Flying SQ and getting AN points

Status
Not open for further replies.

arun

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Posts
311
After a lot of consideration, my son's Nintendo passion has ranked in the top of the requirements of our family trip. So we are flying SQ for SYD-SIN-CMB next month.

I am a QF FF. For this flight I checked the star alliance programs to see what gives the best value. I will get just over 10K on most airlines. But AN gives 18 K as they give points per km not miles. (I think 1 mile is 1.6 km but AN staff said I will get 18K). My booking class is B.

I am thinking of using NZ Airpoints cards because:
1. They give more points
2. Points are valid for 5 years
3. I can transfer points from my Westpc or AMEX reward points (that is just for me - not my wife or son), if I need to top up
4. I expect that QF and Air NZ will merge and I will get to transfer the points to my QF account.
and finally.....
5. I hope that Air NZ will not go the way that Ansett went.

Any comments or better suggestions welcome.
 
1. I think 1 mile is 1.6 km but AN staff said I will get 18K.

2. I hope that Air NZ will not go the way that Ansett went.

1. Aviation is calculated in Nautical Miles so the figure of 1.8k per Nautical Mile is more realistic than the 1.6 :idea:

2. Looking at the aviation sites it's still possible that Air NZ will go under. Having said that, it's possible that just about any airline could go under in the current environment :!:
 
Arun, buy your son a book and fly with the airline you prefer.
 
The Frequent Flyer Concierge team takes the hard work out of finding reward seat availability. Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, they'll help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

I have to agree with this last point, really.

SQ are fantastic, but.... if you have benefits with one other airline, e.g. QF Plat / Gold, even just QC, you are probably better off going with a OW airline, instead of a *A member. Assuming you hold no status at all with the *A.

Unless of course, this trip will put you up a few tiers in *A, if so, then go for it.
 
straitman said:
2. Looking at the aviation sites it's still possible that Air NZ will go under. Having said that, it's possible that just about any airline could go under in the current environment :!:

Jeez Bill, there's no way Air NZ will go under. I've known that airline fairly intimately for some time and there's no way such a well run company could go out the back door. There are some lessons for QF on how an airline should be run - no wonder they want to buy into it.
 
redrat said:
straitman said:
2. Looking at the aviation sites it's still possible that Air NZ will go under. Having said that, it's possible that just about any airline could go under in the current environment :!:

Jeez Bill, there's no way Air NZ will go under. I've known that airline fairly intimately for some time and there's no way such a well run company could go out the back door. There are some lessons for QF on how an airline should be run - no wonder they want to buy into it.

As I said I'm just quoting aviation magazines :!: Any company that is backed by their government every time they get into trouble will probably be around for ever.

We probably all need to remember that the "warm and fuzzy side" (ie passenger side) is very different from the business picture. I must totally agree though that QF could/should learn a few lessons from others including Air NZ :!:

I'll say it again though "It's possible that just about any airline could go under in the current environment" In reality though, I hope you are right and that they stay around for a long time.
 
Straitman, please explain. :)

:?

I still think that an airline can give great business service, whilst still retaining a passenger friendly side. It doesn't need to detract from one or the other, after all, you can still have good service for everyone, whilst keeping a 'business face' on it all.
 
Sully, As I said the decision was after a lot of consideration ;-). So book is not a substitute for Nintendo (according to my son).


Iceman, that was a good point. But flying QF will only take me to SIN and then I have to take Sri Lankan or Emirates (neither of them are in OW). That QF flight to SIN does not make an impact on my status credits.

Straitman, thanks for the info on nautical mile. I keep learning.

Regards
Arun
 
Arun, each parent has the right to deal with their kids in the way we see fit. My remark was facetious and no criticism was intended.

I don't know if you have seen my other post regarding Emirates but in a nutshell you can earn SA points on them if you are a member of United Airlines Mileage Plus. At least you have some scope for a broader range of flights with that group.
 
Jeez Bill, there's no way Air NZ will go under. I've known that airline fairly intimately for some time and there's no way such a well run company could go out the back door.

Really????

Hmmm.

Air NZ turns around losses

Aug 28 09:13 - NZ Press Agency

Air New Zealand on Thursday reported a June year net profit of $NZ165.7 million - its first full year net profit in four years.

Air NZ chief executive Ralph Norris said in a statement that the airline's strong domestic business and improving international business underpinned the profit, compared with a loss of $NZ319 million a year ago.

Air NZ's profit before unusual items and tax was $NZ220.3 million for the year ended June 30, up $NZ187.3 million on the previous financial year.

"Profits were also assisted by the strengthening of the New Zealand dollar against the United States dollar," Mr Norris said.

"As approximately 45 per cent of our costs are US dollar denominated, the rising exchange rate reduces costs in New Zealand dollar terms.

"Partially offsetting this effect is the reduction in the New Zealand dollar value of fares sold in foreign currencies," he said.

During the year Air NZ flew 5.8 million passengers within New Zealand, an increase of 6.2 per cent on the previous year, partly as the result of the airline's Express Class launched in November.

