MrSydney
Jul 28, 04, 5:16 pm
...and it does'nt sound too promising either :td: .
Any ideas what time it will be announced??????
Any ideas what time it will be announced??????
Air New Zealand Air Points - Airport changes to be announced today - 29 July....
View Full Version : Airport changes to be announced today - 29 July....
Quokka
Jul 28, 04, 5:19 pm
http://www.airnz.co.nz/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/key_changes.htm
jarinzfin
Jul 28, 04, 5:20 pm
it's already online!
http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/default.htm
http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/default.htm
MrSydney
Jul 28, 04, 5:34 pm
I have seen the changes and i am not impressed at all
Instead of earning and redeeming Airpoints, you'll be using Air New Zealand Airpoints Dollars.
Every seat for sale on every Air New Zealand ticketed and operated flight will be available to purchase with Airpoints Dollars.
1 Airpoints Dollar is equivalent to 1 New Zealand Dollar
Is this a complete rip off or what!!! Maybe I am nor reading it correctly but....
What are your views??????????
Instead of earning and redeeming Airpoints, you'll be using Air New Zealand Airpoints Dollars.
Every seat for sale on every Air New Zealand ticketed and operated flight will be available to purchase with Airpoints Dollars.
1 Airpoints Dollar is equivalent to 1 New Zealand Dollar
Is this a complete rip off or what!!! Maybe I am nor reading it correctly but....
What are your views??????????
kiwibigdave
Jul 28, 04, 6:03 pm
These are not intuitive changes in my mind so I look forward to someone figuring out what it actually means and letting us all know, but my gut feel is that the burn rates haven't changed dramatically - though how this fits in with the 1 airpoints dollar = 1 NZ$ phrase I just don't understand.
Anyway, using a reward ticket AKL-LAX as an example at the moment this 'costs' 100000 / 180000 / 250000 airpoints [return] and in future will cost 560 / 1250 / 1600 dollars [single]. At a conversion rate of 75:1 the current cost would be 667 / 1200 / 1667, so F and Y are cheaper in future and J is more expensive.
An upgrade on the same route is 30000 today, or 400 converted, and it will still be 400.
The new charts don't yet show NZ-Tasman rates which I feel would also allow a useful comparison.
For earning I see this, on the same route. Today the earn is 10488 / 13110 / 15732 and the burn is 100000 / 180000 / 250000 so the ratio of flights you must take to earn a free one is 9.5 / 13.7 / 15.9.
In future the earn will be 115 / 300 / 490 and the burn 560 / 1250 / 1600 so the ratio is 9.7 / 8.3 / 6.5. This seems like a massive improvement if you're a regular premium fare passenger.
Or maybe I've just got this all wrong. :confused:
Anyway, using a reward ticket AKL-LAX as an example at the moment this 'costs' 100000 / 180000 / 250000 airpoints [return] and in future will cost 560 / 1250 / 1600 dollars [single]. At a conversion rate of 75:1 the current cost would be 667 / 1200 / 1667, so F and Y are cheaper in future and J is more expensive.
An upgrade on the same route is 30000 today, or 400 converted, and it will still be 400.
The new charts don't yet show NZ-Tasman rates which I feel would also allow a useful comparison.
For earning I see this, on the same route. Today the earn is 10488 / 13110 / 15732 and the burn is 100000 / 180000 / 250000 so the ratio of flights you must take to earn a free one is 9.5 / 13.7 / 15.9.
In future the earn will be 115 / 300 / 490 and the burn 560 / 1250 / 1600 so the ratio is 9.7 / 8.3 / 6.5. This seems like a massive improvement if you're a regular premium fare passenger.
Or maybe I've just got this all wrong. :confused:
justakiwi
Jul 28, 04, 6:19 pm
My major gripe with the old-new Airpoints over the old-old version is that status is so much harder to achieve on long hauls. For example, Gold Elite takes 15 discount-Y return trips AKL-LAX rather than 7.5 or so :eek:
Under the new-new version, Gold Elite will take 1500 Airpoints bucks which is just over 9 discount-Y returns, or 2.5 returns in business class, or a mixture somewhere in between.
I'm glad to see one-way awards back, too.
I do think they should do something more for the elites though, such as an earning bonus and/or allowing confirmed upgrades at standby rates.
One bit of fine print I noticed is that if you mix NZ and *A flights in a single itinerary, you earn at the *A rates which are considerably less than the NZ-metal-only rates. So, I think I'll be booking my intra-US flights at ual.com :D
justakiwi
Under the new-new version, Gold Elite will take 1500 Airpoints bucks which is just over 9 discount-Y returns, or 2.5 returns in business class, or a mixture somewhere in between.
I'm glad to see one-way awards back, too.
I do think they should do something more for the elites though, such as an earning bonus and/or allowing confirmed upgrades at standby rates.
One bit of fine print I noticed is that if you mix NZ and *A flights in a single itinerary, you earn at the *A rates which are considerably less than the NZ-metal-only rates. So, I think I'll be booking my intra-US flights at ual.com :D
justakiwi
Quokka
Jul 28, 04, 6:21 pm
If you take a look at the new scheme, you'll note NZ residents get hit up for an additional NZD$28 per sector in real money (not Airpoints "dollars") for international flights:
• Taxes, levies and surcharges cannot be paid for in Airpoints Dollars and must be paid in cash.
• NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude per sector: an NZD$8 insurance surcharge, an NZD$20 fuel surcharge, and any applicable airport taxes.
• Non NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude all applicable taxes, levies and surcharges.
• Taxes, levies and surcharges cannot be paid for in Airpoints Dollars and must be paid in cash.
• NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude per sector: an NZD$8 insurance surcharge, an NZD$20 fuel surcharge, and any applicable airport taxes.
• Non NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude all applicable taxes, levies and surcharges.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 6:23 pm
hmm a lot to take in
1) changes are lot more revenue/profit driven with miles completely removed
2) makes it very hard to compare with other FFPs, but wont stop me trying!
3) need to decide by November whether 75 airpoints = 1 air dollar is good value - compulsory conversion or spend before then
4) zone based earning - may be some anomalies to look out for
5) if a cheap fare means less dollars to redeem but also less money saved (since from same fare class availability) then choice to pay or redeem is less about value and more about cashflow/convenience - need to think through some more
6) at first glance (havent had time to look properly) status is similar difficulty or slightly harder, and GE is harder with requirement of 60% flown and ticketed on NZ
7) still no points/dollars/status for cheapest fares
8) not sure if free upgrades for elites still there
9) paid upgrades are more expensive
10) dollar earning on partners is same or lower than flying on NZ
11) while redemptions for domestic, tasman and pacific seem to link directly to fares, long haul is based on a chart - how often does the chart get updated?
My initial reaction is this is a revolutionary change - FFP is being aligned much more closely to profitability. Much harder to get "value" out of the program as a result. Will take some more analysis to compare with current airpoints to see where better/worse, and it is harder to compare with other FFPs.
1) changes are lot more revenue/profit driven with miles completely removed
2) makes it very hard to compare with other FFPs, but wont stop me trying!
3) need to decide by November whether 75 airpoints = 1 air dollar is good value - compulsory conversion or spend before then
4) zone based earning - may be some anomalies to look out for
5) if a cheap fare means less dollars to redeem but also less money saved (since from same fare class availability) then choice to pay or redeem is less about value and more about cashflow/convenience - need to think through some more
6) at first glance (havent had time to look properly) status is similar difficulty or slightly harder, and GE is harder with requirement of 60% flown and ticketed on NZ
7) still no points/dollars/status for cheapest fares
8) not sure if free upgrades for elites still there
9) paid upgrades are more expensive
10) dollar earning on partners is same or lower than flying on NZ
11) while redemptions for domestic, tasman and pacific seem to link directly to fares, long haul is based on a chart - how often does the chart get updated?
My initial reaction is this is a revolutionary change - FFP is being aligned much more closely to profitability. Much harder to get "value" out of the program as a result. Will take some more analysis to compare with current airpoints to see where better/worse, and it is harder to compare with other FFPs.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 6:30 pm
These are not intuitive changes in my mind so I look forward to someone figuring out what it actually means and letting us all know, but my gut feel is that the burn rates haven't changed dramatically - though how this fits in with the 1 airpoints dollar = 1 NZ$ phrase I just don't understand.
<snip>
The new charts don't yet show NZ-Tasman rates which I feel would also allow a useful comparison.
Agree its not intuitive. The way I see it the initial transfer is poor value - I would expect to get more value than $0.013 per point currently.
Ongoing the changes may be most easily compared on the basis of how many journeys to you need to get a reward of same. Can do this from the earning charts and either typical fares for dom & short haul, or the redeeming chart for long haul. Will look at various representative journeys when I get the chance.
For domestic, tasman express and pacific express you need to use the calculator which I am speculating links directly to booking engine to retrieve fares.
<snip>
The new charts don't yet show NZ-Tasman rates which I feel would also allow a useful comparison.
Agree its not intuitive. The way I see it the initial transfer is poor value - I would expect to get more value than $0.013 per point currently.
Ongoing the changes may be most easily compared on the basis of how many journeys to you need to get a reward of same. Can do this from the earning charts and either typical fares for dom & short haul, or the redeeming chart for long haul. Will look at various representative journeys when I get the chance.
For domestic, tasman express and pacific express you need to use the calculator which I am speculating links directly to booking engine to retrieve fares.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 6:34 pm
My major gripe with the old-new Airpoints over the old-old version is that status is so much harder to achieve on long hauls. For example, Gold Elite takes 15 discount-Y return trips AKL-LAX rather than 7.5 or so :eek:
Under the new-new version, Gold Elite will take 1500 Airpoints bucks which is just over 9 discount-Y returns, or 2.5 returns in business class, or a mixture somewhere in between.
I'm glad to see one-way awards back, too.
I do think they should do something more for the elites though, such as an earning bonus and/or allowing confirmed upgrades at standby rates.
One bit of fine print I noticed is that if you mix NZ and *A flights in a single itinerary, you earn at the *A rates which are considerably less than the NZ-metal-only rates. So, I think I'll be booking my intra-US flights at ual.com :D
justakiwi
Yes good to see one-way awards ^
Sad to see elite benefits seem to be cut back and not expanded :td:
The way it is restructured, redeeming for complex itineries (or anything with overseas connections) is expensive. While this does make the real cost far more apparent I feel this is a dilution as the old scheme (and indeed every other FFP I am aware of) has a real benefit from having only marginal (or no extra!) number of points for the extra segments to compensate for high cost of the first leg.
Under the new-new version, Gold Elite will take 1500 Airpoints bucks which is just over 9 discount-Y returns, or 2.5 returns in business class, or a mixture somewhere in between.
I'm glad to see one-way awards back, too.
I do think they should do something more for the elites though, such as an earning bonus and/or allowing confirmed upgrades at standby rates.
One bit of fine print I noticed is that if you mix NZ and *A flights in a single itinerary, you earn at the *A rates which are considerably less than the NZ-metal-only rates. So, I think I'll be booking my intra-US flights at ual.com :D
justakiwi
Yes good to see one-way awards ^
Sad to see elite benefits seem to be cut back and not expanded :td:
The way it is restructured, redeeming for complex itineries (or anything with overseas connections) is expensive. While this does make the real cost far more apparent I feel this is a dilution as the old scheme (and indeed every other FFP I am aware of) has a real benefit from having only marginal (or no extra!) number of points for the extra segments to compensate for high cost of the first leg.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 6:37 pm
If you take a look at the new scheme, you'll note NZ residents get hit up for an additional NZD$28 per sector in real money (not Airpoints "dollars") for international flights:
• Taxes, levies and surcharges cannot be paid for in Airpoints Dollars and must be paid in cash.
• NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude per sector: an NZD$8 insurance surcharge, an NZD$20 fuel surcharge, and any applicable airport taxes.
• Non NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude all applicable taxes, levies and surcharges.
I dont see this as different to current - any award redeemed costs $$$$ for tax & surcharge.
• Taxes, levies and surcharges cannot be paid for in Airpoints Dollars and must be paid in cash.
• NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude per sector: an NZD$8 insurance surcharge, an NZD$20 fuel surcharge, and any applicable airport taxes.
• Non NZ Residents:
All airfares listed exclude all applicable taxes, levies and surcharges.
I dont see this as different to current - any award redeemed costs $$$$ for tax & surcharge.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 6:38 pm
Is there anything that contains all of the new stuff on one page so can download to read properly?
I presume we get a new booklet mailed out but am too impatient for that :D
I presume we get a new booklet mailed out but am too impatient for that :D
justakiwi
Jul 28, 04, 6:41 pm
If you take a look at the new scheme, you'll note NZ residents get hit up for an additional NZD$28 per sector in real money (not Airpoints "dollars") for international flights:
[/i]
I don't think taxes and fees have ever been included in awards, or at least not international awards. It's been a while since I redeemed points for an award but I know they took my credit card details to cover the sundries.
justakiwi
[/i]
I don't think taxes and fees have ever been included in awards, or at least not international awards. It's been a while since I redeemed points for an award but I know they took my credit card details to cover the sundries.
justakiwi
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 7:32 pm
I dont remember seeing anything about non-airline partners. Surely there must be some changes there otherwise for $1 spend on credit card (excl Amex) you get $0.5-$2 of value back.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 7:46 pm
When it says the first requalifying after 16 Nov we'll compare status under both new and old rules and take the highest, does this mean
(a) look at all flights within the year and calculate old status credits and new air dollars, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
OR
(b) flights pre 16 Nov will earn status credits, flights after earn air dollars for status, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
???
The former is quite generous and means I have (I think) already requalified :cool:
The latter is particularly mean if you are close to requalifying at 16 Nov and is a big (one-off) increase in requirement for status :td:
My interpretation is it should be the (a) method - but am I being too optimistic.
Note from my quick assessment of my flights this renewal period it suggests status may be easier to get (at least on certain flying patterns). ^
(a) look at all flights within the year and calculate old status credits and new air dollars, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
OR
(b) flights pre 16 Nov will earn status credits, flights after earn air dollars for status, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
???
The former is quite generous and means I have (I think) already requalified :cool:
The latter is particularly mean if you are close to requalifying at 16 Nov and is a big (one-off) increase in requirement for status :td:
My interpretation is it should be the (a) method - but am I being too optimistic.
Note from my quick assessment of my flights this renewal period it suggests status may be easier to get (at least on certain flying patterns). ^
Quokka
Jul 28, 04, 8:15 pm
I don't think taxes and fees have ever been included in awards, or at least not international awards.
justakiwi
Recovering taxes is one thing, however the extra NZD $28 cash per sector charged for international awards isn't to cover government or airport imposed taxes or fee, but rather Air NZ invented fuel and insurance "surcharges". Air NZ made up these "surcharges".
justakiwi
Recovering taxes is one thing, however the extra NZD $28 cash per sector charged for international awards isn't to cover government or airport imposed taxes or fee, but rather Air NZ invented fuel and insurance "surcharges". Air NZ made up these "surcharges".
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 8:19 pm
Yes but it isnt a new change relating to Airpoints relaunch
Fliar
Jul 28, 04, 9:56 pm
Please correct me if I'm wrong as I only had a cursory glance over the changes, but it seems as if deep discount tickets still don't earn you anything.
I have nothing against this points-based-on-spending system: the more you spend on NZ the more points you get, makes sense and I kinda like that idea. BUT: I spend about $10,000 per year on flights (on NZ, not * partners!) that don't earn anything, and don't get me any recognition whatsoever.
If I pay $121 x 2 = $242 for a deep discount return to Wellington (I don't actually find this very cheap and worthy of the term 'deep discount' at all for such a short flight, but that's a different story) then why should I not be getting my share of points? Why am I getting 0 points and the person sitting next to me who paid $141 x 2 = $282 getting 282 dollars worth of points?
If you operate a revenue-based system you need to apply it across the board for it to be fair.
Just my 2 cents.
I'll have a better look tonight. It seems to be a mix of good and bad.
I have nothing against this points-based-on-spending system: the more you spend on NZ the more points you get, makes sense and I kinda like that idea. BUT: I spend about $10,000 per year on flights (on NZ, not * partners!) that don't earn anything, and don't get me any recognition whatsoever.
