Question about Life Time status with Qantas?

[simongr]

Interesting stuff and something that would alter to where I credit my flights. I am about to hit LTG and if in my changed role in the future I have continued flying that would have me either achieving QF WP or AA EXP (I do not want to be P1 again I think)then I have pretty much decided to credit to AA rather than QF to ensure EXP. If as a result of LTG I got an easier route to QF WP this might sway where I credit flights.

 

[Jack_OC]

Great, then neither of us are worried

I don't really understand your logic though. You originally said you would not want someone who was only Gold for many years getting a head start to qualify for Platinum for a single year. But you're ok about someone being only Silver for many years and then getting lifetime Gold (without any further SC earning requirements, ever!). I think the bigger free kick is in the latter scenario, by some distance.

Anyway, I'll shut up now, as I don't really have any point to make here other than the system is full of quirks.

 

[oz_mark]

Anyway, I'll shut up now, as I don't really have any point to make here other than the system is full of quirks.

You got it, and why add more?




(and consider gold after 20+ years of silver as a lifetime achievement award!)

 

[medhead]

I’m well aware of that. I'm not sure if you read the quote from oz_mark that I was replying to? His concern is that someone could eventually attain LTG without ever being Platinum (true). Therefore, if the OP’s suggestion was adopted, an LTG could in theory then get to Platinum without ever having earned 1400 SCs in a year (again true). My point was simply that an even bigger anomaly already exists. Currently, if someone gets just under 700 credits every year, they would never get to Gold, until eventually they reach the LTG threshold. Then they would have lifetime Gold, despite never having flown enough to attain Gold for a single year!

This situation obviously couldn’t have arisen in practice yet, as they only count credits earned since 1998. However, if the rules stay as they are, then in about 5-6 years time, it will start to happen, and in about 10-15 years time there will be people getting LTG who never got anywhere near Gold in any given year!

Anyway, as I said in my previous post, I don’t really care one way or the other if they change the rules on this (and even if I did care, I'm sure they won't change) – but I just thought it was worth pointing out that there are already bigger quirks within the rules than the one oz_mark is worried about.

I read the quote. As I said there are different qualification requirements for lifetime and annual status level. (They are also unrelated qualification requirements) 7000/14000 lifetime SC are required to get those lifetime levels. It is not anomaly that a lifetime level is achieve without ever having held that level during an annual period. They have achieved the SC required. Full stop, nothing more require to be said.

It is anomaly to say someone should achieve an annual based status level without achieving the qualification requirement, outside of special exceptions. That being 700/600/1400/1200 SC in the year. That is the real anomaly that someone consistently getting gold would then consistently get platinum, once they pass LTG, (in 20 years) without actually meeting the platinum qualification requirement.

I was simply pointing out that the analogy to attaining lifetime status is false. In one case the person has done what is required. Lifetime status at that level is their benefit. In the other case, they would not be doing what is required, therefore recognition is not required.

 

[equus]

This situation obviously couldn’t have arisen in practice yet, as they only count credits earned since 1998.

Whilst an unlikely scenario, it is quite possible someone could have already reached LTG whilst never having been anything but NB until they hit LTS.

There are two requirements to annual status - the points and those 4 ~.
Lifetime status only requires the points. Somebody who credited to QFF but never actually flew on QF itself could credit 1,000s of points per year without achieving any status - until they hit LTS.

 

[Jack_OC]

I read the quote. As I said there are different qualification requirements for lifetime and annual status level. (They are also unrelated qualification requirements) 7000/14000 lifetime SC are required to get those lifetime levels. It is not anomaly that a lifetime level is achieve without ever having held that level during an annual period. They have achieved the SC required. Full stop, nothing more require to be said.

It is anomaly to say someone should achieve an annual based status level without achieving the qualification requirement, outside of special exceptions. That being 700/600/1400/1200 SC in the year. That is the real anomaly that someone consistently getting gold would then consistently get platinum, once they pass LTG, (in 20 years) without actually meeting the platinum qualification requirement.

I was simply pointing out that the analogy to attaining lifetime status is false. In one case the person has done what is required. Lifetime status at that level is their benefit. In the other case, they would not be doing what is required, therefore recognition is not required.

I think we all know what the current qualification requirements are, and that there is a distinction between annual and lifetime recognition. I also don't think anyone is saying people should get status without achieving the relevant qualification requirements. The question being debated is, should the qualification requirements change for this very select group of people? As I said, I don't really care either way and I doubt if it will happen, but other than the fact that "the proposed change to qualification requirements would result in qualification requirements that are different to what we have now", it's not obvious to me what the objection is.

