LTN Phobia

Just had an amusing moment.

I have some BA codeshare flights on QF domestic which I have been looking at to do a seat assignment. I have my BA membership number in the booking.

I noticed that QF MMB showed me as EK Gold. How strange, I'm BA Gold (besides being QF Platinum, that is, but QF is not to know as I do not have my QF number there), not an EK Gold...

Is this a known general OW Emerald bug on QF MMB?

Traveloguy

I can't say for certain it affects all OW elites, but I can say that AA and BA Emeralds are shown as Skyward Golds on the website. QF are aware of the bug, although it only affects what is shown on their website and not in their actual systems. I've actually had communications about this with them many months ago. Who knows though when it will be fixed.

og

In 5 yrs time it won't really matter since EK will have completely taken over QF ( I think I'm joking - but not too sure ).

moa999

Assume when someone updated the website for EK they broke the oneworld part.

eminere

QF's IT team is truly a different class.

SeriouslyLost

I'd put money on them owning the Intl business outright, operating it as a Dba QF.

sxc

I think they're pretty good compared to some other airlines....eg CX.

eminere

I dunno about that... Apparently for multi-sector itineraries you can now only check in online 24 hours before the last sector instead of the first, which isn't helpful if your last sector is >24 hours after the first (eg if you are connecting from QF1/2/9/10).

LTN Phobia

I think QF website is miles ahead of the JL one. JL one is a horror website as far as I am concerned - I even had to telephone JL to add my non-JL FF number because there was genuinely nowhere to put it on the website for one of my international bookings. It also looks really ugly.

CX one isn't stellar either, and I agree that the QF one is better than CX, although the CX one is much better than JL's.

Having said that, the online check-in link was so well-hidden on the QF manage my booking that I had to really stare at it to find it, so I was not particularly impressed either.

(That's besides my being grumpy with QF for not offering a BB app on which I can get a mobile boarding pass.)

FlyerTalker688786

Yes I kind of agree. But in another hand I think if you think like Japanese you may appreciate the JAL website logic. I found it difficult but occasionally when my head is clear I can understand the way JAL site works.

about CX I think they have improved since they made the switch to Amadeus. But to catch up with BA they are a long way to go yet. QF to me IT wise is between BA and CX.

LTN Phobia

I don't know about that. The list of missing functions is rather substantial, although provision of information on lounges and menu is rather impressive. I see it as more of an information-based website than functionality-based.

QF system (not specifically the website but generally) seems to have some problems with updating information at times. It appears that the if you do a points upgrade, the baggage allowance does not reflect the one for the new cabin at least some of the time, and they are still having system issues with Emerald baggage allowances (including their own Platinum members).

In terms of QF website, in a way MMB not giving me baggage allowance is good and bad - by not offering the information, it can't get it wrong. BA MMB often gives me a lot of information but gets it wrong (e.g. TP for flights upgraded with Avios).

My main complaint about the QF website, particularly the MMB, is that they made it fancy looking, but in doing so, they buried the important functions in design overload, reducing the functionality by making things really hard to find, and also requiring excessive amount of scrolling down.

Still, it is preferable to CX website.