Platinum "anytime" lounge Access ceases from 1 February 2011

[straitman]

I had an interesting envelope waiting for me in my mailbox yesterday - the very same envelope I'd sent to Simon Hickey as CEO of QFF a week before. That's right, it had been marked 'return to sender' but it had been opened and re-sealed with tape! I used the same postal address I'd previously used to send correspondence to QFF.

What's the go? Could it be that they've received so many complaints they're now returning them in disgust?

Are you absolutely certain that the address is a valid address?

I’d send it back, and keep sending it back until they offer a real response.

How long have you got available?

 

[samh004]

How long have you got available?

Forever

 

[trippin_the_rift]

I am not fussed about not having anytime access.

All the more reason for QF to keep it - a benefit that nobody uses is indeed a great perk to offer!

 

[Danger]

Are you absolutely certain that the address is a valid address?

The address I used may not be correct, no. I'll call them and ask for a postal address.

 

[JohnK]

We should NOT ever be willing to accept a higher qualification hurdle just to retain benefits as they are....IMHO

But is it OK to accept constant loss of benefits (as has been the case since May 2005) whilst the qualification level remains the same?

 

[dfcatch]

But is it OK to accept constant loss of benefits (as has been the case since May 2005) whilst the qualification level remains the same?

No, of course not. But it is even worse to also make it harder to achieve.

My point is simple, if Qantas want to retain the loyalty of WPs, then if they take away benefits, they also need to provide genuine enhancements with the other hand, and NPPPs aren't going to cut it.

If Qantas want to make WP harder to attain (even with additional benefits), they run the risk of turning these customers away, as the hurdle is too much effort for the perceived reward.

Rather than appeasing QF, we should be reminding them that we don't want to see the continual erosion of benefits.

I don't mind QF "refreshing" benefits, but it has to be quid pro quo. And the introduction of uber-WP benefits is ok with me, as PG wasn't perfect for everyone (if they are lucky enough to accrue that many SCs.).

On another note, between the 2400 SC bonus and NGCI, I can't help but notice the similarity with AirNZ

 

[Australian]

Originally Posted by Danger
I had an interesting envelope waiting for me in my mailbox yesterday - the very same envelope I'd sent to Simon Hickey as CEO of QFF a week before. That's right, it had been marked 'return to sender' but it had been opened and re-sealed with tape! I used the same postal address I'd previously used to send correspondence to QFF.

What's the go?

ok 0 this has to be the best ever post to this site ... lol (with that one from pineapple skip and his sow ears handicrafts not far behind )

 

[JohnK]

No, of course not. But it is even worse to also make it harder to achieve.

I agree with you although I believe going forward there appears to be 2 likely options

1. Continued erosion of Platinum benefits or
2. Increased qualification level to retain existing benefits

Any future major changes will be related to soft and hard products offered which will benefit all travellers not just high tier frequent flyers.

 

[Danger]

Are you absolutely certain that the address is a valid address?

Okay. I'm very embarrased - but not too proud - to say I got one of the digits wrong on the address when I typed on the envelope. I'll eat humble pie and as punishment impose a 72 hour ban on posting for me!

 

[dfcatch]

I agree with you although I believe going forward there appears to be 2 likely options

1. Continued erosion of Platinum benefits or
2. Increased qualification level to retain existing benefits

Any future major changes will be related to soft and hard products offered which will benefit all travellers not just high tier frequent flyers.

I think we all agree on how it SHOULD be.

However, I do hope your predictions are wrong John. I worry that you may be right.

For domestic WPs I don't see much changing. DJ is a long way off from being competitive. But for international flying WPs, there are alternatives to QF, and a lot may diversify their flying if QF do make it less attractive.

 

[cele]

Sounds like a good idea. What would you suggest for the new requalification levels for Platinum and assuming half that number for Gold?

No idea; but it would be interesting to see the % of top tier FF members across different airlines; i suspect it may be higher for QF than BA, CX, etc. given their relatively more difficult qualification requirements. The point here is any increase in qual level must be commensurate with increased tangible benefits. Otherwise, its another diminution of benefits and probably one far worse than removing anytime access as I'd imagine it would be quite hard for the domestic only Y guys to hit say, 1800 SCs.