If I pay $121 x 2 = $242 for a deep discount return to Wellington (I don't actually find this very cheap and worthy of the term 'deep discount' at all for such a short flight, but that's a different story) then why should I not be getting my share of points? Why am I getting 0 points and the person sitting next to me who paid $141 x 2 = $282 getting 282 dollars worth of points?
If you operate a revenue-based system you need to apply it across the board for it to be fair.
Just my 2 cents.
I'll have a better look tonight. It seems to be a mix of good and bad.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 28, 04, 10:07 pm
no that's my read too - cheapest fares still dont count
however the changes for disc econ and econ may mean it is more worthwhile to pay that bit extra to get the airbucks - although from comments made maybe more true for domestic and short haul than long haul. Haven't yet looked into it so not sure.
however the changes for disc econ and econ may mean it is more worthwhile to pay that bit extra to get the airbucks - although from comments made maybe more true for domestic and short haul than long haul. Haven't yet looked into it so not sure.
ntddevsys
Jul 29, 04, 12:11 am
I do think they should do something more for the elites though, such as an earning bonus and/or allowing confirmed upgrades at standby rates.
Well lets hope so. The bit on Airpoints Tier Status on the website was very brief. Lets also hope that SILVER get a little more.
Well lets hope so. The bit on Airpoints Tier Status on the website was very brief. Lets also hope that SILVER get a little more.
trg2u
Jul 29, 04, 1:00 am
hmm a lot to take in
at first glance (havent had time to look properly) status is similar difficulty or slightly harder, and GE is harder with requirement of 60% flown and ticketed on NZ
.
Agree,alot to digest....
I think, that it will in general be easier to attain/maintain status for the high yielding FF NZ Pax that travels AKL/CHC to USA
ie:Gold Qualify @ present 200 credits reqd - Takes 3.5 C,D class return trips AKL/LAX. Post 16 Nov-Airpoint$900 to Qualify-Only requires 1.5 C,D return trips.
Gold Elite- Takes 5 ret C,D AKL/LAX yr. Post 16 Nov . 2.5 trips
Silver - will now be achieved in 1 ret. trip C,D AKL/LAX -Presently requires 2 return.
If this is correct it is an improvement over present.
at first glance (havent had time to look properly) status is similar difficulty or slightly harder, and GE is harder with requirement of 60% flown and ticketed on NZ
.
Agree,alot to digest....
I think, that it will in general be easier to attain/maintain status for the high yielding FF NZ Pax that travels AKL/CHC to USA
ie:Gold Qualify @ present 200 credits reqd - Takes 3.5 C,D class return trips AKL/LAX. Post 16 Nov-Airpoint$900 to Qualify-Only requires 1.5 C,D return trips.
Gold Elite- Takes 5 ret C,D AKL/LAX yr. Post 16 Nov . 2.5 trips
Silver - will now be achieved in 1 ret. trip C,D AKL/LAX -Presently requires 2 return.
If this is correct it is an improvement over present.
Fliar
Jul 29, 04, 1:53 am
I agree that for premium passengers things are looking up in terms of reaching Gold status. For most passengers though things are definitely not looking good.
I earn most of my SCs on long-haul flights, usually as part of RWTs. My domestic flights generally don't earn points and I don't fly trans Tasman very often.
RWTs are a mix of NZ and other airlines so earn the smaller number of points. Your average Star 2 Y (34,000 miles) would earn you Star Alliance Gold status on Air Canada so let's see what happens with Airbucks. If flying
AKL-LAX-Europe-Asia-AKL
with several 'within-zone' flights either in Europe or Asia, or the US, you would earn:
85-40-several times 15-45-60
or a total of around or even under 300 Airbucks (of course there are more advantageous routings possible). One needs 900 of these, which means one would have to do 3 RWTs per year or fly 105.000 miles (approximately 170.000 kilometres) to get Gold status, versus one RWT on AC and about 1.4 on Thai Airways (no discount economy mileage on TG!).
What I'm also afraid of is that more fares/routes are going to be in non-eligible booking classes. Also, the brochure I received today lists UG pricing from 'economy to business' but there is no word about premium economy.
I earn most of my SCs on long-haul flights, usually as part of RWTs. My domestic flights generally don't earn points and I don't fly trans Tasman very often.
RWTs are a mix of NZ and other airlines so earn the smaller number of points. Your average Star 2 Y (34,000 miles) would earn you Star Alliance Gold status on Air Canada so let's see what happens with Airbucks. If flying
AKL-LAX-Europe-Asia-AKL
with several 'within-zone' flights either in Europe or Asia, or the US, you would earn:
85-40-several times 15-45-60
or a total of around or even under 300 Airbucks (of course there are more advantageous routings possible). One needs 900 of these, which means one would have to do 3 RWTs per year or fly 105.000 miles (approximately 170.000 kilometres) to get Gold status, versus one RWT on AC and about 1.4 on Thai Airways (no discount economy mileage on TG!).
What I'm also afraid of is that more fares/routes are going to be in non-eligible booking classes. Also, the brochure I received today lists UG pricing from 'economy to business' but there is no word about premium economy.
Sydfly
Jul 29, 04, 2:10 am
The way they calculate the airbucks turns out to be a benefit if you are residing in Australia rather than NZ. I just checked a few destinations, but in total you need to make fewer trips to earn the same reward if you have a (mailing ;) ...) address in Australia. Not that I want to complain, but what do you guys think about that discrimination?
You also need fewer bucks to attain Gold, but for Silver it seems to be the same no matter where you live. All in all, I think this is such a complex change, that it'll take us months to fully find all the loopholes :D .
But the biggest benefit that I can see is that if there is a free seat on the plane you can redeem your points, right? ^ Now, does that mean there only has to be 1 Y-class seat or do they specify anywhere which booking class has to have an available seat? I wonder why the other *Alliance members allow that to happen? It simply means that all other members would not be able to get a reward seat, but NZ members can get one on ANY *Alliance flight (SQ F!) even if there is only one seat left for sale??? :confused: That doesn't sound right, does it? Maybe I overlooked some important restriction or maybe it's only valid for NZ operated flights?
You also need fewer bucks to attain Gold, but for Silver it seems to be the same no matter where you live. All in all, I think this is such a complex change, that it'll take us months to fully find all the loopholes :D .
But the biggest benefit that I can see is that if there is a free seat on the plane you can redeem your points, right? ^ Now, does that mean there only has to be 1 Y-class seat or do they specify anywhere which booking class has to have an available seat? I wonder why the other *Alliance members allow that to happen? It simply means that all other members would not be able to get a reward seat, but NZ members can get one on ANY *Alliance flight (SQ F!) even if there is only one seat left for sale??? :confused: That doesn't sound right, does it? Maybe I overlooked some important restriction or maybe it's only valid for NZ operated flights?
mad_atta
Jul 29, 04, 4:31 am
A quick outline (having just inadvertently deleted my previous long one! :mad: ) of my initial thoughts is:
- Good on Ralph and the team for being prepared to take a long hard look and take a fresh approach. I had speculated elsewhere that AirNZ might be the first to move to a completely revenue-based system instead of mileage based - looks like I was right. :) What a pity I was wrong when I speculated that they might give points (albeit at reduced levels) for all fare levels. :(
- Fair enough to reward the flyers who make the biggest contribution to AirNZ's profitability. After all, the whole point of a loyalty scheme is to encourage your good customers. Although as Fliar points out, those who frequently purchase Smart Savers get nothing, however the only real additional advantage you get for the extra outlay of a flexi saver over a smart saver is the airpoints, so perhaps that is fair enough.
- Given that earning rates are fixed but redemption rates are based on market, dollar value prices, that could mean that airbucks depreciate with inflation, so will AirNZ revisit the earning rates regularly? That could get complicated. I suppose the counter argument is that airfares generally have not been rising with inflation, and airlines tend to devalue their own frequent flyer miles periodically anyway.
- Earn/burn rates seem pretty generous, especially for short haul. Around 6 paid discount Y flights = 1 free one - this compares very favourably to, say, QF which is more like 10 paid = 1 free. Of course if you pay full fare (but redeem at the cheapest rates) that improves even further, more like 4:1
- Great to have 1 way rewards back
- Annoying to see that earning and burning on non-AirNZ flights is a lot less attractive. Then again, I suppose they don't earn AirNZ much money, so perhaps that's fair enough, however this does seem to go against the spirit of the *A reward charts.
- Am I right in thinking that for long haul flights, the "special longhaul redemption fares" come out of the existing redemption fare buckets (which we'll be competing with other *A FFPs for), and once these are all gone we pay in airbucks at the 'market rates' that tickets are available for? If so, that seems fair enough and a good system. Fantastic that this effectively means the end of capacity controls. I'm assuming that for partner airlines, we will only have access to the existing redemption fare buckets however.
- Status earning levels now seem a bit more realistic too. 7.5 return trans-Tasman flights in discount Y (or 4.5 in full fare) will earn you silver; double for gold. Fair enough too that Gold Elite requires at least a 'gold's' worth of earning on AirNZ services. This should open up the possibility for AirNZ to become really creative in tailoring benefits for Gold Elites, safe in the knowledge that they really are good customers of theirs, not some other *A airline's.
- Having said that, disappointing that there don't seem to be any new bonuses for elites. This was always a weakness of the current system IMHO.
- No mention of how the new long haul product will tie into this system. Will we be able to upgrade from the back of the bus to the front, or will we only be able to move up one class?
- The new upgrade system seems to make sense, with confirmable upgrades from the higher fares. Those long haul confirmed upgrades sure are expensive, though!
All in all, the new system is such a paradigm shift that it requires a lot of thinking to get your head around. The bottom line for me seems to be that it makes good business sense, but I am still unlikely to switch (for the time being anyway) from AC Aeroplan as my main programme since I value my ill-earned gold status too much! It will be *extremely* interesting to see if other airlines start to follow suit.
- Good on Ralph and the team for being prepared to take a long hard look and take a fresh approach. I had speculated elsewhere that AirNZ might be the first to move to a completely revenue-based system instead of mileage based - looks like I was right. :) What a pity I was wrong when I speculated that they might give points (albeit at reduced levels) for all fare levels. :(
- Fair enough to reward the flyers who make the biggest contribution to AirNZ's profitability. After all, the whole point of a loyalty scheme is to encourage your good customers. Although as Fliar points out, those who frequently purchase Smart Savers get nothing, however the only real additional advantage you get for the extra outlay of a flexi saver over a smart saver is the airpoints, so perhaps that is fair enough.
- Given that earning rates are fixed but redemption rates are based on market, dollar value prices, that could mean that airbucks depreciate with inflation, so will AirNZ revisit the earning rates regularly? That could get complicated. I suppose the counter argument is that airfares generally have not been rising with inflation, and airlines tend to devalue their own frequent flyer miles periodically anyway.
- Earn/burn rates seem pretty generous, especially for short haul. Around 6 paid discount Y flights = 1 free one - this compares very favourably to, say, QF which is more like 10 paid = 1 free. Of course if you pay full fare (but redeem at the cheapest rates) that improves even further, more like 4:1
- Great to have 1 way rewards back
- Annoying to see that earning and burning on non-AirNZ flights is a lot less attractive. Then again, I suppose they don't earn AirNZ much money, so perhaps that's fair enough, however this does seem to go against the spirit of the *A reward charts.
- Am I right in thinking that for long haul flights, the "special longhaul redemption fares" come out of the existing redemption fare buckets (which we'll be competing with other *A FFPs for), and once these are all gone we pay in airbucks at the 'market rates' that tickets are available for? If so, that seems fair enough and a good system. Fantastic that this effectively means the end of capacity controls. I'm assuming that for partner airlines, we will only have access to the existing redemption fare buckets however.
- Status earning levels now seem a bit more realistic too. 7.5 return trans-Tasman flights in discount Y (or 4.5 in full fare) will earn you silver; double for gold. Fair enough too that Gold Elite requires at least a 'gold's' worth of earning on AirNZ services. This should open up the possibility for AirNZ to become really creative in tailoring benefits for Gold Elites, safe in the knowledge that they really are good customers of theirs, not some other *A airline's.
- Having said that, disappointing that there don't seem to be any new bonuses for elites. This was always a weakness of the current system IMHO.
- No mention of how the new long haul product will tie into this system. Will we be able to upgrade from the back of the bus to the front, or will we only be able to move up one class?
- The new upgrade system seems to make sense, with confirmable upgrades from the higher fares. Those long haul confirmed upgrades sure are expensive, though!
All in all, the new system is such a paradigm shift that it requires a lot of thinking to get your head around. The bottom line for me seems to be that it makes good business sense, but I am still unlikely to switch (for the time being anyway) from AC Aeroplan as my main programme since I value my ill-earned gold status too much! It will be *extremely* interesting to see if other airlines start to follow suit.
ntddevsys
Jul 29, 04, 4:50 am
Fair enough too that Gold Elite requires at least a 'gold's' worth of earning on AirNZ services. This should open up the possibility for AirNZ to become really creative in tailoring benefits for Gold Elites, safe in the knowledge that they really are good customers of theirs, not some other *A airline's.
Seriously, why would anyone choose NZ Airpoints if they are flying on some other *A Airline ?
And by the way, its possible to get long time comp. Gold Elite.
Seriously, why would anyone choose NZ Airpoints if they are flying on some other *A Airline ?
And by the way, its possible to get long time comp. Gold Elite.
Fliar
Jul 29, 04, 5:40 am
Mad_atta wrote:
- Fair enough to reward the flyers who make the biggest contribution to AirNZ's profitability. After all, the whole point of a loyalty scheme is to encourage your good customers. Although as Fliar points out, those who frequently purchase Smart Savers get nothing, however the only real additional advantage you get for the extra outlay of a flexi saver over a smart saver is the airpoints, so perhaps that is fair enough.
Not really. A loyalty scheme should be based on revenue generated. If I buy 40 domestic tickets per year at discount economy price I am contributing way more than someon who only buys 10 flexi saver tickets. Still I get nothing they get a bunch of points and SCs. Revenue-based schemes should be just that. If I pay a dollar for a ticket then that's one more dollar for NZ and I want to see that recognised.
I agree with many of the other points Mad_Atta made. It's a rather innovative system. I hope other airlines will take a while to follow suit - AC's 35K *G pearl might be before the swines before you know it as might other shortcuts to the Gold pot :p
One-way awards rule ^
I just calculated SCs for a RWT I will be doing next year. Half of it is in C (to Cairo) and the other half in Y (back to AKL). I get a whopping 740 SCs for that one trip. Nearly enough for Gold. What a huge difference with an economy RWT. Funny really considering I paid almost the same for my RWT ex CAI in C as I did for the one in Y from NZ :D
- Fair enough to reward the flyers who make the biggest contribution to AirNZ's profitability. After all, the whole point of a loyalty scheme is to encourage your good customers. Although as Fliar points out, those who frequently purchase Smart Savers get nothing, however the only real additional advantage you get for the extra outlay of a flexi saver over a smart saver is the airpoints, so perhaps that is fair enough.
Not really. A loyalty scheme should be based on revenue generated. If I buy 40 domestic tickets per year at discount economy price I am contributing way more than someon who only buys 10 flexi saver tickets. Still I get nothing they get a bunch of points and SCs. Revenue-based schemes should be just that. If I pay a dollar for a ticket then that's one more dollar for NZ and I want to see that recognised.
I agree with many of the other points Mad_Atta made. It's a rather innovative system. I hope other airlines will take a while to follow suit - AC's 35K *G pearl might be before the swines before you know it as might other shortcuts to the Gold pot :p
One-way awards rule ^
I just calculated SCs for a RWT I will be doing next year. Half of it is in C (to Cairo) and the other half in Y (back to AKL). I get a whopping 740 SCs for that one trip. Nearly enough for Gold. What a huge difference with an economy RWT. Funny really considering I paid almost the same for my RWT ex CAI in C as I did for the one in Y from NZ :D
Koru Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 6:52 am
Interesting changes, at least unlike the last change they did not just take a 1:1 copy of the AN programme (which copied QF).
