nzchick

It has actually already been credited, and seemed strange, so thought I would get another opinion. This is what happened in our accounts:

27 Aug: CHC - AKL 26/08/07 NZ536 Economy +$10
28 Aug: AKL - SFO 26/08/07 NZ8 Premium Economy +$130
29 Aug: SFO - JFK 26/08/07 UA14 Economy +$25
03 Sep: Reversal NZ8 26/08/07 Premium Economy -$130
03 Sep: Travel NZ8 26/08/07 Premium Economy +$105
03 Sep: Air NZ Premium Economy Mixed Accrual Bonus +$25 (But didn't get this on return journey??)
03 Sep: JFK - SFO 01/09/07 UA893 Economy +$25
12 Sep: LAS - DFW 09/09/07 US395 Economy +$15
21 Sep: LAX - AKL 18/09/07 NZ1 Premium Economy +$105
24 Sep: AKL - CHC 20/09/07 NZ513 Economy +$10

So they haven't even treated each direction in the same way (hence my confusion). $130 outbound & $105 inbound. Sounds like all I have to do is call, like Xiaotung said, and it should be fixed...

In the future I may credit domestic flights to my United account instead to avoid the problem of mixed itinerary earning rates.

Blackcloud

It looks like they did by the reversal $130 then they put in the mixed accrual bonus?
I too am totally confused on what NZ is doing let alone their rationale for crediting less on NZ flights just because their are some other *A flights.

Kiwi Flyer

So they have decided mixed rate applies, but because you already have the higher airbucks credited for the outbound flight you get to keep the extra airbucks.

That does not seem a sensible policy to me, as not only getting the illwill from lower rate on return, but creating confusion. By being inconsistent they are implicitly inviting airpoints members to call them about the discrepancy, creating another opportunity for illwill.

Blackcloud - the rationale on the lower airbucks on mixed itineraries is to encourage higher fare NZ only tickets, ie it is tied with NZ's revenue. However by proactively joining up separate tickets it creates illwill - if you are flying somewhere NZ doesn't fly you have no choice by to have a mixed itinerary and NZ is penalising you for this.

ajnz

I agree that it's stupid.

I received an invitation to another NZ survey yesterday, which mostly focused on cabin configuration and inflight service, rating each component on a 1-10 scale of importance, as well as other carrier reputations etc.

One of the free feedback fields at the end resulted in me (once again) stating that I really dislike this rule, amongst others around Airbuck earning.

Blackcloud

Yes it is causing illwill and is one of the reason I hardly credit to Airpoints.
What also gets me is the NZ codeshares, where NZ is getting some revenue, also are effected. All the announcements about how the codeshares are to be beneficial to Airpoints members were such a load of "insert profanity".
Enough of the rant, I do like how you can get any seat on an NZ operated flight, it just can cost you a fortune but at least you can get a seat if you want.

Xiaotung

How to qualify for the mixed acrual bonus? I have not seen promotion like that.

nzchick

An update:

I spoke to the airpoints people today and the woman I spoke to referred it on to the "accrual people". She said that it appears the person who did the reversal/re-accrual attached the US/UA flights to the NZ booking reference. She also said that "different booking references/PNR's should definitely mean it is treated separately for accrual purposes". What worried me was her statement "unless there is some sort of technicality that means that it can't be credited". My biggest concern is that they will remove the $25 mixed-airline accrual already received and we will end up with fewer airpoints than before I rang...

(I did point point out that had I known they would choose to treat separate flight itineraries in this way I would never have credited the other points to my NZ account, which the woman wholeheartedly agreed with. Whether this makes any difference to their assessment or not I don't know).

I should have a reply either today or Monday apparently so will let you the outcome.

Total insanity to credit this way when NZ don't even fly domestically in the USA (I can understand on their own routes eg New Zealand to London/Asia etc, but if they don't fly it what is the rationale?)

ajnz

I find the whole approach ridiculous. If they even applied your suggestion, flying AKL-SIN on SQ would result in the lower earning rate because it's "Asia on another carrier", even though NZ don't serve SIN any more with their own metal. If you even bought the NZ fare AKL-HKG-SIN until recently you would have been penalised.

I would rather that they took, e.g. the QF or UA approach and award "bonus miles" on NZ flights/codes and kept all other bookings at the current NZ earning rate. That provides an incentive to fly NZ codes where you can, but you're not penalised for being so outrageous as travelling to somewhere NZ don't fly!

nzchick

One last update:

Went online this morning and all the PE transactions have been reversed, and re-posted at the $130 rate (in all 3 of our accounts).

So it's all fixed, kudos to NZ for doing it so quickly (even though it was the result of a crazy - inconsistent - policy in the first place)!

I have to write to Customer Support regarding a problem on our flight, so will draw their attention to the airpoints policy. One can live in hope that enough complaints may force them to change the policy...

Kiwi Flyer

I wouldn't hold your breath. I've written a few times over this (and other meanness in the airbucks earning) and haven't even had the courtesy of a reply.

libertyuk

I know this infuriates me as well. I'm about to undertake a *A trip to an Asian city which would be a longer journey and not connecting to a *A airline from Hong Kong if I was to go on NZ.

I have no problem with NZ offering less airpoints on LAX-LHR, HKG-LHR or even whole trip AKL-LON compared to the *A or non *A partner alternatives (being UA, VS, SQ, TG basically).

However, why I should I get shockingly low earnings flying *A from London to east coast USA, Canada, Africa and Asia besides HKG? If I am flying to India, Korea or Japan there is no way in hell I'm going to fly NZ to HKG and hub from there, unless I want to add hours to by trip, likewise flying to Denver or Vancouver.

Of course I could simply join another *A FF scheme, or use Oneworld airlines which by and large don't discriminate.

Xiaotung

How about this? Aussie members earn higher partner rates to Asia from Australia than NZ members from NZ. Longer distance and more expensive fares end up with fewer airbucks. So much for the fare based system.