Are they BA flights with QF flight numbers booked as part of the QF/BA J sale that was on last year? You may be able to get QF to re-route you via DXB.. I have done so.

So long as the showers work, wifi works and there is a drink or two, there is little going for any of the SIN lounges. The general concourse area is far more interesting for killing an hour or two.

As long as you don't primarily fly Cathay in Economy in anything other than their three most expensive fare buckets (Y, B or H) - http://www.aa.com/i18n/AAdvantage/ea...hayPacific.jsp

Not amused.
I saw this coming, but as Euro-Based Flyer I am punished in many ways:

- SCs on BA do not count for Loyalty Bonus
- No Status Bonus
- No Minimum Miles
- Removal of QF Codeshares on most BA flights.
- Lounge Access removed for QF-Club members (QF-Club membership of my wife is on the hold).

Still a few SCs to go until I reach LTG. Sad!

They should inform their clients much earlier. German courts just set 3 Months as timeframe to publish enhancements.

At least they should honour existing bookings!

Still got no newsletter - so officially I am not informed!

How come, whenever I respond to a whinge stating that airline XX only gives YY% earn on QFF, stating that it is XX airline that sets the rate (based on what they will pay QF in commission via points), everyone shoots me down in flames, saying that it is the fault of QFF being a dodgy program. In short, it isn't the fault of airline XX, it is QF that is being stingy, since they are the ones providing the points in return for the commission they receive from airline XX and my patronage on them.

Now that the earning rate on BA has been reduced to almost nothing, all of a sudden it turns around and it is no longer QF that is at fault for the lousy earning rate, it is BA, since they are the ones providing the benefit.

EVERY SINGLE TIME I have tried to defend QF for poor earning rates in QFF on other carriers, stating it is the other carrier that sets the earning rate, everybody poo-poo's me, saying that QF is the culprit and it is QF that provides the benefit (via points) after receiving payment via the other airline.

Well, if that is the case, then in this case, WRT BA, then the six month rule should apply. QF provides the benefit (in terms of QFF points) and receives the off-set in payment from BA.

Dave

How it is decided exactly what the rates are going to be is quite a different question to who is providing the agreed points

Whether QF told/asked BA not to give 100% or BA is choosing to change, it is BA that is providing the points and it is that element that is covered by the QFF T&Cs . For this element I think that they are covered by the provision on the change by a 3rd party

Even if it is QF that told BA that they will not sell them more than 25% for flights, that is a business agreement between BA and QF and not part of the QFF T&Cs

Yes, QF could be the cause of the change to BA's earning offering, but that cause is not something that I can see covered by the T&Cs

The best I can see is that if someone thinks that they have a case for a pre-existing booking on BA, would be to try taking it to court and seeing if a court would agree that the 6 months provision should prevail

Will have to be careful on selecting CX sectors. If any I think BA comes in handy for 25% earning on cheapest NOGQ where even CX members don't get anything. But hopefully when Qatar joins I should have more choices to use AA.

Because the payments agreed are a mutual thing. In some cases, you're right that an airline may not be prepared to pay the price another is asking for it's miles (such as CX not paying AA FFers anything for Cathay economy fares in booking classes other than Y, B or H).

But in the case of the QF/BA changes, they are definitely mutual because BA has done exactly the same thing for Qantas flights - http://www.britishairways.com/travel...d/public/en_gb

In the case of Qantas and Malaysian, Malaysian are obviously quite happy to pay 125% of miles flown in Qantas Business and 150% in Qantas First for their Enrich FFs, because until the 31st of March that is what you will get. It's only on the 31st of March when the Qantas/Emirates JV kicks in that flights from Australia to Europe drop to the lower earning rates - http://www.malaysiaairlines.com/au/e...rlines.html#qf

Is that because:

- Malaysia has randomly decided to get paid less on that particular day?
- Qantas just decided to get stingier on that day? or
- Qantas want people flying to Europe on their metal to credit their miles to QFF and not Enrich?

FF programs are driven by marketers to drive profits for the airline and the marketers behind the QFF one are trying to drive its members to fly to Europe on QF or Emirates rather than MH, BA or CX. Some FFers may say that's dodgy (and it is from a oneworld alliance perspective) but the beancounters and behavioural psychologists at QFF think it makes bottom line sense.

Personally I am still shocked at the number of people staying with QFF with all the recent announcements. If your a frequent shopper, just use your QFF points for upgrades, but otherwise there should be a strong instinct by many to look at other programmes for crediting of flights if you want to stick with oneworld. AA followed by looking at CX and MH should all be strong options to those of there sick of the fleecing. QF is going to continue with largely negative changes if people stick around. Sadly it also means I am less likely to see QF metal from now on and will probably use CX and MH when going back to Aus or simply going to Asia.

It's interesting because here in Europe AF/KL started the first of the big negative announcement with the 1st April changes a few years back. LH then stuck the knife in even harder (to the point where I now won't consider them as they neither offer a best in class product or provide points to compensate), however BA has actually improved their programme making it in my case the obvious choice (otherwise I probably would have picked AA).

Quite close to LTG. Then QF will definitely not be my first OW-Program. Maybe a SC run will make me coming closer to my goal and free me again. Since I like the Lifetime concepts I really would like BA seeing introducing a lifetime Tier (Yes and LH, but I am dreaming).
Hopefully I can tick QF off my list in a one or two years.

I think the QFF program is still worthwhile if you mainly fly QF domestic, and are based in Australia. You can earn QFF points in a lot of different ways (CC spend, Woolies, etc). Spending points on domestic upgrades and/or awards is reasonably good value. For some people, the majority of points would come from CC spend and shopping rather than flying.

However for people who earn a lot flying (and more longhaul and on other OW carriers), it is not worthwhile.

I'd like the LTG as well, but the skeptic in me suspects that as the ranks swell, airlines will find a way to "enhance" lifetime status. My suspicion is that the process will include:

- introduce a new fourth tier (check already - Platinum One)
- slowly reduce the annual earning requirements for Platinum, Gold and Silver
- slowly reduce the benefits of Gold and Silver (to the point where lowest level status benefits on the big US carriers can already be had just by having one of their co-branded credit cards)
- remove references to Lifetime (Delta already did this, their Million Miler program now only offers "complimentary annual status")

They could remove Lifetime Status (like SQ did for Life PPS members).
They did reduce the earning requirement for Sliver.

But actually they improved the benefits for their frequent flyers (status bonus, luggage) so not in line.

Yes, Lifetime is both for member or airline.

Life SG is not life QP. They could de-link SG from the QP and there goes the main benefit without changing the technical definition.

I agree the changes have reduced the value proposition but the programme is still best for me at the moment.

QFF is the only programe where JQ flights can be credited to. Status can be acheived more easily than distance based tiers. Lifetime status is still offered.

However this is still very much YMMV.