DEVALUATION! - No more stopover for one way tickets effective 1 April 2020
Mar 18, 2020, 6:12 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 88
DEVALUATION! - No more stopover for one way tickets effective 1 April 2020
Currently we save miles by booking a multi-sector itinerary with mixed cabins. For example, LHR-HKG in First then HKD-IAD in Economy (to be cancelled after the first flight and get a tax refund without charge). Your flight you really want to fly costs 81,800 miles instead of 100,000 miles.
However, the agent told me that from 1 April 2020, only transfer is allowed. You can still book a two-sector itinerary but if you finally do not take the second sector, you may have baggage issue. In most of the cases, we have to sacrifice the second sector and cannot enjoy two trips in a one-way ticket.
Also, it is a kind of devaluation when stopover is not allowed.
Update: announced officially on 20 March 2020
New duration limit for stopovers
Stopover duration will now be limited to a maximum of 24 hours for Asia Miles Awards and Airline Partners Awards. Please note that all waitlist bookings made before 1 April 2020 are bounded by this change.
For example, if you redeem an itinerary with Cathay Pacific from Taipei to Bangkok, transiting through Hong Kong, the maximum duration for your stopover in Hong Kong is 24 hours. If the duration is more than 24 hours, you are required to make two separate bookings, with Taipei to Hong Kong as the first booking, and Hong Kong to Bangkok as the second.
However, the agent told me that from 1 April 2020, only transfer is allowed. You can still book a two-sector itinerary but if you finally do not take the second sector, you may have baggage issue. In most of the cases, we have to sacrifice the second sector and cannot enjoy two trips in a one-way ticket.
Also, it is a kind of devaluation when stopover is not allowed.
Update: announced officially on 20 March 2020
New duration limit for stopovers
Stopover duration will now be limited to a maximum of 24 hours for Asia Miles Awards and Airline Partners Awards. Please note that all waitlist bookings made before 1 April 2020 are bounded by this change.
For example, if you redeem an itinerary with Cathay Pacific from Taipei to Bangkok, transiting through Hong Kong, the maximum duration for your stopover in Hong Kong is 24 hours. If the duration is more than 24 hours, you are required to make two separate bookings, with Taipei to Hong Kong as the first booking, and Hong Kong to Bangkok as the second.
Last edited by Donkitravel; Mar 19, 2020 at 10:12 pm
Mar 18, 2020, 8:35 pm
#3
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: HKG
Programs: AA 3MM EXP, SQ Solitaire, LH SEN, CX DM, Hyatt CC, Marriott LT Titanium
Posts: 3,179
Some might be legitimate stopovers.. but the others where you are flying 3/4 of the way around the world on the cost of 1 redemption ticket seem to be stretching it a bit.. while the rules use to allow it, it really was a huge hole that people exploited....
Mar 18, 2020, 8:36 pm
#4
Join Date: Sep 2018
Programs: Alaska
Posts: 2,188
it charges by distance. Does it matter?
Mar 18, 2020, 8:42 pm
#5
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Non-top tier Asia Miles member
Posts: 19,800
I've heard rumours from three independent sources that this will happen. This aligns with what I've been told.
I wonder will there be official announcement, or is this one more internal memorule again.
I wonder will there be official announcement, or is this one more internal memorule again.
Mar 18, 2020, 11:28 pm
#6
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
What will the net result be? Obviously the OP's itinerary (which I had never even thought of before), is both clever but clearly a loophole. I'm sure you guys who are pros at this know about this. But how many people are using this situation for legit itineraries i.e. not just mostly exploiting a loophole?
If it's mostly against people playing the arbitrage game, then I'm all for it and the thread title is a bit self-serving - that's a valuation increase for people like me, who accumulate a bunch of miles and indeed like to use them, but don't go to the gaming lengths others do. Inevitably people / companies who drive the dump trucks through the loopholes make the program less valuable for the rest of us. It's quite zero sum.
