Devil´s Advocate. Qantas is doing the right thing.

[trippin_the_rift]

f you see and appreciate different sides of the problem then you can discover and implement innovative solutions.

I've tried and tried and tried this over and over. Phone calls, meetings, 1 on 1 meetings, platinum one sessions. You name it I've done it with QF. They're not interested mate.
I'm not one to give up - so instead - I created a program to show Qantas FF'ers what their existing activity would look like under another airline loyalty program.

I'll need a few more sets of hands to count the number of frequent flyers that have used the tool and now are actively crediting flights to another program... spoke with yet another user of the product just a few days ago who went from 5,000+ status credits/year to now intentionally halting at 1,200. Sure QFF are doing some things well, but when high spend, loyal premium flyers are switching out (note: switching out of QFF, not out of flying QF) - there's no other way to look at it than a failure of the program to understand it's own customer segments.

 

[Himeno]

I've tried and tried and tried this over and over. Phone calls, meetings, 1 on 1 meetings, platinum one sessions. You name it I've done it with QF. They're not interested mate.
I'm not one to give up - so instead - I created a program to show Qantas FF'ers what their existing activity would look like under another airline loyalty program.

program???

 

[trippin_the_rift]

program???

Website.... http://www.flyora.com/screenshot_stats.JPG

 

[medhead]

, but when high spend, loyal premium flyers are switching out (note: switching out of QFF, not out of flying QF) - there's no other way to look at it than a failure of the program to understand it's own customer segments.

this is an important point. Having discussed my situation with a Qantas experience manager, or some such, I have realised that the front line staff are generally excellent. But the changes to QFF send a clear message that pushes me away.

 

[Brisbane Flyer]

BTW, how much do u spend with Qantas? Or, how much do u influence?

My spend is about $25k annually, total influence is less than $100k. The majority of my business is not located in Australia, hence my influence $$ are low.

Cheers
BF

this is an important point. Having discussed my situation with a Qantas experience manager, or some such, I have realised that the front line staff are generally excellent. But the changes to QFF send a clear message that pushes me away.

 

[bryanjones]

Qantas delays new points earning scheme for partner airlines - Flights | hotels | frequent flyer | business class - Australian Business Traveller

while a little bit fluffy, if you read between the lines ots interesting. OW partner airlines appear to be saying to qantas that they DONT want to pay for less points when QFF flyers fly their OW airline.

Usually QF would love for partners to argue to buy more points rather than accept an offer to pay less. Obviously OW partners see this as a small cost of doing business to be able to have access to revenue that QFF flyers bring their airline.

Qantas must be in a conundrum, "are we trying to fly people or sell points".

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Qantas delays new points earning scheme for partner airlines - Flights | hotels | frequent flyer | business class - Australian Business Traveller

while a little bit fluffy, if you read between the lines ots interesting. OW partner airlines appear to be saying to qantas that they DONT want to pay for less points when QFF flyers fly their OW airline.

Usually QF would love for partners to argue to buy more points rather than accept an offer to pay less. Obviously OW partners see this as a small cost of doing business to be able to have access to revenue that QFF flyers bring their airline.

Qantas must be in a conundrum, "are we trying to fly people or sell points".

I'm making a huge guess here, but figuring airlines must off-set points earned on each other by members through some clearing system. But even then, how much would they 'pay' for any excess points floating around? Probably 1c each the same as the banks?

So lets look at CX... if it sells a business class ticket one way to a bronze, it would be up for roughly 4800 miles x 1.25 cabin bonus x 1c for a one way MEL-HKG. That comes to about $60. Small price to pay to get the passenger on your aircraft rather than a QF aircraft?

So any reduction in the points awarded could potentially lose the pax off CX metal all together. Guess partners wouldn't be happy with that.

 

[bryanjones]

I'm making a huge guess here, but figuring airlines must off-set points earned on each other by members through some clearing system. But even then, how much would they 'pay' for any excess points floating around? Probably 1c each the same as the banks?

So lets look at CX... if it sells a business class ticket one way to a bronze, it would be up for roughly 4800 miles x 1.25 cabin bonus x 1c for a one way MEL-HKG. That comes to about $60. Small price to pay to get the passenger on your aircraft rather than a QF aircraft?

So any reduction in the points awarded could potentially lose the pax off CX metal all together. Guess partners wouldn't be happy with that.

Yep. More eloquently put than me... Seems they are happy to pay, and qf is in the funny position of not wanting it...

