Qatar Airways raises Avios surcharges substantially

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

• AJA says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:00

  Expensive and no UK/EC261 protection on the inbound flights to Europe. Plus a long stop in the middle of the night in DOH. Plus not that easy to buy as they often just offer the double Avios option. Plus people complain about the seat roulette on BA between CW and CS but QR has a habit of swapping aircraft too often and they’ve got 4 different J seats including the old 2-2-2 layout still.

  • BJ says:

    15 Sep15 September 08:17

    Many would claim that in practice on QR you have no protection on the UK/EU outbound either.

  • JDB says:

    15 Sep15 September 08:41

    That’s a lot of anti QR sweeping generalisation prejudices rolled into one! You don’t necessarily need to have a long stop (some people seem to like one for the lounges though) or for it to be in the middle of the night. En route to Australia, one can have an early evening arrival in Doha, a two hour layover and then long overnight flight to Australia arriving there late afternoon. Total travel time the same as BA, save that with BA you get to enjoy two overnights on the aircraft and arrive at 6am. It may be a matter of personal preference, but the QR option suits me far better before even considering the better all round service.

    Re the seat roulette, is it so awful? For me there’s a lot more to QR than Q Suite. We have flown 2-2-2 to HCMC and will voluntarily fly 2-2-2 from Beijing to Doha next month. We are perfectly happy with that.

    Re price: QR has been cheaper and offered routes (eg to HCMC) that BA doesn’t offer. The 261 issue, for us at least, isn’t any basis for choosing an airline. You are excluding yourself from flying good airlines like QF, JL, CX, QR, EK etc. for what? They don’t just leave passengers stranded and one also has travel insurance. And with this 261 airline xenophobia, you are imposing BA on yourself into the bargain. Super.

    • AJA says:

      15 Sep15 September 09:02

      You can fly AY on a reward ticket and get EC261 protection in both directions so it’s not true I’m limited to BA.

      You can do as you say and not have a long layover in DOH but that doesn’t mean every route offers that option.

      Everything I said is true and can happen, more often than not. You seem to take pleasure in contradicting me at every turn. I’m not sure why.

      Do you think this increase in cash for a reward flight is good news?

      • BJ says:

        15 Sep15 September 11:10

        Finnair is the Gold standard for longhaul connecting flights: 261 both ways, no seat lottery, the best business class flat bed, arguably the best aircraft, and frequent sub 1h connections that work most of the time at a low-stress airport.

        • Mark says:

          15 Sep15 September 13:03

          Of course I’d rather have EC261 coverage than not, but it doesn’t cover every eventuality, and given that Finnair doesn’t subscribe to any ADR scheme you are still dependent on them to meet their obligations or be prepared to pursue your tights through the courts. Plus the chances of you needing it for any given flight is relatively small. For that reason it only has a minor impact on my decision making.

          That said, the Qatar fee increases likely make Finnair much more attractive over Qatar now for Avios redemptions on the routes they fly – until they increase their fees….

        • David says:

          15 Sep15 September 13:08

          Now that QR has done this, I presume it’s going to get a lot harder to find availablity.

• Barry says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:01

  NZ to UK about to book yesterday
  Today £270 ish more 🥲

• Bernard says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:03

  Avios has only one direction of travel: constant value erosion.
  Higher points by stealth (RFS) then ever higher add on charges.
  But it seems many will still pay, so if you are the airline, what stops ?
  More to come is the only certainty..
  though the IAGL management claim thru have a ‘new currency’, that’s rubbish. If they did, it has inflation problems of Zimbabwe.

• BlueHorizonUK says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:03

  I believe the increase is due to QR adding a Redemption Fee which is NON-Refundable. This applies to all redemptions across the entire network.

  • BJ says:

    15 Sep15 September 08:19

    Why would it vary so much by destination then?

  • Pogonation says:

    15 Sep15 September 09:07

    This has been on for years.. it is not new

• Will says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:05

  Hope the US review comes down heavily on the FF schemes where they are gouging us. Oil is cheap again. Fares should be falling not increasing

  • JDB says:

    15 Sep15 September 08:12

    @Will – it is highly unlikely that the review of FF plans will bring any benefit to passengers – government interference in these markets usually has unintended consequences and not only do the big US airlines (and their associated credit card friends) have considerable lobbying power but they will find ways to maintain the status quo for their profitability. There ain’t some extra friendly FF passenger nirvana about to be created!

    The more interesting and possibly quite immediate (before year end) news for US passengers is the potential introduction of 261 style compensation.

    • BJ says:

      15 Sep15 September 08:23

      Any government interference is a disaster waiting to happen. I’m still waiting to see the benefit from capping fews on credit cards. I am also unconvinced that energy price caps are a good thing.

      • James says:

        15 Sep15 September 08:55

        Allowing corporations to do what they want without consumer protections or regulation is a proven disaster movie of greed and corruption. It goes both ways.

        • JDB says:

          15 Sep15 September 09:19

          @James – well regulation has worked very well in the UK water sector! The trouble is that corporations are usually smarter than regulators and governments are usually pretty rubbish at running businesses (for the benefit of customers or the public shareholder) so there’s no easy answer.

