AusBTs comparison of frequent flyer programs - more unprofessional work!

[markis10]

Noticed AusBT posted an article yesterday on the comparison of frequent flyer programs, I have been openly critical of their stories and lack of crediting sources in the past because I feel they are somewhat unprofessional, this latest effort has done nothing to improve my opinion (I am looking forward to their exclusive article on the value of DJs PE Points + Pay rewards soon ):

http://www.ausbt.com.au/gold-and-pl...&utm_medium=flipper&utm_campaign=home-flipper

Its 400 to retain with Velocity, which is mentioned in the table so presume its a typo.

No its 69kg for PE or business with Virgin, anyone who needs more baggage than that should not expect it from status IMHO!

So does Virgin at an increasing number of airports, started with Melbourne in May.


The summary of the article I agree with in terms of DJ being better value domestically (something that is a continuing discussion point here) but its also disappointing to see it misses some other key points, like the extra status benefits for rental cards with DJ, which is a direct travel related opportunity that affects many travelers, $1500 spent on car rental with DJ gold crediting will get you a one way PE flight to Sydney (+$58 cash spent) versus 4500 points that will get you no where with QF regardless of the cash co-payment. In the case of Avis and Thrifty for single day rentals there are better options again but that would be going OT!

The article is pretty good overall, and while I generally take everything with a grain of salt when it comes to the press, if you are going to be a specialist publication it would be nice to see a lot more accuracy in the reporting please.

 

[Danger]

I don't rate this online publication in the least. It's a low cost carrier in a premium carrier world (trying to be something it very much isn't). They did an article six or so weeks ago on something Qantas (either the FF program in general or on Business Class, I can't quite remember) that was littered with inaccuracies. I submitted a comment pointing them all out and, to their credit, it was published.

 

[thewinchester]

I can only endorse the comments with my view that AusBT is a junk publication, just trying to cash in on some online ad dollars through constant rot like this.

As for their unprofessionally, their Editor set out to start an argument with me via social media about 2-3 months back. I basically responded that I've made up my mind about them, wasn't likely to change it, and wasn't interested in discussing it further.

Using the site's own twitter a/c (@ausbt) they proceeded to fling insults, thus I blocked that a/c. He then went onto his own personal a/c, and continued carrying on like a pork chop - after already being blocked and explicity told I'm not interested in discussing it.

Yep, sign of a real professional <s>.

 

[jontam69]

I'm not a reader of ausbt as I find their articles are directed more towards newbies rather than seasoned travelers (and there are still far too many inaccuracies and typos for my liking), but the way AFF's moderators and owner have set out to attack them is rather alarming. I saw a tweet from AFF today calling them unprofessional - in my opinion, that is far more unprofessional than anything they have done.

Personally, i think AFF is not happy about their presence because they feel their ad dollars might go elsewhere and I really feel that AFF mods are running a series of attacks on the site to bring its reputation down.

I read AFF because I prefer the forum format to reading articles like on ausbt, but i won't be joining the community because there are quite a few rather 'loud' voices here that seem to love being negative and deriding other people's efforts.

I'm sure this post won't stay up long because the AFF mods and the owner are a bit sensitive when people criticise them, but I felt that it was necessary to express my disappointment in the blatant hate mongering that AFF mods such as markis10 seem to love to engage in.

 

[markis10]

I am always happy to be corrected, and have been on numerous occasions in the past, I think you will find the tweet you mention to be my OP, not something additional to what's clearly posted on the AFF website already. The mods don't get any ad revenue so I find your suggestion somewhat ill-informed, in fact we don't have any ownership of the site and are long term contributors, who have the experience to see through poor research and rushed stories. We are here to make sure this site is an accurate and friendly resource, not to make money.

I am also happy to see my experience shared elsewhere, but when you do please kindly pay credit where credit is due, something that has not happened in the past for quite a few "stories" in various publications, including print media taking a trip report!

 

[david-au-2000]

As for their unprofessionally, their Editor set out to start an argument with me via social media about 2-3 months back. I basically responded that I've made up my mind about them, wasn't likely to change it, and wasn't interested in discussing it further.
Using the site's own twitter a/c (@ausbt) they proceeded to fling insults, thus I blocked that a/c. He then went onto his own personal a/c, and continued carrying on like a pork chop - after already being blocked and explicity told I'm not interested in discussing it.
Yep, sign of a real professional <s>.

I am only a relative "newbie" here and I hope I don't get anybody offside, I read AusBT and find it pretty good but thewinchester, I think your comments in this instance are the "unprofessional" ones. Let me explain why before you reply please.

I follow AusBT and also their editor djsflynn on Twitter and your comments about 'argument' and 'insults' and acting like a pork chop struck me because they both seem pretty good and easy going. So I did a search and here is the exchange between you and AusBT and djsflynn.

thewinchesterau: @winglets747 the people at @AusBT have been stealing content for months, and getting it wrong just as often. I just point, laugh & ignore.

