I don't care either way, just that it is then not a 'frequent flyer' programme by definition. Would make more sense to be called 'frequent spender', or 'furthest flyer' or similar!
Actually thinking about this more, lots on here don’t like the ‘easy status’ and that it should be for actual Frequent Flyers. So why shouldn’t say 30 sectors flown in 12 months qualify for gold and 50 sectors qualify for platinum. The definition of a frequent flyer!
Don’t 100% agree. I do SYD-MEL return weekly. Approx 90-100 sectors a year. A lot of BIS time! If that is Lite fares only that is only 450-500 status credits. Just keeps gold. So need to make sure enough choice fares getting in to the mix.
It's a stupid sale. I can't see how they have done this commercially. They didn't need to go that cheap. You probably still would have bought at $200 return? So they have done themselves out of revenue.
I have done PTV before, but just sucks up too much time. Work is paying…but it is not client reimbursable…it is overhead…and it is small business…and I am shareholder…so keeping costs down and balancing value of time of equation!
It’s just so stupid how they have gone about all this. REX have been much smarter with their jet play. Setup a new route. Let it develop. Don’t stretch the fleet. Have the best on time performance and service going around and they have slowly built it up. Lock in public confidence on delivery...
Are the load factors based on the plane size? Or doesn't it take in to account reduced capacity restraints on the route? Or can they take a full load now?