The aspects that are conconcerning to me anyway;
- Unless I have read it wrong it is a MASSIVE devaluation of points. With 600,000 APs you culd buy two F class tickets from AKL/LHR. But that only equals A8,000. Last time I looked that was not enough for even one F class ticket. The problem with using dollars is that it takes the maths out of the FF programme that the more you have the significantly more you can purchase. Basically an exponential function, whereas actually money reflects a different set of demands.
- Surely it would then be regional as a ticket purchased from LHR more than purchased from AKL. So UK based members get strung very badly.
- upgrades can be confirmed by anyone but only in select high revenue classes for a much larger fee. This is a large increase in money as (1) you will need to pay a higher amount for the ticket and (2) you will need to pay more for the upgrade. Of course you can do the lottery at the airport, but it will be a lot harder as a greater percentage of lower ranked members will have confirmed upgrades rather than the 12 month, 48, 24 hours limits.
- There is very little about status benefits. For example NZ*E could confirm on any fare at 12 months notice. So what benefit will they have no, to confirm at the much higher confirmed upgrade price on any booking class or standby at the airport with the masses.
- There is mention of a $25 fee if you do not book online. But that assumes that NZ actually has a decent online booking engine. :rolleyes: Will this fee be waved for all the things you cannot do online?
- There is also a $20 fee per year if you do not fly on an NZ flight. Will this fee be waved for gold and silver members? What if you are a lifetime Koru club member but do not fly with NZ - will they charge you $20 per year :confused:
- very much a bias on flying NZ. Which makes some sense but sort of shows the limitations of *A when not all airlines are counted as equal (earn status faster) and also with TG offering cheap fares that only accrue in their programme. :mad:
- Will they soft land people from one status level to the other?
Lots to find out but with each change to AP it gets worse and worse IMHO.
What would be interesting is that if you paid the higher monetary amount that you then flew in an earned category allowing you to earn credits and points. But even so I see it as another major devaluation.
Mark
The aspects that are conconcerning to me anyway;
- Unless I have read it wrong it is a MASSIVE devaluation of points. With 600,000 APs you culd buy two F class tickets from AKL/LHR. But that only equals A8,000. Last time I looked that was not enough for even one F class ticket. The problem with using dollars is that it takes the maths out of the FF programme that the more you have the significantly more you can purchase. Basically an exponential function, whereas actually money reflects a different set of demands.
- Surely it would then be regional as a ticket purchased from LHR more than purchased from AKL. So UK based members get strung very badly.
- upgrades can be confirmed by anyone but only in select high revenue classes for a much larger fee. This is a large increase in money as (1) you will need to pay a higher amount for the ticket and (2) you will need to pay more for the upgrade. Of course you can do the lottery at the airport, but it will be a lot harder as a greater percentage of lower ranked members will have confirmed upgrades rather than the 12 month, 48, 24 hours limits.
- There is very little about status benefits. For example NZ*E could confirm on any fare at 12 months notice. So what benefit will they have no, to confirm at the much higher confirmed upgrade price on any booking class or standby at the airport with the masses.
- There is mention of a $25 fee if you do not book online. But that assumes that NZ actually has a decent online booking engine. :rolleyes: Will this fee be waved for all the things you cannot do online?
- There is also a $20 fee per year if you do not fly on an NZ flight. Will this fee be waved for gold and silver members? What if you are a lifetime Koru club member but do not fly with NZ - will they charge you $20 per year :confused:
- very much a bias on flying NZ. Which makes some sense but sort of shows the limitations of *A when not all airlines are counted as equal (earn status faster) and also with TG offering cheap fares that only accrue in their programme. :mad:
- Will they soft land people from one status level to the other?
Lots to find out but with each change to AP it gets worse and worse IMHO.
What would be interesting is that if you paid the higher monetary amount that you then flew in an earned category allowing you to earn credits and points. But even so I see it as another major devaluation.
Mark
Quokka
Jul 29, 04, 7:16 am
I had speculated elsewhere that AirNZ might be the first to move to a completely revenue-based system instead of mileage based - looks like I was right. :) .
Well, Air NZ is the first to move to a completely revenue-based system ... if you ignore those airlines that did do before Air NZ. So it does indeed look like you were right, if you ignore the fact that you're wrong :)
For one example, the National Airlines (RIP) "Comps" program was completely revenue-based. It also was very straightforward -- you basically divided what you paid for a ticket *on any fare* by 10 and that was your credit in their FFP dollars. You could then use the Comps FFP dollars to buy tickets for any seat on any flight just like cash. (Sound familiar?)
Furthermore, the new Air NZ program isn't "competely revenue-based" As has been pointed out before, the program ignores revenue brought in by tickets on certain NZ fares. Also, NZ "Airpoint Dollars" can be earned on partner flights and the amount earned is unlikely to be based on the revenue the ticket brings to Air NZ (i.e. nil) or even the revenue to the partner airline.
So much for Air NZ being the "first to move to a completely revenue-based system" ...
Well, Air NZ is the first to move to a completely revenue-based system ... if you ignore those airlines that did do before Air NZ. So it does indeed look like you were right, if you ignore the fact that you're wrong :)
For one example, the National Airlines (RIP) "Comps" program was completely revenue-based. It also was very straightforward -- you basically divided what you paid for a ticket *on any fare* by 10 and that was your credit in their FFP dollars. You could then use the Comps FFP dollars to buy tickets for any seat on any flight just like cash. (Sound familiar?)
Furthermore, the new Air NZ program isn't "competely revenue-based" As has been pointed out before, the program ignores revenue brought in by tickets on certain NZ fares. Also, NZ "Airpoint Dollars" can be earned on partner flights and the amount earned is unlikely to be based on the revenue the ticket brings to Air NZ (i.e. nil) or even the revenue to the partner airline.
So much for Air NZ being the "first to move to a completely revenue-based system" ...
mad_atta
Jul 29, 04, 7:29 am
- Unless I have read it wrong it is a MASSIVE devaluation of points. With 600,000 APs you culd buy two F class tickets from AKL/LHR. But that only equals A8,000. Last time I looked that was not enough for even one F class ticket. The problem with using dollars is that it takes the maths out of the FF programme that the more you have the significantly more you can purchase. Basically an exponential function, whereas actually money reflects a different set of demands.
I think you have read it wrong. As far as I understand it, for long haul flights there are two types of rewards:
1) "Special long haul redemption fares" (catchy title, AirNZ! :rolleyes: ), which come from award inventory, just like current awards. The redemption levels are detailed here (http://www.airnz.co.nz/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/airnz_longhaul_reward_redemption.htm), where you'll see for example that NZ-LHR in F is 2,250 each way or 4,500 return (so a very marginal devaluation).
2) If there is none of this inventory available, instead of the current situation (where you would just have to buy a seat or take another flight that did have redemption availability) you can use your 'airbucks' at market rates. Under *that* scenario then I guess an F ticket AKL-LHR would cost around 10K.
I may have it wrong, but that is my understanding of the new system, so it's not as bad as you thought.
I think you have read it wrong. As far as I understand it, for long haul flights there are two types of rewards:
1) "Special long haul redemption fares" (catchy title, AirNZ! :rolleyes: ), which come from award inventory, just like current awards. The redemption levels are detailed here (http://www.airnz.co.nz/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/airnz_longhaul_reward_redemption.htm), where you'll see for example that NZ-LHR in F is 2,250 each way or 4,500 return (so a very marginal devaluation).
2) If there is none of this inventory available, instead of the current situation (where you would just have to buy a seat or take another flight that did have redemption availability) you can use your 'airbucks' at market rates. Under *that* scenario then I guess an F ticket AKL-LHR would cost around 10K.
I may have it wrong, but that is my understanding of the new system, so it's not as bad as you thought.
mad_atta
Jul 29, 04, 7:45 am
Ah Quokka, sometimes I wonder whether you should relax just a teensy bit more and get a little more enjoyment out of life? Or perhaps invest in some slightly more rose tinted (or a little less black tinted) glasses? :p
Having said that, you're right on various counts. I rewrote my post in such a hurry that instead of using the word profitability I used the word revenue - very different things. I also had originally written the first 'major' airline (a very imprecise term it's true, and one which one could convincingly argue AirNZ doesn't fit anyway). Nonetheless, my bad.
My point (which I would also argue to Fliar's post) is that it is not just about valuing each dollar paid to AirNZ, it is about the potential profit from that dollar. $1100 spent on an ultra cheap Disneyland special SYD-AKL-LAX return probably represents a loss to AirNZ, whereas $1100 on a full fare economy SYD-AKL return represents big profits. Theoretically, the 'loyalty' of the person paying for the latter should be rewarded more than the person paying the former. In reality the system is not nearly complex enough to cope with all the nuances of cost vs revenue, but it is a clear attempt to move in that direction. At what fare level does NZ make so little (if anything at all) that it can justify not awarding any miles? Don't get me wrong, I don't like the fact that smart savers and deep discounts don't earn miles (and I think it would also make sense for them to earn but at a further reduced rate), but I can understand the rationale behind it.
As for partner airlines, I'm afraid you're way off base on that one, Quokka. If I fly on UA but credit the miles to AirPoints (though as ntddevsys quite rightly pointed out, why would you?) then UA pays AirNZ an agreed amount for taking on the liability of the points earned on UA's services. NZ does the same, paying UA for all mileage plus members accruing miles on NZ's services. Theoretically, what NZ earns from UA should be approximately equal to what the redemption of those miles costs it, making it a cost neutral transaction. Of course I have no idea exactly how those levels are set, and whether one party does in fact benefit at the expense of the other, but it is not as though AirNZ is 'giving' you the miles out of the goodness of its heart because you happened to fly on a partner airline.
Having said that, you're right on various counts. I rewrote my post in such a hurry that instead of using the word profitability I used the word revenue - very different things. I also had originally written the first 'major' airline (a very imprecise term it's true, and one which one could convincingly argue AirNZ doesn't fit anyway). Nonetheless, my bad.
My point (which I would also argue to Fliar's post) is that it is not just about valuing each dollar paid to AirNZ, it is about the potential profit from that dollar. $1100 spent on an ultra cheap Disneyland special SYD-AKL-LAX return probably represents a loss to AirNZ, whereas $1100 on a full fare economy SYD-AKL return represents big profits. Theoretically, the 'loyalty' of the person paying for the latter should be rewarded more than the person paying the former. In reality the system is not nearly complex enough to cope with all the nuances of cost vs revenue, but it is a clear attempt to move in that direction. At what fare level does NZ make so little (if anything at all) that it can justify not awarding any miles? Don't get me wrong, I don't like the fact that smart savers and deep discounts don't earn miles (and I think it would also make sense for them to earn but at a further reduced rate), but I can understand the rationale behind it.
As for partner airlines, I'm afraid you're way off base on that one, Quokka. If I fly on UA but credit the miles to AirPoints (though as ntddevsys quite rightly pointed out, why would you?) then UA pays AirNZ an agreed amount for taking on the liability of the points earned on UA's services. NZ does the same, paying UA for all mileage plus members accruing miles on NZ's services. Theoretically, what NZ earns from UA should be approximately equal to what the redemption of those miles costs it, making it a cost neutral transaction. Of course I have no idea exactly how those levels are set, and whether one party does in fact benefit at the expense of the other, but it is not as though AirNZ is 'giving' you the miles out of the goodness of its heart because you happened to fly on a partner airline.
Koru Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 8:07 am
I think you have read it wrong. As far as I understand it, for long haul flights there are two types of rewards:
1) "Special long haul redemption fares" (catchy title, AirNZ! :rolleyes: ), which come from award inventory, just like current awards. The redemption levels are detailed here (http://www.airnz.co.nz/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/airnz_longhaul_reward_redemption.htm), where you'll see for example that NZ-LHR in F is 2,250 each way or 4,500 return (so a very marginal devaluation).
2) If there is none of this inventory available, instead of the current situation (where you would just have to buy a seat or take another flight that did have redemption availability) you can use your 'airbucks' at market rates. Under *that* scenario then I guess an F ticket AKL-LHR would cost around 10K.
I may have it wrong, but that is my understanding of the new system, so it's not as bad as you thought.
That is true (I read it wrong), but I wonder how flexible yield management will now be to opening award classes when you can use points to buy a fare.
I guess I am now a little disappointed as they only seem to have gone half way. They could have made airbucks like actual cash for all fares as now you have two tiers. I wonder when the next enhancement will be to do away with the lower bracket.
Remember when;
- APs were earnt on class travelled rather than paid.
- APs could be used to upgrade a points bookings.
- complementary certs could be used to upgrade a points or campanion ticket
- NZ*E was achievable
I am also interested how the credit cards will take this, what will be the earning rates there?
Mark
1) "Special long haul redemption fares" (catchy title, AirNZ! :rolleyes: ), which come from award inventory, just like current awards. The redemption levels are detailed here (http://www.airnz.co.nz/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/airnz_longhaul_reward_redemption.htm), where you'll see for example that NZ-LHR in F is 2,250 each way or 4,500 return (so a very marginal devaluation).
2) If there is none of this inventory available, instead of the current situation (where you would just have to buy a seat or take another flight that did have redemption availability) you can use your 'airbucks' at market rates. Under *that* scenario then I guess an F ticket AKL-LHR would cost around 10K.
I may have it wrong, but that is my understanding of the new system, so it's not as bad as you thought.
That is true (I read it wrong), but I wonder how flexible yield management will now be to opening award classes when you can use points to buy a fare.
I guess I am now a little disappointed as they only seem to have gone half way. They could have made airbucks like actual cash for all fares as now you have two tiers. I wonder when the next enhancement will be to do away with the lower bracket.
Remember when;
- APs were earnt on class travelled rather than paid.
- APs could be used to upgrade a points bookings.
- complementary certs could be used to upgrade a points or campanion ticket
- NZ*E was achievable
I am also interested how the credit cards will take this, what will be the earning rates there?
Mark
mad_atta
Jul 29, 04, 8:13 am
I wonder how flexible yield management will now be to opening award classes when you can use points to buy a fare.
A very good question - I have been wondering that too. Will we see a sneaky reduction in the number of actual redemption seats available, in the hopes of making more people redeem their airbucks at the more expensive, 'market' rate?
Note that for all shorthaul services (all that have express in the name, anyway), they *have* gone the whole hog as far as redemptions go - you simply pay market rate using your airbucks, i.e. if the lowest fare available WLG-BHE is a $200 Fully Flexi, then I'd have to pony up the requisite 200 airbucks to get my fix of glamour, BHE-style!
A very good question - I have been wondering that too. Will we see a sneaky reduction in the number of actual redemption seats available, in the hopes of making more people redeem their airbucks at the more expensive, 'market' rate?
Note that for all shorthaul services (all that have express in the name, anyway), they *have* gone the whole hog as far as redemptions go - you simply pay market rate using your airbucks, i.e. if the lowest fare available WLG-BHE is a $200 Fully Flexi, then I'd have to pony up the requisite 200 airbucks to get my fix of glamour, BHE-style!
Quokka
Jul 29, 04, 8:59 am
but it is not as though AirNZ is 'giving' you the miles out of the goodness of its heart because you happened to fly on a partner airline.
No duh (as they say in California). I'm pretty sure I understand the above seeing as I've explained it to others in various posts over the years:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24962
The point about Airpoints earned on partner flights being unlikely to be based on revenue is that what partner airlines pay the FFP airline traditionally has been based on other factors (such as distance and class). So that's another place where the system is not "completely revenue-based".
Theoretically, what NZ earns from UA should be approximately equal to what the redemption of those miles costs it, making it a cost neutral transaction.
If it's "cost neutral" then Air NZ is doing it all wrong ...
Points awarded for using an airline's partners are basically sold by the airline running the FFP to the partners. Airlines love selling points to partners since the airline gets the cash now -- the liability for future award travel goes on its books it can put off being dealt with. If you take a look at the reports for many of the US airlines, you'll see selling points/mileage is quite the operation.