AusBT: @thewinchesterau 'Stealing content'? Our articles are 100% our own. Maybe you're confusing sourcing with writing & value-adding? [df]

You: @AusBT sadly Media Watch doesn't bother with Z-grade sites such as yours, it'll be like shooting fish in a barrel.

AusBTthewinchesterau Whatever. (sighs, rolls eyes, shakes head and smiles) [df]

thewinchesterau: @AusBT roll your eyes as much as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that what you write is rehashed & lifted copy.

@djsflynn: @thewinchesterau See previous tweet ('whatever' etc etc). #thatisall [df]

thewinchesterau: @djsflynn wow, you can't take a hint can you. I don't care about your views, as they just aren't true.

@djsflynn: @thewinchesterau Seems we have differing views of 'truth' so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one, my friend. Have a good week.

I don't want to start an argument and I don't know what other 'history' there might be here but it seems pretty clear that thewinchester started the 'argument' and that at no stage did AusBT or djsflynn "fling insults" or "act like a pork chop", the AusBT tweets did not seem very insulting, there was no big argument, thewinchester was the one making inflamatory remarks to which AusBT did not bite back and in fact djsflynn ended things in what I would consider to be a very civil and easy-going manner.

I'm not an apologist for AusBT or anybody but nor am I what some people call a 'hater' - you know, people who seem to have lots of vitriol for others. I'm a Labour voter but I don't hate Liberals. I'm not in favour of guns but I don't hate gun owners and shooters. You get the idea. But there does seem to be a bit of 'hate' here which frankly find off-putting and it all seems a bit one-sided.

Again I am only a newcomer to AFF but I believe my opinion is as valid as anybody else and I don't like what I am seeing here, especially a personal and apparently unsusbtantiated attack on an individual.

 

[david-au-2000]

I am also happy to see my experience shared elsewhere, but when you do please kindly pay credit where credit is due, something that has not happened in the past for quite a few "stories" in various publications, including print media taking a trip report!

Mark, if AusBT copied a trip report from AFF then I will definitely be revising my view of them, but did they actually do that?

And they did run a story yesterday morning on DJ's 'points + pay' PE upgrade deal but that was already on DJ's website, they linked to it, I dont see the point you are making?

Once again I am not an "old hand" here and I'm enjoying the community and the threads I take part it, but it does seem that there's a bit of negativity and anti-AusBT going on here, maybe they have done something to rub you up the wrong way personally, I will ever say that I know all the facts because there are a few sides to every story, and yes if there are mistakes in their stories then absolutely point them out but there seems to be more than that going on here. I'm not trying to defend anybody!

 

[samh004]

This seems to be turning into a for- and against, taking sides against another website, than a discussion on the article. Is it meant to be?

Interesting how much they got wrong!

 

[markis10]

Mark, if AusBT copied a trip report from AFF then I will definitely be revising my view of them, but did they actually do that?

And they did run a story yesterday morning on DJ's 'points + pay' PE upgrade deal but that was already on DJ's website, they linked to it, I dont see the point you are making?

Once again I am not an "old hand" here and I'm enjoying the community and the threads I take part it, but it does seem that there's a bit of negativity and anti-AusBT going on here, maybe they have done something to rub you up the wrong way personally, I will ever say that I know all the facts because there are a few sides to every story, and yes if there are mistakes in their stories then absolutely point them out but there seems to be more than that going on here. I'm not trying to defend anybody!

AusBT are not print media, and I am not talking about the PE upgrade either.

There are plenty of sites that are a fountain of information on frequent flyer info, and most of them credit sources, play by site rules, when they get it wrong you can expect to read the right info here in most cases, if we had an issue with competition, I doubt you would find them mentioned here in the first place, the only issue is the accuracy of the information being presented!

 

[david-au-2000]

Wow, a print publication ripped off an AFF trip report, can you "name and shame"?

Sorry if I seem daft Mark but I still dont get the point here, if AusBT were not the ones to rip off that trip report in what way does AusBT not 'credit sources' or not 'play by the rules'? Have they done a cut-and-paste copy of some articles from AFF or from other sites?

 

[markis10]

I did say various, and prefer to keep it non specific, if you put up a piece of info to do with frequent flyers, while an organization/business may not support peer review, you can expect it here and on various other forums such as Flyertalk etc. Why put up with rubbish when the truth is out there?

 

[david-au-2000]

I did say various, and prefer to keep it non specific, if you put up a piece of info to do with frequent flyers, while an organization/business may not support peer review, you can expect it here and on various other forums such as Flyertalk etc. Why put up with rubbish when the truth is out there?

Hey I agree with you about the value of forums like AFF, that's why I am here and the information I've learned has been great and made me a much better traveller.

