oneworld in Africa
 

Paul: Thanks for your question - and for your support of oneworld. We recognise that our network coverage in Africa is not as strong as in other regions of the world and, over time, this is something we would be interested in addressing.

Bearing in mind oneworld's requirements (quality of customer service, safety, profitability track record, brand name etc), potential candidate recruits based in the continent are limited, however. But not non-existent.

Also, because of the level of demand for air travel within the continent - currently only around a 2 per cent of world demand - it is less of a priority for recruitment than some other regions.

Having said all that, it is worth noting that our existing carriers provide competitive schedules to and from the continent - and that oneworld was in fact the first alliance with a member based in Africa, in the form of the BA franchisee Comair in southern Africa.

Interesting point you raise about xONEx fares, which I have passed on to our fares people to see if there is anything they could consider here.

All the best

oneworld4u

OW4U, I second this. It would be a tremendous help here, and consistent with your xONEx policies for Asia (extra transit stop allowed from Europe to SWP) and North America.

I also give OW a great amount of credit for actively participating here. I don't recall seeing any participation from *A on the few occasions on which I have perused their forum. As you can see from my profile, I am a dedicated OW member, and your participation certainly makes me feel that OW actually cares about my business, something which I find sorely lacking in so many industries today. Thanks!!!

Wow thanks for the quick response and such positivity. I'd be stoked if they were to make a change that allowed me to get to more than one of the currently serviced cities outside of South Africa. I travel to ACC a lot but hvae the need to go to MRU and occassionally NBO or DAR as well so a transit in LHR would be a huge help. You'd have one happy OW fan here!! For that I'd defnitely owe you a beer!!

I couldn't agree more with the above.

Let's hope that some other alliance doesn't snap up ET before oneworld does. Sure, it's 2% of world air travel, but a) that is going to grow and b) regular travellers on oneworld would like to visit Africa properly :)

AA Charging service fees for ASR
 

Dear oneworld4u

I guess no one has brought this up yet so I'm asking you if you can pass this to someone who can fix this problem.
Recently, when I call AA to ask them to do ASR on flts operated by AA but ticketed by CX, they claimed that I need to pay them a service fee before they can do ASR for me. They then suggested me to do ASR online or via CX since CX is the airline which ticketed my PNR. However, CX cannot select any seats blocked by AA (all the good ones, e. g., exit row), and when CX sends request to AA, AA does not respond (I call AA and ask them if they receive the request from CX, they say yes but their system does not respond). Moreover, as long as there is a code-share flt (CX-code op by AA) AA.com cannot display the PNR, and even if a PNR could be displayed on AA.com I don't find myself able to select exit row seats (I entered my CX Gold/Sapphire #). I think since ASR is a oneworld elite benefit, AA should not be charging me service fees even if it is ticketed by CX. Also, I'd like to ask you to ask the IT team to conenect all the systems used by OW airlines more closer, so CX (or any other OW carriers) can select premium seats (e. g., exit row) on other OW carriers when the booking is made by them.

Thank you very much!!

What makes you think that? It is not listed on the FF benefits pages at the Oneworld site and I have never seen any individual airline claim that it was so. This is in the same category as priority baggage handling for other airline OW Elites - you might like to think that it's a defined benefit, but it isn't.

Pre-reserved preferential seating is a benefit of OneWorld Status according to the OneWorld website. Now there is a * in that information that says "In accordance with the individual policy of the oneworld member airline operating the flight."

Now the OP's expectation of Advanced Seat Rerservation and OneWorld's meaning of Pre-reserved preferential seating may differ, as may AA's and CX's individual policies.

But I do believe it is correct to say that pre-reserved preferential seating is a benefit of OneWorld status.

oneworld4u - First, thanks for your continued assistance.

Second, the above response was posted in mid-March, and I don't believe we still have a definitive answer on the co-terminal/segment section, as to whether, e.g., having "NYC" or "LON" in cases of a co-terminal city wouldn't be compatible with e-ticketing restrictions.