Of course there's that large and ever growing outstanding points liability that's on the books. The easiest way to deal with that is to change your FFP and devalue the worth of the existing point balance. And don't kid yourself, that's exactly what Air NZ is doing. The first time Air NZ reports its accounting after the Airpoints devaluation, we'll be able to find out in real $ terms exactly how much Air NZ thinks they saved and devalued the outstanding airpoints by.
No duh (as they say in California). I'm pretty sure I understand the above seeing as I've explained it to others in various posts over the years:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24962
The point about Airpoints earned on partner flights being unlikely to be based on revenue is that what partner airlines pay the FFP airline traditionally has been based on other factors (such as distance and class). So that's another place where the system is not "completely revenue-based".
Theoretically, what NZ earns from UA should be approximately equal to what the redemption of those miles costs it, making it a cost neutral transaction.
If it's "cost neutral" then Air NZ is doing it all wrong ...
Points awarded for using an airline's partners are basically sold by the airline running the FFP to the partners. Airlines love selling points to partners since the airline gets the cash now -- the liability for future award travel goes on its books it can put off being dealt with. If you take a look at the reports for many of the US airlines, you'll see selling points/mileage is quite the operation.
Of course there's that large and ever growing outstanding points liability that's on the books. The easiest way to deal with that is to change your FFP and devalue the worth of the existing point balance. And don't kid yourself, that's exactly what Air NZ is doing. The first time Air NZ reports its accounting after the Airpoints devaluation, we'll be able to find out in real $ terms exactly how much Air NZ thinks they saved and devalued the outstanding airpoints by.
ANDREWCX
Jul 29, 04, 11:10 am
The more I read this the more idiotic NZ's new system seems.
Take this for example the NZ redemption chart (http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/airnz_longhaul_reward_redemption.htm) (for AU residents) says that a flight on NZ from MEL to LAX is from AP$880 in Y while a Star Alliance (ie United) flight is AP$480 (per the Star Alliance reward chard (AU) (http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/star_reward_redemption.htm) ) neither of which looks anything like the AP$1188 listed on the handy before and after comparison chart (http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/comparison.htm) ....
So a) they don't seem to have a clue what rewards will 'cost' as the comparison and specific tables hold no similarity to each other and b) its WAY CHEAPER to redeem a flight from point A to point B with any other star carrier than NZ which to my fuzzy thinking would mean that NZ will be buying a lot of seats on UA, TG etc for Airpoints holders traveling between points services by NZ and NZ's planes will be lighter loaded - all cost no benefit.
So on a business sense this seems so stupid words cannot say - they create a system that is alien and incomprehensible to the travelling public that actually encourages higher cost activities (redeeming on partners) and discourages loyalty.
Its more than possible that FF progs will change their earn / redeem basis in the future but I predict this will not be the model and that it will be scrapped as the monumental failure it will so likely be. Maybe NZ management is intentionally trying to run the carrier into the point where regulators allow it to merge with QF.
A final point - what the hell is happening with earning from non-airline partners? how incomprehensible will CC earning rates now be and how pathetic will partner credits sound - just imagine being told you will get $1.25 credit for your hotel stay (doesn't sound like a grat value does it)!
Take this for example the NZ redemption chart (http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/airnz_longhaul_reward_redemption.htm) (for AU residents) says that a flight on NZ from MEL to LAX is from AP$880 in Y while a Star Alliance (ie United) flight is AP$480 (per the Star Alliance reward chard (AU) (http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/star_reward_redemption.htm) ) neither of which looks anything like the AP$1188 listed on the handy before and after comparison chart (http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/comparison.htm) ....
So a) they don't seem to have a clue what rewards will 'cost' as the comparison and specific tables hold no similarity to each other and b) its WAY CHEAPER to redeem a flight from point A to point B with any other star carrier than NZ which to my fuzzy thinking would mean that NZ will be buying a lot of seats on UA, TG etc for Airpoints holders traveling between points services by NZ and NZ's planes will be lighter loaded - all cost no benefit.
So on a business sense this seems so stupid words cannot say - they create a system that is alien and incomprehensible to the travelling public that actually encourages higher cost activities (redeeming on partners) and discourages loyalty.
Its more than possible that FF progs will change their earn / redeem basis in the future but I predict this will not be the model and that it will be scrapped as the monumental failure it will so likely be. Maybe NZ management is intentionally trying to run the carrier into the point where regulators allow it to merge with QF.
A final point - what the hell is happening with earning from non-airline partners? how incomprehensible will CC earning rates now be and how pathetic will partner credits sound - just imagine being told you will get $1.25 credit for your hotel stay (doesn't sound like a grat value does it)!
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 1:39 pm
Wow a lot of comments overnight from offshore.
Starting to take it in and I can see it is a huge benefit from Air NZ's perspective. I disagree about the revenue arguments above, from what I can make of the charts and rules I think it is somewhat profitability based.
Eg economy NZ to Hawaii is very low airbucks earned for the distance, which makes sense to me.
Some more thoughts.
Flexi saver fares (disc econ that earns airbucks) are now more attractive with improved earning rates. Ie before may have gone for cheapest but now may be worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks. ^
Domestic and short haul generally is improved earn/burn rates. Having said that the redemption is 1 airbuck = $1 whereas the charts for long haul are more like 1 airbuck = $3.
On international trips it is probably not worth crediting airpoints if there is significant travel on NZ and other carriers due to much diminished earning on the NZ legs, and slightly diminished earning on the other carriers.
For redeeming there is a very heavy penalty for using other carriers, earn/burn rates are generally 50% worse and some cases 100+% worse than on NZ routes (where only NZ).
As others point out, earn/burn ratios for full fare long haul improve to around 4-5 for 1 award. Disc econ is around 7-9. Worse when other carriers in same journey.
The charts for long haul are clearly much less than $$$ for paid fares. While NZ says every seat is available, it is unclear to me what this means for redemptions. Presumably the airbucks quoted are for the cheapest fare buckets (which may only have a couple of seats on a given flight). What will be charged when that cheapest fare bucket runs out? Does it revert to 1 airbuck = $1? If so then this is a massive devaluation because unless you book 330 days out (on popular routes) the earn/burn ratio (for full fare) reverts to perhaps 15 or more. :td: However there may be some method of converting $$ to airbucks required?
Starting to take it in and I can see it is a huge benefit from Air NZ's perspective. I disagree about the revenue arguments above, from what I can make of the charts and rules I think it is somewhat profitability based.
Eg economy NZ to Hawaii is very low airbucks earned for the distance, which makes sense to me.
Some more thoughts.
Flexi saver fares (disc econ that earns airbucks) are now more attractive with improved earning rates. Ie before may have gone for cheapest but now may be worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks. ^
Domestic and short haul generally is improved earn/burn rates. Having said that the redemption is 1 airbuck = $1 whereas the charts for long haul are more like 1 airbuck = $3.
On international trips it is probably not worth crediting airpoints if there is significant travel on NZ and other carriers due to much diminished earning on the NZ legs, and slightly diminished earning on the other carriers.
For redeeming there is a very heavy penalty for using other carriers, earn/burn rates are generally 50% worse and some cases 100+% worse than on NZ routes (where only NZ).
As others point out, earn/burn ratios for full fare long haul improve to around 4-5 for 1 award. Disc econ is around 7-9. Worse when other carriers in same journey.
The charts for long haul are clearly much less than $$$ for paid fares. While NZ says every seat is available, it is unclear to me what this means for redemptions. Presumably the airbucks quoted are for the cheapest fare buckets (which may only have a couple of seats on a given flight). What will be charged when that cheapest fare bucket runs out? Does it revert to 1 airbuck = $1? If so then this is a massive devaluation because unless you book 330 days out (on popular routes) the earn/burn ratio (for full fare) reverts to perhaps 15 or more. :td: However there may be some method of converting $$ to airbucks required?
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 1:49 pm
Continued...
Provincial members lose out. The earning is based on journey so 2 domestic legs gets same airbucks as one, but redeeming is based on fare $$$ which is more for 2 legs. In addition, international awards have a surcharge for the domestic legs and this is 9-10 times (depending on whether solely NZ or mixed) the airbucks earned for domestic leg in conjunction with international travel - ie earn/burn is worse than average.
Upgrades seem to be more expensive.
I like the idea of confirmed upgrades. Gives an improved opportunity to assess whether to buy econ and upgrade with airbucks or pay for higher class. However, it may have detrimental impact on upgrade coupons for status (assuming these are still being provided - the website and mailer is silent on this). If the status upgrades are still standby then the upgrade availability may have gone by the time the window arrives due to other confirmed upgrades. This can easily be solved by making the status upgrade a confirmed one.
Relativities for disc econ, econ, biz and first seem to align with profitability. Some interesting anomalies there in the charts!!
Silent on non-airline partners. I realise it may take some time to negotiate terms but I for one would like to know how it changes. This will probably influence timing of transfer from cc to airpoints and also how the existing points get used vs converted to airbucks.
Provincial members lose out. The earning is based on journey so 2 domestic legs gets same airbucks as one, but redeeming is based on fare $$$ which is more for 2 legs. In addition, international awards have a surcharge for the domestic legs and this is 9-10 times (depending on whether solely NZ or mixed) the airbucks earned for domestic leg in conjunction with international travel - ie earn/burn is worse than average.
Upgrades seem to be more expensive.
I like the idea of confirmed upgrades. Gives an improved opportunity to assess whether to buy econ and upgrade with airbucks or pay for higher class. However, it may have detrimental impact on upgrade coupons for status (assuming these are still being provided - the website and mailer is silent on this). If the status upgrades are still standby then the upgrade availability may have gone by the time the window arrives due to other confirmed upgrades. This can easily be solved by making the status upgrade a confirmed one.
Relativities for disc econ, econ, biz and first seem to align with profitability. Some interesting anomalies there in the charts!!
Silent on non-airline partners. I realise it may take some time to negotiate terms but I for one would like to know how it changes. This will probably influence timing of transfer from cc to airpoints and also how the existing points get used vs converted to airbucks.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 1:54 pm
From NZ (shown on TV and again in the papers today)
Air New Zealand, backed by a supplied auditors report from accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, says that 61 per cent of all flight redemptions will require fewer "equivalent airpoints". A further 15 per cent will need the same, while the rest will need more.
I think this is trickery!! I am guessing they are assuming all redemptions are made from the cheapest bucket when this is in fact most unlikely. If longhaul reverts to 1 airbuck = $1 once the cheapest bucket is used then any additional redemptions are much more expensive (although a good way for NZ to reduce liability quickly for unsophisticated members).
Air New Zealand, backed by a supplied auditors report from accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, says that 61 per cent of all flight redemptions will require fewer "equivalent airpoints". A further 15 per cent will need the same, while the rest will need more.
I think this is trickery!! I am guessing they are assuming all redemptions are made from the cheapest bucket when this is in fact most unlikely. If longhaul reverts to 1 airbuck = $1 once the cheapest bucket is used then any additional redemptions are much more expensive (although a good way for NZ to reduce liability quickly for unsophisticated members).
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 2:05 pm
Article posted to the news thread mentions Global Plus cc. Earning rate to be changed on Amex but stay the same (???) for Visa/Mastercard.
Doesnt say what it means though so I am still :confused:
Doesnt say what it means though so I am still :confused:
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 2:11 pm
The way I see it the initial transfer is poor value - I would expect to get more value than $0.013 per point currently.
I take this back, but with the proviso can actually redeem using the charts. I predict Air NZ call centre will be flooded on 16 Nov - hope the elite line works to our advantage!
Looking at some sample itineraries on NZ only it may be worth keeping the points and redeeming under new rules, but for more complex itineraries and other carriers it may be better to redeem before the compulsory conversion.
Hmm just a thought, if NZ is really serious about reducing the airpoints/airbucks liability then maybe we'll see some specials before November to encourage early redemption? Or am I being too hopeful? :D
I take this back, but with the proviso can actually redeem using the charts. I predict Air NZ call centre will be flooded on 16 Nov - hope the elite line works to our advantage!
Looking at some sample itineraries on NZ only it may be worth keeping the points and redeeming under new rules, but for more complex itineraries and other carriers it may be better to redeem before the compulsory conversion.
Hmm just a thought, if NZ is really serious about reducing the airpoints/airbucks liability then maybe we'll see some specials before November to encourage early redemption? Or am I being too hopeful? :D
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 2:15 pm
When it says the first requalifying after 16 Nov we'll compare status under both new and old rules and take the highest, does this mean
(a) look at all flights within the year and calculate old status credits and new air dollars, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
OR
(b) flights pre 16 Nov will earn status credits, flights after earn air dollars for status, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
???
The former is quite generous and means I have (I think) already requalified :cool:
The latter is particularly mean if you are close to requalifying at 16 Nov and is a big (one-off) increase in requirement for status :td:
My interpretation is it should be the (a) method - but am I being too optimistic.
Note from my quick assessment of my flights this renewal period it suggests status may be easier to get (at least on certain flying patterns). ^
The brochure mailed strongly suggests the (a) interpretation. ^
(a) look at all flights within the year and calculate old status credits and new air dollars, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
OR
(b) flights pre 16 Nov will earn status credits, flights after earn air dollars for status, assess status based on status credits and on air dollars and take the highest
???
The former is quite generous and means I have (I think) already requalified :cool:
The latter is particularly mean if you are close to requalifying at 16 Nov and is a big (one-off) increase in requirement for status :td:
My interpretation is it should be the (a) method - but am I being too optimistic.
Note from my quick assessment of my flights this renewal period it suggests status may be easier to get (at least on certain flying patterns). ^
The brochure mailed strongly suggests the (a) interpretation. ^
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 2:24 pm
My overall impression after a few hours to absorb.
I am impressed with the innovation shown. While there are pluses and minuses and some areas I think could be improved, NZ will turn around peoples thinking about awards.
1) Since redeeming can be any fare bucket and price will be based on bucket, those prepared to book early get the good deals and those who want last minute pay more. This is as it should be.
2) With miles you know exactly how many you need for a particular award, but not sure if it is available. Whereas airbucks reverses that - you know there will be something available but dont have certainty on how much it will cost. This will take some getting used to.
I am impressed with the innovation shown. While there are pluses and minuses and some areas I think could be improved, NZ will turn around peoples thinking about awards.
1) Since redeeming can be any fare bucket and price will be based on bucket, those prepared to book early get the good deals and those who want last minute pay more. This is as it should be.
2) With miles you know exactly how many you need for a particular award, but not sure if it is available. Whereas airbucks reverses that - you know there will be something available but dont have certainty on how much it will cost. This will take some getting used to.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 2:26 pm
I noticed an inconsistency. Mr Norris referred to around 5% of seats being award flights, but previously Air NZ has mentioned 15% of seats being available for awards. I appreciate some routes may not be popular and so award seats dont get used but the impression I had was in general award seats were being used - hence ongoing references to hard to get award flights.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 2:30 pm
I wasnt impressed by the quality of the charts. There are what appear to be mistakes, and general inconsistency that detracts slightly.
Eg on some refers to AKL/CHC to LAX/SFO but others drop CHC and SFO references.
Eg some of the *A/mixed routes seem to be not possible (unless there are some new partners in the wings), while others that are possible are not listed on the chart.
Eg order on the earn/redeem charts differs (I know this is nitpicking but makes it harder to transfer into spreadsheet).
Eg inconsistent zone names - eg on some charts a zone is called Australia, others it is Tasman.
It appeared to me that the charts were put together in a rush.
Eg on some refers to AKL/CHC to LAX/SFO but others drop CHC and SFO references.
Eg some of the *A/mixed routes seem to be not possible (unless there are some new partners in the wings), while others that are possible are not listed on the chart.
Eg order on the earn/redeem charts differs (I know this is nitpicking but makes it harder to transfer into spreadsheet).
Eg inconsistent zone names - eg on some charts a zone is called Australia, others it is Tasman.
It appeared to me that the charts were put together in a rush.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 2:43 pm
The way they calculate the airbucks turns out to be a benefit if you are residing in Australia rather than NZ. I just checked a few destinations, but in total you need to make fewer trips to earn the same reward if you have a (mailing ;) ...) address in Australia. Not that I want to complain, but what do you guys think about that discrimination?