 

[medhead]

I think we all know what the current qualification requirements are, and that there is a distinction between annual and lifetime recognition. I also don't think anyone is saying people should get status without achieving the relevant qualification requirements. The question being debated is, should the qualification requirements change for this very select group of people? As I said, I don't really care either way and I doubt if it will happen, but other than the fact that "the proposed change to qualification requirements would result in qualification requirements that are different to what we have now", it's not obvious to me what the objection is.

The proposal, in the OP, is being made on the basis that lifetime status holders are somehow being treated differently and unfairly. This is clearly not the case, as they are still subject to the same annual qualification/requalification requirement. Changing that requirement would then mean that the lifetime status person is being treated differently. That deals with the proposal being debated as per the OP.

My previous reply was actually addressing the analogy that compared lifetime status qualification and annual status qualification. As you say, these are separate requirements, so IMO the analogy is false.

 

[EmilyHoward]

If you didn't get to Silver in any one year but just under I think it might take about 50 years to get to LTG. That sounds like a fun thing to do for 50 years!

EH

 

[samh004]

I don't think it matters either way, as I don't see Qantas changing the requirements to make it easier, even after all the years it takes to achieve lifetime for most.

That said, my opinion is there could be more offered to LTS/LTG holders, but I'm not sure what and don't think it should be an easier rise to a higher status.

Hoping to hit LTS soon.

 

[medhead]

If you didn't get to Silver in any one year but just under I think it might take about 50 years to get to LTG. That sounds like a fun thing to do for 50 years!

EH

Well actually, it could be possible to do it in a year, if not flying on Qantas aircraft. As already mentioned.

If we limit people to only Qantas Aircraft, the maximum that can be earned in a year without making Silver is 1080 (3x F SYD/MEL-LHR - only 3~) => 6.5 years to LTS.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

That said, my opinion is there could be more offered to LTS/LTG holders, but I'm not sure what and don't think it should be an easier rise to a higher status.

In true QFF style, they won't think up things that will get people 'active and back into the program' but rather dream up ways to annoy them more
Who is to say that silver gets knocked off the food chain altogether and a diamond level is introduced so that Silver is the new Gold.

There are certainly a group of FF'ers who are driven by status and benefits and to 100% satisfy those members, starting LTG achievers off on 700SC would tick the boxes (wouldn't work for LTS).
Problem is - most frequent flyers see flying it as a bus ride and can't wait to never fly routinely again.

 

[Downwind]

Then to be consistent all silver and gold members should start the next year on 250/600. Also platinum members should start in 1200.

Basically you're being illogical. You are given a status level for a fixed term - the current 12 months. Not for the following 12 months. Having silver this year based on what I earned last year, does not make it easier to get gold for next year. Everyone is still required to get the requirements to move to the next level. In the case of platinum that requirement is 1400/1200 SC. Not gold + 800/600 SC. Similarly for silvers moving up.

Im sorry but I just don't get your logic. If PS/SG/WP started at the re qualification amount, they'd be "gifted" the same status for the following year. This is illogical, but makes perfect sense for LT holders, because they will always be gifted PS or SG status each and every year. Earned status is for 12 months, but LT status is for 12 months, and the next 12 months and the next 12 months, I'm sure you get the drift......

I know that WP is 1400/1200, but in order to get there, you must pass 700/600 required for SG, so IMHO it effectively is SG + 800/600.

 

[Downwind]

A Lifetime level surely is "a line in the sand" which you can never fall below, whereas the Annual Qualification is just that... you have to do it every year.

I just don't see why just because you have reached a Lifetime Level either Silver or Gold you should have an easier start. The reward for that much flying to achieve that Lifetime Level is surely that Lifetime Level which can't be taken away.

As for soft landings Qantas would do that because, as has been said, people sometimes have a year or so of 'low flying' LOL. Having a soft landing will draw them back in at the end of that time.

EH

I absolutely see your point, but can I ask a question? If the LT level is the line in the sand that you never fall below, why are you expected to start below it?

IMHO, LTS as it currently stands is pretty much worthless as it only comes into play when and if you earn less than 250/600SC. As I mentioned earlier, LTG takes 23 odd years at the SG minimum earn to get, so why shouldn't that loyalty be rewarded with a more valuable benefit? It's just my take on things, and I have no issue if others have a different opinion.

 

[Downwind]

I read the quote. As I said there are different qualification requirements for lifetime and annual status level. (They are also unrelated qualification requirements) 7000/14000 lifetime SC are required to get those lifetime levels. It is not anomaly that a lifetime level is achieve without ever having held that level during an annual period. They have achieved the SC required. Full stop, nothing more require to be said.

It is anomaly to say someone should achieve an annual based status level without achieving the qualification requirement, outside of special exceptions. That being 700/600/1400/1200 SC in the year. That is the real anomaly that someone consistently getting gold would then consistently get platinum, once they pass LTG, (in 20 years) without actually meeting the platinum qualification requirement.

