Is there a glitch with Classic Reward points calculations?

[Jack_OC]

A couple of weeks ago I was scoping out a Classic Reward trip from Europe back to MEL for next year. I found flights that I liked, involving a short BA flight into LHR, then LHR-HND followed by NRT-MEL with JL. It priced at 180,000 points (in J) per passenger. I took screenshots, so I'm not imagining any of that!

I just looked again, and exactly the same itinerary is coming up as 214,500 points per passenger. I'm not aware of any changes in the past few weeks that could explain this, so I have to assume either there is a glitch now or there was a glitch a couple of weeks ago.

I believe this trip should be calculated based on the oneworld Classic Flight Reward table, as it involves 2 OW airlines other than QF, and it does not involve any non OW airline. Looking at that table, 180,000 points looks right. There is no J fare of 214,500 points in that table.

Another weird thing - if I vary the dates slightly (e.g. by one day), the cash component changes dramatically (by hundreds of Euros). I didn't think that was supposed to happen either?

Does anyone know what's going on here?

 

[serfty]

@Jack3193 oneworld class rewards are priced as return/round trips. The distance between the origin of the first segment and the destination of the last segment is taken into calculations.

 

[Jack_OC]

@Jack3193 oneworld class rewards are priced as return/round trips. The distance between the origin of the first segment and the destination of the last segment is taken into calculations.

Yes, but my question is why the number of points for the exact same itinerary has suddenly changed, since two weeks ago?

The total I'm now being quoted (214,500 per passenger) doesn't correspond to anything on the oneworld classic reward chart. The total I was quoted 2 weeks ago (180,000 per passenger) did. This makes me suspect that QF site is not actually calculating this properly now, i.e. now for some reason it's just calculating it as 3 separate segments.

 

[Mattg]

Could you perhaps post the exact routing (including dates and flight numbers)? I suspect there is a logical explanation for the price that is being quoted, but need more information.

The price won't be based on the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward chart (which is priced as a round-trip, as serfty says) if the one-way price using the regular chart is lower. When using multiple different partner airlines from the Partner Classic Flight Reward table and/or breaking up the trip by at least 24 hours, the price is based on the sum of individual sectors.

 

[midnight]

Related but somewhat different.
I have just been doing a bit of research for next trip to Canada to see our daughter and thought we might go via San Francisco this time since Qantas is now flying Brisbane to SF.
I went on to "Where can I go" on QF website and got the following which I don't understand
The search was for no fixed date but I did click on various different months and the results were the same.

Premium Economy
Brisbane to San Francisco 187,000 + $246
Brisbane to Los Angeles 162,600 + $646

Business
Brisbane to San Francisco 238,400 + $254
Brisbane to Los Angeles 216800 + $590

I know last time we went Brisbane to LA in Premium Economy was 144,000 plus around $700 but there have been changes since then.

I was always under the assumption that they worked in zones and would have thought both destinations would be in the same zone as they are pretty much the same distance (San Fran is a couple of hundred kilometres closer).

Anyone have any idea why the variances in points and cash. I do realise different airports have different charges but surely not that much.

Also interesting that the cash component goes down for Business to L.A. as compared to PE.

 

[Jack_OC]

Could you perhaps post the exact routing (including dates and flight numbers)? I suspect there is a logical explanation for the price that is being quoted, but need more information.

The price won't be based on the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward chart (which is priced as a round-trip, as serfty says) if the one-way price using the regular chart is lower. When using multiple different partner airlines from the Partner Classic Flight Reward table and/or breaking up the trip by at least 24 hours, the price is based on the sum of individual sectors.

I don't want to post such specific details of my plans in a public forum, but your reply is very helpful thanks. My itinerary does involve a stop of >24 hours in Tokyo, so based on what you say, the correct number of points is 214,500, which is what I'm being quoted now.

However, as I said I was quoted 180,000 points for exactly the same flights two weeks ago. When I say exactly the same flights, I mean just that - same routes, same dates, same times, same operating carriers, same flight numbers. So maybe there was a glitch then?

By the way, when you say the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward chart is priced as a round-trip - what exactly does that mean? My trip is what I assume would be considered one way (i.e. I will start in Europe and end up in Australia). The total distance of the 3 segments combined is ~11,400 miles one way. Does that mean the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward price would be based on the assumption that my trip is ~22,800 miles (i.e. assuming I did the same 3 segments in reverse)? If so it would fit into Zone 10 (19,201 - 35,000 rtn miles, for 318,000 points). However, if I vary my dates/times to avoid the stop of >24 hours, it now quotes me 179,000 points per passenger. That's almost, but not quite, the same as what it would be for Zone 6 (9,601 - 11,600 rtn miles, for 180,000 points). That total doesn't seem to match up to anything on either chart.

