An invitation from Lesley Grant

[Hvr]

But I haven't received a PM!

I'll be in BKK or I'd take you.

 

[Dmac6345]

But I haven't received a PM!

JT if my invite had the option to bring a guest, I would have sent you a PM.

 

[JessicaTam]

Aww shucks!

 

[Danp]

It looks like the WP1's are getting the +1's on the invites

I'm a regular WP and didn't get the option for the Sydney event

 

[samh004]

No problem picking you up I am taking a guest as well.

That would be awesome, I'll send you a PM before the event to liaise

There was no such box.

I got a +1, but didn't use it.

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

Yes, my invitation was to the sydney event.
View attachment 35461

And did the rsvp have an option for a +1? Mine didn't. Thinking it might be a venue capacity thing?

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

It looks like the WP1's are getting the +1's on the invites

I'm a regular WP and didn't get the option for the Sydney event

I'm thinking it's the Sydney event with no +1s... Has anyone had this option for the Sydney event?

 

[JessicaTam]

Giving the P1s a +1 would be a reasonable recognition of status.

 

[Rugby]

No +1 with my invite (Syd). I'll be in transit too, so unfortunately will miss it. Look forward to the run down.

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

The +/- 1 may determine my attendance. Happy wife, happy life overrides free booze, sadly

 

[Hvr]

Giving the P1s a +1 would be a reasonable recognition of status.

So if they're going to give us a +1 where do I list my requirements?

 

[boomy]

I'm sure you and others will have the bases covered on revival of MASAs and/or offering SC on Classic Awards permanently (as unlikely as either scenario is).

I'm not sure reviving MASA is the solution for QF's revenue problem. I think QF should focus on people who pay full price for their tickets, introduce more international routes and offer more competitive prices.
All they need to do is give their FFs the option to fly with them and earn a decent amount of points and SCs. Until they do that they should amend the new partner earning table.

 

[DaveB]

Have concluded the only logical reason for my invite was hitting QStore hard over the past 12 months. Now left with a modest points balance of under 500K. Only ever booked the odd QF reward flight with zero bookings since ending of online MASA's. Have also for years sent minimal inflow to QFF from CC spend since mandatory direct sweep of points was imposed.

 

[Princess Fiona]

I'm not sure reviving MASA is the solution for QF's revenue problem. I think QF should focus on people who pay full price for their tickets, introduce more international routes and offer more competitive prices.
All they need to do is give their FFs the option to fly with them and earn a decent amount of points and SCs. Until they do that they should amend the new partner earning table.

I couldn't agree more with this ^

 

[ftm]

Looks like it is P1's who get the +1. I got the invite last week (WP) and my partner got the invite yesterday (P1). I didn't have an option for +1, but he did.

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

Ok so the new acronym should be P+1.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

I'm not sure reviving MASA is the solution for QF's revenue problem. I think QF should focus on people who pay full price for their tickets, introduce more international routes and offer more competitive prices.
All they need to do is give their FFs the option to fly with them and earn a decent amount of points and SCs. Until they do that they should amend the new partner earning table.

QF thinks they are focusing on people who pay full price for their tickets - by 'rewarding' them with more points. Problem is that by giving more points they are essentially creating more 'bad points' into existence. That is - QF incurs hard costs to for those points to be created. No doubt full fare paying customers want more - but more points is not the silver bullet QF is searching for.

Whereas if QFF focused on frequent spenders - there is zero cost incurred until a redemption occurs (if ever - which rumoured ~30% of all points will simply expire and only a very small% ever redeemed for intl premium cabins) and even then QFF has additional benefits by controlling yield and burn rates in their perfect closed loop system.

I'm not sure giving more points away for flying is end game QF is aiming to achieve and my guess is that it's a strategic move for the next program change in a few years. Perhaps even to a revenue based system if flight loads are consistently >90% where this would make perfect sense. There's a lot of factors in play here but ultimately while MASAs were great for the very small% of frequent flyers who redeemed for them. Fact is MASAs actually cost Qantas a lot more than if you were to redeem for toasters in the store. However if they introduced MASAs for partner/oneworld airlines - this would be a financial plus for the program while genuinely improving the offering for premium frequent flyers and high value non-status members. The only problem I see with this is other airlines then limiting inventory to QFF, but if there was a higher cost and QFF paid slightly more than I doubt it would cause much issue as it's a win-win-win situation for QFF, partner airline and FF member.

But hey - leave it to the experts

 

[Ansett]

As a P1 I received the option to invite a partner. So it appears that it is only P1 that get this option.

 

[dfcatch]

QF thinks they are focusing on people who pay full price for their tickets - by 'rewarding' them with more points. Problem is that by giving more points they are essentially creating more 'bad points' into existence. That is - QF incurs hard costs to for those points to be created. No doubt full fare paying customers want more - but more points is not the silver bullet QF is searching for.

Whereas if QFF focused on frequent spenders - there is zero cost incurred until a redemption occurs (if ever - which rumoured ~30% of all points will simply expire and only a very small% ever redeemed for intl premium cabins) and even then QFF has additional benefits by controlling yield and burn rates in their perfect closed loop system.

