Upcoming Qantas Frequent Flyer Changes
May 22, 2011, 1:50 am
#181
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: HKG/BNE
Programs: CX MPO Gold; QFClub
Posts: 336
I disagree; a lifetime top tier status ceases to provide any encouragement to use the carrier much. LT Gold provides a reward for travel performed without removing any incentive to continue to earn the 1200 needed to renew. Once LT Plat status is achieved , then can just focus elsewhere safe in knowledge that always have top QF status
At least LT Plat at a very high level (and I absolutely agree and support the notion of 10 years successive Plat as a pre-requisite a la LH Life SEN - and if you've been Plat since Plat started, you're there already this year) keeps those people attuned to flying QF for another 5 years (say) after LTG.
And you have to be at least 60 years old.
Yep, knew that, and actually don't really have a problem with it at all. Great - a Lifetime top tier for your retirement travel. Limits the liability. Win-win.
May 22, 2011, 2:05 am
#182
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,548
I don't disagree. But I would argue that even LTG removes a considerable impetus to ean/fly QF, and I know quite a few of the LTGs on this board would nod in agreement. How many have attained LTG and switched out of QF? More than one just in this thread. Most of them go on to OWE in another airline, so end up in the First class lounges anyhow..
May 22, 2011, 2:49 am
#184
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OOL/DOH
Programs: QF LTS WP, Avis Pres Club, HH Diam.
Posts: 3,192
May 22, 2011, 3:44 am
#186
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: East Cheam
Programs: QF, BA, VA
Posts: 198
Lifetime status is great for QF when you are locking your FF's into traveling with you (or other OW airlines). I suspect it is not so great when after a few years there are thousands turning LTG. (An assumption on my part.)
You have to find a way to lock those FF's in again or they will use the benefit and fly with other airlines. Why continue with QF if there is nothing else to aim for and other airlines offer better earn and burn rates?
I'm sure QF must have done the maths......maybe!
You have to find a way to lock those FF's in again or they will use the benefit and fly with other airlines. Why continue with QF if there is nothing else to aim for and other airlines offer better earn and burn rates?
I'm sure QF must have done the maths......maybe!
May 22, 2011, 4:24 am
#187
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,548
Lifetime status is great for QF when you are locking your FF's into traveling with you (or other OW airlines). I suspect it is not so great when after a few years there are thousands turning LTG. (An assumption on my part.)
You have to find a way to lock those FF[unwanted apostrophe removed
]s in again or they will use the benefit and fly with other airlines. Why continue with QF if there is nothing else to aim for and other airlines offer better earn and burn rates?
You have to find a way to lock those FF[unwanted apostrophe removed
]s in again or they will use the benefit and fly with other airlines. Why continue with QF if there is nothing else to aim for and other airlines offer better earn and burn rates?Trying to get customers based on quality of offerings rather than by trying to get people to stay for the promise of a pretty card in the future
May 22, 2011, 4:50 am
#188
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: East Cheam
Programs: QF, BA, VA
Posts: 198
(I'll pop the apostrophe back though. When used with abbreviations I believe it is acceptable
)
May 22, 2011, 5:00 am
#189
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,548
It isn't acceptable to use an apostrophe when pluralising. "FF" is an abbreviation, "FFs" would be the plural of the abbreviated "FF" whilst "FF's" would be the possessive form of "FF" .
Dave
May 22, 2011, 5:39 am
#190
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: AVV
Programs: QF, HH
Posts: 1,112
Oh, thank GOD somebody knows the truth about when and where to use apostrophes! ^
May 22, 2011, 5:45 am
#191
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: East Cheam
Programs: QF, BA, VA
Posts: 198
Well, mebe at some point , people will recognise the value of quality over a pretty card
It isn't acceptable to use an apostrophe when pluralising. "FF" is an abbreviation, "FFs" would be the plural of the abbreviated "FF" whilst "FF's" would be the possessive form of "FF" .
Dave
It isn't acceptable to use an apostrophe when pluralising. "FF" is an abbreviation, "FFs" would be the plural of the abbreviated "FF" whilst "FF's" would be the possessive form of "FF" .
Dave
(Flying these days has lost the magic it used to have. For me anyway.)(As for the apostrophe, the whole issue of possessive apostrophes has never been properly addressed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language is inconclusive when it comes to apostrophes. So I'll pop my back.
I wonder if FF should actually be F.F.?)
May 22, 2011, 5:47 am
#192
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 805
Yes, I agree that quality and a good earn/burn rate are better than a shiny card.
On the other matter:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe
On the other matter:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe
May 22, 2011, 5:50 am
#193
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,529
May 22, 2011, 5:58 am
#195
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,548
Originally Posted by TonyHancock
(As for the apostrophe, the whole issue of possessive apostrophes has never been properly addressed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language is inconclusive when it comes to apostrophes. So I'll pop my back. I wonder if FF should actually be F.F.?)
I wonder if FF should actually be F.F.?)I would agree that F.F. would be an appropriate abbreviation , same as I would always tend to use e.g. and i.e. in a written document rather than the sloppier eg and ie form