 

[RAM]

Yep. More eloquently put than me... Seems they are happy to pay, and qf is in the funny position of not wanting it...

So, approach the question from another angle - What is Q's agenda? Is it a dysfunctional one? One that does not reward the owners of the airline (shareholders) does not reward the customers of the airline but rewards a particular group of employees/consultants? Who knows WHY Q has chosen the apparently 'cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face' approach but they have.

Think back to 2007 and the Private Equity bid complete with the strong support (& huge payoff for) the then chief executive. Clearly a conflict of interest then yet it was allowed to go ahead (the bid that is) but did not get up. The authorities were not exactly intervening in that proposal nor issuing severe warnings to participants nor making strong public statements.

Now for conflicts of interest - there may be an interesting parallel to the current Storm Financial/Commonwealth Bank goings on. Or maybe there is not. Look at the similarities though - previously Govt owned company, floated between 1993-95ish, media sensitive company. No there is no comparison....

Handing over your traditional routes at no cost to "partners" seems a bit like the scene from Monty Python with the Black Knight - hacking off all limbs and still boldly proclaiming you're ready to continue the fight.

As a self-proclaimed "National carrier" it does seem counter-intuitive to stop serving a capital city for international flights?

What do the rest of the world's carriers do if a route is apparently not profitable flying a particular aircraft type? Credible airlines replace that capacity with a lower capacity plane. Maybe Q could have used a couple of those cancelled B787s to link Perth internationally as Q seems to be unable to do a mea culpa and admit they made a potentially company threatening choice by NOT using the B777.

However if your goal is to break up the airline and possibly participate in a Private Equity carve-up (with you in a plum role) then what would you do differently?

Perhaps we should start a thread - "What would we, in the position of the Q Board and senior executives, do to drive Q out of business?"

After all the title of this thread "Devil's advocate" did start me thinking.... Alienate premium passengers, put staff offside, constantly announce and then cancel 'strategic initiatives', blame the rest-of-the-world, engage multiple consultants and fact-finding studies, use high-cost low-availability aircraft (down-time for maintenance issues), launch new offshoots overseas against strongly entrenched competitors....

Now that would be an interesting thread!

 

[SeatBackForward]

QF should re-structure themselves/ JQ can be their airline operations, and QFF being their primary concern. Cause you know, everyone wants to earn points on groceries to spend on JQ afterall..

 

[medhead]

BTW, how much do u spend with Qantas? Or, how much do u influence?

My spend is about $25k annually, total influence is less than $100k. The majority of my business is not located in Australia, hence my influence $$ are low.

Cheers
BF

I spend enough on flights to be platinum with both Qantas and Virgin. In the ball park of your spend. I'm not sure how this is really relevant to my point, I had a relationship with qantas based on my spend. They have changed that relationship, devalued that relationship. That's their choice. But the question I've asked myself is "Do they want my money?" They've removed all incentive for me to keep spending my money with them. The 'me' in all that is irrelevant; The big question is how do they expect to make money when they are release people from the need to travel with QF? I am just astounded at their strategy to become profitable, based on my situation that seems to be push customers away.

 

[juddles]

1) ,....
Anyone, it is interesting that you choose to bag armchair experts following 5 points that are full of armchair expert opinion. You close off about being sick of whinging also seems to nullify your claim to being a devil's advocate. It suggest true belief in your position rather than promoting an alternative for the discussion............. You seem to have made an unsound assumption that shareholder happiness and customer happiness are mutually exclusive.

Medhead, firstly let me thank you for your long and thoughout post - that is what I want from this.

As for the armchair expert thing - off course my post is armchair expert type stuff! I have never worked in the airline industry. Any opinión I have is personal and restricted. But at least I recognize that

The ¨whinging¨ I refer to is the thoughtless and cheap shots taken at Qantas with no apparent bothering to take the time to sensibly contribute (your post is the opposite - hence I liked it)

An underlying concern I have (hence the Devil´s Advocate approach), is that it appears that this fórum, as almost any, can morph into a situation where groupthink reigns. Where someone cannot express support for AJ without being flamed out of existence.

My true personal view of AJ and his management? I am not happy with downsizing of QFi, but I just dont claim to understand the reasons for it, nor can I profess to have solutions. It is that simple.

Thanks again for your (and other posters) responses - I consider almost everyone on this fórum to be very intelligeent people, from whom I have both learnt much and will continue to enjoy ALL sides of the arguments. Because I care about flying, and especially about QF.

Cheers.