On a related subject, let me refer to a currently open thread at http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=835664. The OP is trying to book a LONEx ticket with Qantas and is being told that surface segments are counted against the continent segment limits as well as the overall 16-segment maximum rule.

Other OW members, namely AA and BA, do not count them against per-continent limits, and it obviously has nothing to do (in this case) with any limitations of e-ticketing or GDSs. Perhaps it's just a training gap, but with decentralized rule interpretation between the various member airlines, this sort of confusion is very unwelcome.

Perhaps you could comment on how cross-training and "mediation" on issues relating to common products' rules is accomplished between OW member airlines.

Thanks again for all your help.

"Quote:
Originally Posted by Viajero
Issue #2: OWE limited to 16 segments.
Stated reason: Technical limitation of eTickets.
FT suggestion: Linked PNRs.
Response: None so far.
.

Has a substantive response been provided on this issue yet?"

As far as I can tell, this has not still been answered - a possible explanation would be, therefore, that linked PNRs would have solved the problem, but Oneworld decided not to go down that path in order to save $$$$ by reducing the number of segments, and would prefer not to publicise this?

ppppppppppppppppp

Would prefer to hear the answer from oneworld4U... In any event, if linked PNRs are not the solution, what is?

The solution is to keep your itineraries under 16 sectors.

OneWorld's Benefit from 16-segment Maximum
 

It is no fantasy that OneWorld benefits from a reduction in maximum flight segments -- it's a FACT. They sell a ticket for the same price that has 4 less flights (potentially). That frees up a seat that otherwise would not have been available for sale.

PC timetable
 

The downloadable PC timetable is great. However, every so often when I start it up it tells me there's a new version to download, which then takes a minute or so. It would be great if there was an option to have it keep itself up-to-date automatically by downloading/installing new versions when they appeared - and thus remove the start-up delay to install a new version.

I'm sorry, I should I have made myself clearer - I meant, was there actually a feasible technical solution for this that would have permitted QF to continue offering 20 segments?

It is not QF that is no longer offering 20 segments, it is oneworld. - it is a OW product, OW has changed the rules to make it 16 segemnts rather than 20. Don't go blaming QF for this.

Dave

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

:D

Bukhara - some people here do value your input ;)

I don't see why wanting oneworld4u to address this issue is a knock on Bukhara's input. Oneworld4u has stated that the reason for imposing the 16 segment limitation was due to IATA changes and that would consider expanding the number back to 20 when technological advances allowed that. We are still awaiting oneworld4u's response to the suggestion that was made. Sure Bukhara doesn't see it as viable and I certainly value his opinion (as a BA insider) but I myself would still like to hear the official representative's response to that suggestion and to the quote I provided from the IATA's eticketing program manager that 16 segment eticketing is "not a showstopper" for longer rtw tickets.

bbbbbbb

Nope, wasn't blaming QF (I am a devoted customer, without being an apologist...) Fundamentally, I am curious to know whether the 16 segment rule (regardless of which organisaiton imposes such rules) was introduced purely as a consequence of technical limitations stemming from the phasing out of paper tickets, because the previous posts on this issue by oneworld4U seem a bit inconclusive/unclear to me. Like many who read and enjoy flyertalk fora, I am not an industry insider or expert, so a response in reasonably plain english would be nice. If other posters insist on answering for oneworld4U, then I suppose I can't stop them, but it would be helpful if the focus could remain on the purpose of this particular forum and all of the apparent "baggage" from previous debates could be left out...

oneworld4u on PNRs and the 16-segment Explorer limit
 

As the FT blog on the 16-segment limit for oneworld Explorer (and other airline round-the-world fares) shows no sign of abating, let’s get back to some basics.

oneworld Explorer enables customers to develop their own bespoke itineraries choosing from more than 9,000 flights a day offered by ten airlines and another 20 affiliates serving some 700 destinations in 150 countries, flying in First, Business, Premium Economy or Economy.

That provides customers with huge choice and flexibility – but, like other round-the-world fares – it also makes it among the most complex of air fares to develop and market.

