|
I would like to ask you how you can have DM Status until mid 2016 when we are now in Jan 2015 ? Everyone else has a 12 month window but you claim you have a 17 month window ?
Originally Posted by QRC3288
(Post 24142289)
Fascinating thread. A lot of good posts above.
I just opened an AA account last night, I can hit EXP with relative ease in the next 4 months, which will give me both DM and EXP. My DM status is good through mid-2016 (I already reset a while back). If CX is rumored to being making these changes then it's time I get smarter about where I bank my miles. CX, it has been good, but we're going to have to change our relationship:D. Overall, CX is going to be a hugely relevant airline in the next few decades and CX will need a competitive loyalty program versus global peers. Not SQ. CX is just geographically blessed and SQ, well, isn't. I'm not sure how this program change shakes out, so I'm hedging my bets now. My two cents are it's foolish to ignore the Y pax unless CX truly intends to turn Y class into a LCC. I'm sure CX knows the #s, but a.) I bet the % of MPC/AM members in the back are higher than the front, and b.) I bet MPC/AM members pay significantly more for their Y tix than the average traveler. Increasing the yield in the back gives breathing room for pricing in the front. Air travelers are notoriously price sensitive, but air travelers are also notoriously willing to open their wallets to spend on status. Folks, this is why frequent flier programs exist. To get us to spend more money. Not to mention, 77G is not exactly a premium plane. It has 40 J, 30 PEY, and the rest cattle car in the back. Increase the yield in the back and you get breathing room in the front. Here are my problems: 1.) MPC/Asia Miles does not give me a good path to award bookings. In fact, it sucks. Earn / burn is horrible compared to say AA, and - unlike even 3 years ago - as a Diamond I simply cannot get award bookings like I used to. I'm sure the bean counters back in revenue control think they're being clever releasing inventory 2-3 days out. But to me, I don't like the uncertainty and many times I just skip trying to upgrade if I can't book it earlier. Here's a real world example. Flight to LAX, I'm booked in J. I try to score mileage upgrade to F ~4 weeks out. Denied. I can see tickets are for sale, I ask MPC if they can check with supervisor...2-3 minutes later, denied again. I decide to forget it. At airport 4 weeks later...op-up to F! Excellent! Sitting in F with us? A lovely American family of 3 who had burned AA miles 6 months in advance. So, thank you CX for the free upgrade, but seriously, that's ridiculous. Handing out so many partner awards and then playing hardball with MPC/AM members. Not to mention the increasingly annoying hoops we have to jump through to score upgrade awards now, like no waitlisting unless a ticket is confirmed on the class underneath. Give me a break. How about allowing us to waitlist, and if it clears, give us 24 hours to buy the class underneath. I feel like I'm in business school 101 introduction to common sense. What is the purpose of MPC/AM? For me it was the soft benefits of op-ups, recognition, really above and beyond service, but if I can anticipate much of that will go away unless I commit all my traveling dollars to CX, well forget it (see reason #2, below). We all know MPC/AM earn/burn sucks. I'm going with the place that gives me better earn/burn ratio since it's not like I have much award advantage with CX anyway. Btw, this same situation pertains to A fares for HKG residents. 2.) The other blatantly obvious situation to me is CX's onboard food/drinks etc. is nothing to write home about and if MPC/AM devalues, I'll naturally be making more decisions about those services. CX is basically saying to me, "okay mr qrc, please spend all your money here." to which my answer is, "okay, prove to me why I should." In my view, CX has gotten away with offering a pretty "blah" soft offering thanks to the great MPC/AM program. Let's look at some of the soft things, particularly F&B. Eva has superior alcohol in J and the same hard product. Both Korean Airlines offer a comparable (or in some cases, superior) wine selection in long-haul J than CX does in F. EK to the Middle East and European destinations is good in J and superb in F with on-board F&B and a shower on the a380, J (and sometimes F) fares are extremely reasonable and much cheaper than CX. Not to mention, if I do start accumulating serious miles elsewhere, I can transfer in and get F tix on EK. Availability isn't terrible ex-HKG....I've just been really disappointed with the availability for CX that I'm kinda ready to switch. And QR is apparently - at some point - going to start the new J service to HKG, which renders my annoyance with them moot (I hate their slanted J class beds, but at some point they will be gone and QR is an extremely viable option for me to travel around). The only place I'm not ready to change are my flights to China, I've read the others above who will do CA and MU, but I'm not quite there yet. I suppose I will credit some elsewhere, but I think KA metal will still get the bulk of my China business I'm just not ready to fly the Chinese carriers full stop yet. That said, I fly Y to China, and it sounds like CX may not value Y fare customers anymore anyway. It's not really like I'm going to do a wholesale switch, but I guess with CX's potential program change I'm more likely to become a free agent loyalty person than before, unless CX really blows me away with whatever the new MPC program is. They're gonna have to make it worth it. Otherwise, there are just way too many options out there with increasingly awesome products. |
Originally Posted by flyinghighinthesky
(Post 24147706)
I would like to ask you how you can have DM Status until mid 2016 when we are now in Jan 2015 ? Everyone else has a 12 month window but you claim you have a 17 month window ?
|
Originally Posted by flyinghighinthesky
(Post 24147706)
I would like to ask you how you can have DM Status until mid 2016 when we are now in Jan 2015 ? Everyone else has a 12 month window but you claim you have a 17 month window ?