I was simply pointing out that the analogy to attaining lifetime status is false. In one case the person has done what is required. Lifetime status at that level is their benefit. In the other case, they would not be doing what is required, therefore recognition is not required.

Huh?

You don't find it odd that someone who potentially has never been SG can all of a sudden become LTG, but do find it odd that someone should get a particular status without meeting the requirements outside of special exceptions? The special exemption is the lifetime status........

And how is the anomaly of someone who was always SG now getting platinum, any different to someone who was never PS/SG getting LTS/LTG? In my opinion, they are identical.

 

[medhead]

Im sorry but I just don't get your logic. If PS/SG/WP started at the re qualification amount, they'd be "gifted" the same status for the following year. This is illogical, but makes perfect sense for LT holders, because they will always be gifted PS or SG status each and every year. Earned status is for 12 months, but LT status is for 12 months, and the next 12 months and the next 12 months, I'm sure you get the drift......

I actually saying that to demonstrate the failure of your logic.

I know that WP is 1400/1200, but in order to get there, you must pass 700/600 required for SG, so IMHO it effectively is SG + 800/600.

NO! there is the failure of your logic. The qualification level for platinum is 1400/1200 regardless of the status level that you already hold, be that Bronze or Platinum. All lifetime status means is you have automatically qualified at the required level. IF you want to move up you have to get the full status credits required for the next level. If someone make gold in the current year they then have gold for the following membership year. They still have to get 1400 SC to move to Platinum. The rules do not say platinum is Gold + whatever.

As I mentioned earlier, LTG takes 23 odd years at the SG minimum earn to get, so why shouldn't that loyalty be rewarded with a more valuable benefit? It's just my take on things, and I have no issue if others have a different opinion.

Huh? Umm, DER!! it is rewarded with getting gold benefits for life.

Huh?

You don't find it odd that someone who potentially has never been SG can all of a sudden become LTG, but do find it odd that someone should get a particular status without meeting the requirements outside of special exceptions? The special exemption is the lifetime status........

And how is the anomaly of someone who was always SG now getting platinum, any different to someone who was never PS/SG getting LTS/LTG? In my opinion, they are identical.

Lifetime is a completely different qualification requirement. I really don't know how you can't understand that simple fact. People can meet the qualification requirements for LTS in 6.5 years without ever holding any status level. That is not an anomaly - get the 7000 SC you have qualified. full stop.

special exceptions = complimenting status or DSC or other random, targeted promos by Qantas.

It is anomaly that someone who only ever flys at the gold level should suddenly get platinum status without actually meeting the qualification requirement for platinum.

Seriously, there is no point continuing this if you can't even realise/understand that lifetime status is different to annual status.

 

[JohnK]

There isn't, and should never be, a 'shortcut' to top tier status. I too am approaching LTG, but don't expect to retain WP unless I earn it. You are asking for a shortcut. This devalues it for everyone else.

There are a number of short cuts to top tier status so why not this one?

- Comping status when you are clearly nowhere near the level required to re-qualify
- Gifting status to someone who has never even come close to a top tier in the hope they will do more flying
- The endless Double SCs offers to the point where they are so predictable people are able to locate the webpages with the offer before they are advertised

So why not some recognition, other than a safety net, for those who have shown loyalty over the long haul?

 

[Downwind]

I actually saying that to demonstrate the failure of your logic.

I still dont see your point.....

NO! there is the failure of your logic. The qualification level for platinum is 1400/1200 regardless of the status level that you already hold, be that Bronze or Platinum. All lifetime status means is you have automatically qualified at the required level. IF you want to move up you have to get the full status credits required for the next level. If someone make gold in the current year they then have gold for the following membership year. They still have to get 1400 SC to move to Platinum. The rules do not say platinum is Gold + whatever.

Im fully aware of what the qualification levels are. But you are wrong in your assertion that the WP qualification level is 1400/1200 regardless of the status level you hold. That might very well be the fixed level, but thats assuming that everyone starts their new year with the status they earned last year and wont have the following year unless they fly in the current year. This clearly does not apply to LT status, as they will ALWAYS renew their status. Lets say we have a LTS SG at 0SC and a non LTS SG at 0SC (who was SG the previous year). From this point on, the LTS SG needs 0Sc to retain SG and the non LT holder needs 600SC to retain, which is fair enough. At this point (LTSG=0 and SG=600) they will both requalify for SG next year. However, to upgrade to WP the LTSG needs the full 1400SC, whereas the non status SG only needs the remaining 800SC and it is my suggestion that this is unfair.

