Cheapest way into the SYD T1 F lounge as a guest?

[acampbel]

And the relevance to this topic would be?

Would it help you accept my morally shaky ways that I have rain water tanks at home to water my garden? Would you also like to champion the issue where water inside the house is not monitored, but us vegie gardeners face excessive scurtiny even though we are doing out bit for the environment? Again, the relevance to this topic would be zero.

Or is this the resident forum troll cough environmentalist?

Ahh ..... the "Troll" label. What a fine way of dismissing an argument.

I take your point about going off topic, and it was not my intention to open up an old argument. I had just been surprised by the tone of many posts on the original question - the wisdom of conning one's way into the F Lounge to have breakfast with a colleague. I would argue that Beardoc's plans are silly but not illegal, and certainly less damaging than the status runs that seem to be a peccadillo of this forum's members.

And as a semi-regular flyer I can hardly claim to be a saint when it comes to generating more than my fair share of CO2. Like yourself and many others I have put in a rainwater tank and flouro bulbs and go around the house after my wife turning the heating down, but all this good work can be un-done with a single unnecessary long-haul flight.

It's like the stupid FBT rule that sees people in their hundreds driving between Sydney to Melbourne to get a tax break. In a battle between greed and the environment you won't find many takers for a bet on the latter!


Cheers,


Andrew

.

 

[vt]

Ahh ..... the "Troll" label. What a fine way of dismissing an argument.

Not dismissing an argument. If you could call it such. I just dont see the relevance to the topic and as such, would consider this to be a troll.

I object to the OP wanting to gain access to the FLounge for breakfast due to:
1. Trying to obtain benefit by deception. So if the OP carried out his plan and remained in the lounge for the day, having breakfast, lunch and dinner. Having all the treatments he can in the spa.

No boarding pass? No Problem! Just log online and book the next fully flexible flight, checkin, cancel, rinse and repeat.

2. In doing this, has wasted the resources of Immigration and Qantas.

I guess the high horse responses we have had on this thread may be due to our members having higher moral standards and not wanting this great site to be known as the how to screw QF for as much as we can, even if it is legally grey site.

Again, I dont see where the environment and greenie argument fits into this topic.

 

[acampbel]

I'll try one more time .....


I thought it was a tad hypocritical for some forum members who screw the planet (for status runs) to lambast another member for screwing Qantas (for eggs benedict).

Sorry - I was completely wrong.

[Now where do they hide that padlock?]


Andrew

.

 

[yo yo ma]

OK. Let's hypothetically say that 1% of pax miles are down to status runs...

And let's hypothetically say that there are no more status runs and that there is a 1% reduction in passengers per flight. The flight still leaves anyway, so I can't see your point???

BTW, I have never made a status run, but would consider doing one if needed...

 

[acampbel]

And let's hypothetically say that there are no more status runs and that there is a 1% reduction in passengers per flight. The flight still leaves anyway, so I can't see your point???

BTW, I have never made a status run, but would consider doing one if needed...

Oh goody ... now we get the fallacious argument. So Qantas doesn't schedule flights based on demand? They were going to load up the plane with bags of cement and fly it to London anyway??

I suppose you don't bother to vote either, as what difference could it possibly make?


Somebody stop me, please!

 

[Mal]

Oh goody ... now we get the fallacious argument. So Qantas doesn't schedule flights based on demand? They were going to load up the plane with bags of cement and fly it to London anyway??

Some British airlines are actually doing this at the moment. Their LHR takeoff/landing slots will be lost if they don't meet certain targets (80% of flights per week or something for each slot), so rather than losing them they are flying planes around on dummy runs with no passengers.

I thought it was a tad hypocritical for some forum members who screw the planet (for status runs) to lambast another member for screwing Qantas (for eggs benedict).

Well some people like Indy car racing, some people like Jetboats or their Jetcraft. Others drive around pointlessly for various reasons. We all have our own likes and dislikes, and I don't judge those people - nor should they judge me.
As I've said before, I don't care what people think of me and my flying. It is my business not theirs.

