Qatar Airways raises Avios surcharges substantially

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

• Bobby says:

  15 Sep15 September 14:47

  Looks like the charge has been halved in the last couple of hours 🤔

• Chris says:

  15 Sep15 September 14:51

  I’m platinum on qatar. Their standards have fallen drastically since COVID and they are now just another average airline. Don’t be fooled by their scam trax rating. They don’t deserve 5 stars. The q suites are getting tired. Non q suites aircraft are also tired. But their food since the disaster 2022 FA Cup menu has been simply horrendous. Yesterday I sent a meal back as it was served stone cold. Basics such as putting ice in a gin and tonic.. no sliced lemon available!!. Serving bread rolls without butter.. I could go on and on.. they’ve lost the plot totally.

  • Joe says:

    16 Sep16 September 22:21

    What route was this Chris? That’s very disappointing to hear… I haven’t flown with them since May 2022 when both the Qsuite experience & the soft product were still as I’d remembered throughout the many years prior of living in the ME. Has it really got that bad consistently, or was this just a single dodgy experience?

• PB2 says:

  15 Sep15 September 15:00

  MainlyMiles (Singapore based I think) is reporting Qatar have already backtracked today a little on the sharp increases, “softening” the rises on some routes.

  • Chris James says:

    15 Sep15 September 16:28

    yes apparently by 50%

• Tim says:

  15 Sep15 September 15:11

  Reports coming in that it was a mistake. ‘Qatar Airways now claims that doubling award fees was a “mistake”’. [Loyalty Lobby]

• Roberto says:

  15 Sep15 September 15:30

  I confirm that high rises apparently have been backtracked….I checked several routes from Madrid and now look similar to previous days.

• Neil says:

  15 Sep15 September 15:45

  Indeed!!

  RTN QR Business Class Redemption now showing as 150,000 Avios +£623 now… seems the original increase has been halved!

  • LittleNick says:

    15 Sep15 September 16:16

    Whilst there seems to be some backtrack on the increase in the surcharge, this is still very disappointing. It’s clearly the wrong direction of avios but I suspect that’s the way it’s going for all operators of avios, reducing value had per point. Making it more a kin to a currency with a fixed conversion rate to fiat. Whilst I would generally oppose government regulation/intervention in FF schemes, I would agree with the two caveats to this:
    1) An airline selling avios then a week later significantly devalues the purchase is akin to breaking its contact for the purchase. Some could even potentially argue it’s worse
    2) Japan carefully regulate YQ surcharges based on actual fuel prices and airlines can’t make them up as they see fit, I would personally welcome this approach from more governments worldwide. I believe this is effective good regulation and would not over regulate the scheme.

    • BJ says:

      15 Sep15 September 16:33

      If the airlines cannot get what they want via YQ they will find other ways so regulation might nit help that much in the grand scheme of things. Regulation just encourages uniformity, competition by contrast encourages opportunity. If authorities want to regulate they should regulate joint ventures and possibky even alliances out of existence, and they should break up AF/KLM, Lufty Group and IAG. While they’re at it they should regulate against nonEU carriers owning stakes in EU carriers. The whole industry has become far too cosy, I’m tired of seeing a string of numbers for most legacy flights.

      • BBbetter says:

        15 Sep15 September 17:08

        Nobody in EU wants to invest in or start an EU long haul full service airline. Without Delta’s money, VS would’ve been bankrupt by now.
        Instead of banning non-EU investors, EU needs to stop governments interfering in airlines operations.

        • BJ says:

          15 Sep15 September 17:42

          That’s my whole point except that if there is to be any interference it should only be to prevent cosy relationships and encourage competition.

        • BJ says:

          16 Sep16 September 05:52

          @meta, at the moment there remains variation across airlines in unbundling giving people who care about such things some choices. Regulate YQ and airlines will probably all start charging for all of them. From comments I get impressikn that baggage is important to most readers; it remains common that premium cabins come with very generous luggage allowances. That could easily be targeted if airlines have their YQ capped. They could be creative too: prepare your own boarding pass or we will charge you, fast track for a fee, twilight bag drop fees, standard and premium meals. Where there’s a will there’s a way. I don’t like high YQ any more than the next person but I’m not convinced regulation will hold back price inflatiin in the long term. Ultimately airlibez can only push revenue fares and reward costs to points at which peopke refuse to pay regardless of how tvey apportion tgeir costs and how they are regulated. I commented earlier that I thought loyalty scheme were increasingly approaching that limit. They are getting away with it at the moment due to high revenue fares but a reckoning may come for the loyalty sector if they keep pushing higher costs demand cools and revenue fares fall.

