Heads up about program changes

[hossein_au]

Assuming we believe the reason given by Justin at the lunch (and I have no reason not to believe him) then their removal is going to have little effect on Qantas revenue.

JohnK, with all due respect, you seem to argue with every single person who says s/he will leave Qantas, but you state you have no reason not to believe a Qantas spin doctor (I don't know Justin, and I don't know what he does, but I respectfully take everything a Qantas mid to high level manager says these days with a huge grain of salt).

Believe me, I am happy for you that you have found what best works for you, and I truly wish you a wonderful and happy relationship with Qantas, but you need to realise that different people have different needs and different points of view. If someone tells you they prefer Virgin because of the service they've received, why do you have to ridicule them? Their definition (and experience) of service obviously differs from you. Why get upset over something so subjective? I reckon choice is good...

Indeed. The cheap seats cost Qantas money, much better to kill the cheap fare scam. They'll return to profit in no time.

And I'm sure Qantas Exec will tell you, over lunch, that the demise of the cheap fare scam was due to a lot of people earning (peanut) status through that and now that they (both the cheap tickets and the free-loaders) are gone, all will be good...

That's my feeling too. When I talk to QF FFers outside the AFF community I hear very little outrage over the recent changes because most people were not taking advantage of them anyway.

But the thing is that flying pattern is not evenly distributed across the general population. You p!$$ off the top 5% of your customers and you stand to lose way more that 5% of your revenue/profit; and that is true for any business, let alone in aviation where the competition is so fierce.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

But the thing is that flying pattern is not evenly distributed across the general population. You p!$$ off the top 5% of your customers and you stand to lose way more that 5% of your revenue/profit; and that is true for any business, let alone in aviation where the competition is so fierce.

The top 5% of flyers by profit? or by revenue?

It seems that most of these changes will help those bringing in profit (or at least leave them no worse off).

 

[amaroo]

I have no issue with double SC offers on cash airfares. Personally I would like a little more time to plan travel but it would appear Qantas is only interested in short term bookings. So they are useless offers to me enticing me to travel in the next 6 weeks.

Their logic is sound.

Like the pulling of MASA. They already have your points but if you want to build status - you'll need to hand over the coin. Same with DSC or 1/2 DSC offers. No need to entice people that have already booked - QF have already got their money in the bank.

You win some and lose some. Singles that pre-book months in advance miss out on companion sales and DSC offers....however, they can strike gold with a lucrative 10x gift voucher knowing they can take full advantage with a steady stream of predictable forward bookings.

 

[hossein_au]

The top 5% of flyers by profit? or by revenue?

It seems that most of these changes will help those bringing in profit (or at least leave them no worse off).

I was making a general statement that AFF members are far more likely to be in the top bracket of frequent flyers than the general public. This is a generic, broad, and deductive, statement; I have no data to prove this beyond doubt one way or another. To be honest, I don't think Qantas does either (unless they go through their data and match it to each member of AFF).

I am a mere small fish in this big pond, but in my case, I have earned my Gold and then WP year after year through flying very frequently in discount economy and occasional premium economy (all of them self funded). I, for one, have not taken any shortcuts and have not taken advantage of any loop holes (I have ever had 1 MASA, booked for later this month because the prices were too expensive for me (the cheapest CBR to BNE one-way direct, in economy, was around $300) and I decided to use points to fly). And I will not re-qualify for WP based on the recent changes. Based on your argument (which I agree with), Qantas is telling me I am not good-enough of a customer for them. I understand that, and I respect their decision. But it is also within my rights to re-evaluate what "I" bring to this relationship; namely my loyalty and my cash... what do they say about "goose" and "gander"??!!

 

[BD1959]

I am a mere small fish in this big pond, but in my case, I have earned my Gold and then WP year after year through flying very frequently in discount economy and occasional premium economy (all of them self funded). I, for one, have not taken any shortcuts and have not taken advantage of any loop holes (I have ever had 1 MASA, booked for later this month because the prices were too expensive for me (the cheapest CBR to BNE one-way direct, in economy, was around $300) and I decided to use points to fly). And I will not re-qualify for WP based on the recent changes. Based on your argument (which I agree with), Qantas is telling me I am not good-enough of a customer for them. I understand that, and I respect their decision. But it is also within my rights to re-evaluate what "I" bring to this relationship; namely my loyalty and my cash... what do they say about "goose" and "gander"??!!

QF obviously don't value the standard Corporate Cowboy: those that ride the Golden Triangle week-in, week-out. They use the Corporate TA to book fares, the Corporate TA is obliged to provide the cheapest seats available; usually these are Discount Economy; occasionally, if returning during the evening peak, they may be Economy (I tend to get a 1/3 hit on this).

As discussed elsewhere, you can just about scrape WP on this pattern (without the DSCs). Highly unlikely to under the new regime, but would get SG.