Originally Posted by alphaod
(Post 24147720)
I assume QRC3288 already made the needed mileage for renewal, and odds are MPC won't change in the next six months, so when it's renewed it'll be mid-2016 ;)
|
This thread has made me think about my future travelling on CX
I am one of the DM ‘lowlifes’ who travels mostly in PEY/Y, pays the additional monies to get an asia miles fare, and automatically defaults to choosing CX. I rarely choose another airline for a route when CX is also an option, and have been either Gold or Diamond with 1 years exception since 2000. Last year did well over 120,000 miles on CX alone. Was a Passages member before that.
I part own and run a small consulting company and clients are careful with their expenses, so I do not get corporate business class travel. I do get discretion and select CX for myself and contractors. From talking to other DMs, many are in the same situation as I am in, with similar loyalties. I would argue that AM/MPC does have a small revenue based component already in that cheap Y class tickets do not earn miles, and that to attain status on CX is far harder than most other programmes. Running through the benefits for me personally: 1. Loss of the seat block is not great, but other airlines are unlikely to provide this benefit. 2. First Class Check in, okay. 3. Fast Track through security. This is an excellent one world perk. Was transiting LHR T5 just before Christmas and without it no way would I have connected. Really felt for those without access. 4. Lounge access. Very good for me as I prefer to eat in the lounge and tend not to eat even on long hauls to the UK or US. This tends to negate the preferred meal option. 5. Priority boarding, useful as in PEY/Y the overhead lockers can get full quickly and I prefer access to my expensive electronic kit to be close. 6. Op-ups are a very rare occurrence for me, I estimate 1 in 20, but then I tend to have no expectation of being upgraded. It is not a ‘right’ no matter what the status. 7. I happen to like the fact get greeted onboard and the crew know my name. It just makes the journey more comfortable. 8. I do not get invited to any of the special events, but not something I have thought about. 9. When I do redeem miles it tends to be on CX routes which tend to be fairly wide open or other One World members where CX is not an option. So if CX are going to make it more difficult for me to benefit from being a member then it is worth considering my options and CX will cease to be my airline of choice. Given my flying patterns, this could be: 1. Moving to another One World programme, get to OWE while still being DM then let that drop. AA would make sense, though American have reported CX have tried to change the earnings rate. As some fares in business elsewhere are not much more than CX in PEY this has an attraction. 2. Move to another alliance. Skyteam does not work, but Aeroplan and Mileage Plus could well do on Star. 3. Do a hybrid drop to CX Gold and get another status elsewhere. 4. Go neutral and go for the best deals out there. Obviously the doom and gloom outlook may be overstated, though the more knowledgeable posters here do look like having an understanding of the potential implications of potential changes. Bottom line is, I will look at my bottom line in travelling. I believe if handled poorly this will cost CX a lot of goodwill from a formerly very sticky section of their client base, and once they, like I, have travelled back down the tiers will not readily make the effort to get back up, especially if in future this is made harder. |
Originally Posted by Nicc HK
(Post 24148456)
I am one of the DM ‘lowlifes’ who travels mostly in PEY/Y, pays the additional monies to get an asia miles fare, and automatically defaults to choosing CX. ...
Obviously the doom and gloom outlook may be overstated, though the more knowledgeable posters here do look like having an understanding of the potential implications of potential changes. .... Marco Polo Titanium (hypothetical tier above Diamond) would have a different qualification criteria (eg. Full Y/F/J revenue based) and have additional benefits to Diamond. By introducing a new, more exclusive club that is above the current club does not necessarily mean less benefits in the current club. As an analogy, this would be like a paid F flyer myself saying that I am not going to fly Etihad Airways anymore as they now have a class called "Residences" that is above their regular First Class (while everything in regular First Class is comparable to what they have now if not better) even though regular First Class is now considered to be "second class". |
What really is added benefit they could offer to CX Titanium whose qualification is solely based on revenue F/J travel? For such echelon flight on Y would be rare anyways and if you purchase F/J i just dont see any benefit of incremental value... Lets face it if you really wanted to travel and pay up for full fare F or J then magically seat wud open, you do not need any seat gurantee benefits.... (If thats not the case they gotta fire someone at revenue management)
But offering any real benefit like guranteed upgrade for Titanium seems to go against this ethos... Soi am just not sure |
Interesting and Positive Assumption
If you are right then this is a positive move by CX to look after its truly premium passengers, and to give the F/J loyalists something extra is a good idea.