To make it as easy as possible for travel agents and airline reservations folk to sell and support and for the average customer to plan and buy, we have endeavoured to reduce the complexity as much as possible.

That’s just one reason why Explorer pricing is based on the number of continents visited, rather than mileage flown.

It also means using systems and procedures as far as possible that are in common usage throughout the industry and easily understood by the average travel agent.

With the entire air travel industry moving to a 16-segment limit for individual e-tickets a few months ago, Explorer has followed.

Can you imagine the complexity in supporting the sale of a product not based on these global industry-wide standards? Can you imagine the number of FT blogs that would flow as a result of sales agents around the world being unfamiliar with the additional idiosyncrasies of such a fare? How many of the participants of this forum for experts and enthusiasts, let alone the standard small town travel agent, have heard of such a thing as “linked PNRs”, quite apart from understanding how they may work?

So, sorry Viajero, Hugh and others, but linked PNRs is not regarded as a practical procedure for this product at this time.

As it is, very, very few people used Explorer for journeys of more than 16 segments – the exceptions seem to be FT regulars! Of course we do not want to disappoint any customers, but to continue to make this product marketable, saleable and supportable around the world has meant making the 16-segment change.

We still believe this product represents excellent value for money and, for the vast majority of Explorer’s users, the 16-segment change has had no impact whatsoever.

As for the British sky being yellow (Bukhara), as everyone knows, it is predominantly grey and white with a rare and occasional smattering of blue during daylight hours. At night, black is its dominant tone, except in cities where light pollution taints it orange… or even yellow!

Happy and safe travelling - and, as ever, thanks for your interest in and support of oneworld.

oneworld4u - thank you for (hopefully) putting that issue to bed.

You will find that many discussions on FT seem to go round in circles. The alliance sites (which combine posters from airline forums with their own idionsyncracies) are probably even worse!

The other key question for many posters on this thread, which I believe remains unanswered (and relates to the 16-segment limit) is:

Is it possible to use City codes on oneworld fares (eg LON rather than LHR/LGW/LCY, NYC rather than JFK/LGA/EWR)?
and thus save burning short land segments where OW airlines connect into different airports.

------------------------

Oneworld4u

Could you read this thread

There are serious quite extraordinary problems getting Malev flights to post to other one world frequent flyer accounts especially to BA executive club.
There are ridiculous patently untrue reasons given in some cases that the person is a no show.

Have you heard about this problem as frankly it's unacceptable and could you bring it to the attention of someone in both oneworld and Malev that can END the problem ?
I've flown 6 sectors with them recently and only 3 have appeared , the others have gone missing.
Some people have had to retro claim claims being rejected several times despite having all the required evidence of having taken the flights.

Could you assure us that the matter is being and will be taken in hand and keep us up to date (perhaps in that thread) as to what the REAL problem is and progress as to fixing it.

Thank you.

Earthman: I've asked the folks at MA to look into the issues you and the thread have highlighted and let me have their comments. oneworld4u

Change of Wording on Technical Rule Sheet
 

I have just noticed the following change on the technical rule sheet (at least I don't recall seeing this wording before), which would seem to settle the issue of using city codes instead of airport codes

(their emphasis)

Yes its different. I have the pdf oneworld_explorer_rule_sheet_03-06-08.pdf (down loaded 5 Mar 08), and that text "between any 2 airports", is not included.

oneworld4u:- What is the meaning of this rule change ??

The key question is whether it is possible still to ticket OW tickets using city names rather than specific airports, or has the whole concept of co-terminals just been ditched as well as part of this so-called improvement that is e-ticketing?

Thanks Oneworld4u-theres quite a few of us that will be looking foward to their comments and more importantly a speedy resolution regarding the apparent malev disappearing flight manifests and consequent non posting of flights or only half posting of miles and program renewal points to other one world carrier program's.

Just my thought, IMHO.

How did they charge airport taxes for co-terminals/cities in old days ?
For example, LHR and LGW have different taxes, NRT and HND have different taxes.
In old days, taxes are collected at airport, so little problem, probably ?
In these days, taxes are collected at ticketing.