Huh? Umm, DER!! it is rewarded with getting gold benefits for life.
Lifetime is a completely different qualification requirement. I really don't know how you can't understand that simple fact. People can meet the qualification requirements for LTS in 6.5 years without ever holding any status level. That is not an anomaly - get the 7000 SC you have qualified. full stop. Special exceptions = complimenting status or DSC or other random, targeted promos by Qantas.

Im fully aware that lifetime status is a different qualification requirement, but the end result is that you have that status for LIFE. It is a simple concept and I get it. Why should you have to re-earn status that you have already earned for the remainder of your or QF's life?? If you earn between 605-1395SC in a year, it makes no difference to you if you hold LTG, so my question goes back to the value of LTG, and IMHO, it is inadequate.

Might you care to explain how you can earn LTS in only 6.5 years without reaching PS? By my calculation, the maximum SC you can earn in a year without getting PS is 295. 7000/295 is over 23 years. If you're assuming that the member wont fly the 4 QF sectors, then they can earn 7000SC and obtain LTS in a matter of weeks/months without ever having reached PS, because we all know you dont earn "annual" status, without the 4 QF/JQ/3K sectors. And just so that i'm clear, you have no issue with someone earning LTS/LTG on QF without ever having earned ANY status with QF, but are all up in arms if a loyal QF flyer gets to start their renewal at 250/600SC? And you have the audacity to call me illogical........

How is DSC a special exemption? It is in no way an exemption from the requalification levels. All it is is a way to earn double what you ordinarily would, but it has no correlation to the requalification amount. And again.... you have no issue with someone with a "special exemption" of gifted status or a DSC invitee getting status that they havent "officially" earned, but are horrified at the thought of a LTS/LTG obtaining WP for 600/800SC?

It is anomaly that someone who only ever flys at the gold level should suddenly get platinum status without actually meeting the qualification requirement for platinum.

Does his mean you are against LT status? Because a LT status holder suddenly gets status without actually meeting the qualification requirement for that status (other than the secondary requal level of 7000/14000?)

Seriously, there is no point continuing this if you can't even realise/understand that lifetime status is different to annual status.

Im fully aware of the distinction.

The sad thing for me is that your name pops up a lot around here, with mostly helpful advice, but you do yourself a disservice with your occasional rude, aggressive, abusive and insulting posts. Surely you are mature enough to understand that people can agree to disagree? Instead, you think you are always right and seem intent on ramming your point home come hell or high water.
You have your opinion, I have mine, and it matters nought if we disagree, but please refrain from the personal attacks and insults......

 

[medhead]

I still dont see your point.....



Im fully aware of what the qualification levels are. But you are wrong in your assertion that the WP qualification level is 1400/1200 regardless of the status level you hold. That might very well be the fixed level, but thats assuming that everyone starts their new year with the status they earned last year and wont have the following year unless they fly in the current year. This clearly does not apply to LT status, as they will ALWAYS renew their status. Lets say we have a LTS SG at 0SC and a non LTS SG at 0SC (who was SG the previous year). From this point on, the LTS SG needs 0Sc to retain SG and the non LT holder needs 600SC to retain, which is fair enough. At this point (LTSG=0 and SG=600) they will both requalify for SG next year. However, to upgrade to WP the LTSG needs the full 1400SC, whereas the non status SG only needs the remaining 800SC and it is my suggestion that this is unfair..

This is exactly where you are wrong. They both require 1400SC to get platinum. You are proposing that one only requires 800 SC. That is unfair. You claim to be aware of the difference between various aspects but here, yet again you're confusing retention requirement with qualification requirement. You're also ignoring that the automatic qualification for LTG is the benefit given for long term loyalty.

 

[medhead]

There are a number of short cuts to top tier status so why not this one?

- Comping status when you are clearly nowhere near the level required to re-qualify
- Gifting status to someone who has never even come close to a top tier in the hope they will do more flying
- The endless Double SCs offers to the point where they are so predictable people are able to locate the webpages with the offer before they are advertised

So why not some recognition, other than a safety net, for those who have shown loyalty over the long haul?

There is a very big difference between targetted, random promotions and a standing across the board advantage, which is unfair by the OPs standards.

 

[Downwind]

You're also ignoring that the automatic qualification for LTG is the benefit given for long term loyalty.

And you're ignoring the fact that a LTG member has little to no incentive to bother flying QF or at the very least crediting their 600-1395SC to QF FF as they are effectively useless. It is my suggestion that these SC should be valued and one way of doing that is to reduce the requal levels for LTG holders by 600SC, the value of annual SG.

I am not suggesting that the member be given 600SC, as that would be unfair, but I see no issue with QF saying that WP is SG+800 (which it effectively is) and given a LTG is SG, they should just have to make up the 800SC difference. It appears you do have an issue with this, and thats fine, can we please leave it at that?