          In respect of regulating FF programmes, what are you suggesting the government might do? Order reduced redemption rates, higher earnings rates, more redemption seats offered. The system seems pretty transparent, vibrant and innovative and if anyone doesn’t like it, they don’t have to join any loyalty programme and/or they can sue as they often do in the US with the benefit of no win no fee agreements. Should the government also be interfering in US country club memberships or gated communities both of which might be considered unfair?

        • Tom says:

          15 Sep15 September 09:20

          This is not the opposite of capping fees, sorry. The point is companies are interested in protecting their profitability so if you cap interchange fees it just leads to either a cut in benefits to maintain margins or the companies finding another way to charge customers.

          Regulation is absolutely necessary but price regulation which interferes with supply and demand dynamics is basic economic illiteracy.

        • BJ says:

          15 Sep15 September 11:17

          Yeah but there are things where meddling backfires even when supposedly in our interests; my fear is FF schemes might be one of them. Without interference customers can vote with their wallet, sometimes interference removes or limits that option. It’s a difficult one.

  • William Avery says:

    15 Sep15 September 08:17

    I think if it was a genuine climate tax then that would be fair and should be sucked up but assume it’s just revenue to cover the losses/lower profit they are making?

  • BJ says:

    15 Sep15 September 08:55

    FF schemes are not gouging us, there is still HUGE value to be obtained from them when you know your schemes well and are canny enough to use it/them well versus revenue option.

    • meta says:

      15 Sep15 September 10:13

      Governments should regulate surcharges by introducing caps like in Japan, Brazil, Hong Kong and a few other places. Otherwise these charges are plucked out of thin air, presented by marketing departments as taxes so as to appear it’s something mandated by the government.

      If FF programmes want to increase the number of miles as a result, so be it but if it goes too high that people can’t earn that much then the loyalty programmes will find themselves in trouble. It is a fact that loyalty programmes are more profitable than running an airline.

      • BJ says:

        15 Sep15 September 11:32

        The airlines would just go down other avenues such as hiking miles required, lounge access, seat selection, bags only for a a cash fee or more miles.

        The direction of the game has always been the same – increasing costs, closing loopholes and limiting abuse. Despite this, as doors have closed new ones have always opened creating new opportunities. My fear is that too muvh regulation will fundamentally change that dynamic and not for the better.

        • meta says:

          15 Sep15 September 12:07

          If they increase the costs at other end they’ll then kill the programme that feeds them. Unbundling is already a common practice so nothing new here and honestly I don’t care about lounge access, bags or advance seat selection. I am just interested in having a good onboard service and hard product.

          I also wouldn’t worry about loopholes. Marketing departments are clueless about them until the words gets out. Hence why the best deals are known to only a select few.

          And have we seen anything drastic with Japan, Hong Kong and Brazil examples?

        • BJ says:

          15 Sep15 September 13:43

          I don’t care about thos things either as I lrefer to kerk my journey times as short as possibly and have travelled HBO for well over a decade already. However, many do care and for the moment they do have choices between airlinez that bundle and those that don’t. If interference forces airlines to maximise other avenues to maximise revenue some of those choices could evaporate fast.

          My other concern is that too much or the wrong regulatory interference could push the loyalty industry increasingly to Nectar-line schemes with mostly fixed-value rewards the excite nobody and is the last thing people like us in the HfP community want.

  • BBbetter says:

    15 Sep15 September 12:04

    Oil is a smaller factor in flight prices.
    Demand and competition on a given route are the biggest factors influencing price.

• JDB says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:06

  Maybe this change will bring the ability to use the companion voucher a step nearer.

  • BJ says:

    15 Sep15 September 08:32

    A lot of people now have difficulty collecting the amounts of avios required within sensible timescales. I am now under the impression that even amongst HfP readers a lot of avios are being purchased via Boost at 0.92ppa.

    • Littlefish says:

      15 Sep15 September 08:57

      This. And if I am buying at 0.92p then I need to be confident of at least that level of value when I redeem. This no notice Qatar devaluation (and others) plays into this. BA were already <1p value, I suspect Qatar are now too … so it was 2 for 1 / 50% off redemptions only, pretty much already.
      However, from Qatar's point of view I suppose if they continue to see these awards snapped up 11 months out at the new pricing then it'll stick.

      • JDB says:

        15 Sep15 September 09:24

        I’m not supporting QR’s move but it felt pretty inevitable that they would move towards BA redemption cash pricing. The relative cheapness of QR redemptions has been so hammered home that ‘enhancement’ of the fee structure shouldn’t really be a surprise.

        @BJ alludes in another post to the many gem opportunities that remain but once/if over publicised these too will vanish.

• Ruth says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:15

  Early 2025
  UK-SGN, HAN-UK 150K + £513
  Now taxes £853 and can only see 300K for the exact dates now.

• HH says:

  15 Sep15 September 08:18

  ZRH-DPS booked last month for 80k+£171.50 and now selling for 80k+£335.20

  SIN-LHR booked last month for 75k+£178.20 and now selling for 75k+£342

  That’s almost double the cash component!

  • executiveclubber says:

    15 Sep15 September 09:29

    I think SIN-LHR is still a decent deal even at this pricing

    • HH says:

      15 Sep15 September 11:09

      At 0.92p/A, that’s over £1k one-way. It doesn’t feel like a “deal” compared to the old days.

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