 

[dk4]

I am just astounded at their strategy to become profitable, based on my situation that seems to be push customers away.

It is a "you're with us, or you're against us" zero-sum, binary, black & white approach. It first started when "anytime access" to lounges was discontinued, and then direct sweep credit cards mandated.

Prior to that time, the management ethos was "we recognise that sometimes we can't get you to where you want to go, but as one of our best customers, we want you to feel at home with us as much as possible, even when you can't use our services".

Today it seems to have become "fly with us, regardless of our limited international network and excessive prices, or we won't care about you".

Which I do think is short term profit oriented, and representative of the financial crisis they have inflicted upon themselves. (Their strategy of "cash cowing" Qantas and "feeding" Jetstar seems to have backfired.)

 

[harvyk]

From Wiki: ¨In common parlance,a devil's advocate is someone who, given a certain argument, takes a position they do not necessarily agree with (or simply an alternative position from the accepted norm), for the sake of debate or to explore the thought further. In taking this position, the individual taking on the devil's advocate role seeks to engage others in an argumentative discussion process. The purpose of such a process is typically to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to either improve or abandon the original, opposing position. It can also refer to someone who takes a stance that is seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a much more conventional stance.¨

I wish here to defend the changes in Qantas that have so offended the members who feel robbed.

It seems that any thread that bags Qantas gets the usual flurry of people supporting those negative views. To me, although some individual posts shed great perspectives, as a collection those threads are not very helpful or meaningful.
Alan Joyce may not be a favoured person here, and, as per the introductory quote, I am just here to explore, not be his friend. But my self doubts include the following:

1.- QF is aprivate company, not a government entity. They have to be profitable to their shareholders. Shareholders are more important than customers. This truth is valid for any company. They exist to make money, not to make customers happy. If you cannot accept that truth you should be striving to reestablish a government airline (and by Jesus wouldnt those employees rort the system!)

I put this down as a yes and no. Private companies exist to make money for the shareholders, however without customers that money stops flowing in very quickly.

2.- QantasInternational competes in an extremely unlevel playing field. Just look at their costs per employee. In a truly free market they could never survive – the only thing that can keep them going is irrational customer loyalty (such as I have) or unbelievably lucky and succesful innovation (such as NZ)

Partially agree, they have an unlevel playing of they where to aim for people at the budget end of the spectrum, but move them to the value part of the spectrum and the luxury end of the spectrum and the playing field becomes much more even. There is a big problem that QF for some reason has been attempting to be everything to all people, no doubt brought on by BFOD policies.

3.- We as a FF community hate the new changes to earn. It is always hurtful to lose something, but IMHO it was ridiculous that someone could do two return BNE-BDB trips on QF (for about $200) and a whoopee ¨bullsh_t F¨ tour around the LOTFAP for about $1000, and be a full ranking WP with QF.

Can't argue with that.

4.- WP are a dime a dozen these days. Hence the invention of WP1.

WP's are a dime a dozen on this forum (and by extension friendship groups of those on this forum), and in the JLounge since by definition a WP does a lot of travel. Out in the real world WP's are rare as hen's teeth.

5.- WP1 complain about the lack of extra services/rewards. But maybe they really are the customers who should have been WP vanilla all along? It is the fault of all the other pseudo WP that their benefits have been eroded.

WP already get very good service, the problem is as much as anything else you get accustomed to the new higher level of service, so what is actually really special service feels "normal".

6.- Not a day goes by without an armchair expert bagging the QF corporate team. They may be right. But if they are so good at this stuff, why can´t they please leap in to the rescue? As in every business – easy to bag, hard to deliver.

Armchair experts are a funny thing. Most of the time they cough on about stuff where they really don't see the big picture, but every so often one comes along who can see the forest from the trees (I'd put myself in the first category). Since they are not indoctrinated with company policy, procedure and spin they can provide some very insightful opinions which managers really should be listening to.

Sorry to post this thread – it is me being sick of the whinging. I know that I post this with the risk (surety?) of being ostracized. But I have concerns as to the group-think that flourishes in some corners of AFF. And I am happy to be flamed for supporting my position. I have a thick skin.

But if anyone dares to support QF, or at least question the outrage, then please put that right here.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

My true personal view of AJ and his management? I am not happy with downsizing of QFi, but I just dont claim to understand the reasons for it, nor can I profess to have solutions. It is that simple.

