Originally Posted by
freed0m
It is not true. Asia Miles charges by distance. The only loophole is that there is no further charges after some distance.
Asia Miles can well charge more for longer distance.
Removing stopover for one-way ticket is a loss for everyone.
But I was under the impression this is a new way to game CX award availability? For example, CX doesn't release one-way F Class HKG-LHR, but will release one-way LHR-HKG-XXX (IAD in the OP's case) or wherever. Am I mistaken? I've never done this but I've seen on here and elsewhere this is the new way to game the CX system.
For example, look at the OP's itinerary...it is LHR-HKG-IAD. This is obviously a ridiculous itinerary whereby the HKG-IAD segment is obviously setup just to get the award availability in F on LHR-HKG, which CX is otherwise not releasing.
I should add, CX setup this system to try and screw over us captive HK-based people. I'm definitely not out to blame the people taking advantage, the ultimate blame lies with CX and their idiotic mindset/system where they tried to screw us HK-based pax over again by introducing superior award inventory for connecting flights. And then, the bloggers megaphoned it and now we have everyone setting up itineraries like LHR-HKG-IAD, or as the poster above me amusingly mentions, YVR-HKG-SEA.
If we are talking about the OP's title "devaluing", that word specifically, for me as someone who is mostly captive to HK and wouldn't book such a weird itinerary anyway, cutting off the demand for the folks gaming the system is a "win" and definitely not a devaluation at all, if they're stopping excess demand that I'm competing with for F seats.
Of course, the best win would just be if CX would treat to ex-HKG or to HKG one-way award inventory the same as connecting tix. Then those of us in Hong Kong could benefit and the other passengers wouldn't have to setup absurd itineraries, and they could still possibly get seats.