    • callum says:

      15 Sep15 September 16:47

      You cannot “generally oppose” government regulation of FF schemes while simultaneously saying that YQ fees should be regulated and redemption prices should be regulated. That’s a fairly comprehensive level of control.

      Devaluing Avios after selling them isn’t akin to breaking a contract, let alone “even worse”. You can dislike it as if it was, but it’s very clearly not.

      I like flying from jurisdictions that limit YQ etc., but I don’t see a logical reason why they shouldn’t be set to whatever they want. They’re private businesses, if they want to charge high fees then I just won’t use them.

      • LittleNick says:

        15 Sep15 September 18:43

        Why can’t I generally oppose regulation in the FF market? Please explain, I completely accept the argument that once governments intervene/regulate, costs increase in any market. I’m saying YQ should be regulated because it’s always been marketed as a fuel surcharge based on oil/kerosene prices. If they want to add an additional fee for redemption then that’s different, but bundling it all altogether as a fuel surcharge is misleading, transparency is always good for both user and supplier.

        Selling avios and then suddenly increasing redemption fees is downright bad business behaviour and is market manipulation of the consumer. If the seller knows in advance which QR clearly do that in a weeks time your avios will be worth far less that’s not perfect competition or a good market, that’s asymptotic knowledge in the market. If you knew that in a weeks time your avios would be worth less you may not bother purchasing them.

        If they want to add redemption fees in addition to YQ then fine, but bundling it up as a fuel surcharge is misleading and wrong which is why I support government regulation based on actual fuel data for YQ.

        • meta says:

          15 Sep15 September 19:13

          @BJ What else can they charge for? Unbundling has already happened and if they introduce charges for lounge access, seat selection, etc. it won’t be anything new. They can also increase the amount of miles. However, introducing all of the above is a risky strategy as that might mean that loyalty programmes are a thing of the past.

          Who is going to pay say half a million Avios pp to fly to Australia + true taxes if the lounge access, seat selection, bags and other bits are not included? Do airlines really want to kill the most profitable part of their business? Do they want to end selling miles to credit card companies and other partners?

          At the moment airlines are double/triple charging customers through miles and through YQ. Although admittedly BA less so with RFS.

        • Callum says:

          16 Sep16 September 00:57

          Why did you stop reading half way through the first line? You can moan about anything you want, you can’t claim to be “generally against regulation” however when you’re simultaneously…. calling for strict regulation.

          YQ isn’t marketed at all. Looking up a random QR fare, it’s listed as “Carrier Imposed International Surcharge”. So, from your description, you should be completely fine with it? It’s not “bundled up as a fuel surcharge” – you’re just calling it that.

• Charles says:

  15 Sep15 September 17:02

  Loyalty Lobby sums things ups perfectly, which I don’t often say:

  ‘ Let’s see how long it takes for Qatar Airways and Finnair to adopt BA’s insane fuel and other surcharges when their programs are facing extreme inflation due to “garbage” Avios converted from BA.

  Qatar Airways and Finnair’s adoption of a common currency that BA and IAG airlines use without having any guard rails in place for conversions was a misguided endeavor.

  It is understandable that BA Executive Club members prefer to fly to other airlines with much lower fees and better service rather than set foot on BA.’

  • BBbetter says:

    15 Sep15 September 17:11

    lol, LL suddenly got this bright idea from somewhere?
    You think QR joined Avios without knowing there’ll be transfers?
    Some brilliant business acumen on comments today.

    • Charlie says:

      15 Sep15 September 17:38

      ??? You realistically think Qatar and Finnair both had some long term game plan of devaluation by joining Avios? There was probably a balance of factors considered, including IAG printing more Avios than they should in the initial decision, but to suggest Qatar and Finnair had a long term plan is delusional, otherwise alignment would have happened on day 1. Your business acumen accrued to nil, you numpty.

    • Rob says:

      15 Sep15 September 18:28

      The Qatar strategy is to make the programme far more appealing than BAEC to encourage transfers out of BA and thus generate huge payments from IAGL. It is working.

      • LittleNick says:

        15 Sep15 September 18:46

        How is it working if they then suddenly wake up the surcharged for said redemptions?

        • Rob says:

          15 Sep15 September 19:02

          They don’t need to be ludicrously cheaper / better availability than BA, just cheaper / better enough. They are trying to find a balance, with the upside that putting up fees means they can get RevMan to release more seats for redemptions.

          If we’re honest, given BA’s availability issues to Asia / Australasia, Qatar could charge far more than BA and still get our business because BA simply doesn’t have the seats ….

• Ranger43 says:

  15 Sep15 September 17:14

  Booked a QA redemption back in March EDi-DOH-DPS return £588 & 152000 avios (2 passengers) £50 dearer today

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.