You also need fewer bucks to attain Gold, but for Silver it seems to be the same no matter where you live. All in all, I think this is such a complex change, that it'll take us months to fully find all the loopholes :D .
But the biggest benefit that I can see is that if there is a free seat on the plane you can redeem your points, right? ^ Now, does that mean there only has to be 1 Y-class seat or do they specify anywhere which booking class has to have an available seat? I wonder why the other *Alliance members allow that to happen? It simply means that all other members would not be able to get a reward seat, but NZ members can get one on ANY *Alliance flight (SQ F!) even if there is only one seat left for sale??? :confused: That doesn't sound right, does it? Maybe I overlooked some important restriction or maybe it's only valid for NZ operated flights?
For Australian members it seems all the tables have been converted to airbucks. There may be some small advantage due to rounding or any mistakes (deliberate or otherwise). I wonder how often NZ will adjust aussie airbucks to take account of currency movements? May open up some arbitrage opportunities.
On a completely unrelated question ;) how will they deal with members who shift from NZ to Aust or vice versa? Presumable airbucks balance (and status to date) need to be converted using an exchange rate of some sort.
Sydfly - my reading is that for awards redeemed on NZ or *A or other partners, the booking comes from usual paid fare buckets. But the rate charts quoted are only for the cheapest. So yes there is more available on other carriers too, but unless you get in early it costs you more. Depending on how quickly the cheap fare buckets go relative to the award buckets on other carriers there may be an advantage or a disadvantage to airbucks members. The other carriers allow this because they get more money from NZ if seat comes from higher bucket. At least that is my understanding.
You also need fewer bucks to attain Gold, but for Silver it seems to be the same no matter where you live. All in all, I think this is such a complex change, that it'll take us months to fully find all the loopholes :D .
But the biggest benefit that I can see is that if there is a free seat on the plane you can redeem your points, right? ^ Now, does that mean there only has to be 1 Y-class seat or do they specify anywhere which booking class has to have an available seat? I wonder why the other *Alliance members allow that to happen? It simply means that all other members would not be able to get a reward seat, but NZ members can get one on ANY *Alliance flight (SQ F!) even if there is only one seat left for sale??? :confused: That doesn't sound right, does it? Maybe I overlooked some important restriction or maybe it's only valid for NZ operated flights?
For Australian members it seems all the tables have been converted to airbucks. There may be some small advantage due to rounding or any mistakes (deliberate or otherwise). I wonder how often NZ will adjust aussie airbucks to take account of currency movements? May open up some arbitrage opportunities.
On a completely unrelated question ;) how will they deal with members who shift from NZ to Aust or vice versa? Presumable airbucks balance (and status to date) need to be converted using an exchange rate of some sort.
Sydfly - my reading is that for awards redeemed on NZ or *A or other partners, the booking comes from usual paid fare buckets. But the rate charts quoted are only for the cheapest. So yes there is more available on other carriers too, but unless you get in early it costs you more. Depending on how quickly the cheap fare buckets go relative to the award buckets on other carriers there may be an advantage or a disadvantage to airbucks members. The other carriers allow this because they get more money from NZ if seat comes from higher bucket. At least that is my understanding.
kawoh
Jul 29, 04, 2:53 pm
key points for me
1/ looks like awards are cheaper now. if syd-akl-lax return is 150 AD, and an award is 600 AD (this is assuming the award is RETURN and not one way?? can anyone confirm?), this is the equivalent of 15,000 miles x 4 = 60,000... which is the same as UA? It looks like companion awards are now around 400-450 to the US.. that's like only 45,000 or so miles travelled on the same sector to earn a free award (companion), but that must be the cheapest transpac on the market today for any f/flyer program.
2/ there seem to be clear benefits of flying first, look at how much you earn flying F one way from say CAI - FRA... 245 AD.. or 490 return! 2 of those and you'll requal for Gold.
3/ I don't like the annual fee for not flying NZ metal, whilst you may fly them, you may not accrue to them. For example, I like NZ because you earn 1,500 points for stays at Hilton. I wonder what will happen with partner earning on NZ... (non airlines).... perhaps they should do what SQ do, ie - you can accrue to another airline program, but if you fly NZ metal, you are exempt from the annual fee without needing to collect AD's...
4/ I love NZ's thinking though, more airline programs should do it - you pay an annual fee if you want to keep your miles unless you fly the airline once a year ... helps get rid of the occasional credit card earners taking our precious seats, but awards those who actually fly to get the seats. for those serious credit card earners who transfer big chunks, well they can pay the annual fee if it's worth the $$$ to them, but it helps cover NZ's bottom line at least partially each year for those who never fly NZ. I noticed NZ canned the Amex MR program for NZ shortly.. perhaps this is NZ's first steps to dissolve itself with involvement in c/card programs...
1/ looks like awards are cheaper now. if syd-akl-lax return is 150 AD, and an award is 600 AD (this is assuming the award is RETURN and not one way?? can anyone confirm?), this is the equivalent of 15,000 miles x 4 = 60,000... which is the same as UA? It looks like companion awards are now around 400-450 to the US.. that's like only 45,000 or so miles travelled on the same sector to earn a free award (companion), but that must be the cheapest transpac on the market today for any f/flyer program.
2/ there seem to be clear benefits of flying first, look at how much you earn flying F one way from say CAI - FRA... 245 AD.. or 490 return! 2 of those and you'll requal for Gold.
3/ I don't like the annual fee for not flying NZ metal, whilst you may fly them, you may not accrue to them. For example, I like NZ because you earn 1,500 points for stays at Hilton. I wonder what will happen with partner earning on NZ... (non airlines).... perhaps they should do what SQ do, ie - you can accrue to another airline program, but if you fly NZ metal, you are exempt from the annual fee without needing to collect AD's...
4/ I love NZ's thinking though, more airline programs should do it - you pay an annual fee if you want to keep your miles unless you fly the airline once a year ... helps get rid of the occasional credit card earners taking our precious seats, but awards those who actually fly to get the seats. for those serious credit card earners who transfer big chunks, well they can pay the annual fee if it's worth the $$$ to them, but it helps cover NZ's bottom line at least partially each year for those who never fly NZ. I noticed NZ canned the Amex MR program for NZ shortly.. perhaps this is NZ's first steps to dissolve itself with involvement in c/card programs...
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 3:11 pm
1/ looks like awards are cheaper now. if syd-akl-lax return is 150 AD, and an award is 600 AD (this is assuming the award is RETURN and not one way?? can anyone confirm?), this is the equivalent of 15,000 miles x 4 = 60,000... which is the same as UA? It looks like companion awards are now around 400-450 to the US.. that's like only 45,000 or so miles travelled on the same sector to earn a free award (companion), but that must be the cheapest transpac on the market today for any f/flyer program.
No the awards quoted are all one-way. This is an improvement as we used to have to pay return rate even if only wanted one-way.
No the awards quoted are all one-way. This is an improvement as we used to have to pay return rate even if only wanted one-way.
Latitudes
Jul 29, 04, 3:14 pm
2/ there seem to be clear benefits of flying first, look at how much you earn flying F one way from say CAI - FRA... 245 AD.. or 490 return! 2 of those and you'll requal for Gold.
If this is indeed a benefit, it won't last for long. :( With NZ removing F from their service, your AD-earning ability will reduce to *A rates. :td:
I don't know about you guys, but I have an uneasy feeling about all of this...
Maybe I don't fully understand the program, but there are warning bells going off telling me to spend the few AirPoints I have left before November 16 and cut my losses.
If this is indeed a benefit, it won't last for long. :( With NZ removing F from their service, your AD-earning ability will reduce to *A rates. :td:
I don't know about you guys, but I have an uneasy feeling about all of this...
Maybe I don't fully understand the program, but there are warning bells going off telling me to spend the few AirPoints I have left before November 16 and cut my losses.
Quokka
Jul 29, 04, 3:37 pm
Some more thoughts.
Flexi saver fares (disc econ that earns airbucks) are now more attractive with improved earning rates. Ie before may have gone for cheapest but now may be worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks.
"but now it may be worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks"? Think about it ...
One of the biggest perils of the new system for Air NZ is that it makes it somewhat easier for consumers to figure whether it's worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks.
Consumers can find what the FF credit is worth to them in $ terms and compare that to the difference in fares.
If the number of airbucks earned (i.e. basically airbucks bought by you paying the higher fare) is not greater that the difference in price (ie the little more) then the answer is No in strictly $ terms. In that case, the additional $ you spend on the higher fare is being discounted, you're losing money on the "investment" and you'd be better off buying the cheaper fare if its available.
For example, under the new system, a NZ domestic flight of 300+ kms on a "Flexi Saver" fare will "earn" you 12 Airpoints dollars. So picking two such routes you find the following:
Lowest one way fares from
Auckland - DUD
Smart Saver $100*
Flexi Saver $190*
Fare Difference $90
$AP gained $12
Auckland - ZQN
Smart Saver $126*
Flexi Saver $206*
Fare Difference $80
$AP gained $12
So Air NZ is giving you the wonderful opportunity to purchase $12 worth of Airpoints dollars for an additional $80 or $90 of your real money. Of course the numbers above are based on the lowest one way fares for each type. The availiability and cost/benefit calculations will vary but you can assume it will favour Air NZ's benefit if they did their job right.
There can be other benefits to buying the higher saver fare in various circumstances such as status credits and/or better ticket change possibilities. But if you compare the conditions of the two lowest Domestic Express fare classes it looks like the change conditions and fees are currently the same. The only difference between the conditions of the Smart Saver and Flexi Saver fare type is the latter "earns" or buys points and possibly Status Credits.
Flexi saver fares (disc econ that earns airbucks) are now more attractive with improved earning rates. Ie before may have gone for cheapest but now may be worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks.
"but now it may be worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks"? Think about it ...
One of the biggest perils of the new system for Air NZ is that it makes it somewhat easier for consumers to figure whether it's worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks.
Consumers can find what the FF credit is worth to them in $ terms and compare that to the difference in fares.
If the number of airbucks earned (i.e. basically airbucks bought by you paying the higher fare) is not greater that the difference in price (ie the little more) then the answer is No in strictly $ terms. In that case, the additional $ you spend on the higher fare is being discounted, you're losing money on the "investment" and you'd be better off buying the cheaper fare if its available.
For example, under the new system, a NZ domestic flight of 300+ kms on a "Flexi Saver" fare will "earn" you 12 Airpoints dollars. So picking two such routes you find the following:
Lowest one way fares from
Auckland - DUD
Smart Saver $100*
Flexi Saver $190*
Fare Difference $90
$AP gained $12
Auckland - ZQN
Smart Saver $126*
Flexi Saver $206*
Fare Difference $80
$AP gained $12
So Air NZ is giving you the wonderful opportunity to purchase $12 worth of Airpoints dollars for an additional $80 or $90 of your real money. Of course the numbers above are based on the lowest one way fares for each type. The availiability and cost/benefit calculations will vary but you can assume it will favour Air NZ's benefit if they did their job right.
There can be other benefits to buying the higher saver fare in various circumstances such as status credits and/or better ticket change possibilities. But if you compare the conditions of the two lowest Domestic Express fare classes it looks like the change conditions and fees are currently the same. The only difference between the conditions of the Smart Saver and Flexi Saver fare type is the latter "earns" or buys points and possibly Status Credits.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 3:43 pm
"but now it may be worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks"? Think about it ...
One of the biggest perils of the new system for Air NZ is that it makes it somewhat easier for consumers to figure whether it's worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks.
Consumers can find what the FF credit is worth to them in $ terms and compare that to the difference in fares.
If the number of airbucks earned (i.e. basically airbucks bought by you paying the higher fare) is not greater that the difference in price (ie the little more) then the answer is No in strictly $ terms. In that case, the additional $ you spend on the higher fare is being discounted, you're losing money on the "investment" and you'd be better off buying the cheaper fare if its available.
That's the reason 1 airbuck <> $1 (okay in some circumstances it does but generally not). Also the reason no FFP relates miles/points/bucks/whatever exactly with $ - because it then is too easy to work out cost/benefit.
I take your point that the fare difference is more than the number of airbucks (I'm not surprised). My point is the disincentive to purchase the Flexi fares (over Smart Saver if available) is less now than it was. For me any decision would depend on lots of things, like status, chance I would need to change the booking, etc.
One of the biggest perils of the new system for Air NZ is that it makes it somewhat easier for consumers to figure whether it's worthwhile paying a little more to get airbucks.
Consumers can find what the FF credit is worth to them in $ terms and compare that to the difference in fares.
If the number of airbucks earned (i.e. basically airbucks bought by you paying the higher fare) is not greater that the difference in price (ie the little more) then the answer is No in strictly $ terms. In that case, the additional $ you spend on the higher fare is being discounted, you're losing money on the "investment" and you'd be better off buying the cheaper fare if its available.
That's the reason 1 airbuck <> $1 (okay in some circumstances it does but generally not). Also the reason no FFP relates miles/points/bucks/whatever exactly with $ - because it then is too easy to work out cost/benefit.
I take your point that the fare difference is more than the number of airbucks (I'm not surprised). My point is the disincentive to purchase the Flexi fares (over Smart Saver if available) is less now than it was. For me any decision would depend on lots of things, like status, chance I would need to change the booking, etc.
Fliar
Jul 29, 04, 4:12 pm
Quokka you're right of course, but since it's impossible to buy a standby upgrade to LAX or Asia for $400 real dollars, 1 Airbuck is worth slightly more to me than a Kiwibuck.
trg2u
Jul 29, 04, 4:20 pm
Article posted to the news thread mentions Global Plus cc. Earning rate to be changed on Amex but stay the same (???) for Visa/Mastercard.
For Global Plus CC NZ customers here is the link to the new earning rates
GlobalPlus (https://www.globalplus.co.nz/airpointsdollars/earningrates.asp)
Not alot of change.Some improvement for GlobalPlus Gold Cards +12%
For Global Plus CC NZ customers here is the link to the new earning rates
GlobalPlus (https://www.globalplus.co.nz/airpointsdollars/earningrates.asp)
Not alot of change.Some improvement for GlobalPlus Gold Cards +12%
Quokka
Jul 29, 04, 6:31 pm
Quokka you're right of course, but since it's impossible to buy a standby upgrade to LAX or Asia for $400 real dollars, 1 Airbuck is worth slightly more to me than a Kiwibuck.
What's slightly more?
Since earning/buying the 400 Airbucks for the standby upgrade will cost you many times $400 real dollars, Air NZ makes out quite nicely in the game. Calculations for some scenarios show that one would have to spend an additional $3000-$4000 real dollars to "earn" the standby upgrade. That's an *extra* $3000 spend over the non-FFP accruing fares, not the total amount of spent on airfares. With numbers like that, in those cases one would be better off just buying the Business Class ticket outright than playing the FFP game.
In effect one might spend heaps more additional real dollars to possibly buy something that Air NZ would otherwise have go to waste -- i.e. an empty seat in business class. So "$400" is the wrong number to look at, rather the important number is what those airbucks actually cost you to acquire. That's the same no matter if the FFP currency is expressed in points, miles, airbucks or Paua shells.
Since the new system is amazingly convoluted, there may have been some overlooked cases with opportunities for arbitrage. Or it may be such a poor return that a sensible person would just punt on it or use a different FFP. Either way ...
Gentlemen, start your spreadsheets!
What's slightly more?
Since earning/buying the 400 Airbucks for the standby upgrade will cost you many times $400 real dollars, Air NZ makes out quite nicely in the game. Calculations for some scenarios show that one would have to spend an additional $3000-$4000 real dollars to "earn" the standby upgrade. That's an *extra* $3000 spend over the non-FFP accruing fares, not the total amount of spent on airfares. With numbers like that, in those cases one would be better off just buying the Business Class ticket outright than playing the FFP game.
In effect one might spend heaps more additional real dollars to possibly buy something that Air NZ would otherwise have go to waste -- i.e. an empty seat in business class. So "$400" is the wrong number to look at, rather the important number is what those airbucks actually cost you to acquire. That's the same no matter if the FFP currency is expressed in points, miles, airbucks or Paua shells.