 

[Travel Guru]

While I certainly sympathise with your argument regarding the environment, I still think you're off track with this one.

Whether someone is flying for a status run, a business meeting or to see their mother, they are doing so because they are receiving a perceived benefit for their time and money, and it really is no-ones business why someone is flying.

Why should someone else decide that one persons reason for flying is more important than someone else, to the person doing the status run in order to retain a level (something ive never needed to do), the perceived benefit may be just as pleasurable or perhaps more so than visiting family.

I for one cant see a link between someone sneaking into the F lounge and obtaining something by deception, and someone on a status run who is paying for a service and receiving something in exchange.

TG

 

[Harpoon]

I'll try one more time .....


I thought it was a tad hypocritical for some forum members who screw the planet (for status runs) to lambast another member for screwing Qantas (for eggs benedict).

Sorry - I was completely wrong.

[Now where do they hide that padlock?]


Andrew

.

Your argument is valid to a point. But I share the opinion that your comparison has nothing to do with this particular topic, and is a bit of a stretch to say "anyone whos done a status run cannot comment on a breaky run" becuase they are in different 'morally responsible' categories. And hence due to the off topic nature, appears as trolling. It was kind of like saying "anyone who drives a car is on morally shaky grounds" - yes true, but it has no relevance to this thread.

Human beings do a squillion 'morally shaky' things every day when it comes to the environment, including using a computer and posting on a forum. I think the apparent 'goodie-too-shoes-ness' in your first post probably rubbed a few people the wrong way. And the fact that you appeared to be fishing for a reaction - which you sure got. No big deal, we can move on.

P.S. Suggest you make a new thread about 'Status Runs - Environmental Hypocrits' if it's on your mind - it has little to do with scoring a free breaky.

 

[acampbel]

OK. I will admit that there is no connection between the two topics, per se. Seeing as you have looked back to my original post you will see that I start with a vague reference to the biblical story of a mob about to stone some floozy to death. I have used a specific example ("He that is without status-run among you") rather than a generalisation ("He that is without sin among you") to emphasise my point, but I think it is valid to associate lack of consistency with hypocrisy.

Anyway .... I've worked out why Beardoc really annoyed the forum members. The thought of someone achieving for free their life-long aim of FL or CL hobnobbing just got too much for some!

Fine. I'm going home now so you can all shout at my exhaust emissions.

Cheers,

Andrew

.

 

[serfty]

I know the 'fabled' guy who booked a First Class Singapore airlines flight out of MEL; a few others on this forum have met him as well.

While many of us would not countenance booking an international flight merely to experience a first class lounge, most who know this guy were still a little surprised he actually did it.

He is known for his lurks and perks, staying at 5 Star hotels for $1 etc., just because he could - even though the airfares to get to that hotel may have been much more.

I can understand trying to be a guest at the "Fabled" SYD Qantas First Class lounge simply to experience it; but for goodness sake, one should at least fly somewhere to do so! If nothing else, to explore the full experience of Air Travel (Carbon offsetting at the same time if you desire).

I have posted an option earlier in this thread, 'tis simple to do so.

Anyway, back to the Flounge - A Big disclaimer, I would NOT do it for breakfast! Aside from the menu for breakfast being attenuated recently (more elsewhere soon) "All Day Dining" is far better.

 

[oz_mark]

I can understand trying to be a guest at the "Fabled" SYD Qantas First Class lounge to experience; but for goodness sake, one should at least fly somewhere to do so! If nothing else, to explore the full experience of Air Travel (Carbon offsetting at the same time if you desire).

Maybe we need a new option for a green status run,where you can choose to pretend to fly, but want to save the planet, so won't actually fly

 

[straitman]

Maybe we need a new option for a green status run,where you can choose to pretend to fly, but want to save the planet, so won't actually fly

... or just pretend to do the whole thing :!:

 

[JohnK]

I'm not stating that status runs are illegal ..... just morally on very shaky ground.

Morally shaky ground? In what way?