Being selfish if nothing changes for me then I am agnostic and all power to those who gain. On the other side if it means the benefits which are useful to me disappear then this is a negative impact. Sadly 'enhancements' to Frequent Flyer Programmes are like 'Special Projects' to people in Banks, something to be wary of. Perhaps my reading from this thread is wrong but it seems that flyers like me will not be seen in a positive light by the CX bean counters. |
Originally Posted by daniellam
(Post 24148592)
By introducing a new, more exclusive club that is above the current club does not necessarily mean less benefits in the current club.
That's why I think CX really needs to know what it's getting in bed with. They are going to have to significantly up their game in J or F or be in for a nice shock during the next time the economy has a problem, because I bet folks won't flock back to MPC once the program's DNA changes. It's a lot harder to change loyalty programs than it is to change who I fly with tomorrow. I can fly with anyone tomorrow, but I will fly primarily with the carrier whose loyalty program I'm with, if this makes sense. I'm sure they're feeling good right now with low oil prices and a sustained recovery since the financial crisis. But the winds in this business can change fast, and airline executives are some of the last to figure it out - once their business tanks and they wonder where their customers went. I hope what you say is the way it's implemented - it will be better for everyone - but I have my doubts. |
This change probably will piss off a lot of people but I think it makes economical sense to have a revenue based system, favoring premium classes. I've no idea in terms of how an airline operates so I write this accepting 110% that I may be wrong and have no basis other than my own thoughts, but I feel somehow achieving 100% load in Y isn't always the most profitable for the airline.
I get this idea after having a look at some of these ridiculously low fares in Y for ULH flights, like a QR flight I recently saw from SYD-DOH-CDG for like AUD$1400. I mean, take off the operating costs and the margin is already probably very thin on this fare (few hundred dollars tops), then if the airline was to offer a Y passenger F lounge access due to status, this will further eat away from whats remaining of that little profit. Assuming that each lounge visit will cost the airline an average $50, that is already $200 they are loosing further (not to mention the fixed costs to have people running the elite program, fast track passes etc.). So I think we'd all agree that status pax on average cost more for the airline to carry. So if an airline had the choice of 90% Y loads with no-status pax vs. 100% Y loads with status pax, I have a feeling the optimal economic point where additional marginal revenue and cost interacts best would be closer to the 90% mark than it is to the 100% mark. I'd even go further to say carrying that last 1% most expensive customers (12 hour layover lounge-hopping tours anyone? :P) would probably cost the airline more than carrying the cheapest 5% of customers who just wants a transport from A to B. It is obviously expected that these elites will bring in this margin more frequently, however say if the bottom margin for a super saver fare is $250 for the airline per Y pax, an elite visiting 4 partner lounges may dwindle that profit to $50 already. That means CX would have to carry the elite five times before they even meet the profit levels of a non-status pax. Contrast that to a F pax dropping HKD$250k on a HKG-JFK flight. Sure the seat probably costs USD$500k to install, but once the initial capital expenditure has been met, these F pax are probably worth at least a good 100x at the operating profit level compared to a discount Y pax that is paying HKD$6000 for that same route. The point I'm trying to raise here is that while us customers would probably like the airline to look at our overall spend, it is probably more logical for the airline to not look at that but instead look at the overall contribution to the net profit after all costs have been met. In that sense, a Y pax spending USD $200k a year with CX may not be more valuable to the bottom line than a J flyer spending $50k a year. |
Originally Posted by fakecd
(Post 24148665)
What really is added benefit they could offer to CX Titanium whose qualification is solely based on revenue F/J travel?
J seat guarantee on KA Easier redemption for miles Buggy on arrival for far gates (I land at 65+ pr 45+ once a week!) Less crowded lounges ("Titanium" and F only would be less crowded) Escort through security on arrival and departure (they do for DM+.) I'd love them to offer an option to pick up some food in the lounge to take on to the plane i.e. Peninsula catering preparing take away picnic baskets (inflight catering is terrible) |
Originally Posted by Jane's Addiction
(Post 24148927)
I can think of a few things they could incrementally offer to a theoretical higher tier that would make me happy:
J seat guarantee on KA Easier redemption for miles Buggy on arrival for far gates (I land at 65+ pr 45+ once a week!) Less crowded lounges ("Titanium" and F only would be less crowded) Escort through security on arrival and departure (they do for DM+.) I'd love them to offer an option to pick up some food in the lounge to take on to the plane i.e. Peninsula catering preparing take away picnic baskets (inflight catering is terrible) - upgrade vouchers (can be specified as shorthaul or longhaul) - limousine service on departure from HKG (it could be Uber!) - guaranteed award availability in Y and J (booked 30 days in advance) - birthday month inflight shopping US$100 voucher - CX holidays discounts - CX holidays round trip transfers (currently one-way for J packages) - 3 guests allowed into the F lounge (useful for members with spouse + 2 kids) |
Originally Posted by gemini573
(Post 24140005)
As mentioned earlier, SCMP has a piece on this.
http://www.scmp.com/business/compani...e-big-let-down |
Originally Posted by Guy Betsy
(Post 24149607)
I wonder who the journalist interviewed here.. ?
|
Basically I agree with most of the FTers post above and do hope AgencyGuy will help telling CX to take extra caution before pushing out something "revolutionary"...