Since the new system is amazingly convoluted, there may have been some overlooked cases with opportunities for arbitrage. Or it may be such a poor return that a sensible person would just punt on it or use a different FFP. Either way ...
Gentlemen, start your spreadsheets!
Fliar
Jul 29, 04, 7:57 pm
Calculations for some scenarios show that one would have to spend an additional $3000-$4000 real dollars to "earn" the standby upgrade. That's an *extra* $3000 spend over the non-FFP accruing fares, not the total amount of spent on airfares. With numbers like that, in those cases one would be better off just buying the Business Class ticket outright than playing the FFP game.
I agree with most of what you say. Except that I can't buy a business class outright as I don't get reimbursed for that :(
I agree with most of what you say. Except that I can't buy a business class outright as I don't get reimbursed for that :(
Fliar
Jul 29, 04, 8:23 pm
For Global Plus CC NZ customers here is the link to the new earning rates
GlobalPlus (https://www.globalplus.co.nz/airpointsdollars/earningrates.asp)
Not alot of change.Some improvement for GlobalPlus Gold Cards +12%
But compare the current AMEX rewards thingy at 2 points per dollar with the Globalplus 2 dollars per point!
Even the new Global plus amex gold card earns more than 25% fewer points.
No wonder Air NZ ditched the AMEX deal.
GlobalPlus (https://www.globalplus.co.nz/airpointsdollars/earningrates.asp)
Not alot of change.Some improvement for GlobalPlus Gold Cards +12%
But compare the current AMEX rewards thingy at 2 points per dollar with the Globalplus 2 dollars per point!
Even the new Global plus amex gold card earns more than 25% fewer points.
No wonder Air NZ ditched the AMEX deal.
Tiki
Jul 29, 04, 10:43 pm
I am confused on where the inventory is coming from. In the past, both NZ and all other *A used X class. So doesn this new system mean that NZ can now book any class and use their AP$ so they won't be using X class anymore? And people who book *A awards (for example UA MP) will still be using X class?
ntddevsys
Jul 29, 04, 11:30 pm
So many questions ...
If there is only a Fully Flexible ticket, do you get the fully flexible rules if you pay with airbucks ?
Whats going to be happening to my precious Hotpoints conversion ($1NZD = 0.875 Airpoints) ?
Does this signal a new NZ website ?
Koru Flyer - Is it important to have Gold Elite as achievable ?
If there is only a Fully Flexible ticket, do you get the fully flexible rules if you pay with airbucks ?
Whats going to be happening to my precious Hotpoints conversion ($1NZD = 0.875 Airpoints) ?
Does this signal a new NZ website ?
Koru Flyer - Is it important to have Gold Elite as achievable ?
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 29, 04, 11:46 pm
So many questions ...
Yup
If there is only a Fully Flexible ticket, do you get the fully flexible rules if you pay with airbucks ?
Hope so.
Whats going to be happening to my precious Hotpoints conversion ($1NZD = 0.875 Airpoints) ?
Who knows? Hopefully non-airline partner aspects get released soon.
Does this signal a new NZ website ?
At the very least there will need to be some changes to online award bookings. I hope NZ makes other improvements - eg the member section is hopeless and nearly always you need to ring to find out what other FFPs display as standard online.
Koru Flyer - Is it important to have Gold Elite as achievable ?
KF & others have pointed out that some existing status benefits are significantly diluted by airbucks (based on info provided to date) but there is no mention of whether or how status benefits change.
I for one would want to see some improvements if NZ wants me to continue to retain status and not just use airbucks for cc (not many options where to put these) and the specific flights that make sense for airbucks over other FFPs (which I am still looking into).
Yup
If there is only a Fully Flexible ticket, do you get the fully flexible rules if you pay with airbucks ?
Hope so.
Whats going to be happening to my precious Hotpoints conversion ($1NZD = 0.875 Airpoints) ?
Who knows? Hopefully non-airline partner aspects get released soon.
Does this signal a new NZ website ?
At the very least there will need to be some changes to online award bookings. I hope NZ makes other improvements - eg the member section is hopeless and nearly always you need to ring to find out what other FFPs display as standard online.
Koru Flyer - Is it important to have Gold Elite as achievable ?
KF & others have pointed out that some existing status benefits are significantly diluted by airbucks (based on info provided to date) but there is no mention of whether or how status benefits change.
I for one would want to see some improvements if NZ wants me to continue to retain status and not just use airbucks for cc (not many options where to put these) and the specific flights that make sense for airbucks over other FFPs (which I am still looking into).
MrSydney
Jul 30, 04, 12:22 am
MrSydney has a head cold and not feeling 100% but I am just terribly confused about all of this. It does not make sense!! :o
Am I the only one??????? :(
Am I the only one??????? :(
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 30, 04, 12:37 am
No and I dont have a cold as an excuse.
I reckon there will be several things that I think I understand now, will turn out I dont!
I reckon there will be several things that I think I understand now, will turn out I dont!
mad_atta
Jul 30, 04, 1:09 am
MrSydney has a head cold and not feeling 100% but I am just terribly confused about all of this. It does not make sense!! :o
Am I the only one??????? :(
Poor MrSydney, allow me to prescribe a nice hot lemon & honey, liberally laced with single malt scotch and paracetemol, and a nice long lounge in front of the telly until the dust has settled.
Am I the only one??????? :(
Poor MrSydney, allow me to prescribe a nice hot lemon & honey, liberally laced with single malt scotch and paracetemol, and a nice long lounge in front of the telly until the dust has settled.
Latitudes
Jul 30, 04, 3:11 am
Where is airnzboy?
Perhaps he can help shed some light on this. :confused:
Perhaps he can help shed some light on this. :confused:
Leumas
Jul 30, 04, 3:25 am
Guys and gals,
After reading/skimming most of your posts and reading the materials, here's what I think...
I'm assuming that the general population is more price sensitive than miles sensitive. This place is not representative of the general population.
I think the scheme will work out better for NZ in the long run. The trick will be in yield management. Given most people are price sensitive, it's more likely for them to choose something non-airbucks earning. Therefore, if I'm NZ, I'll increase the price gaps between non-airbuck earning fare classes and the earning fare classes.
4 discount economy classes earn the same amount of airbucks (also 4 classes for full economy). If you increase the price of the airbucks-earning classes, people will buy more non-airbucks earning fares. With the near monopoly NZ have on the NZ domestic market, I'm actually slightly surprised at the airbucks on offer on these routes.
Therefore, yes, you can redeem seats on any flights as long as there're seats for sale, but you won't earn anywhere near as quickly as before. On 16 Nov, NZ's points/bucks liability drops by some 80% overnight. From that point on, earning will not be as quick as now. The CC and Amex earning rate will be slowed down dramatically too.
In other words, the scheme is no longer for the everyday-Joe, leisure travellers, it's for business travellers who need the flexibility and will be paying the extra fare anyway. They're taking away the liability NZ will create from leisure travellers and reward those that fly for business, something they're already doing. Customers aren't getting any extra benefits from this change to airbucks, the benefits this new scheme brings is nothing more than what it already offers.
In fact, I'll go one step further. Yes, you can redeem seats on any flights as long as there're seats on sales, but you've to pay more for it. Do you prefer to find a seat on a different flight (but still pay the same price) or to pay more for it? Remember, if they put up prices, they can further reduce their airbucks liability. Is this any better for you, the customer? (You can get around it though by looking for the cheapest flight to redeem. This is, again, no change from the current situation. So the customers aren't any better off.)
One last thing - I wouldn't put money on redeeming on a more expensive fare will get you the same conditions/flexibility as buying it with real money. In addition, they'll still ping you for more fees and charges when touching your airbucks account.
I hope I haven't lost you... :)
After reading/skimming most of your posts and reading the materials, here's what I think...
I'm assuming that the general population is more price sensitive than miles sensitive. This place is not representative of the general population.
I think the scheme will work out better for NZ in the long run. The trick will be in yield management. Given most people are price sensitive, it's more likely for them to choose something non-airbucks earning. Therefore, if I'm NZ, I'll increase the price gaps between non-airbuck earning fare classes and the earning fare classes.
4 discount economy classes earn the same amount of airbucks (also 4 classes for full economy). If you increase the price of the airbucks-earning classes, people will buy more non-airbucks earning fares. With the near monopoly NZ have on the NZ domestic market, I'm actually slightly surprised at the airbucks on offer on these routes.
Therefore, yes, you can redeem seats on any flights as long as there're seats for sale, but you won't earn anywhere near as quickly as before. On 16 Nov, NZ's points/bucks liability drops by some 80% overnight. From that point on, earning will not be as quick as now. The CC and Amex earning rate will be slowed down dramatically too.
In other words, the scheme is no longer for the everyday-Joe, leisure travellers, it's for business travellers who need the flexibility and will be paying the extra fare anyway. They're taking away the liability NZ will create from leisure travellers and reward those that fly for business, something they're already doing. Customers aren't getting any extra benefits from this change to airbucks, the benefits this new scheme brings is nothing more than what it already offers.
In fact, I'll go one step further. Yes, you can redeem seats on any flights as long as there're seats on sales, but you've to pay more for it. Do you prefer to find a seat on a different flight (but still pay the same price) or to pay more for it? Remember, if they put up prices, they can further reduce their airbucks liability. Is this any better for you, the customer? (You can get around it though by looking for the cheapest flight to redeem. This is, again, no change from the current situation. So the customers aren't any better off.)
One last thing - I wouldn't put money on redeeming on a more expensive fare will get you the same conditions/flexibility as buying it with real money. In addition, they'll still ping you for more fees and charges when touching your airbucks account.
I hope I haven't lost you... :)
ntddevsys
Jul 30, 04, 5:09 am
Therefore, yes, you can redeem seats on any flights as long as there're seats for sale, but you won't earn anywhere near as quickly as before. On 16 Nov, NZ's points/bucks liability drops by some 80% overnight. From that point on, earning will not be as quick as now. The CC and Amex earning rate will be slowed down dramatically too.
Quite high level thinking that,
You've lost me. How exactly does the airbucks liability drop by 80 % over night ?
Customers are still getting some new things. Non-elite confirmed upgrades [hate to think what that will do to our upgrade inventory/spare seats in J], one way rewards [there back] and the ability to redeem them on any flight [Note i dont say seat]
Quite high level thinking that,
You've lost me. How exactly does the airbucks liability drop by 80 % over night ?
Customers are still getting some new things. Non-elite confirmed upgrades [hate to think what that will do to our upgrade inventory/spare seats in J], one way rewards [there back] and the ability to redeem them on any flight [Note i dont say seat]
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 30, 04, 2:55 pm
I think the scheme will work out better for NZ in the long run. The trick will be in yield management. Given most people are price sensitive, it's more likely for them to choose something non-airbucks earning. Therefore, if I'm NZ, I'll increase the price gaps between non-airbuck earning fare classes and the earning fare classes.
4 discount economy classes earn the same amount of airbucks (also 4 classes for full economy). If you increase the price of the airbucks-earning classes, people will buy more non-airbucks earning fares. With the near monopoly NZ have on the NZ domestic market, I'm actually slightly surprised at the airbucks on offer on these routes.
Therefore, yes, you can redeem seats on any flights as long as there're seats for sale, but you won't earn anywhere near as quickly as before. On 16 Nov, NZ's points/bucks liability drops by some 80% overnight. From that point on, earning will not be as quick as now. The CC and Amex earning rate will be slowed down dramatically too.
Agree this will be much better for NZ. Not sure where 80% comes from.
I see the improved earning for disc econ as a response to Qantas where you can earn miles on any fare. While NZ doesnt go as far as that, it is more generous than QF in which fare buckets are disc econ vs full econ (at least for travel in NZ, QF is particularly harsh).
I wouldnt be surprised if cc earning will be reduced, although Global Plus doesnt seem to be initially. If we assume the average earn/burn rate (for same route/category) overall is about 10 and factor in non-earning fares to get around 12. (I know savvy types could get this much lower but need a figure for overall where much of the travel is domestic or trans tasman.) This means if airbucks are being used at roughly same rate as earned (should in theory due to the expiry rules), from flying NZ, around 8% of seats need to be redemption. This is an increase from current 5% quoted although may be complicated by *A awards which I'll ignore.
But 8% doesnt include airbucks from cc etc which nearly every man and his dog earns. My theory is most of the annual 15% increase in airpoints balance is due to non-airline partners. Previously NZ has indicated up to 15% award seats and this would seem to be one of the highest I have seen anywhere. I would probably discount this somewhat as I think there are more overseas folk travelling on awards on NZ than airpoints members travelling on awards on other carriers, for which presumably NZ is adequately compensated by the other FFP. So maybe 10% on awards overall is sustainable, in which case the earning rate of non-airline partners needs to reduce significantly based on the number of airpoints (and not yet transferred to airpoints) there are out there and the fact these are continuing to grow rapidly = unsustainable.
The other alternative where no one has gone yet (maybe Amex is starting to go this way?) is for cc payments to airpoints to subsidise an increase in capacity to help absorb the additional airpoints/airbucks/yet to be transferred points.
I know there's lots of assumptions in there that are probably wrong but I think the theory holds.
4 discount economy classes earn the same amount of airbucks (also 4 classes for full economy). If you increase the price of the airbucks-earning classes, people will buy more non-airbucks earning fares. With the near monopoly NZ have on the NZ domestic market, I'm actually slightly surprised at the airbucks on offer on these routes.
Therefore, yes, you can redeem seats on any flights as long as there're seats for sale, but you won't earn anywhere near as quickly as before. On 16 Nov, NZ's points/bucks liability drops by some 80% overnight. From that point on, earning will not be as quick as now. The CC and Amex earning rate will be slowed down dramatically too.
Agree this will be much better for NZ. Not sure where 80% comes from.
I see the improved earning for disc econ as a response to Qantas where you can earn miles on any fare. While NZ doesnt go as far as that, it is more generous than QF in which fare buckets are disc econ vs full econ (at least for travel in NZ, QF is particularly harsh).
I wouldnt be surprised if cc earning will be reduced, although Global Plus doesnt seem to be initially. If we assume the average earn/burn rate (for same route/category) overall is about 10 and factor in non-earning fares to get around 12. (I know savvy types could get this much lower but need a figure for overall where much of the travel is domestic or trans tasman.) This means if airbucks are being used at roughly same rate as earned (should in theory due to the expiry rules), from flying NZ, around 8% of seats need to be redemption. This is an increase from current 5% quoted although may be complicated by *A awards which I'll ignore.
But 8% doesnt include airbucks from cc etc which nearly every man and his dog earns. My theory is most of the annual 15% increase in airpoints balance is due to non-airline partners. Previously NZ has indicated up to 15% award seats and this would seem to be one of the highest I have seen anywhere. I would probably discount this somewhat as I think there are more overseas folk travelling on awards on NZ than airpoints members travelling on awards on other carriers, for which presumably NZ is adequately compensated by the other FFP. So maybe 10% on awards overall is sustainable, in which case the earning rate of non-airline partners needs to reduce significantly based on the number of airpoints (and not yet transferred to airpoints) there are out there and the fact these are continuing to grow rapidly = unsustainable.
The other alternative where no one has gone yet (maybe Amex is starting to go this way?) is for cc payments to airpoints to subsidise an increase in capacity to help absorb the additional airpoints/airbucks/yet to be transferred points.
I know there's lots of assumptions in there that are probably wrong but I think the theory holds.
Leumas
Jul 30, 04, 6:23 pm
Now that I'd some sleep, I'm not sure where that 80% came from either... :D I think I must have been dreaming about something else. Anyway, my point was that when the system changes over, NZ's points/bucks liability will drop by a great deal (75 AP = 1 AB). It drops in real terms because this is effectively a devaluation exercise.
For example, when you'd 30K points and you want a seat on a specific route, it doesn't matter how much the seat may cost if you're to buy with real money. Now, it can cost you more if you pay with airbucks than I did when I booked my seat earlier (also with airbucks) - just like how the real money system will work.