If it's mostly against people playing the arbitrage game, then I'm all for it and the thread title is a bit self-serving - that's a valuation increase for people like me, who accumulate a bunch of miles and indeed like to use them, but don't go to the gaming lengths others do. Inevitably people / companies who drive the dump trucks through the loopholes make the program less valuable for the rest of us. It's quite zero sum.
Mar 18, 2020, 11:41 pm
#7
Join Date: Sep 2018
Programs: Alaska
Posts: 2,188
What will the net result be? Obviously the OP's itinerary (which I had never even thought of before), is both clever but clearly a loophole. I'm sure you guys who are pros at this know about this. But how many people are using this situation for legit itineraries i.e. not just mostly exploiting a loophole?
If it's mostly against people playing the arbitrage game, then I'm all for it and the thread title is a bit self-serving - that's a valuation increase for people like me, who accumulate a bunch of miles and indeed like to use them, but don't go to the gaming lengths others do. Inevitably people / companies who drive the dump trucks through the loopholes make the program less valuable for the rest of us. It's quite zero sum.
If it's mostly against people playing the arbitrage game, then I'm all for it and the thread title is a bit self-serving - that's a valuation increase for people like me, who accumulate a bunch of miles and indeed like to use them, but don't go to the gaming lengths others do. Inevitably people / companies who drive the dump trucks through the loopholes make the program less valuable for the rest of us. It's quite zero sum.
Asia Miles can well charge more for longer distance.
Removing stopover for one-way ticket is a loss for everyone.
Mar 19, 2020, 1:44 am
#9
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
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.
Last edited by QRC3288; Mar 19, 2020 at 1:51 am
Mar 19, 2020, 2:07 am
#10
Join Date: Sep 2018
Programs: Alaska
Posts: 2,188
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.
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.
the loophole is pseudo return trip with one-way price.
e.g. business class JFK-HKG stopover HKG-
the price is 85,000 miles + fee
JFK-HKG r/t trip will be 85,000 miles x 2 + fee
for HKG based folks, you can book something like HKG-HEL stopover HEL-CAN, almost return trip with finnair
Last edited by freed0m; Mar 19, 2020 at 2:45 am
Mar 19, 2020, 2:16 am
#11
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Non-top tier Asia Miles member
Posts: 19,800
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.
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.
the loophole is pseudo return trip with one-way price.
e.g. business class JFK-HKG stopover HKG-BOS
the price is 85,000 miles + fee
JFK-HKG r/t trip will be 85,000 miles x 2 + fee
for HKG based folks, you can book something like HKG-HEL stopover HEL-CAN, almost return trip with finnair
e.g. business class JFK-HKG stopover HKG-BOS
the price is 85,000 miles + fee
JFK-HKG r/t trip will be 85,000 miles x 2 + fee
for HKG based folks, you can book something like HKG-HEL stopover HEL-CAN, almost return trip with finnair
Mar 19, 2020, 2:20 am
#12
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: TPE / HSZ
Programs: CX GO (=SPH), IHG Diamond Amb, Hertz 5*, Accor, Hilton, National
Posts: 6,437
the loophole is pseudo return trip with one-way price.
e.g. business class JFK-HKG stopover HKG-BOS
the price is 85,000 miles + fee
JFK-HKG r/t trip will be 85,000 miles x 2 + fee
for HKG based folks, you can book something like HKG-HEL stopover HEL-CAN, almost return trip with finnair
e.g. business class JFK-HKG stopover HKG-BOS
the price is 85,000 miles + fee
JFK-HKG r/t trip will be 85,000 miles x 2 + fee
for HKG based folks, you can book something like HKG-HEL stopover HEL-CAN, almost return trip with finnair
Mar 19, 2020, 2:44 am
#13
Join Date: Sep 2018
Programs: Alaska
Posts: 2,188
Mar 19, 2020, 2:47 am
#14
Join Date: Sep 2018
Programs: Alaska
Posts: 2,188
Mar 19, 2020, 3:54 am
#15
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Non-top tier Asia Miles member
Posts: 19,800