So, QF are saying that the benefits that are provided and costing them so much money, they are willing to risk losing the revenue completely for that cost. What are they??

- Seat allocation ... all online, no additional cost
- WP Shadow ... only if the flight isn't full
- Additional Luggage .... not usually a consideration for your Corporate Cowboy (or Girl)
- Priority Boarding ... no additional cost (and rarely enforced)
- Business Lounge over QC ... this *HAS* to be the killer for QF

So, QF are willing to trample all over the very customers they've fought tooth-and-nail to keep at WP previously (provided they had an average history of > 1200 SCs) because of the cost of brown sludge and a premium beer over a standard beer.

Wow!!

Regards,

BD

 

[AnonymousCoward]

QF obviously don't value the standard Corporate Cowboy: those that ride the Golden Triangle week-in, week-out. They use the Corporate TA to book fares, the Corporate TA is obliged to provide the cheapest seats available; usually these are Discount Economy; occasionally, if returning during the evening peak, they may be Economy (I tend to get a 1/3 hit on this).

No corporate TA I've had to use (Amex, CWT etc.) books NOQ fares. They're usually K or similar.

So, QF are willing to trample all over the very customers they've fought tooth-and-nail to keep at WP previously (provided they had an average history of > 1200 SCs) because of the cost of brown sludge and a premium beer over a standard beer.

Renting, staffing and providing food/beverages in a lounge costs nothing? Get rid of 1/2 the WPs, then they could rent a smaller space next time, have fewer staff and order less stuff.

Or, alternatively, if the number of WPs stays the same, then those ones are buying more expensive fares, or they're paying for J

Wow!!

What is this collective "head in the sand" mentality on this forum? The airline's losing money. They've figured out that the program's creating the wrong incentives. They changed it to align benefits with people providing profit.

Sucks that we lose out on benefits. But it's completely logical and understandable.

 

[JohnK]

If someone tells you they prefer Virgin because of the service they've received, why do you have to ridicule them? Their definition (and experience) of service obviously differs from you. Why get upset over something so subjective? I reckon choice is good...

Who did I ridicule?

Service is subjective. If you have good service on a flight doesn't mean anyone else on that flight is going to receive good service.

For the record I fly Qantas and their service us inconsistent. Virgin is not even close. But that is my opinion.

Now if someone posts that Virgin provides great service to all Platinums and Golds then I am going to disagree. I fail to see the Virgin greatness.

And this is no different to those who claim Cathay treats all Oneworld Emeralds better than Qantas. Total and utter rubbish and I will post my disagreement everytime.

Now back to Any Seat awards earning SCs and points. You think Qantas shouldn't have removed them and will lose revenue and customers. I disagree and I should be able to disagree without being ridiculed. Do you agree?

 

[boomy]

QF obviously don't value the standard Corporate Cowboy: those that ride the Golden Triangle week-in, week-out. They use the Corporate TA to book fares, the Corporate TA is obliged to provide the cheapest seats available; usually these are Discount Economy; occasionally, if returning during the evening peak, they may be Economy (I tend to get a 1/3 hit on this).

As discussed elsewhere, you can just about scrape WP on this pattern (without the DSCs). Highly unlikely to under the new regime, but would get SG.

I fly weekly between the east coast capitals, mostly on red-e-deal fares and I reached P1 every year since introduction with no DSC or MASA so not everyone will be affected the same. Even with the recent changes I will get WP and probably retain P1 because domestic SCs are will mostly be the same after 30 June.

 

[Mr_Orange]

No corporate TA I've had to use (Amex, CWT etc.) books NOQ fares. They're usually K or similar.

My company uses one of the largest corporate TAs there is, and they always book E, N, O or Q if they are available, since BFOD is generally the company policy.

 

[BD1959]

No corporate TA I've had to use (Amex, CWT etc.) books NOQ fares. They're usually K or similar.

Well I've just reviewed my last 12 itins: 26 sectors (a couple are triangle itins) split 10/16 VA to QF and booked on CWT:

6/26 are Q
7/26 are N

The rest are:

6/26 = S
4/26 = V
1/26 = E
2/26 = L

So 50% are in those buckets you say CWT don't book!!

Renting, staffing and providing food/beverages in a lounge costs nothing?

PLEASE.

Go read my post again.

I said the COST differential of the J lounge over the QC. Of course they Cost money ... but is the differential of providing that to WPs worth the risk of losing the revenue entirely? Obviously QF have modelled this, decided it does and are prepared to wear that risk.

What is this collective "head in the sand" mentality on this forum? The airline's losing money. They've figured out that the program's creating the wrong incentives. They changed it to align benefits with people providing profit.

Sucks that we lose out on benefits. But it's completely logical and understandable.