Now, airbucks will be more price sensitive in NZ's favour, and your airbucks will drop in value overtime as tickets get more expensive. (Hence my earlier point that I think the price gap between non-airbucks earning fares and airbucks earning fare will increase. It's in NZ's interest to keep the non-earning fare as low as possible and the earning fare as expensive as possible. Remember that the $ difference may be 200% between the lowest and most expensive fare, but the airbucks earn rate is only around 50%, if that.)
One thing we don't know yet is how bookings by airbucks will be handled from a system point of view. From there, we can have a better insight into how the yield management actually work, does it actually take the seat away from the revenue-generating class or does it go into the award class first...
Good point about QF... I wonder on routes that NZ and QF compete on domestically, how big a proportion it is on the overall domestic NZ business...
In terms of the CC and Amex side, is it fair to say that your annual fees on those already contribute a bit to your points/bucks redemption? Global+ and the ANZ/QF charge more than your normal bank credit cards. Amex also charge a $35 fee for moving points from MR to your airline/hotel programme, but I suspect that's Amex being money-hungry than anything else.
For example, when you'd 30K points and you want a seat on a specific route, it doesn't matter how much the seat may cost if you're to buy with real money. Now, it can cost you more if you pay with airbucks than I did when I booked my seat earlier (also with airbucks) - just like how the real money system will work.
Now, airbucks will be more price sensitive in NZ's favour, and your airbucks will drop in value overtime as tickets get more expensive. (Hence my earlier point that I think the price gap between non-airbucks earning fares and airbucks earning fare will increase. It's in NZ's interest to keep the non-earning fare as low as possible and the earning fare as expensive as possible. Remember that the $ difference may be 200% between the lowest and most expensive fare, but the airbucks earn rate is only around 50%, if that.)
One thing we don't know yet is how bookings by airbucks will be handled from a system point of view. From there, we can have a better insight into how the yield management actually work, does it actually take the seat away from the revenue-generating class or does it go into the award class first...
Good point about QF... I wonder on routes that NZ and QF compete on domestically, how big a proportion it is on the overall domestic NZ business...
In terms of the CC and Amex side, is it fair to say that your annual fees on those already contribute a bit to your points/bucks redemption? Global+ and the ANZ/QF charge more than your normal bank credit cards. Amex also charge a $35 fee for moving points from MR to your airline/hotel programme, but I suspect that's Amex being money-hungry than anything else.
Kiwi Flyer
Jul 30, 04, 6:39 pm
In terms of the CC and Amex side, is it fair to say that your annual fees on those already contribute a bit to your points/bucks redemption? Global+ and the ANZ/QF charge more than your normal bank credit cards. Amex also charge a $35 fee for moving points from MR to your airline/hotel programme, but I suspect that's Amex being money-hungry than anything else.
Maybe for the cc provider but not sure how that helps offset the unsustainable proportion of seats sought after non-flying activity. If I remember my economics 101 correctly, if there's too much demand then either price must go up (ie cc earning devalued) or supply must expand (hence my comment on the other partners funding an increase in capacity.
Maybe for the cc provider but not sure how that helps offset the unsustainable proportion of seats sought after non-flying activity. If I remember my economics 101 correctly, if there's too much demand then either price must go up (ie cc earning devalued) or supply must expand (hence my comment on the other partners funding an increase in capacity.
justakiwi
Jul 30, 04, 6:42 pm
The new Airpoints scheme is so different from QF Frequent Flyer that I think both sides must be in agreement that the alliance will never happen. Of course, I think they probably were from the outset :p
justakiwi
justakiwi
Koru Flyer
Jul 31, 04, 3:51 pm
Personally, I think it is a extremely clever move by NZ, but extremely bad for us.
Although, I am with the poster before who noted that what would you rather have 500 miles or $6.60?
Mark
Although, I am with the poster before who noted that what would you rather have 500 miles or $6.60?
Mark
pomjim
Aug 1, 04, 2:32 am
Well, by my reading, it would appear that the new scheme is better re. redeeming points on other airlines.
Example: now, 90,000 points Brisbane-Asia return. With the "airbucks" scheme, 910 return, needing 68040 airpoints.
Or have I got it wrong?
Example: now, 90,000 points Brisbane-Asia return. With the "airbucks" scheme, 910 return, needing 68040 airpoints.
Or have I got it wrong?
ntddevsys
Aug 1, 04, 2:59 am
~Duplicate Post~
ntddevsys
Aug 1, 04, 3:01 am
Welcome to Flyertalk, pomjim,
Exactly right. Only thing is that 'special' fare has to be avaliable (ie X Inventory) otherwise you pay with airbucks whatever that fare happens to be selling at.
Exactly right. Only thing is that 'special' fare has to be avaliable (ie X Inventory) otherwise you pay with airbucks whatever that fare happens to be selling at.
Gotta Requalify
Aug 2, 04, 7:16 am
Well, by my reading, it would appear that the new scheme is better re. redeeming points on other airlines.
Example: now, 90,000 points Brisbane-Asia return. With the "airbucks" scheme, 910 return, needing 68040 airpoints.
Or have I got it wrong?
In terms of your last question - no one can really answer it, because I am not sure if anyone understands everything yet!
Flying from Brisbane to Asia (Economy) requires 910 AD
(This is from the Australian table)
http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/star_reward_redemption.htm
I received my letter today and in it, rather than dividing my total by 75 - my 200,000 points gets divided by 84.
So 910 x 84 = 76,440 - so a little more points but still cheaper than 90K.
However, in Business class its a lot worse - in new table it is 900 AD one way.
900 x 2 = 1800 x 84 = 151,200 = compared to 135000 points today.
So if you live in Australia and want to book business class fares to Asia - do it before November 16
FC = 1170 x 2 x 84 = 196560 compared to 180,000 for a zone 3 award.
Example: now, 90,000 points Brisbane-Asia return. With the "airbucks" scheme, 910 return, needing 68040 airpoints.
Or have I got it wrong?
In terms of your last question - no one can really answer it, because I am not sure if anyone understands everything yet!
Flying from Brisbane to Asia (Economy) requires 910 AD
(This is from the Australian table)
http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/airpoints/airpoints_relaunch/star_reward_redemption.htm
I received my letter today and in it, rather than dividing my total by 75 - my 200,000 points gets divided by 84.
So 910 x 84 = 76,440 - so a little more points but still cheaper than 90K.
However, in Business class its a lot worse - in new table it is 900 AD one way.
900 x 2 = 1800 x 84 = 151,200 = compared to 135000 points today.
So if you live in Australia and want to book business class fares to Asia - do it before November 16
FC = 1170 x 2 x 84 = 196560 compared to 180,000 for a zone 3 award.
kiwibigdave
Aug 2, 04, 6:19 pm
One thing I couldn't see being discussed yet, though admittedly I did race through, was the apparent change back to one price for all classes for companion tickets on short haul flights. i.e. At the moment a companion ticket NSN-BNE costs 21000 / 42000 for Y / J but in the new scheme it seems to be 360 AP$ regardless. [x 75 = 27000]. For NSN-RAR, which was also 21000 / 42000, it's now 400 AP$ [40500] regardless [ouch! if flying Y]. For long haul flights the varying rates per class is retained.
Kiwi Flyer
Aug 2, 04, 6:33 pm
:confused: I thought the companion rates for short haul were econ only, with biz being 1 airbuck = $1 or maybe not available at all?
Re-reading and I am no clearer. Maybe we can use these rates for biz companion too?
Re-reading and I am no clearer. Maybe we can use these rates for biz companion too?
kiwibigdave
Aug 2, 04, 7:19 pm
Maybe we can use these rates for biz companion too?
I hope so, with the NSN-East Coast of Australia business class companion award being one of my most likely burn options.
I hope so, with the NSN-East Coast of Australia business class companion award being one of my most likely burn options.
igel
Aug 3, 04, 2:34 am
I have been looking at the tables for New Zealand, which I assume that AP members in Singapore will be using rather than the ones for Australian members. There is still some points that need clarification :confused:
Suppose I have a mixed NZ/Star Circle Pacific fare in C class say - SIN-couple of places in NZ - LAX - NRT - SIN. Journey from SIN all the way to LAX on NZ metal, and LAX-NRT-SIN on NH. For NZ sectors, do I earn the the NZ rates or the mixed/Star Alliance rates. For AKL-LAX, there is a difference of 50AP$. Suppose I credit all NZ ticketed/operated sectors into AP, and all non NZ journeys into another Star Alliance programme, how is NZ supposed to know that my journey is a mixed NZ/Star itinerary? If the ticket stock is issued by another airline, eg NH, NZ will only see that I will be travelling SIN-couple of places in NZ - LAX. They will not see the rest of the itinerary if I choose to credit them into another Star Alliance programme.
Well, with the changes, I will probably only credit paid C NZ sectors into AP since the earn/burn rations appear to be more favourable. Y journeys and C journeys on other airlines Asia-Europe/Asia-US will go elsewhere.
Suppose I have a mixed NZ/Star Circle Pacific fare in C class say - SIN-couple of places in NZ - LAX - NRT - SIN. Journey from SIN all the way to LAX on NZ metal, and LAX-NRT-SIN on NH. For NZ sectors, do I earn the the NZ rates or the mixed/Star Alliance rates. For AKL-LAX, there is a difference of 50AP$. Suppose I credit all NZ ticketed/operated sectors into AP, and all non NZ journeys into another Star Alliance programme, how is NZ supposed to know that my journey is a mixed NZ/Star itinerary? If the ticket stock is issued by another airline, eg NH, NZ will only see that I will be travelling SIN-couple of places in NZ - LAX. They will not see the rest of the itinerary if I choose to credit them into another Star Alliance programme.
Well, with the changes, I will probably only credit paid C NZ sectors into AP since the earn/burn rations appear to be more favourable. Y journeys and C journeys on other airlines Asia-Europe/Asia-US will go elsewhere.
Fliar
Aug 3, 04, 7:28 am
Suppose I have a mixed NZ/Star Circle Pacific fare in C class say - SIN-couple of places in NZ - LAX - NRT - SIN. Journey from SIN all the way to LAX on NZ metal, and LAX-NRT-SIN on NH. For NZ sectors, do I earn the the NZ rates or the mixed/Star Alliance rates.
It is my understanding that you earn the mixed, i.e. lower rates.
Well, with the changes, I will probably only credit paid C NZ sectors into AP since the earn/burn rations appear to be more favourable. Y journeys and C journeys on other airlines Asia-Europe/Asia-US will go elsewhere.
Which is exactly what NZ wants you to do.
A couple of observations: upgrades to Asia/LA used to cost 30,000 points. At approximately 17K kms at 70% in discount economy this would take about 2.5 trips. Now I earn 120 airbucks per RTN trip in discount economy. It takes 3.5 trips (that's about $1,300 real dollars extra for the same award!).
I booked a *award on SQ in F for 180,000 points earlier this year. This equates to 2,400 airbucks. Will I be able to 'buy' my *F award for 2,400 airbucks? NO WAY!
So far this deal looks like it's going to be quite bad for me. Any flights in C or F (yeah right!) I'll credit to NZ as in cases they can earn more than 4 times as many points (e.g. AKL-LAX 60 vs 250 on non-NZ)!
It is my understanding that you earn the mixed, i.e. lower rates.
Well, with the changes, I will probably only credit paid C NZ sectors into AP since the earn/burn rations appear to be more favourable. Y journeys and C journeys on other airlines Asia-Europe/Asia-US will go elsewhere.
Which is exactly what NZ wants you to do.
A couple of observations: upgrades to Asia/LA used to cost 30,000 points. At approximately 17K kms at 70% in discount economy this would take about 2.5 trips. Now I earn 120 airbucks per RTN trip in discount economy. It takes 3.5 trips (that's about $1,300 real dollars extra for the same award!).
I booked a *award on SQ in F for 180,000 points earlier this year. This equates to 2,400 airbucks. Will I be able to 'buy' my *F award for 2,400 airbucks? NO WAY!
So far this deal looks like it's going to be quite bad for me. Any flights in C or F (yeah right!) I'll credit to NZ as in cases they can earn more than 4 times as many points (e.g. AKL-LAX 60 vs 250 on non-NZ)!
Kiwi Flyer
Aug 6, 04, 2:04 pm
Some further comments on the new scheme.
status
Gold and silver status is significantly easier to achieve – 10-20% more status credits flying NZ for domestic and short haul and 50-100+% more for long haul. A small number of routes reduce status earning. For *A and mixed itineraries generally more status credits except for some full economy. For gold elite the higher threshold and requirement for significant flying on NZ makes it harder to earn (depending on flying patterns).
awards
Earn/burn rates flying on NZ improve for high yield pax, and reduces for low yield (some isolated exceptions). However if taking advantage of any seat (as opposed to the cheapest bucket) then earn/burn is substantially worse (assuming 1 airbuck = $1 fare). Upgrades are more expense and most econ->biz would appear to not be worthwhile (cost same or only slightly lower than biz award). Flying to LHR on NZ earns very little more than flying to LAX/SFO. As before awards are relatively more expensive for domestic and short haul compared with long haul.
summary
While the new structure is radically different to other FFPs I am familiar with, I do see some parallels to the recent changes at LH Miles & More. It will be interesting to see what changes other FFPs may make.
I also see it as positive NZ is doing something about the unsustainable non-flying earning, which no other major airline I am aware of has tackled yet.
status
Gold and silver status is significantly easier to achieve – 10-20% more status credits flying NZ for domestic and short haul and 50-100+% more for long haul. A small number of routes reduce status earning. For *A and mixed itineraries generally more status credits except for some full economy. For gold elite the higher threshold and requirement for significant flying on NZ makes it harder to earn (depending on flying patterns).
awards
Earn/burn rates flying on NZ improve for high yield pax, and reduces for low yield (some isolated exceptions). However if taking advantage of any seat (as opposed to the cheapest bucket) then earn/burn is substantially worse (assuming 1 airbuck = $1 fare). Upgrades are more expense and most econ->biz would appear to not be worthwhile (cost same or only slightly lower than biz award). Flying to LHR on NZ earns very little more than flying to LAX/SFO. As before awards are relatively more expensive for domestic and short haul compared with long haul.
summary
While the new structure is radically different to other FFPs I am familiar with, I do see some parallels to the recent changes at LH Miles & More. It will be interesting to see what changes other FFPs may make.
I also see it as positive NZ is doing something about the unsustainable non-flying earning, which no other major airline I am aware of has tackled yet.
Fliar
Aug 8, 04, 5:38 pm
Deleted because I even confused myself. :confused: Math is not my strong point :p
Koru Flyer
Aug 8, 04, 5:56 pm
One other aspect I do not like is having to pay for NZs poor website. Most if not all other FF and airline programmes do not charge a surcharge for transactions that cannot be made online. But not with NZ!
"When you redeem your Airpoints Dollars online, you will not be charged a Service Fee. Bookings made through the Air New Zealand Service Centre, any Air New Zealand Travelcentre or a Travel Agent from 16 November 2004 will incur a Service Fee per one-way flight of NZD$25 for International and NZD$15 for Domestic services. Most Airpoints bookings will be able to be made online, however, certain redemptions including long haul journeys, Companion Tickets and flights on Star Alliance and other Partner Airlines will not be available online in November 2004. A Service Fee will still be charged on these redemptions due to the complexity of the booking, or because we are acting on behalf of another airline."
How on earth are long haul and companion tickets complicated, not to mention a ticket say FRA-LHR! :td:
Mark
"When you redeem your Airpoints Dollars online, you will not be charged a Service Fee. Bookings made through the Air New Zealand Service Centre, any Air New Zealand Travelcentre or a Travel Agent from 16 November 2004 will incur a Service Fee per one-way flight of NZD$25 for International and NZD$15 for Domestic services. Most Airpoints bookings will be able to be made online, however, certain redemptions including long haul journeys, Companion Tickets and flights on Star Alliance and other Partner Airlines will not be available online in November 2004. A Service Fee will still be charged on these redemptions due to the complexity of the booking, or because we are acting on behalf of another airline."
