Looks like I did a sloppy job of checking the changes in the latest (2016-April-22) rule sheet, and I missed two items (at least!)

This post discusses what I think is the more significant item, and my next post will discuss the other item.

ajnaro has pointed out in another thread (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/onewo...l#post26914209) that the wording of the "Sales Restrictions" section has changed

The pre April 22nd wording was (my bolding):And the new wording is:
So, as ajnaro said in his post^

So now I'm thinking of purchasing my next ex-Africa xONEx in Australia to avoid the FX fees my Australian CC provider charges:).

The second item I missed was pointed out by thois (see post #272 in this thread - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/onewo...t-query-7.html)

Even though the wording of the back-track rules for a second visit to Europe/Middle East has been re-written (see post #324 upthread), rule 4(h) still has the wording regarding excluded inter-zone flights to/from the UK, namely (my bolding):In the new rules, paragraph 4(e) no longer has 3.1.3 or 3.2.3 (or 3. anything in fact), so the continued inclusion of the restriction would appear to be pointless and is probably due to sloppy editing when the rule was changed in April. BUT thois reports that the AA fares section is still disallowing inter-zone flights and is referring to this rule - go figure:rolleyes:

Wow. This thread has gone from joy to misery to even more joy - all in the space of a couple of months. More twists and turns than a good murder mystery novel ....

So wait...
I can now buy an ex-JP DONE3 from an agent in AU and pay the JPY price in AUD?

That's how I'm reading the new wording:)

hmm... I may have to contact the local travel agent to see if she can book such a DONE3 from AU, and put it in the same PNR as the linked DAS13 and any extra US/EU side trips I might need.

I have emailed the itinerary of my proposed next DONE5 (ex-MPM) to an Australian TA.
Waiting see what sort of response I get

With all the recent confusion about which backtrack rules apply, I wonder if this itinerary would be valid.
MPM-DOH-CDG-LHR-DXB-LHR-USA-ASIA-NRT-xLHR-CPT.

It can go on the same PNR

But that doesn't necessarily buy you through-ticket level protection.

Yes, your itinerary is valid
It backtracks through Europe/Middle East and so it must comply with the new rule, which is #3 below:The main requirement is that one of the visits to Europe/Middle East must be "a transfer without stopover" and you have this at the end of your itinerary - NRT-xLHR-CPT.
The exclusion of South Africa/Mauritius is not applicable in your case because you are not travelling to/from Europe in both directions - one of your directions is via the Middle East, namely MPM-DOH.

Another example of how far downhill the once-wonderful AA ATW desk has gone. If any of the old hands is still there they might be able to interpret the rule change differently.

My understanding, from the post by thois, is that it is the AA fares section making this, incorrect, interpretation, not the RTW desk. (Last year when I was trying to book my DONE5 with backtrack in Europe, the RTW desk was agreeing with me, but AA's fares section was adamant that its interpretation was correct.)

This is the "problem" with the RTW desk. It isn't the desk but it's the tariff team. I was talking with, in my mind, their number 1 agent this weekend and it is evident that the Winston Salem team (legacy US) is ill-trained to price these tickets.

Moral of the story, if you think the fare is wrong, use one of the legacy RTW agents (there are 3 that are legacy and amazing) to agree with you. When they do then they have always called tariff for me and "educated them" on how to properly rate the ticket. 30 minutes on hold and my RTW angel came back with the correct fare and routing for me....

New Routing Rules - 01AUG16
 

OK, I will get the discussion going.

It is great news that the ‘legacy’ wording is being removed – see post# 347 upthread where this was first raised (in this thread that is)

So from now on, the AA Pricing Department (or whatever its correct name is) should have no reason to disallow inter-zone segments in Europe/Middle East

__________________________________________________ ___

But the cynic in me says AA will just find some other (mis)interpretation of the rules to make life difficult for us.

I predict the misinterpretation will be over the words “travel to/from Europe in both directions” in order to disallow itineraries that include South Africa and/or Mauritius. I had already given my view on clause 4(e)3 - see post#336 upthread.

What clause 4(e) says is:I’m interested in what others think the words “to/from Europe in both directions” mean in practice. Here’s what I think they mean.

1. A flight TO Europe is a direct flight from an airport in Africa to an airport in the Europe Zone. In practice this currently means a direct flight to either MAD (flying IB), LHR or LGW (flying BA). AB used to have flights from WDH to Germany and may do so again, and AY to my knowledge has never flown to Africa but of course might choose to do so in the future
   x
2. A flight FROM Europe is a direct flight from an airport in the Europe zone to an airport in Africa
   x
3. A journey from an airport in Africa to an airport in Europe VIA DOHA is NOT a flight “to Europe” for the purpose of this rule and a journey from an airport in Europe to an airport in Africa VIA DOHA is NOT a flight “from Europe” for the purpose of this rule.
   x
   I have used DOHA in this example because currently QR is the only Middle East carrier flying to Africa; RJ used to fly there and of course may choose to do so again in the future

What do others think?