Thanks again for your (and other posters) responses - I consider almost everyone on this fórum to be very intelligeent people, from whom I have both learnt much and will continue to enjoy ALL sides of the arguments. Because I care about flying, and especially about QF.

Cheers.

Many aspects of running an airline are not unique to aviation.

Public relations for example is a universal concept. There is no special 'magic' when it comes to airline PR. So it is possible those skilled in PR can legitimately offer advice, even though they have no direct airline PR experience.

The same applies to customer service - it is not a unique concept to an airline.

Are we skilled in airline fleet management and decision purchases? I'm not, but anyone with eyes open can see there are some valid questions to be asked. If QFi wanted a tax payer guarantee, are we not allowed to ask why brand new, fuel efficient aircraft are going to jetstar? Are we not allowed to ask why benefits are cut when planes are sitting around on the ground elsewhere, presumably at some cost?

I think it is fair that someone is allowed to ask these questions. Otherwise we might have politicians, who probably have a perfect experience when flying Qantas, making decisions about my tax payer money that may not lead to an improvement for me, an ordinary person.

We all care about QF, for one reason or another. Some have status, others (such as me) care about the loss of jobs if it fails. But offering valid suggestions on how to improve service (and potentially increase revenue) should not be confused with taking a cheap shot. Many issues have been raised for a long time... with apparently no urgency seen to address those issues.

 

[medhead]

I get what you mean (now) about whinging. I think that could come down to fatigue. For example I could bang on about how my situation is affected, undoubtedly I do, without ever taking the time to make the link to the bigger picture. I think many others many be suffering similar fatigue, where they really can't see a decent strategy from Qantas. Unfortunately, I can't see any killer alternatives suggested in thread. Well perhaps that they are trying to cut to profit. The problem is that many can see more effective changes that they could be making instead of this lot.

 

[juddles]

.....We all care about QF, for one reason or another......

This is what worries me - we all DO care, which should be a massive support to the airline. Another way to put this is that many of us are prepared to wear a few inconveniences to support it, due to personal/sentimental/other reasons. Which should be a huge plus for QF´s ability to flourish. But it is not.

But maybe, as per harvyk´s observation, WP´s are common only in this fórum, not the bigger world. And from that reality I suggest that just maybe the changes that we dont like here in the AFF community are non-issues to the millions of casual (read credit card, etc ) and uninformed members of the QFF program, whose spend/behaviour patterns far outweigh the impact of serious frequent flyers?

Woops - now I am not sure if my content is Devils Advocate or not? Go you good thing AJ!!

 

[medhead]

This is what worries me - we all DO care, which should be a massive support to the airline. Another way to put this is that many of us are prepared to wear a few inconveniences to support it, due to personal/sentimental/other reasons. Which should be a huge plus for QF´s ability to flourish. But it is not.

Qantas has burned that social/political capital. I'm prepared to support the airline as you suggest. The problem is that each iteration of changes tell me that qantas don't care about that support. These latest changes say emotion needs to be put aside.

 

[harvyk]

This is what worries me - we all DO care, which should be a massive support to the airline. Another way to put this is that many of us are prepared to wear a few inconveniences to support it, due to personal/sentimental/other reasons. Which should be a huge plus for QF´s ability to flourish. But it is not.

But maybe, as per harvyk´s observation, WP´s are common only in this fórum, not the bigger world. And from that reality I suggest that just maybe the changes that we dont like here in the AFF community are non-issues to the millions of casual (read credit card, etc ) and uninformed members of the QFF program, whose spend/behaviour patterns far outweigh the impact of serious frequent flyers?

Woops - now I am not sure if my content is Devils Advocate or not? Go you good thing AJ!!

This forum certainly cares, and QF say thank you from time to time by offering exclusive lunches / Q&A's to forum members, and give us access to some pretty high up people which the average QFFer wouldn't be able to do.

As for the general public well I know a few people who are QFFers outside of this forum, and one of the pretty much universal things is that they don't really know how they earn / use their points. I've had people complain to me that their points are worthless (and that's with a balance of 4 times what I have, I did suggest the bank of harvyk, but they didn't go for it ) and that was before simpler and fairer. So for the non-AFFer types, cancelling things like mASA's, bringing in simpler and fairer, will be a complete non-event (since you can only get annoyed by such things if you see the true value in a point in the first place), these are the people who see things like getting QP on SG as a bonus for flying so much, not something which has been their goal from the beginning.

 

[Himeno]

I do have to wonder if things for Qantas wouldn't be as bad if the A380 and 787 delays hadn't happened.