. That said, not all FF programs do as well.

 

[Quickstatus]

dense a configuration would the market turn up

O'Leary toying with the idea of standing room tickets for RK is one.

 

[jase05]

O'Leary toying with the idea of standing room tickets for RK is one.

When I was living in the UK briefly about 20 years ago it was a bit of a talking point at the time and funny enough plenty of friends and family at the time said they would absolutely fly say London to Paris standing up if the fare was right. Not something that appealed to me at the time and definitely wouldn’t now. I can never see the safety regulators allowing it regardless

 

[Mattg]

It's quite interesting, isn't it, that frequent flyer programs seem to reduce price elasticity, allowing airlines to charge higher fares. At the same time, the loyalty program itself is a major profit centre. So it generates increased revenue for the airline in multiple ways.

If this scenario could be replicated for all airlines (which it isn't), it would be hard to see why any airline wouldn't have a program!

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Probably not. I'd then just look at the prices and schedule and choose whatever one is best. Alternatively, I might book Air New Zealand for Australian domestic flights and then just credit it to my United account to earn status that way.

-RooFlyer88

 

[dairyfloss]

I'd suggest if there was no FF programs, that QF - and indeed all others - would need to sizeably up their game on-board, on the ground and in any exclusive 'class of service' lounges, in order to compete.

Based on my experiences with QF & VA, and assuming I'd continue to fly J as I have been, I would still fly QF domestically for their generally better and more wide reaching product on the ground and in the air (again, this assumes improvements as they would need - *cough* J lounges & J meals *cough*), and would fly a mix of carriers internationally, with SQ taking most of my money to Asia and Europe, and QF perhaps still getting my hard-earned for Pacific landings and crossings.

Of course, QFF would be the last airline in the world to get rid of its QFF program... so it doesn't really matter much what I'd do!

Cheers,
Matt.

 

[Quickstatus]

I can never see the safety regulators allowing it regardless

Is a seated passenger safer than a standing passenger with a standing “seat and seatbelt”
I’m not sure that the current dogma is correct

Many passengers will sacrifice comfort for price

that frequent flyer programs seem to reduce price elasticity,

Correct. Except that the considerations on offer with FF status do not have a price which makes it difficult to compare.
However those who have embraced BFOD often see an environment where they are not having to run the hamster wheel to maintain those so called “freebies” . And overall it might be cheaper…QF loyalty $ in the airline pocket or the consumer.

 

[Basalt]

Agree, great question. Easy answer:

No, nup, negatory.

My partner and I are able to collect enough QFF points for a couple trips a year for our family of 4 with a mix of international and domestic every year, often with legs in J. Combine with WP/PC+ and things like Flounge experiences even when flying Jet* Y make the QFF appealing to us. We're big drinkers, so lounge access gives us a looot of value.
Drop the FF program, and then there's zero reason for us to remain loyal. BFOD all the way.

 

[harvyk]

My first year of serious travel I never bothered signing up to QFF, and yet I still flew with QF on most flights. Had a couple of DJ and NZ flights in there but it was still mainly red rat.

It wasn't until the end of the year that I realised that I'd have made PS had I been QFF ( and that QP's at the time where pretty good) that I signed up to QFF.

So yes, I'd still fly QF, although I probably wouldn't be deliberately flying their partners overseas.

 

[1022]

In Y I'd probably still lean towards QF for the few niceties that remain but the premium I'd be prepared to pay would top out at (say) $15-$20 for a golden triangle Red-e vs VA Choice fare or Rex Saver. In most ports the QF terminal experience is a bit more pleasant and less hectic than the competition, especially so in Sydney. This would be a pertinent factor if I no longer had lounge access.
In J, VA wins hands down these days. Even though the service can often be a bit ... young ... and inconsistent in flow and execution, it's usually pleasant. More importantly, they have been nailing catering of late whilst QF domestic J catering now resembles what used to be served in cardboard boxes to Y about 10 years ago and only seems to get worse and more spartan every time I fly. The current VA lounges are better than or at least equal to many QF J lounges around the country.

 

[FenderQF]

Short and sweet. Nope.

 

[Mattg]

I realised that I probably should have added a poll to this thread when I started it.

I've now done so - feel free to cast a vote, even if you've already responded to this thread

 

[SYD]

I realised that I probably should have added a poll to this thread when I started it.

I've now done so - feel free to cast a vote, even if you've already responded to this thread

Probably could have been a non QF specific thread? Or ask the same for VA?

 

[cove]

Living in Perth we would try hard not to bother flying on a 737 so that gives Qantas a leg up for us to get to Sydney or Melbourne and return in business class.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Yeah - I guess BFOD would describe the choice as only being 3-3 Y class with 30" or 31" seat pitch and assuming all soft products are the same and route network and frequency would be similar across competitors, a sort of quasi-Areoflot situation. In a competitive market, its unlikely that airline seats would become an interchangeable standardized commodity, and different airlines would experiment with different seat pitches/baggage inclusions and soft products like food and drink to differentiate themselves from their competitors.

FWIW AA tried this back in the early 2000s… ‘more room throughout coach’ (MRTC). Standard 34’ pitch for their large aircraft like the 777 operating international. And of course they had an FF program and fares to match their competitors. Didn’t seem to work out for them