kaka

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 6_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/536.26 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/6.0 Mobile/10B142 Safari/8536.25)

I guess existing j flyers do find it unfair the i flyers are getting the same benefits??!

fakecd

i think "CIV" stands for "client instrinsic value" index... or "customer instrinsic value"

cxlondon

Taken from a BA related site - Corporate Individual Value

fakecd

i was upselling few of my economy tickets today... the agent was saying "you can choose K class to accruel more points for your FQTV or choose M class up to you"

it's the first time a reservation agent said to me about "more points" on a higher fare class... is this related?

ernestnywang

What FQTV (FFP) are you using?

fakecd

Marcopolo club of course.

When I questioned her, she kind of dodged the question and avoided answering and just said "sorry forget what I said"....

I reckon with this CIV changes it makes sense to change earning ratio change... globally FF points based on revenue is happening so I wouldn't be surprised if CX is moving to revenue/yield based points system, or at least make V/L class earn 50% instead of 100% like they do now, which i think is too generous.

CrazyJ82

I wouldn't agree with that. I haven't crunched any numbers, but I have a hunch that if you looked at CX's L/V fare for a sector of a given length, it's probably higher than the lowest fare for a sector of similar length that would (have) earn(ed) miles under an (old) FFP in the U.S. or Europe. In those markets, budget carriers have driven all fares quite low and I think carriers have realized that the lowest fares are now so low that it doesn't make sense to reward them as heavily.

Whereas with CX, you still need to make a commitment to CX if you're buying an L/V -- it's often already not the cheapest CX fare available, and is noticeably higher than any budget option that might exist on the route.

nsolitude

Yeah, but I guess for non-corporate fliers like me, CX's fares are actually quite expensive; so it is a huge commitment to maintain MPC elite status.

AA_EXP09

I like the old model better as it works for me.
I can do OLCI and get the lowest BN number that I can.
My CIV score would be interesting as I have flown paid J twice this year but in the past have also only flown CX where they are the most direct (in particular YVR/YYZ-HKG) and credit to CX for the purpose of accruing CX miles where I can get none on AA (I got EXP on AA through domestic and TATL flying, plus some mileage runs.)
However I do see how the new model makes sense for CX though it may not benefit me (though I suspect that those with high CIV are not frequently booking Y/Y+ anyhow...)

AA_EXP09

exMNL and SFO I have seen some of the cheaper fares be in S class.
UA also interlines to CXKA in S class.
This is not necessary.

midlevels

I regularly buy E or V class even though S fares are almost always available for less.

Especially for V fares, if I don't get 100% mileage credit for this then why would I bother paying more? I'd just buy S.

I don't think CX will revamp the mileage earning classes any time soon. They already did this last year.

AA_EXP09

Isn't this for now limited to the USA, which unfortunately suffers reduced service and competition thanks to mergers (that should have never been approved)?

fakecd

don't get me wrong. i'm not advocating for reduction of miles for V/L class, I myself fly exclusively on those fares typically. But let's face it reality of aviation business is that devaluation of benefits in form of FFP benefits are sexy trend... we've seen this with no more Econ to Business upgrades, we've seen this will increased miles requirement, we've seen this with reduced availability of awards etc etc.

so now with introduction of CIV index, I wouldn't be surprised to see some changes. after all they have also just announced the "enhancement" of upgrade bidding, so they got enough PR material to hide such devaluation of program.

purely speculation. but changes do come in waves.

TGflyergirl

Other OW carriers don't put their own Sapphires in front of CX Diamonds. This makes it somewhat imbalanced (i'm not going to call it unfair though)

Cathay Boy

It's their choice, and CX will pay for it when they realized many Y flyers are leaving and their revenue actually loses at a much bigger percentage than anticipated. People keep seeing Y as only "break-even" cabin and premium is where the profit is, but seldom people see it the other way around: because there's only a limited percentage of world population that can afford to fly premium regularly, the market is very limited. On the other hand, more and more general population can afford Y travel, and are exponentially growing and willing to fly, Y segment of airline industry has grow exponentially while premium market has recover at a much slower pace.

An easy example that reflects this theory is how LCC airlines are taking over the mainstream airlines in market shares, mainstream airlines are acting like LCC airlines, and the world's few true "luxury" airlines are copying some of the LCC airlines' practices and degrading themselves day by day, and the influence is not the other way around.