Domestic traffic rose 7.3 per cent, and capacity fell 1.5 per cent, with a load factor of 72.7 per cent. Internationally, Air NZ's short-haul traffic fell 2.8 per cent, capacity fell 3.6 per cent and the load factor was 75.0 per cent.

Total sales revenue fell 18 per cent to $NZ3.62 billion, and total operating revenue was also down 18 per cent to $NZ3.64 billion.

The company's cargo division produced revenue of $NZ296.1 million.

While the financial year began with a strong rebound in demand for travel after 2001, the second half showed a decline in traffic after the SARS outbreak and the Iraq war.

Air NZ chairman John Palmer said the airline could not afford to stand still, and its future depended on the proposed alliance with Qantas receiving regulatory approval.

"There are numerous recent examples of airlines that have been profitable one year and bankrupt shortly thereafter. While pleased with our progress, it should be noted that the company is still not achieving its cost of capital," he said.


"We must address the fundamental problems of over-capacity and cost structure and it is for this reason that we believe that the alliance with Qantas provides the best future for Air NZ.

"Despite the difficulties of the industry, we remain optimistic that, with regulatory approval of the alliance with Qantas, Air NZ will have the ability to make the changes required to survive and prosper," Mr Palmer said.

" We are determined to continually transform and simplify our business to remain ahead of industry change."

Air NZ was on the verge of bankruptcy at the end of 2001 when its Ansett unit collapsed and the industry slumped in the wake of the September 11 attack, until the Government bailed it out with $NZ885 million.

Air NZ shares were unchanged on Thursday but closed Wednesday at NZ49¢.


http://afr.com/articles/2003/08/28/1061663883660.html
 
Post subject: Flying SQ and getting AN points

And for accuracy sake:

'AN' was the designator of ANSETT

'NZ' is the 2 letter code of Air NZ

:D :D
 
icemann said:
Straitman, please explain. :)

:?

I still think that an airline can give great business service, whilst still retaining a passenger friendly side. It doesn't need to detract from one or the other, after all, you can still have good service for everyone, whilst keeping a 'business face' on it all.

Sorry Iceman, I overlooked your please explain... :oops:

Yes I agree with what you have said and maybe should have given more detail previously. Put simply all I meant was that an airline (like many other businesses) can be like a duck on a pond. All smooth and shiny on the surface BUT paddling like hell underneath. --- It doesn't mean they won't ultimately suceed, equally however it doesn't mean they will ultimately suceed. :wink:

Jeez Bill, there's no way Air NZ will go under. I've known that airline fairly intimately for some time and there's no way such a well run company could go out the back door. There are some lessons for QF on how an airline should be run - no wonder they want to buy into it.

Redrat. A little more info for you. 8)

"Faced with regulatory challenges at home and in Australia, stiff competition and a global aviation environment that is hardly cunducive to profits, Air New Zealand is putting on a brave face....... The situation is similar to what the carrier faced when it completed a 100% buyout of Ansett Australia in a bid to gain critical mass to compete with Qantas. But Qantas only gained market strength, and the Ansett deal dragged ANZ down so far the New Zealand government had to bail it out......." :roll:

Reference: - Neelam Mathews / Auckland, New Zealand for Aviation Week & Space Technology. August 18th 2003.

There are plenty of other references I assure you :!:
 
Straitman, you are correct.

Like the classic meeting between two people over coffee and "How's business going ?", and the reply "Oh, not bad..."

When really, they want to say "Hoping that it doesn't go under because of the dot.com bubble burst / earthquake in XYZ / any other factor that's just hit the industry"

Business sometimes is like paddling upstream in a leaky boat with a broken oar.
 
Yes, I've seen the journalism and we know what they can be like.
But really, look at the way the NZ Govt. took on the huge percentage of the company. They weren't about to let a national icon go under. They were close to bankruptcy but look at them now.
 
Further to my last (I had to go to lunch) Air NZ is a leaner airline than QF. If QF had tried the same sort of AN buyup and failed in a similar manner I wonder if they could have survived like Air NZ have to-date.
A 'marriage' of these two airlines has some great synergy potential if it's done right. Hell, the engineering for QF, NZ, VB is shared between all three with absolutely no animosity.
So while there is much debate over a merger between QF & NZ they're already there at a base engineering level.
Despite what the Chairman of Air NZ says to the press (and there's been many statements lacking vital information over the last two years), there is no way the NZ Govt. would let their national icon go out the back door completely. They'll 'reshape' or 'rightsize' it but it's here to stay.

Now if QF could only match the meal quality that NZ serve up in their J class equivalent. That alone would be a merger worth having. :D
 
Any company that is backed by their government every time they get into trouble will probably be around for ever.
Now if QF could only match the meal quality that NZ serve up in their J class equivalent. That alone would be a merger worth having.
:oops: That only leaves the funny accents to worry about :!: :oops:
 
there is no way the NZ Govt. would let their national icon go out the back door completely. They'll 'reshape' or 'rightsize' it but it's here to stay.

There is a pretty long list of Flag cariers that have gone JUST that way.

Their Governments originally had such benevolent thoughts too. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top