I'm not sure giving more points away for flying is end game QF is aiming to achieve and my guess is that it's a strategic move for the next program change in a few years. Perhaps even to a revenue based system if flight loads are consistently >90% where this would make perfect sense. There's a lot of factors in play here but ultimately while MASAs were great for the very small% of frequent flyers who redeemed for them. Fact is MASAs actually cost Qantas a lot more than if you were to redeem for toasters in the store. However if they introduced MASAs for partner/oneworld airlines - this would be a financial plus for the program while genuinely improving the offering for premium frequent flyers and high value non-status members. The only problem I see with this is other airlines then limiting inventory to QFF, but if there was a higher cost and QFF paid slightly more than I doubt it would cause much issue as it's a win-win-win situation for QFF, partner airline and FF member.

But hey - leave it to the experts

MASAs acted a bit different to that though - and this is where I think QF totally misunderstood/misunderstands their FF demographic.

Ok here goes.....

1/ Conventional QF wisdom assumes that those regularly redeeming MASAs (a redemption that only produces a "marginal" profit margin for QF) would, in their absence, redeem those same points for redemptions which carried a higher "margin" for QF. eg. Toasters or higher-priced ASA awards.

2/ QF also takes the view that it was a cheap way for savvy FFs to fly in J for cheap, and that by removing this "cheap" option, said FF would now actually fork out hard currency to fly in J.

3/ The third aspect of QF's thought process was the issue of people using MASAs to attain/retain status cheaply. The thought is that these people were taking up revenue seats at low cost, and also that by obtaining status cheaply, these people were obtaining benefits when they fly (which costs QF), without having invested the necessary amount in the first place.

Now let's deal with the facts.....

Very few people took "advantage" of MASAs.

Most QFF members redeem their points on poor value (ie. High-profit-margin for QF) items such as toasters, domestic upgrades, JQ Y redemptions etc etc.

By removing MASA availability from the website,QF ensured no-one accidentally stumbled across them.

To access them required not only "knowledge", but also "time and effort".

Let's not forget that MASAs were more expensive in $$ (thus compensating QF for the points/SC earn).

And of course unless you were status-running, then you weren't actually getting the max value from them.

Let's now address the arguments in turn:

1/ This is somewhat axiomatic.... If the ability to redeem MASAs is taken away, of course those points will be redeemed elsewhere. It is however, fair to say that most MASA users are smart enough to redeem on decent value things (eg.. Premium international redemptions and upgrades), as opposed to toasters, and almost certainly NOT more expensive ASAs.

2/ Firstly, most FFs who like to fly in J and do so at company expense (or to whom money is no object), probably couldn't be coughd with fapping around with MASAs in the first place. In other words, would MASA users now suddenly start paying cold hard cash to sit in J on the same flight that otherwise would have been a MASA? The answer is no.
The only exception would be some members here who earn generous points by flying in J on the company dime, and then use MASAs to inflate status. And they are not going to suddenly start paying $$ to fly TSV-BNE-DRW and back for the day.... They are going to stay home and read my pearls of wisdom instead.

3/ This issue has two parts. First, do MASA runners cost QF yield revenue? Only in Excel is the answer "yes". Firstly, these pax are taking excess seats, and filling a plane that YM decided wasn't going to fill with full J fare paying pax. How do I know this? That's easy...... There had to have been a U seat available. If YM thought the whole J cabin could be sold for full fare, they would not release U seats on that sector. Secondly, by taking the U seat, when the next J pax comes along, he has to pay a higher fare because there is one less seat available in the cabin (yes, I know I'm simplifying the process). Thirdly, the FF is spending points and $$ that they otherwise would not have spent (resulting in QF making a profit, albeit "marginal").

The second part is the question about undeserving peeps availing themselves of the Taittinger without actually having spent $40,000 buying retail First Class Fares.

QF's best status runner is the one who spends money they otherwise wouldn't spend, taking flights they otherwise wouldn't fly, to earn status that they otherwise wouldn't have, only to then stop flying as they've now run out of points/$$/time. Awesome for QF, as aside from the cost of the shiny card and a couple of coasters, this fake-FF isn't taking advantage of any amenities/benefits which cost QF dollars. And if they don't continue flying, they don't retain their status.

And if they do continue flying and get addicted to the game, then they continue to donate $$ to QFF for the sake of it.


So in summary....

1/ Those redeeming MASAs are NOT simply going to redeem a more profitable class of ASA.

2/ Those redeeming MASAs are NOT simply going to fly those same flights but this time pay cash to fly in J.

3/ Those redeeming MASAs solely for status are actually donating more $$ to QF than QF ever would have extracted from them.

In fairness to our friends at Qantas Loyalty - there really is no way to show this on the pivot-table. On paper, the above erroneous assumptions make sense. It takes a different kind of thinking to understand the dynamic in action.

