Qantas to No Longer offer a Points option for Loyalty Bonus

[codash1099]

Deja vu all over again.

The changes in management don't seem to have done anything to change their approach to their most loyal customers.

Death by a thousand cuts. Good thing I'm unable to fly any more.

 

[justinbrett]

I sent some "feedback" via the complaint portal - select Corporate > Qantas Policies. (Didn't bother selecting Frequent Flyer as I know from experience those go direct to Manila).

 

[SYD]

Another reason for those who are LTG and already maintained WP or not targeting it to shift some spend elsewhere.

Or burn points but I still earn SCs when I burn….(as PC…).

 

[aikman]

I wonder why they did this. 8,000 points is an insignificant amount.

I can't see anyone disengaging from QFF because of this so I guess they had nothing to lose.

 

[Daver6]

Just received the WP newsletter and it's mentioned there



Remember, it aligns with our preference....which is apparently to not have an option. We're sheep and unable to think.

 

[nancypants]

This is the stupidest enhancement of all time

 

[pauldab]

This is the stupidest enhancement of all time

I doubt it's the stupidest, VA are still front runners there with this years status changes

 

[DejaBrew]

Just received the WP newsletter and it's mentioned there

Not in mine. August newsletter? Nothing. August points balance email? Nothing.

 

[dylarr]

Not in mine. August newsletter? Nothing. August points balance email? Nothing.

Same. No mention of it at all in my newsletter.

Just seems irritating - the lack of notification, failure to adhere to the 90 day clause and it is such a small thing to remove, why take away this choice?

 

[DejaBrew]

why take away this choice?

Maybe it’s aimed squarely at preventing people from “pre-loading” SC in their new member year?

 

[TeaKozy]

Maybe it’s aimed squarely at preventing people from “pre-loading” SC in their new member year?

Perhaps? But I can't imagine that many would be maintaining status on the balance of their carry-over SC, or at least sufficiently many to warrant such a change.

I feel that they've done the sums and calculated that whilst the points hold a liability, the effective cost of awarding SC's is zero (or marginal). Sort of aligns with the recent points deval (although this seems arbitrarily petty, especially for those with LTG unlikely to reach WP who'd choose the points and have little incentive to credit to QF).

 

[DejaBrew]

Perhaps? But I can't imagine that many would be maintaining status on the balance of their carry-over SC, or at least sufficiently many to warrant such a change.

Agree it would likely be a niche group (aka "AFFers") who would be most inclined to plan that sort of thing.

I feel that they've done the sums and calculated that whilst the points hold a liability, the effective cost of awarding SC's is zero (or marginal).

You may well be right about that. Worst case scenario may be the people get 50SC that make no material difference in terms of their existing QFF Status and/or lounge access et al, and makes a tiny dent in terms of getting toward LTG (let alone LTP). Best case scenario, it's a zero sum game as those "loyalty" SC are rendered null and void at the end of the current member year.

 

[SYD]

Maybe it’s aimed squarely at preventing people from “pre-loading” SC in their new member year?

A bit harder to plan LBs v something like GT - which is still relatively easy to line up as “insurance” SCs or a head start.

 

[DejaBrew]

A bit harder to plan LBs v something like GT - which is still relatively easy to line up as “insurance” SCs or a head start.

The 90 day selection window offered some degree of ability/flexibility to plan, however I tend to agree with you / @TeaKozy that it's too much of a niche scenario for them to bother blocking.

 

[TeaKozy]

Preliminary year-end results due soon (end of August). Seems that there was a bit of a uptick in the unredeemed liability last FY. Were that repeated, you could imagine some scrutiny from the board on how they intend to reign it in (without impacting profitability, no doubt).

Financial year Points earned (bn) Points redeemed (bn) Unredeemed FF revenue liability (A$bn)
FY24 202 171 $3.328 (current 1.599, non-current 1.729)
FY23 175 155 $3.180 (current 1.311, non-current 1.869)
FY22 118 93* $3.113 (current 1.168, non-current 1.945)
FY21 n/d n/d $3.013 (current 0.894, non-current 2.119)
FY20 n/d n/d $2.817 (current 0.617, non-current 2.200)

That they've effectively doubled the current liability suggests they are expecting a massive upswing in redemptions in the short-term.

 

[serfty]

A bit harder to plan LBs v something like GT - which is still relatively easy to line up as “insurance” SCs or a head start.

I suspect a combination of things.

The points had a cost that no longer exist.

If they now award the SC the date they are earned those who who leveraged the three months for status will no longer be able to do so.

 

[justinbrett]

Maybe it’s aimed squarely at preventing people from “pre-loading” SC in their new member year?

If that really was the concern, they could easily fix it by saying the status credits will date when the bonus was earnt, not activated.

I’m guessing it’s just a cash saving, as even at a low valuation would be about $80.

My other theory is it’s something to do with government travel. It is/was a loophole that you can’t earn frequent flyer points, only status credits. But then the status credits can earn you this bonus.

 

[Austman]

If they now award the SC the date they are earned those who who leveraged the three months for status will no longer be able to do so.

I suspect that's the reason.

You could take some time to decide which would work better for you.

If close to re-qualifying for your status level, you might wait and see if you can get it from future flights. Then take the points.

 

[SYD]

I suspect a combination of things.

The points had a cost that no longer exist.

If they now award the SC the date they are earned those who who leveraged the three months for status will no longer be able to do so.

In some ways it actually makes sense.

Earn X SCs and get Y SCs as a LB (500 / 50).

Under PC, earn X points get Y points bonus - although 200k / 2.5k seems disproportionate?

 

[DejaBrew]

If that really was the concern, they could easily fix it by saying the status credits will date when the bonus was earnt, not activated.

Easily? Not so sure about that given their track record of specifying certain T&Cs that their IT systems can't/don't enforce.