Missed Connection: Lounge access and points ripoff

[BD1959]

<snip> partner lounge access is when travelling on a marketed & operated OneWorld flight.

Semantics, maybe, but this isn't strictly true. As a QC Member, you only have access to a Partner Lounge when travelling on that Partner's metal and even then, the partner should be one of AA or BA. So, for example, if you were to be flying out of Rome you would not have access to the BA Lounge if flying CX. Wording from QF Website:

[h=2]Access to Partner airline lounges[/h]In addition to Qantas Club lounges, you can relax in British Airways lounges (Terraces and Executive Club lounges) and American Airlines[SUP]®[/SUP] Admirals Club lounges.
To access a partner airline lounge, simply present your Qantas Club card or Platinum or Gold Frequent Flyer card at check-in and again with your boarding pass at the lounge reception. You may also invite a guest. Note: both you and your guest must be travelling together and have onward travel that day on a flight marketed and operated by the partner airline whose lounge you wish to visit.[SUP]***[/SUP]

[SUP]***[/SUP] Marketed and operated means a flight operated by the same airline whose flight number appears on your ticket. Includes American Airlines® or British Airways operated flights with a 'QF' flight number on your ticket.

​

In this instance there's no ambiguity since there are no Partner Lounges at LHR T4.

BD

 

[Moopere]

The value of lounge access changes depending on the situation eg. I am sure the perceived value would be a lot higher for the OP given he has just flown long haul half way round the world (a hot shower sometimes is priceless!).

Yes, quite right. I was thinking along these lines myself. There have been times, stuck in airports that are strange to me for long periods when I'd just about pull anything out of my wallet to get a bit of peace, and a shower yes! A particularly long transit in the middle east and one at LAX comes to mind.

 

[DejaBrew]

There have been times, stuck in airports that are strange to me for long periods when I'd just about pull anything out of my wallet to get a bit of peace, and a shower yes!

That was pretty much the case in my situation. As indicated in the OP, my travel had already been delayed several hours by Qantas and the missed connection was set to delay me another few hours. By the time I reached my ultimate destination (which was Heerlen, Netherlands), I'd been travelling for about 36 hours straight. A hot shower after the first day's travel would have been very nice indeed. A simple luxury, but highly valued at that time.

 

[UP4014]

While lounge access is a great thing I think I'd look back and appreciate the effort QF made to get you out on KLM.

I've had some long trips to South America via North America and these days if I want to refresh myself I have a stop over and do it properly. I certainly appreciate the lounge shower but it can't be relied upon and I wouldn't bother making a complaint about that aspect.

Getting the missed points and SC's as a result of flying KLM, yes I'd raise that as an issue but I'm not inclined to push to hard when an obvious effort has been made to get you there which in this case would appear so. Would you be happier if next time if it was "Sir, sorry to tell you there is a 22 hour delay until tomorrow's flight" as you've just missed this one?

My last trip to SFO (from SYD via BNE and LAX) resulted being about 7 hours late into SFO due to a problem with the plane in Brisbane and then bad weather, so I sat with everyone else and waited, wandered in and out of the LAX Admirals Club a few times and had my one free drink as per the entitlement. (bought the rest :mrgreen All up a trip from SYD to SFO took me about 28 hours, not really much point in getting worked up about it, go with the flow when things start to go pear shaped.

Sometimes I think we have these expectations that someone must pay if things don't go to plan, it's travel and many things don't go to plan.

Just my few cents.

Matt
PS, the airline does need to be like for like, KLM for BA is ok but I wouldn't say accept Egypt Air as a substitute.

 

[goldy]

While your point is somewhat valid, using FJ is a poor example of your argument simply because QF do incur fuel costs for all FJ flights owing to the ownership they have in FJ. I suspect they see charging codeshares the same as Aus Post determin the cost of postage, it's averaged out across all operations rather than being a direct user charge for one route or example, spreading added costs across ll revenue streams does lessen the impact.

Indirectly perhaps. But they should not be able to recover such a remote expense by way of a direct fuel surcharge. Out of interest, do QF add the surcharge to all QF codeshares operated by BA, AA, AY, AF, SA, OZ, VN, JL and any other airline they codeshare with?

And using your logic, why is the JQ surcharge less than the QF one on the same sector? clearly its not being divided across all operations as you suggest. Or is JQ fuel cheaper due to its lower cost base??

Im getting the feeling that half the information on this forum is conjecture rather than fact. bit disappointing really.

 

[UP4014]

Indirectly perhaps. But they should not be able to recover such a remote expense by way of a direct fuel surcharge. Out of interest, do QF add the surcharge to all QF codeshares operated by BA, AA, AY, AF, SA, OZ, VN, JL and any other airline they codeshare with?

And using your logic, why is the JQ surcharge less than the QF one on the same sector? clearly its not being divided across all operations as you suggest. Or is JQ fuel cheaper due to its lower cost base??

Im getting the feeling that half the information on this forum is conjecture rather than fact. bit disappointing really.

Different planes on the same route?

Different surcharges could be because each entity has different hedging arrangements for fuel resulting in them each paying different amounts? Just one of many variables relating to cost modelling.

 

[Moopere]

Different planes on the same route?

Different surcharges could be because each entity has different hedging arrangements for fuel resulting in them each paying different amounts? Just one of many variables relating to cost modelling.

I think this sub-thread (sorry all) is my fault. If so, the QF ticketed trip to NAN and the FJ ticketed trip to NAN are the same metal and same flight numbers, its the same plane on the same route at the same time of day....its the same QF ticketing cops the 200$ fuel charge, FJ ticketing doesn't - its that simple from where I sit as a passenger. For the extra cost I get the option to use the QP lounge on 3 of the 4 legs of the round-trip journey ... a pleasure I had to pay additional for in the first place anyway (QP membership).

Its a bit off track now, but it was part of my pondering what lounge access was worth .. that was my own tenuous thread of relevance to this topic.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

...LAX Admirals Club a few times and had my one free drink as per the entitlement. (bought the rest :mrgreen

...

Sometimes I think we have these expectations that someone must pay if things don't go to plan, it's travel and many things don't go to plan.

In fact you are entitled to unlimited coupons (subject to responsible serving of alcohol!!)... it is a like-for-like arrangement with Qantas club where AA members enjoy an open bar. Hence you have the same rights visiting an AAdmirals club.

we have expectations when things go wrong because we have a contract in place. To expect an 'original routing credit' is within the bounds of that contract and to suggest otherwise is not necessarily the best advice.

there are outs to the contract of carriage, but an aircraft being 'late out of maintenance' and how they deal with that is within Qantas' control.