How on earth are long haul and companion tickets complicated, not to mention a ticket say FRA-LHR! :td:
Mark
Kiwi Flyer
Aug 8, 04, 6:13 pm
My comments about status were from a calculation thus:
Based on threshold for silver, gold need 4.5 airbucks for each status credit previously (gold elite is 5 and additional requirement of earning Gold equivalent on NZ flights).
For all NZ routes and a selection of *A/mixed routes (likely ones for a NZ-based member) I looked at ratio of airbucks to status credit in each category.
AFAIK the definitions of categories have not changed.
On almost all routes NZ flies, for almost all categories (disc econ, econ, biz, first) earn more (in some cases much more) than 4.5 airbucks for each old status credit. There are limited exceptions (NZ-LHR full econ being one of them but NZ-LHR disc econ & biz is better off by my calcs, similarly for some NZ-Asia worse off in terms of status in full econ but better off in disc econ & biz).
Not quite as clear cut for *A or mixed itineraries. From a sample of likely routes for someone based in NZ, there is generally more than 4.5 airbucks for each old status credit. A few more routes than NZ only itins are less than 4.5 but still majority of ones I looked at are more than 4.5.
From my analysis flying TG trans-tasman (or NZ on a mixed itinerary) is strongly discouraged with a big loss of airbucks compared with NZ trans-tasman!
Please let me know if there's a hole in my logic or I have miscalculated.
Fliar - the example you give under current airpoints is only 100 status credits = silver requirement (well 90 if requalifying)
Based on threshold for silver, gold need 4.5 airbucks for each status credit previously (gold elite is 5 and additional requirement of earning Gold equivalent on NZ flights).
For all NZ routes and a selection of *A/mixed routes (likely ones for a NZ-based member) I looked at ratio of airbucks to status credit in each category.
AFAIK the definitions of categories have not changed.
On almost all routes NZ flies, for almost all categories (disc econ, econ, biz, first) earn more (in some cases much more) than 4.5 airbucks for each old status credit. There are limited exceptions (NZ-LHR full econ being one of them but NZ-LHR disc econ & biz is better off by my calcs, similarly for some NZ-Asia worse off in terms of status in full econ but better off in disc econ & biz).
Not quite as clear cut for *A or mixed itineraries. From a sample of likely routes for someone based in NZ, there is generally more than 4.5 airbucks for each old status credit. A few more routes than NZ only itins are less than 4.5 but still majority of ones I looked at are more than 4.5.
From my analysis flying TG trans-tasman (or NZ on a mixed itinerary) is strongly discouraged with a big loss of airbucks compared with NZ trans-tasman!
Please let me know if there's a hole in my logic or I have miscalculated.
Fliar - the example you give under current airpoints is only 100 status credits = silver requirement (well 90 if requalifying)
mad_atta
Aug 8, 04, 6:18 pm
Previously when flying this itin would net you 32 SC's return - you would need to do 3 return trips and then find another 4 points (a flexi saver domestic return) to get to gold. Airbucks is not an improvement on this route.
Under the old system, surely 100 status credits only got you silver, not gold? So you would need 6+ AKL-LHR roundtrips in discount Y for gold? Or have I missed something?
Having said that, there's no doubt that the new system has shifted more in favour of short haul flyers. Makes sense, given their far greater importance to NZ's financial future, even if we don't like it.
Under the old system, surely 100 status credits only got you silver, not gold? So you would need 6+ AKL-LHR roundtrips in discount Y for gold? Or have I missed something?
Having said that, there's no doubt that the new system has shifted more in favour of short haul flyers. Makes sense, given their far greater importance to NZ's financial future, even if we don't like it.
Fliar
Aug 8, 04, 8:41 pm
Under the old system, surely 100 status credits only got you silver, not gold? So you would need 6+ AKL-LHR roundtrips in discount Y for gold? Or have I missed something?
Having said that, there's no doubt that the new system has shifted more in favour of short haul flyers. Makes sense, given their far greater importance to NZ's financial future, even if we don't like it.
Yes, you are right. I got confused :confused: (and have deleted the post). Bottom line for me: it takes me 2 trips to Europe on TG to get gold and more like double that on NZ (6+ now as you said Mad_Atta).
Having said that, there's no doubt that the new system has shifted more in favour of short haul flyers. Makes sense, given their far greater importance to NZ's financial future, even if we don't like it.
Yes, you are right. I got confused :confused: (and have deleted the post). Bottom line for me: it takes me 2 trips to Europe on TG to get gold and more like double that on NZ (6+ now as you said Mad_Atta).
Fliar
Aug 9, 04, 2:20 am
I just had a look at the award charts...EDITED TO DELETE MENTION OF THE ERROR IN THE AWARD CHARTS (although I honoustly don't think they won't notice before November 16).
Something else I don't understand is how NZ can give so many points for business class travel even on *carriers. For example AKL-LAX is 300 bucks on NZ in C and 250 on a *carrier. That's 3 times more than full economy. How can NZ afford this for a flight they are not even getting paid for? Surely they are paid/reimbursed by the carrier the passenger actually travels on if (s)he chooses to credit points to NZ, but 300%? If the point was to entice people to travel more on NZ metal or at least to reduce liability from people who don't but only credit points to NZ, then I don't get it. If I fly business class in SQ I don't get 3 times as many KF points as in full economy. It's lucrative to credit points to NZ even though I don't fly them!
Am I missing something? (again?) :D
Something else I don't understand is how NZ can give so many points for business class travel even on *carriers. For example AKL-LAX is 300 bucks on NZ in C and 250 on a *carrier. That's 3 times more than full economy. How can NZ afford this for a flight they are not even getting paid for? Surely they are paid/reimbursed by the carrier the passenger actually travels on if (s)he chooses to credit points to NZ, but 300%? If the point was to entice people to travel more on NZ metal or at least to reduce liability from people who don't but only credit points to NZ, then I don't get it. If I fly business class in SQ I don't get 3 times as many KF points as in full economy. It's lucrative to credit points to NZ even though I don't fly them!
Am I missing something? (again?) :D
Kiwi Flyer
Aug 9, 04, 12:25 pm
1) Fliar - could you perhaps edit that out so NZ doesnt put the award cost up?
2) Have you seen the fare difference between econ & biz on that route? Quite an eye-opener to me.
3) As I said the earning relativities are more in line with the new M&M - strongly rewarding premium fares. On some routes the relativity is much higher than on other routes. The same thing applies to fares.
2) Have you seen the fare difference between econ & biz on that route? Quite an eye-opener to me.
3) As I said the earning relativities are more in line with the new M&M - strongly rewarding premium fares. On some routes the relativity is much higher than on other routes. The same thing applies to fares.
igel
Aug 10, 04, 1:44 am
Something else I don't understand is how NZ can give so many points for business class travel even on *carriers. For example AKL-LAX is 300 bucks on NZ in C and 250 on a *carrier. That's 3 times more than full economy.
The only way to travel AKL-LAX at the moment, even on a mix Star itinerary that includes further travel beyond LAX, is on NZ metal only. Remember that for mix NZ/* itineraries, airbucks are given on a per-sector basis. If you see the mix NZ/* charts for Asia-Europe, it is only 140 points for C class, primarily because NZ does not fly its own metal Asia-Europe.
The only way to travel AKL-LAX at the moment, even on a mix Star itinerary that includes further travel beyond LAX, is on NZ metal only. Remember that for mix NZ/* itineraries, airbucks are given on a per-sector basis. If you see the mix NZ/* charts for Asia-Europe, it is only 140 points for C class, primarily because NZ does not fly its own metal Asia-Europe.
Fliar
Aug 10, 04, 6:39 am
The only way to travel AKL-LAX at the moment, even on a mix Star itinerary that includes further travel beyond LAX, is on NZ metal only. Remember that for mix NZ/* itineraries, airbucks are given on a per-sector basis. If you see the mix NZ/* charts for Asia-Europe, it is only 140 points for C class, primarily because NZ does not fly its own metal Asia-Europe.
Good point.
Good point.
igel
Aug 23, 04, 3:16 am
Thought that I would share some of my analysis of the consequences of the new AP scheme on for a C class trip SIN-NYC/other Nth American city-SIN
Note that SIN-NYC-SIN is about 20,000 miles or 32,000 km
If one flies SIN-VIE-JFK-VIE-SIN on OS, or SIN-CPH-EWR-CPH-SIN (SK), or SIN-FRA-JFK/EWR - FRA -SIN (LH) ticketed as 4 flight sectors/coupons, then the trip earns 480 AP$ (= 36 000km = 22500 miles), and will net NZ Silver status. In other words, the airpoints earning rate is about 112.5% of the base mileage in an equivalent mileage/km based frequent flier programme - that is as best as it gets. Of course for the NZ APs, your mileage may vary as a roundtrip C class DEL-VIE-JFK-VIE-DEL is also 480 AP$ (Asia - Europe - Nth America) although so the earning rate compared to a strictly mileage/km based FFP appears higher. Similarly, say SIN-INC-JFK-INC-SIN (4 flight coupons/sectors) on OZ in C will earn 520AP$
However, if one is ticketed ex-SIN on SQ, say either SIN-EWR-SIN or SIN-JFK-SIN (but flight stops in FRA for refueling), as two flight coupons, this trip in C class will earn only 400 AP$ (= 18750 miles = 30000 km) less than the equivalent of 100% base miles in an equivalent mileage/km based FFP. So there is a major disincentive for NZAP members to book single flight coupon direct or nonstop flights SIN-Nth America-SIN on SQ. Out of SIN, OS and SK, as well as OZ often offer discounted C class tickets ex-SIN, which suits me fine since I avoid flying SQ.
In contrast, SIN-AKL-SIN on NZ will earn 410 AP$ (= 30750 km = 19220 miles) which works out to be nearly equivalent to 190% of base mileage/km.
Note that SIN-NYC-SIN is about 20,000 miles or 32,000 km
If one flies SIN-VIE-JFK-VIE-SIN on OS, or SIN-CPH-EWR-CPH-SIN (SK), or SIN-FRA-JFK/EWR - FRA -SIN (LH) ticketed as 4 flight sectors/coupons, then the trip earns 480 AP$ (= 36 000km = 22500 miles), and will net NZ Silver status. In other words, the airpoints earning rate is about 112.5% of the base mileage in an equivalent mileage/km based frequent flier programme - that is as best as it gets. Of course for the NZ APs, your mileage may vary as a roundtrip C class DEL-VIE-JFK-VIE-DEL is also 480 AP$ (Asia - Europe - Nth America) although so the earning rate compared to a strictly mileage/km based FFP appears higher. Similarly, say SIN-INC-JFK-INC-SIN (4 flight coupons/sectors) on OZ in C will earn 520AP$
However, if one is ticketed ex-SIN on SQ, say either SIN-EWR-SIN or SIN-JFK-SIN (but flight stops in FRA for refueling), as two flight coupons, this trip in C class will earn only 400 AP$ (= 18750 miles = 30000 km) less than the equivalent of 100% base miles in an equivalent mileage/km based FFP. So there is a major disincentive for NZAP members to book single flight coupon direct or nonstop flights SIN-Nth America-SIN on SQ. Out of SIN, OS and SK, as well as OZ often offer discounted C class tickets ex-SIN, which suits me fine since I avoid flying SQ.
In contrast, SIN-AKL-SIN on NZ will earn 410 AP$ (= 30750 km = 19220 miles) which works out to be nearly equivalent to 190% of base mileage/km.
Kiwi Flyer
Aug 26, 04, 9:30 pm
Any word on earning for non-airline partners under airbucks scheme?
bertheike
Sep 26, 04, 7:14 pm
Where is airnzboy?
Perhaps he can help shed some light on this. :confused:
I think the new program is an improvment for most !
1) If one wants *aliance award invontory it stays like it was ! There must be a special invontory class to get the award for the $ noted in the mixed Carrier reward chart; but aditional for NZ now you may buy with your program $ each market fare with availability in that bookingclass , or for the discounted NZ reward chard you need the award invontory class like bevore!
2.) The spending looks also not so bad to me.
intrazone awards costs 150$ up to a distance 2000km=1250miles ! That´s 11250 o.w or 22500 old point with the given ratio 1:75 ! No other *aliance program gives that for this !
3.) the earning on some interesting RTW routes are realy bombastic ! ^ CAI-FRA 270 , CAI-DXB 240 , FRA-DXB 240 (all in F/A ) , or FRA-TUN , FRA-TIP , FRA-CCM 180 ( all in C/D) !!! CAI-DXB is in F ow. 2891 EGP rt. 5782EGP=930 USD ! So therefor you get 480NZ$ in return !
or a C*RTW like
ZAG-FRA-ALY-FRA-MUC-CAI-FRA-TUN-FRA-DXB-SIN-BKK-HKG-NRT-HNL-LAX-LAS-SFO-DEN-ORD-Southamerica-FRA-CMN-FRA-ZAG brings more than 3000NZ$.
It´s a lile bit complex, but if one takes the routes between Europe and North of Africa and Africa-Near east , this brings the best earning value !
Perhaps he can help shed some light on this. :confused:
I think the new program is an improvment for most !
1) If one wants *aliance award invontory it stays like it was ! There must be a special invontory class to get the award for the $ noted in the mixed Carrier reward chart; but aditional for NZ now you may buy with your program $ each market fare with availability in that bookingclass , or for the discounted NZ reward chard you need the award invontory class like bevore!
2.) The spending looks also not so bad to me.
intrazone awards costs 150$ up to a distance 2000km=1250miles ! That´s 11250 o.w or 22500 old point with the given ratio 1:75 ! No other *aliance program gives that for this !
3.) the earning on some interesting RTW routes are realy bombastic ! ^ CAI-FRA 270 , CAI-DXB 240 , FRA-DXB 240 (all in F/A ) , or FRA-TUN , FRA-TIP , FRA-CCM 180 ( all in C/D) !!! CAI-DXB is in F ow. 2891 EGP rt. 5782EGP=930 USD ! So therefor you get 480NZ$ in return !
or a C*RTW like
ZAG-FRA-ALY-FRA-MUC-CAI-FRA-TUN-FRA-DXB-SIN-BKK-HKG-NRT-HNL-LAX-LAS-SFO-DEN-ORD-Southamerica-FRA-CMN-FRA-ZAG brings more than 3000NZ$.
It´s a lile bit complex, but if one takes the routes between Europe and North of Africa and Africa-Near east , this brings the best earning value !
stewardo
Oct 20, 04, 10:18 am
Not quite as clear cut for *A or mixed itineraries. From a sample of likely routes for someone based in NZ, there is generally more than 4.5 airbucks for each old status credit. A few more routes than NZ only itins are less than 4.5 but still majority of ones I looked at are more than 4.5.
I hope you guys will forgive me for a dim-moment right now, but I'm not completely understanding mixed itineraries..
Will airpoints look at the whole ticket to decide which are mixed, or only the segments you check in on one journey?
The example in my head - say a return NZ ticket to LAX with a seperately purchased LAX-ATL(or wherever in the USA) obviously will earn NZ airbucks and then *A bucks for the second ticket. .. but if I check my bags right through from AKL will the bucks drop instantly to mixed levels??
<permanently confused>
I hope you guys will forgive me for a dim-moment right now, but I'm not completely understanding mixed itineraries..
Will airpoints look at the whole ticket to decide which are mixed, or only the segments you check in on one journey?
The example in my head - say a return NZ ticket to LAX with a seperately purchased LAX-ATL(or wherever in the USA) obviously will earn NZ airbucks and then *A bucks for the second ticket. .. but if I check my bags right through from AKL will the bucks drop instantly to mixed levels??
<permanently confused>
Kiwi Flyer
Oct 20, 04, 10:55 am
I believe it will be based on the ticket. Where a single ticket involves more than one carrier there is some revenue sharing, and it is in those circumstances that we earn less airbucks.
Where you have 2 tickets with the first solely NZ and second any carrier, the earning on the first ticket should be at the full rate.
This is my understanding - will be interesting to see what happens in practice.
Where you have 2 tickets with the first solely NZ and second any carrier, the earning on the first ticket should be at the full rate.
This is my understanding - will be interesting to see what happens in practice.
Kiwi Flyer
Nov 10, 04, 11:17 am
I have started a new thread on the new member guide (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3379858)