If Qantas Loyalty had senior managers who understood that their role was to actually generate loyalty and get bums on seats across the Group - then they would both understand this, and be able to communicate that message across the Executive group.

But you're not going to get that culture from a CEO who still thinks solely as a Yield Analyst. No matter how smart the mathematician - you still need other skills to actually understand your customers. And "loyalty" is a different skill set to "Yield".




That said - we lived before MASAs, and will continue to do so in their absence. It's not a show-stopper for me.

 

[Ansett]

MASAs acted a bit different to that though - and this is where I think QF totally misunderstood/misunderstands their FF demographic.

Ok here goes.....

1/ Conventional QF wisdom assumes that those regularly redeeming MASAs (a redemption that only produces a "marginal" profit margin for QF) would, in their absence, redeem those same points for redemptions which carried a higher "margin" for QF. eg. Toasters or higher-priced ASA awards.

2/ QF also takes the view that it was a cheap way for savvy FFs to fly in J for cheap, and that by removing this "cheap" option, said FF would now actually fork out hard currency to fly in J.

3/ The third aspect of QF's thought process was the issue of people using MASAs to attain/retain status cheaply. The thought is that these people were taking up revenue seats at low cost, and also that by obtaining status cheaply, these people were obtaining benefits when they fly (which costs QF), without having invested the necessary amount in the first place.

Now let's deal with the facts.....

Very few people took "advantage" of MASAs.

Most QFF members redeem their points on poor value (ie. High-profit-margin for QF) items such as toasters, domestic upgrades, JQ Y redemptions etc etc.

By removing MASA availability from the website,QF ensured no-one accidentally stumbled across them.

To access them required not only "knowledge", but also "time and effort".

Let's not forget that MASAs were more expensive in $$ (thus compensating QF for the points/SC earn).

And of course unless you were status-running, then you weren't actually getting the max value from them.

Let's now address the arguments in turn:

1/ This is somewhat axiomatic.... If the ability to redeem MASAs is taken away, of course those points will be redeemed elsewhere. It is however, fair to say that most MASA users are smart enough to redeem on decent value things (eg.. Premium international redemptions and upgrades), as opposed to toasters, and almost certainly NOT more expensive ASAs.

2/ Firstly, most FFs who like to fly in J and do so at company expense (or to whom money is no object), probably couldn't be coughd with fapping around with MASAs in the first place. In other words, would MASA users now suddenly start paying cold hard cash to sit in J on the same flight that otherwise would have been a MASA? The answer is no.
The only exception would be some members here who earn generous points by flying in J on the company dime, and then use MASAs to inflate status. And they are not going to suddenly start paying $$ to fly TSV-BNE-DRW and back for the day.... They are going to stay home and read my pearls of wisdom instead.

3/ This issue has two parts. First, do MASA runners cost QF yield revenue? Only in Excel is the answer "yes". Firstly, these pax are taking excess seats, and filling a plane that YM decided wasn't going to fill with full J fare paying pax. How do I know this? That's easy...... There had to have been a U seat available. If YM thought the whole J cabin could be sold for full fare, they would not release U seats on that sector. Secondly, by taking the U seat, when the next J pax comes along, he has to pay a higher fare because there is one less seat available in the cabin (yes, I know I'm simplifying the process). Thirdly, the FF is spending points and $$ that they otherwise would not have spent (resulting in QF making a profit, albeit "marginal").

The second part is the question about undeserving peeps availing themselves of the Taittinger without actually having spent $40,000 buying retail First Class Fares.

QF's best status runner is the one who spends money they otherwise wouldn't spend, taking flights they otherwise wouldn't fly, to earn status that they otherwise wouldn't have, only to then stop flying as they've now run out of points/$$/time. Awesome for QF, as aside from the cost of the shiny card and a couple of coasters, this fake-FF isn't taking advantage of any amenities/benefits which cost QF dollars. And if they don't continue flying, they don't retain their status.

And if they do continue flying and get addicted to the game, then they continue to donate $$ to QFF for the sake of it.


So in summary....

1/ Those redeeming MASAs are NOT simply going to redeem a more profitable class of ASA.

2/ Those redeeming MASAs are NOT simply going to fly those same flights but this time pay cash to fly in J.

3/ Those redeeming MASAs solely for status are actually donating more $$ to QF than QF ever would have extracted from them.

In fairness to our friends at Qantas Loyalty - there really is no way to show this on the pivot-table. On paper, the above erroneous assumptions make sense. It takes a different kind of thinking to understand the dynamic in action.

If Qantas Loyalty had senior managers who understood that their role was to actually generate loyalty and get bums on seats across the Group - then they would both understand this, and be able to communicate that message across the Executive group.

But you're not going to get that culture from a CEO who still thinks solely as a Yield Analyst. No matter how smart the mathematician - you still need other skills to actually understand your customers. And "loyalty" is a different skill set to "Yield".




That said - we lived before MASAs, and will continue to do so in their absence. It's not a show-stopper for me.

Hi dfcatch Excellent summary and fully agree with you on all points.