I think the implication is that, in terms of carbon emissions, global warming and the general state of the planet, unnecessary flights are a "bad thing" :mrgreen:

So does that also mean I should not get into my car to go for a nice relaxing drive. After all there is no real purpose to the drive other than relaxation which I could achieve in many other ways.

I have done a few status runs and I am proud of them. I will continue to do status runs as long as I can afford them and enjoy them. I am not buying into this carbon emission garbage....

 

[acampbel]

.... I have done a few status runs and I am proud of them. I will continue to do status runs as long as I can afford them and enjoy them. I am not buying into this carbon emission garbage....

No comment

 

[Travel Guru]

No comment

I've said it before, i'll say it again, who's place is it to judge which trip is or isn't worthy of flying?

To the person paying the fare, the trip is obviously justified otherwise they wouldn't pay for it, and who's to say that someone doing a status run to get their last 30 SC's to re-qualify platinum is any less important to them than nanna flying to see her grandkids is to her???

It's all well and good to take the moral high ground, but as the good book says 'Judge not lest ye be judged'.

TG

 

[medhead]

Not dismissing an argument. If you could call it such. I just dont see the relevance to the topic and as such, would consider this to be a troll.

Sorry this is all OT but...

Trouble is that "troll" sometimes used on this forum in a way to dismiss a different opinion without any connection to the full meaning of "troll". If we quote the source of all knowledge wikipedia:

Troll (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion."

Yes the post was off topic, it may even be controversial to some people (i.e. Andrew Bolt). But do you honestly believe the intention was to bait an emotional response or disrupt normal discussion?

 

[JohnK]

I've said it before, i'll say it again, who's place is it to judge which trip is or isn't worthy of flying?

Is a regional manager flying from Australia to SE Asia monthly or bi-monthly, in business class, for a meeting lasting less than a day more important than someone on a status run? Why not use tele conferencing for the meetings?

I think it is up to the individual to evaluate how important the trip is going to be to them. I could fly SYD-BKK direct but I choose to fly via SIN/HKG for almost the same price. Am I doing the wrong thing? I don't think so. And I will continue to think this way as long as business people continue to fly around all over the place for meetings, that could still be achieved using tele conferencing, or just to look and feel important....

 

[docjames]

/on topic/

I think if you have any status with QF they'll probably turn a blind eye to someone wanting to "visit".

if you're Joe Nobody, forget it, you wont get past the front gate.

 

[vt]

Sorry this is all OT but...

Trouble is that "troll" sometimes used on this forum in a way to dismiss a different opinion without any connection to the full meaning of "troll". If we quote the source of all knowledge wikipedia:

Troll (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion."

Yes the post was off topic, it may even be controversial to some people (i.e. Andrew Bolt). But do you honestly believe the intention was to bait an emotional response or disrupt normal discussion?

I'm sorry you cant make up your own mind as to what words mean. I'm also sorry your using a wiki site as the be all and end all in defining the English language. Hey! Its on the interwebs so it must be trues

:mrgreen:

If you think that linking the environment into this thread is not trying to bait an emotional response then I dont think any other OT would.

Each to their own. This is a FREQUENT FLYER site. Not a greenie carbon emission garbage website

 

[medhead]

I'm sorry you cant make up your own mind as to what words mean. I'm also sorry your using a wiki site as the be all and end all in defining the English language. Hey! Its on the interwebs so it must be trues

Are you for real? "troll" is a word of your interwebs, wikipedia is just as valid as the Oxford English Dictionary. Wikipedia is not me making up a meaning for a word, it gives the accepted meaning of "interweb" terms.

If you think that linking the environment into this thread is not trying to bait an emotional response then I dont think any other OT would.

Sorry, discussion of the environment is not an emotional thing for some of us.

Edit: now OT = off topic and I'm sorry but I don't know what the last bit of your post means.
Personally, I think calling the OP morally inferior is unrelated to the question posed and designed to provoke an emotional response. Yet 90% of this thread is about how the very idea of the OP is morally reprehensible.