![]() |
Are cross-carrier benefits changing?
Someone on the AC forum reported that QF would no longer be permitting oneworld Sapphires to use the Business Class check-in, or have priority baggage tags, unless they were flying in that class of service. Has anyone else encountered any change in cross-carrier benefits for the new year?
|
If there are changes, the Oneworld site hasn't reflected them.
http://www.oneworld.com/satellite/sa...fm?teamcode=aa [This message has been edited by Darren (edited 01-02-2002).] |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Darren: If there are changes, the Oneworld site hasn't reflected them. http://www.oneworld.com/satellite/sa...fm?teamcode=aa </font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> All oneworld Emerald and Sapphire members are invited to relax in The Admirals Club when traveling on qualifying flights. </font> |
And, chosing Qantas as the carrier, the 1W site says:
"Qantas invites oneworld Emerald and Sapphire members to relax in The Qantas Club when travelling on qualifying flights." |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Shareholder: Someone on the AC forum reported that QF would no longer be permitting oneworld Sapphires to use the Business Class check-in, or have priority baggage tags, unless they were flying in that class of service. Has anyone else encountered any change in cross-carrier benefits for the new year?</font> |
I didn't want to ask, Wayne.
HV, if you click down on the Platinum drop-down menu, it explicitly says that you can use the biz class check in as a OW sapphire. I am not saying that it didn't change, I am saying that if it did then it isn't reflected on the website. From my experience, QF is sort of in a tizzy at the moment, and seems to be making up a lot of their own rules to accomodate a much larger customer base after AN took a dump. For instance, they made a rule that you can't bring anyone with you into the Qantas Club if you are on a F or J ticket or if you are a status member. There were others here and there, along the lines of 0ing out premium availability on some flights and forcing people to WL so that they could selectively sell seats to paying pax before UG pax. |
I know GB is teasing, but I'll play along. Well, aside from wet leasing the transTasman flights to QF and handling AC's passengers at MEL, not much. At the same time, less than half our posts on the AC Forum tend to be about AC, which is why the above found its way there
|
Shhh, Shareholder, you're giving away our secret! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif
FewMiles.. ------------------ [ FlyerTalkers' Resources on the Web ] [ Unofficial Guide to AAdvantage ] [ Unofficial oneworld Info Desk ] |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Shareholder: At the same time, less than half our posts on the AC Forum tend to be about AC, which is why the above found its way there</font> Coming back on topic, QF is running out of capacity at its terminals - the .au duopoly was maintained to some degress by QF and AN each running their own domestic terminals. Now that the AN terminals are boarded up almost all domestic traffic has to be squeezed into the QF buildings. The QF domestic lounges can huge affairs - think of the BA lounges at Heathrow - but equally huge numbers of people have access rights. And when PER-SDY has to be routed via Melbourne (and "internationally" MEB-SYD) then I'm not suprised that the lounges look like QF's LAX debacle on a bad day and that QF are having to kick some people out. Wierd stuff _is_ happening in the QF system - I can book a rewards ticket PER-SIN for next weekend, but there's no SIN-PER available until March. And don't get me started on the *@#$% web page! CD |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:28 pm. |
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.