REX cancels frequent flyer program blames Gillard Labor Govt
Australia’s largest stand alone regional airline, REX or Regional Express, has cancelled its frequent flyer loyalty program and blamed the Gillard Government for bringing it to the verge of ruin.
This is how it broke the news on its website this morning.
Dear Customer Regional aviation is facing its greatest fight for survival come 1 July 2012 as draconian government measures translate into astronomical cost increases, which for Rex alone amounts to more than $5 million per year. To put this into perspective, this would be equivalent to the Qantas Group facing a $300 million cost increase, which is more than the $200 million profit the Qantas Group posted last financial year.In order to ensure that the majority of its regional network continues to be serviced, Rex has to implement a series of radical initiatives to reduce the cost base. One of the most painful we are compelled to take is the termination of the Rex Flyer program.
With immediate effect, existing memberships will not be renewed at expiry date and neither will any new members be accepted. Members are strongly encouraged to check the membership expiry date online at www.rex.com.au. As per the Terms & Conditions, only points accrued by the expiry date will count towards the reward flight. Any reward flight earned will need to be redeemed and flown within 6 months of the date earned.
Rex would like to take this opportunity to thank all members for their support over the last 9 years.
Before the leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, rushes out to the nearest REX hangar to pose in front of one of its stricken SAAB 340 turpo-props, some perspective is offered.
REX is a very smart, very savvy, and very profitable airline, and delivers an outstanding service.
But it does live on a knife edge, as it always has, in that with room for no more than 33 passengers per flight, and sometimes less, it only has to see a drop off of two or three passengers, or a decline in yields or margins to have a route pushed into loss.
Conversely, it only has to win a few passengers per flight to make an overall profit margin that Qantas or Virgin Australia managers dream about, if they could apply them to jets that fly with hundreds of seats at a time rather than dozens.
REX also has no real competitors on many of its routes, other than the remote risk that customers might actually drive to Sydney, Melbourne or Adelaide, which over much of its network, is a costly and time consuming option that doesn’t really make sense.
The REX loyalty program was a number of things.
It was by far the most honest and straightforward. You earned a free flight for every ten flights, just like getting a free haircut at the barbers, or a special deli reward at your favourite country bakery.
While the Qantas and Virgin Australia schemes offer much flashier rewards, they are also much harder to get, they come with more conditions than a farmer’s mortgage, and they have largely morphed into data base selling programs rather than reward programs, especially as they make increasing amounts of money out of third parties like grocery chains and bank cards and create points to reward people who needn’t ever fly with Qantas as a paying passenger in order to compete with some schmuk who mistakenly thinks buying Qantas fares earns the entitlement to first dibs on a free seat.
Nah, nah and nah. The last thing modern complex loyalty programs reward is loyalty.
This makes the loss of the honest and simple REX program the sadder.
But somewhere in REX someone no doubt did the sums and worked out that Gillard Government or no Gillard Government, its loyalty program was costing it too much to retain customers it wasn’t likely to lose anyhow, since driving is seldom an option, and where there was a Qantaslink alternative, it would take an extraordinary frequency of flying between Wagga Wagga and Sydney to qualify for anything.
The bottom line is that REX understands how tough the regional aviation environment has always been during its nearly 10 years of operations, and taking decisions like this is why it has survived and prospered in a sector that has annihilated the hopes and fortunes of dozens of would be country airlines.










Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.
Well blaming the government does seem to be the thing to do at the moment. I whacked my shin on a table last night whilst getting up to feed the baby. I am sure that it is Gillards fault somehow.
I would have thought it better to introduce a more traditional scheme rather than axing it altogether…
Rex must have also calculated that it won’t suffer a customer backlash by taking sides in politics. Today’s press release is one of a number of anti-government statements coming from Rex in recent months.
Customers who don’t like their ticket-money being used for political campaigns don’t have an alternative on many routes, so obviously Rex figures that they’ll still have to keep flying Rex anyway, like it or not.
Agree with ozFinn.
Whilst Rex is a good plucky little airline, it certainly made a blunder in having a 1 in 10 flights free program.
That is not a viable ratio for any airline, regardless of Ben’s comment that is was “an honest and straightforward program”.
Furthermore, why would it introduce such a costly program if it has few competitors on its routes.
Ben is correct that carriers like Rex with small aircraft do indeed live on a knife edge for all the reasons he set out. Their tipping point of a profit versus a loss on a flight is indeed fragile.
The aviation busines is a tough business regardles of what sector you are in.
Small carriers have a fragile existence even if they operate monopoly routes and receive state government subsidies to provide an airline service to small communities.
They still have to generate enough sales per flight to make it viable and this is hard to achieve in many rural communties. They also face considerable price elasticity isssues; competing with a person’s own motor vehicle.
And of course they have not been immune to the massive escalation in the price of fuel in recent yeras.
QF will give you a free flight (less taxes/fuel) after 8 identical flights (rough ratio). More like 1 after 11-12 if you want to use your points to pay for the surcharges.
The Rex program is certainly in the same league as this.
Fair enough Ross regarding the “earnings” side of the program
I had not completed the maths.
That being said, the “redemptions” side is a very different matter.
For the reasons Ben identified re the general viability of an airline with small aircraft, a single redemption is a far larger proportion of its total capacity than on an airline with large aircraft.
Frequent flyer programs are largely founded on the premise that airlines can extract value out of their unsold capacity and a great deal of this is directed to off-peak flights. As major airlines (in reasonable times) run at around 82% load factors, they theoretically have an average of 18% of their total capacity to play with. What this actually works out to be because of their frequency over a route, is zero capacity allocated on peak flights and around 30% on off-peak flights and virtually zero capacity at peak times of the year.
A carrier like Rex has neither frequency or flexible capacity.
Hence redemption takeup can really hurt its viability, especially if it does not have tight inventory control.
They also have the issue of pent-up demand for redemptions and will have the ACCC on their backs if they do not fulfil the program’s promise. Hence they have the challenge of making seats available to comply with the customer proposition of the program and then not displace revenue pasengers when doing so. This is hard when you have small aircraft.
Furthermore, because of the profile of Rex’s passengers; they would almost certainly tend to redeem their travel over the very sector that they usually travel on which is therefore dilutionary revenue wise. Whereas in the programs of the big airlines redemptions are generally on routes where the customer has not earnt them. Redemptions in the big airline programs generally generate a leisure flight that otherwise would not have been taken and, what is more, they often travel with a companion who does not use points and hence this companion trip generates incremental revenue.
I could go on to point out the positives and the negatives and the economics of the big airline programs but the comparison I have provided above I think illustrates how a program for a small aircraft airline like Rex is a liability rather than an assett.
Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.