But here's the thing, you criticise AusBT for not giving credit and not "playing by the rules" whatever rules they are and imply they copy stories from AFF but instead of giving examples which prove your point you say you prefer to keep it non-specific. It's like thewinchester saying they insulted him and acted like a pork chop when the evidence shows nothing of the sort, and claims that AusBT 'steals content' and their stories are lifted and rehashed but nobody showing any proof.

I really don't want to get offside with anybody over this and I don't want you to think I am having a shot at you Mark, but all I can see are a few broad claims being made that are one-sided and no 'proof' and the one bit of 'proof' I can find undermines some of those claims. This is the good thing about forums, they let everybody have their say and it's all very open and people can explain their view and present the reasons for it and then its up to people to make their own mind up.

 

[admin]

I saw a tweet from AFF today calling them unprofessional - in my opinion, that is far more unprofessional than anything they have done.

I can confirm what markis10 says in his post: the tweet you are referring to was automatically generated when the thread was created. We automatically tweet all new threads. No "special" treatment.

I'm sure this post won't stay up long because the AFF mods and the owner are a bit sensitive when people criticise them

There is heaps criticism about AFF on AFF. Only posts which breach our guidelines (vulgar, commercial, offensive) are deleted.

 

[kpc]

to the poster 2 posts above: I suggest searching posts by djsflynn on FT if you want more info:idea:. I think one of the main criticisms is that (some) material published in AusBT has probably been gleemed from both FT and AFF without any acknowledgment of the source of that partic. info.:shock:

 

[david-au-2000]

to the poster 2 posts above: I suggest searching posts by djsflynn on FT if you want more info:idea:. I think one of the main criticisms is that (some) material published in AusBT has probably been gleemed from both FT and AFF without any acknowledgment of the source of that partic. info.:shock:

Thanks for that tip KPC. I went to FT and called up djsflynn's profile and posts and I have to say that either I am blind or I just can't see the issue here.

From 91 posts I could see only one such claim of AusBT lifting stories from another site. That was in a thread about "Review and criticism of NZ's Y, cuddle class and Y+ onboard new B777-300ER" Review and criticism of NZ's Y, cuddle class and Y+ onboard new B777-300ER - FlyerTalk Forums where somebody links to the AusBT review.

KiwiFlyer posts "I'm not the author but posted similar comments on new Air NZ 77W on my blog. There are a few good seats, and lots of bad ones." Serfty replies "The guy who run aus-b-t sources much material from blogs and sites like this and AFF." djsflynn refutes it, pointing out they had an AusBT journalist on the plane for most of the day writing notes and taking photos, and KiwiFlyer endorses this and apologises, saying "Correct. I was not the source for the article and sorry if this was implied in any way."

There's another thread about "Virgin Blue offers free Velocity Gold status match for Qantas frequent flyers" Virgin Blue offers free Velocity Gold status match for Qantas frequent flyers - FlyerTalk Forums where partway through the thread Serfty links to a similar thread on AFF but there is no mention of material being sourced, it's just for Velocity to say "the status match promotion, as reported in the Australian Business Traveller and in other online forums was incorrectly represented." And that makes interesting reading actually because djsflynn explains how AusBT called Velocity and got the information directly from them, there are several follow-up posts on that and I found it a very interesting insight into how journalists and PR work and not always to the same end!

Anyway and again I hope nobody sees this as a silly "me vs AFF mods or high-profile AFF posters" thing but I cant see any evidence to support these claims or what appears to be AusBT bashing for its own sake. Yes by all means mistakes in a story are not good and should be pointed out and fixed and I notice that AusBT has actually fixed them now on the OP story but there seems to be a bit more vitriol here, and I say vitriol only because I am not seeing any reason or any of the facts to support the claims that have been made.

Anyway I don't want to be an island on this and dont want to fixate on it either.

 

[samh004]

Anyway and again I hope nobody sees this as a silly "me vs AFF mods or high-profile AFF posters" thing but I cant see any evidence to support these claims or what appears to be AusBT bashing for its own sake. Yes by all means mistakes in a story are not good and should be pointed out and fixed and I notice that AusBT has actually fixed them now on the OP story but there seems to be a bit more vitriol here, and I say vitriol only because I am not seeing any reason or any of the facts to support the claims that have been made.

I suppose you had to be here last year, but at least one of the big issues was that the owner of AusBT was trying to poach members from AFF to write articles on his site, instead of presumably doing TR's and the like here. It didn't go down too well.

Further, I don't think anyone needs to post in a thread to glean the info contained in it, so working out where news articles are sourced, when sources aren't provided is tricky stuff. Thought there seems to be an increasing number of articles spotted that look to have been sourced from threads here, and I'm not just saying at AusBT. Haha.

Things are definitely strained between the sites, but I don't think the problems originated here.

 

[admin]

Enough has been said on this topic, from all sides. The original issue has been discussed and the AusBT site corrected. I think it's now time to close this thread.