To sum up my thoughts: 1. If CX only consider F/J revenue for the new DM+ / Ti / whatsoever called, I'm sure CX is heading for a catastrophic failure, particularly ex-HKG full fare Y (or even K fare) is higher than some ex-outport I fare, and cost of serving full fare Y is still lower than discount J 1a. Given the above, number of HKG based top tier members relative to outport based top tier members will drop even further. I believe CX knows which country's flyer gives them higher revenue yield per head per flight 2. Banking miles with other program while tracking revenue is great idea, but given better burning ratio with AA, same amount of miles may cost CX more (i.e. Previously this amount of miles in AM may only redeem one flight but in AA, two may be possible) 3. Lounge access: For me at least, I have PP with unlimited access (and I believe quite a number of such top tier flyer as well) so lounge access is never a huge attraction to me. If somehow lounge access is greatly reduced / restricted, together with other benefits reduction I don't need to stay in the program just for the limited lounge access right. Nice to have CX lounge access when I'm flying Y, but I still can use PPL in HK / other PP lounges outport. I can use the J lounge anyway if I fly J. Finally, Enhance which is something suddenly came into mind: If Enhance is implemented, how will that ticket count? Just the enhance part? R fare plus the enhance payment? I doubt their system is "advanced" enough to do such tracking which means will simply results in even more confusion p.s. Some FTers asked if CA or MU can match CX after I mentioned that I may opt for CA or MU if not taking CX. To me, ultimately I need to a flight to get me from A to B safely, want it to be punctual, and better comfortably. So far at the bare minimum CA and MU and / or other airlines also can get me to B from A safely and with comparable frequency. Brand loyalty with CX once gone, I may not need to stick with any of the airline anymore and therefore I may choose any airline that's to my best interest as many other FTers said. CA and MU were just examples for travelling to PEK / PVG which are my most frequently travelled ports |
Originally Posted by sscywong
(Post 24149836)
Basically I agree with most of the FTers post above and do hope AgencyGuy will help telling CX to take extra caution before pushing out something "revolutionary"...
To sum up my thoughts: 1. If CX only consider F/J revenue for the new DM+ / Ti / whatsoever called, I'm sure CX is heading for a catastrophic failure, particularly ex-HKG full fare Y (or even K fare) is higher than some ex-outport I fare, and cost of serving full fare Y is still lower than discount J 1a. Given the above, number of HKG based top tier members relative to outport based top tier members will drop even further. I believe CX knows which country's flyer gives them higher revenue yield per head per flight 2. Banking miles with other program while tracking revenue is great idea, but given better burning ratio with AA, same amount of miles may cost CX more (i.e. Previously this amount of miles in AM may only redeem one flight but in AA, two may be possible) 3. Lounge access: For me at least, I have PP with unlimited access (and I believe quite a number of such top tier flyer as well) so lounge access is never a huge attraction to me. If somehow lounge access is greatly reduced / restricted, together with other benefits reduction I don't need to stay in the program just for the limited lounge access right. Nice to have CX lounge access when I'm flying Y, but I still can use PPL in HK / other PP lounges outport. I can use the J lounge anyway if I fly J. Finally, Enhance which is something suddenly came into mind: If Enhance is implemented, how will that ticket count? Just the enhance part? R fare plus the enhance payment? I doubt their system is "advanced" enough to do such tracking which means will simply results in even more confusion p.s. Some FTers asked if CA or MU can match CX after I mentioned that I may opt for CA or MU if not taking CX. To me, ultimately I need to a flight to get me from A to B safely, want it to be punctual, and better comfortably. So far at the bare minimum CA and MU and / or other airlines also can get me to B from A safely and with comparable frequency. Brand loyalty with CX once gone, I may not need to stick with any of the airline anymore and therefore I may choose any airline that's to my best interest as many other FTers said. CA and MU were just examples for travelling to PEK / PVG which are my most frequently travelled ports Once miles are credited to AA, it's AA's problem. CX doesn't have to pay for those (extra) miles AA prints and it is AA who has to bear the redemption costs. I am not sure if I want to fly the C919s these Chinese carriers have ordered. Good for you if you trust those mainland planes as it gives you more options. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:53 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.