For domestic WPs I don't see much changing. DJ is a long way off from being competitive. But for international flying WPs, there are alternatives to QF, and a lot may diversify their flying if QF do make it less attractive.

Agree - particularly for the non-capital city routes. This could partly explain why QF has chosen to attack "domestic" weighted benefits vs the international ones (e.g. look at luggage allowance changes; my read is intl luggage allowance has increased for WPs)
The reality is QF is a profit maximising operation and they have to continually: (i) squeeze costs / delay investment; (ii) grow revenues. While the wisdom of alienating your most loyal customers is dubious at best, it’s much easier to quantify cost saving measures than trying to estimate new revenues / "revenue saved" from adding FFP benefits. Unless the strategy / marketing guys (i.e. big picture guys) can win the internal struggle against the bean counters, it wouldn't surprise me if benefits continue to be eroded....

 

[oz_mark]

While the wisdom of alienating your most loyal customers is dubious at best, it’s much easier to quantify cost saving measures than trying to estimate new revenues / "revenue saved" from adding FFP benefits.

The question, though, is are the platinums really going to change. Given that the vast majority are likely to have that status by virtue of corporate bookings, I find it a bit hard to believe that the (most) companies are going to start sending their staff on other carriers.

In the absence of any real competition in the corporate travel market (look at how many say they won't start travelling DJ until x,y, and z happens), the accountants are going to win. The accountants just have to ask 'Where are they going to go?'.

 

[simongr]

I think though that there are many WPs who "manage" to fly QF even though they might be on a BFOD booking system. Now they might be inclined to not manage to fly QF.

 

[oz_mark]

...and then there will be some that try harder to 'manage' themselves onto a QF flight.

 

[kpc]

The question, though, is are the platinums really going to change. Given that the vast majority are likely to have that status by virtue of corporate bookings, I find it a bit hard to believe that the (most) companies are going to start sending their staff on other carriers

I'm free to book any airline I wish for work related international (and domestic) travel. Used to be SQ, then it became QF, I wonder which airline next :shock:...at the moment, the only real benefit QF plat has for me (over QF gold) is F lounge access at Syd. When i get "bored" of this, I will be happy just to maintain QF Gold, and shift a "significant" amount of revenue away from QF. Free market research here for Red Roo and his management team at QF

 

[dk4]

May I suggest that a converse argument, is also valid.

Previously someone who may have managed to swing 90% of their flights toward QF (gaining WP), and allowed 10% of bookings to go elsewhere (for what ever reason, including making sure that it "appeared" that they were adhering to BFOD policies) did so with the knowledge that "anytime access to QPs" came with WP status.

That person may now be in a situation to rethink their position.

And instead could reduce the amount of flying with QF, AND increase the amount of flying done with the major alternative, to ensure that they can attain "sufficient status" on both airlines. i.e. a Gold + Gold strategy.

A great spin effect of downgrading from WP and going for Gold+Gold is that the traveller will now actually appear to be taking to heart, the expanding new paradigm of BFOD. (At significant expense to QF.)

So, using fairly basic math, if one customer moves their flying split from 90/10 to 50/50 (e.g. WP strategy to G+G strategy), QF will need to offset this by more than four others moving up to 99/1! [But then, also imagine if those travellers' companies audit flying patterns, to make sure BFOD "seems" to be adhered to - such geniuses will probably not be travelling (QF or any airline) too much longer.]

The "our way or the highway" approach may have worked with ancillary FF products (e.g. personal credit cards) but I reckon that it will fail when it comes to flying, particularly as DJ moves to pull up their socks.

Anytime Access was an exceedingly smart market position, and it was there for a reason!

 

[markis10]

Interesting to hear that DJ are snowed under with status match requests at present, not sure why

 

[oz_mark]

Interesting to hear that DJ are snowed under with status match requests at present, not sure why

Goodo - making those pesky WP's go elsewhere when flying DJ should help relieve the overcrowding in the Qantas Clubs.

 

[JohnK]

Goodo - making those pesky WP's go elsewhere when flying DJ should help relieve the overcrowding in the Qantas Clubs.

And increase the chance of Golds allocating the coveted row 4 on 737's and row 23 on 767's.

 

[oz_mark]

And increase the chance of Golds allocating the coveted row 4 on 737's and row 23 on 767's.

The thought had never crossed my mind