This comment from Qantas in its snowy submission was eye-raising;
<snip>
Also interesting that there weren’t many submissions. The usual airline and supermarket suspects, but didn’t see any hotel chains and other accommodation providers, and very few from retailers. My pile of points earn plastic is dominated by the latter two groups, and Hotel schemes are where my few grudges against unfair dealings lie.
Cheers skip
The entire ACCC thing is a bogus witch hunt, brought on by a few frustrated folks who went crying to the ACCC when their points expired.
A total waste of taxpayer money, and if other Gov inquiries are anything to go by - their mind is already made up so submissions are basically worthless. Even more worthless when the ACCC publically says you can submit two - one for public and one for private. It's like running two sets of financials and submitting your
preferred one to the ATO.
A few changes will come in to justify the ACCC spending god knows how much time and resources.
The outcome will ultimately drive up the costs to operate a loyalty program, and many small businesses will not be able to afford to run a program, and, therefore, not be able to compete with large, well-funded corporations.
However, in saying that - I don't know why both of the airlines mentioned just don't fix their own tech to make it more consumer-friendly.
The airlines would then avoid the ACCC parade, save taxpayers money, make customers happier, and most likely increase their own profits (because it would force creativity and innovation).
I am sure earn rates are determined by the partners, and what they are willing to pay for points for each fare level. But the rate at which QF sells points its partners probably weighs heavily on that, and it would be surely naive to assume QF sells its points to its partners at the same rate. For all we know, it could cost MH 3x what it costs AA to buy a QF point.
I haven't read the full submission - but just that sentence alone is ambiguous. Could be read the way you suggest, or simply a fancy way of saying that earn rates are different, and the earn rate is determined by the particular partner services you are using. So fly MH you get 'x' points. Fly QF you get 'y' points. But both of those sets of points are still determined by Qantas.
It works like this: the airline with dominance [ie: more of their members flying with the other airline] dictates the terms.
Therefore, one could assume that Qantas dictates the terms for the MH agreement. Fairer and simpler, right?