I don't think anyone is arguing with QF's right to run the programme the way they do; I don't think anyone is saying that they don't need to reduce costs (hell, the stoppage, various IR initiatives over the last 4 years, together with the RedQ project were all supposed to reduce costs - and have obviously failed massively - I've even proposed they abandon DSCs) what I think we're all trying to understand is how QF driving away any revenue stream will - in their current climate - help them in the short to medium term.

Regards,

BD

 

[BensAdventures]

I'm trying to understand that new earning table in respect to Emirates but I'm unclear where it fits. Is Emirates just another partner airline just without SC's? I'm looking for a fare from BKK-FRA, and Emirates is quite reasonable. There was a QF codeshare at the same price, but I went to book it yesterday and it's gone!

 

[trippin_the_rift]

Overall I think points earning changes are positive move in the right direction for QFF and real frequent flyers.
1,000 MPG was never sustainable and from a FF point of view does not reward those who you want to look after.

In all honesty I think QFF really wanted to lower the points earning further for cheap bookings. Things could have been a lot worse for QFFs!

 

[medhead]

And I'm sure Qantas Exec will tell you, over lunch, that the demise of the cheap fare scam was due to a lot of people earning (peanut) status through that and now that they (both the cheap tickets and the free-loaders) are gone, all will be good...

You may have miss read my post. The cheap scam that I was writing about is not gone. You have below your executive who thinks that flying an empty seat is better than getting money for the seat.

The top 5% of flyers by profit? or by revenue?

It seems that most of these changes will help those bringing in profit (or at least leave them no worse off).

Still trying to claim that unsold NOQES fares are profitable and selling those seats isn't profitable. At least you're persistent....

Maybe they should fly empty aircraft to maximise profit. Actually, this sounds a lot like "The Compassionate Society" episode of yes minister. The hospital that was more efficient without patients.

 

[medhead]

Overall I think points earning changes are positive move in the right direction for QFF and real frequent flyers.
1,000 MPG was never sustainable and from a FF point of view does not reward those who you want to look after.

In all honesty I think QFF really wanted to lower the points earning further for cheap bookings. Things could have been a lot worse for QFFs!

Which doesn't gel at all, with the claim that the reduced earning is still better than VA's earning. Apparently, they still want flights to earn more on Qantas than on VA. Shame that these changes now mean the opposite.

 

[JohnK]

Their logic is sound.

Agree to disagree.

Like the pulling of MASA. They already have your points but if you want to build status - you'll need to hand over the coin. Same with DSC or 1/2 DSC offers. No need to entice people that have already booked - QF have already got their money in the bank.

Forget existing bookings. I am busy at short notice which is the period covered by the offer. I am sure most people are the same. I can plan months in advance. They are losing extra cash revenue from me.

You win some and lose some. Singles that pre-book months in advance miss out on companion sales and DSC offers....however, they can strike gold with a lucrative 10x gift voucher knowing they can take full advantage with a steady stream of predictable forward bookings.

Not really relevant for this discussion. We were double SCs offers and paying with cash. Not vouchers. Cash....

 

[amaroo]

Agree to disagree.

Forget existing bookings. I am busy at short notice which is the period covered by the offer. I am sure most people are the same. I can plan months in advance. They are losing extra cash revenue from me.

Not really relevant for this discussion. We were double SCs offers and paying with cash. Not vouchers. Cash....

The scheme has something for everyone. Has always been this way...

 

[Awesom Andy]

Do keep in mind that for corporate bookings, QF doesn't care much about the pax's loyalty, they care much more about the business's loyalty.

 

[hossein_au]

What is this collective "head in the sand" mentality on this forum? The airline's losing money. They've figured out that the program's creating the wrong incentives. They changed it to align benefits with people providing profit.

Sucks that we lose out on benefits. But it's completely logical and understandable.

Qantas is losing money; that's a fact. What I, a mere mortal, think is that their approach is akin to the "baby" and the "bath water"... I would love Qantas to prosper and I honestly wish them luck, but many years of working at senior level management and strategic planning keeps telling me otherwise. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[hossein_au]

You may have miss read my post. The cheap scam that I was writing about is not gone. You have below your executive who thinks that flying an empty seat is better than getting money for the seat.




Still trying to claim that unsold NOQES fares are profitable and selling those seats isn't profitable. At least you're persistent....

Maybe they should fly empty aircraft to maximise profit. Actually, this sounds a lot like "The Compassionate Society" episode of yes minister. The hospital that was more efficient without patients.

I got your sarcasm, and I was following your lead Read my post again please, I was being sarcastic, with tongue firmly on the cheek :-D

 

[opusman]

Qantas is losing money; that's a fact. What I, a mere mortal, think is that their approach is akin to the "baby" and the "bath water"... I would love Qantas to prosper and I honestly wish them luck, but many years of working at senior level management and strategic planning keeps telling me otherwise. I hope I'm wrong.

There's a good chance that losing money is Qantas senior management's plan anyway...