To illustrate this, I've done a dummy booking for different dates and a different starting city in Europe, and got the same result. See below. How is it calculating this as 179,000 points, rather than as 180,000 per the OW chart or 214,500 per the standard chart when priced as 3 separate segments?

 

[Mattg]

I don't want to post such specific details of my plans in a public forum, but your reply is very helpful thanks. My itinerary does involve a stop of >24 hours in Tokyo, so based on what you say, the correct number of points is 214,500, which is what I'm being quoted now.

However, as I said I was quoted 180,000 points for exactly the same flights two weeks ago. When I say exactly the same flights, I mean just that - same routes, same dates, same times, same operating carriers, same flight numbers. So maybe there was a glitch then?

By the way, when you say the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward chart is priced as a round-trip - what exactly does that mean? My trip is what I assume would be considered one way (i.e. I will start in Europe and end up in Australia). The total distance of the 3 segments combined is ~11,400 miles one way. Does that mean the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward price would be based on the assumption that my trip is ~22,800 miles (i.e. assuming I did the same 3 segments in reverse)? If so it would fit into Zone 10 (19,201 - 35,000 rtn miles, for 318,000 points). However, if I vary my dates/times to avoid the stop of >24 hours, it now quotes me 179,000 points per passenger. That's almost, but not quite, the same as what it would be for Zone 6 (9,601 - 11,600 rtn miles, for 180,000 points). That total doesn't seem to match up to anything on either chart.

To illustrate this, I've done a dummy booking for different dates and a different starting city in Europe, and got the same result. See below. How is it calculating this as 179,000 points, rather than as 180,000 per the OW chart or 214,500 per the standard chart when priced as 3 separate segments?
View attachment 218505

The Oneworld Classic Flight Reward chart only applies if the total points that would otherwise be required for a J itinerary are higher than 318,000 points (and all Oneworld Award rules are met). There is no "one-way price" for this, as previously mentioned, the distance back to the origin is counted if the final point on the ticket is somewhere else.

For the above itinerary, 179,000 Qantas points is the sum of 20,000 points (for the BA CDG-LHR sector) plus 159,000 points (for JL LHR-MEL). To be honest, I'm a little surprised it has priced the JL flights at 159,000 points as there is an airport change in Tokyo. I would have expected it to be 20,000 points (CDG-LHR) + 104,500 points (LHR-HND) + 90,000 points (NRT-MEL) because of the change of carrier in London, the airport change in Tokyo, and the fact this is not a Oneworld Classic Flight Reward. If the itinerary was (for example) CDG-LHR-NRT-MEL then I would expect the price to be as quoted.

In short, without seeing the exact itinerary you're looking at, the discrepancy is most likely due to the way the website is treating the airport change in Tokyo.

 

[Jack_OC]

The Oneworld Classic Flight Reward chart only applies if the total points that would otherwise be required for a J itinerary are higher than 318,000 points (and all Oneworld Award rules are met). There is no "one-way price" for this, as previously mentioned, the distance back to the origin is counted if the final point on the ticket is somewhere else.

Right, so in my example, the distance would be calculated as CDG-LHR-HND ... NRT-MEL-CDG. Approx 22,000 miles as I suggested earlier? Which would put it in Zone 10 in the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward chart. I get that would make the Oneworld Classic Flight Reward price 318,000, and therefore it doesn't apply as that's more than the price you get by adding up the separate segments.

For the above itinerary, 179,000 Qantas points is the sum of 20,000 points (for the BA CDG-LHR sector) plus 159,000 points (for JL LHR-MEL). To be honest, I'm a little surprised it has priced the JL flights at 159,000 points as there is an airport change in Tokyo. I would have expected it to be 20,000 points (CDG-LHR) + 104,500 points (LHR-HND) + 90,000 points (NRT-MEL) because of the change of carrier in London, the airport change in Tokyo, and the fact this is not a Oneworld Classic Flight Reward. If the itinerary was (for example) CDG-LHR-NRT-MEL then I would expect the price to be as quoted.

In short, without seeing the exact itinerary you're looking at, the discrepancy is most likely due to the way the website is treating the airport change in Tokyo.

Thanks, that makes sense now (how it's calculating 179,000 points when I reduce the stopover time to <24 hours).

I think the reason for the discrepancy between my itinerary now (214,500) and what I was quoted 2 weeks ago (180,000) can only be explained by a glitch 2 weeks ago. As I said, I have screenshots and the itinerary is absolutely identical. Anyway, that's fine - I really just wanted to make sure that I wasn't inadvertently paying more than I should if I go ahead and book.