KACommuter

I have certainly stayed loyal to my main hotel programme even though I have lifetime top tier status. So I'd argue that this CAN be true.

What I don't know is if I end up costing them more as benefits such as late 4 pm check out and free breakfasts must cost something. And obviously I represent a sample size of one.

matrixwalker2012

I fly LAX-HKG-SIN in PE in E class about 4 times a year. On AA, that earns me 26K EQM and 3.5K EQD. 4 of those trips earns me EXP on AA which gives me OWE.

Doing the same trips on CX, I won't even make MPC Gold, which is OWS, so you tell me which program I should credit to? AA gets me all the way to Emerald. CX won't even get me to Sapphire.

KACommuter

My guess is CX probably thinks of this as sensible because:
- CX doesn't pay for your lounge access on checking in at LAX
- they charge AA for your lounge access in HK and Singapore
- MPC doesn't incur maintenance costs for your membership
- you'll still fly PE as there isn't a competing OW product
- they don't have much upside beyond this from you being a member

SO you definitely made the right choice!

sxc

Apparently in oneworld the operating carrier pays, not the program that gives you status. So in this case CX loses out: they have to pay AA for the miles awarded and pay for the lounge access b

SLGO

But no matter how, CX gets the business on PEY. Perhaps this is why CX is not refining anything after the change in MPC?

Too much travel

Lots of talk about super-duper "more-special-than-you" lounge access and DYKWIA "I-should-board-earlier-than-you" boarding priority etc. These are very marginal nice-to-haves, but don't address the fundamental problem, which is that CXMP is extremely stingy in giving miles, and are an extreme rip-off when redeeming miles.

Until they address this double-whammy, why bother crediting excess miles (or - for some - any miles at all) to CXMP? On the earning side of the equation, there needs to be meaningfully generous bonuses for top tier - e.g. AA/BA's 100% bonus for top-tier. On the redemption side, it needs to be easier and cheaper to redeem miles. BAEC manages to show all OW redemption options and pricing on its website together with available remaining seats... none of the CXMP IT rubbish which requires calling the helpline to ask what seats there are on most other OW airlines.

Add on the lack of potential lifetime OWE status, and it's game, set and match against CXMP unless things change.

jagmeets

I really wonder if CX/CPLP have done an analysis if/how far their desired objectives have been met?

Presumably those were along the lines of culling the numbers so that the higher value customers feel more valued for their loyalty and drive even more of the high value spend CX's way...or at least how things have played out vs the selling points in a consultant's pitch book?

sxc

I'm pretty sure CX would rather people credit to MPC. Once you lose control of the consumer relationship, you lose any influence over their behaviour and all the data that goes with it. And anecdotally this forum proves that once you're out of MPC, you're tempted to try other airlines so CX loses the revenue eventually.

Cathay Dragon 666

Different category of people want different things. You place more value on miles redemption shows your needs to have access to cheap/free things. Other passengers that can afford things, which have no reliance nor crave for cheap redemption, but we do want and expect top-class services and privileges when we are paying top-class prices. I do not judge you for your thriftiness, nor should you judge others that value different benefits than you.

Again, this is you, and maybe there are many of you. But I can say for sure that for premium flyer like me (and many other paying-premium flyers), getting excessive miles is not a top priority. Now, I would admit it's probably #3 or #4 on my list, and in this forum I do argue that Cathay should give more miles credit to reflect revenue paid or loyalty status, but it is not the top thing on my list.

This we agree. I feel like I'm a used up passenger that Cathay does not at all recognize my loyalty (premium flying no less) over the last few decades, 4 million flown miles, and now that I'm half-retire Cathay has no problem kicking me down to Gold or Silver if I don't earn enough points. Horrible.

fairhsa

Agree that Diamonds should get Gold Mid-Tier benefits.
Agree on seat blocking - that's a no-brainer surely?
They should make the Diamond mid teir benefit (the upgrades) actually useful - i.e. able to be used on any ticket class. I was delighted to get mine last year ... I flew extra to get them... and then tried to use them and realised they are basically useless. In order to fly biz on a long haul flight, you have to pay a premium economy ticket that costs more than biz on another airline or a discount biz ticket! Lunacy. I won't use all my upgrades. They cost more than actually buying sensible tickets.

The lounge passes are a completely stupid benefit. I can take two people into a lounge - why do I need more? Waste of time and give me nothing.

What I want back is sector based getting to diamond. Right now, I fly short haul all the time. I would have to fly my current routes EVER OTHER DAY to get diamond based on the current rules. That is, fly 240 days of the year. It used to be 80. That's just stupid. I had reason to fly a few long haul biz last year but it won't continue. Once that ends, so does my loyalty.

sscywong

Actually I'd say the current scheme has taken into account their most valuable sector based DM aka those business flyers between HKG-PEK/PVG/SIN who are willing to pay K fare or even Y fare (like me ) because it's out of Co's pocket...

Since the point chart was released I've been asking "Why cut at 750 miles?" because this is inconsistent with the AM reward chart... But when you taking into consideration that PVG/SHA is 766/779 then it make complete sense... (Actually that hurts NKG business as it is 733 miles... Some of my trips to NKG had been made more "effective" by adding meetings in Shanghai so it falls into the Short Haul class not Ultra-Short Haul...)

QRC3288

I agree with most of your points, especially about the utter uselessness of the lounge passes. Totally Useless capital T and U. (They could turn them into a big win by removing the OW restriction and the redemption group requirement....would get some great use from other potential customers on other alliances, who will no doubt be wowed by the lovely CX lounge experiences. I could easily use these if I could set up a client or family member flying SQ. But the dumb redemption group requirement coupled with OW only means they're totally useless to me).

But for me, the 1600 bookable upgrades are solid gold, so I guess some differences here. I am fortunate enough to only fly J and F long-haul, although I sympathize with the real road warriors on here who fly Y and PEY. So what I've done with the bookable upgrades is just use them as "almost as good as cash" F tickets on J class tickets I normally buy. They save me real money because I'm buying J not F (and they're good for even C, D or I ticket, aka all biz fare classes), and they're quite easy to use. So for someone who would be in a position to use them for F upgrades....aka folks regularly buying long-haul J....I think these are a very solid benefit.

d00t

Folks who earn status by virtue of their employer funding the tickets don't need much incentivisation. In fact, there isn't a great deal of scope to extract incremental revenue from these pax. The segment is very profitable, but your company may have an agreement with CX and therefore you're stuck no matter what is served up.

Crazy. Why not credit to another FFP? AA, MH etc both do sector base qualifying.

sscywong

Actually, no. We are free to choose CX/KA, CA to PEK, MU to PVG or whatever we like. Also Co is also "encouraging" us to book lower fare classes (and that's happening in some consulting firms and investment banks) even we are already flying Y only....

There's not much extra they can extract from us (it's very hard to press a little bit more juice from us who are already paying Y fare and flying RT nearly every week...) but they can lost quite a significant amount from us very easily

triplefives

"However this ‘focus on high yield passengers’ didn’t lead to higher yields. It just chased away customers buying mid-range fares."

http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea....s-bottom-line/