A highest tax among co-terminals/cities can be charged ?
Anyway, some tricks are needed to handle this.

I don't have any concrete opinion. Just a thought.

I think they charge on the basis of the highest of the co-terminals. I'm travelling much, much less these days so it's been a while since I had any sort of ticket using co-terminals, but not so long ago that the taxes were collected at the airport! Last time I did it would have been about 3 years ago when I had part of a DONE4 (issued by CX in Taipei) open-dated as LHR-WAS-NYC-HKG where what I ended up flying was LHR-BWI//IAD-EWR//JFK-HKG. This caused absolutely no problems at all at the time.

But now we have the "progress and convenience" of e-ticketing, which as far as I am concerned, as it is currently implemented, is actually all about the profits and convenience of the airlines and is a major step backwards for the customer.

I have heard that the OWE rules will be changing on July 10 - is there truth to this?

Can't see anything about the rules, but the fares ex-Asia (excl Japan & Indonesia) are going up on 1 July for various OW fares. As notified by CX in HK:
There are also increases of 10+% on ex-LHR economy fares (and 5% on F), and on various other routes (e.g. ex-Thailand up 10% in F&J, 7% in Y) on the same date.

http://www.qantas.com.au/agents/dyn/qf/news/200806/0683

provides more on the above - looks like xONEx changes only in Aus, NZ and China/ HK

I think the clarification on "between any two airports" clearly means that surface segments between city airports definitely count

Price increases and rule changes
 

Dear OW4U,

I am currently on my first AONE6 ex MRU and in the process of ordering my second to continue travelling directly after this one is finished. I am now on a paper 20 segment ticket and I can see the advantages of an e-ticket, so no problem with the 16 segments.

The announcement of the possibility of booking the xONEx online was great news. Since I am currently working with the very charming, professional and 'willing to go the extra mile' BA representative at MRU I am somewhat hesitant to wait for the online option to be activated.

In order for me to make the decision which option to use I would like to know:

1. Will the online option also include a $300,- ticket issue fee?
2. Will the prices for tickets go up to compensate for the loss of agent fees?
3. Will OneWorld announce expected price / rule changes to their RTW products in advance?

I love the product (prefer the 'continent' approach and the backtracking) and love the airlines. Just think the management of the RTW routes is a little labour intensive.

Last question: it looks like some OneWorld partners a more hesitant to free up A class seats since I will be always waitlisted for the F class segments, but never for the C class segments (the name CX comes to mind...). Is this a known issue when travelling on a BA AONEx ex MRU (or other low cost option)? Issue resolved!

Thanks for the time!

Dear OW4U,

As I have talked about in another post, I have run into a brick wall trying to book a DGLOB34 that includes the routing HNL-NAN-BNE. These are QF/FJ codeshares, QF3840 and QF398.

However, the Global Explorer webpage suggests that I should be able to use these as they are operated by Air Pacific (not part of OW, but specifically mentioned as usable in a OWGE).

Can you please clarify whether this is a misunderstanding on AA's end, or a valid rule that needs to be updated on the webpage.

Ok, this directly implies that "Linked PNR's" do exist, but are not widely known.

OW4U,

Two additional questions:

My lovely BA rep in MRU says she cannot issue an e-ticket with sectors open. This is surely wrong. She cannot issue a ticket with all sectors open, at least one needs to be confirmed, but that is the only restriction, right?

Any idear when the online tool goes live? Is this a matter of weeks or months? No definite answer needed, an indication will do... :D

Thanks!
Henk

I think so... my TA booked me tickets on RJ and QF separately (connecting at BKK). They are on separate PNRs.

I asked her to combine them as I was connecting and they did. The QF PNR now lists all the RJ flights as well (missing things like seating requests).

She apparently had to get both the RJ and the QF people on the phone and conference them, so they could each do what they had to do in their own system, as opposed to doing it herself.

Of course, I then called MA to connect my other two sectors to RJ, but they had a lot of trouble working out what the hell I was after :)