Open complaint letter

[MAN Flyer]

I fired an email off last night to those I know in the UK. It was titled 'Disgrace' !.

As a result, I think I'll hang fire for now on our official request to use some of their images on here.

[jhm]

My initial thoughts:

1 The letter seems too dense with complaints, i.e. most people will switch off after the first few. For example, although we all regret dropping the "Raffles" name, the business decision has been made, it's been implemented and nothing we say/do will change this. Do we really need to include this ? It just seems to deflect the attention from our main point(s).

2 Words mean nothing; action does, e.g. book a flight on some other airline; send the ticket to SQ with a letter.

3 I agree with zvezda that a general petition will most likely be ignored and that what's required is a personal letter (not e-mail!) based on that individual's circumstances. What will, I think, make SQ pay attention is something like this - I'm a [TPP][QPP]; I've flown X paid flights in Raffles/First over the past 12 months; [gripe about changes]; as a result, I'm booking / will book my next flight with [competitor]; here's my receipt from [BA] ; yours faithfully. Address that not only to head office but also cc to the relevant country manager.

[jhm]

Some further thoughts:

1 Could we please capitalise properly KrisFlyer ?

2 In the beginning, rather than "Having been loyal customers of your airline for some time now", can we please specify that we're Solitaire PPS, Qualifying PPS, Elite Gold etc ? This makes more of an impact.

3 As others have mentioned, we need to remove/tone down references to grossly unfair, outrageous, disaster etc - this is meant to be a business letter rather than a rant.

4 The ending needs to be strong - e.g. suggesting/telling SQ of the impact on their bottom line (the only thing which they'll care about) - rather than some vague hint that we might bank our miles elsewhere (SQ says big deal!) or consider taking some other airline.

[shortfinals]

All points noted: will alter when i get back from the orifice.

[jjpb3]

4 The ending needs to be strong - e.g. suggesting/telling SQ of the impact on their bottom line (the only thing which they'll care about) - rather than some vague hint that we might bank our miles elsewhere (SQ says big deal!) or consider taking some other airline.

While a strong ending with a numerical estimate of the shift in spending would be nice, I'm not sure how credible such a number would be, unless people turned in the receipts from their re-bookings as an exhibit to the letter. In addition, for many of us, it's just too early to tell how much shifting will occur. I don't fly SQ regularly enough that I have upcoming business trips which I could shift to other airlines for immediate impact. Finally, because we do fly SQ partly because it happens to serve the destinations we go to, possibly the most frequent reaction might just be to shift to a less miserly FFP. Peanuts, yes, but it means KrisFlyer doesn't get payments from my *A flights whereas the partner FFP would, including my SQ flights. More important, SQ loses a good source of customer data, as well as a touchpoint with its customers.

In the joint letter, IMO, a qualitative threat can certainly make the point, having been signed by members who have status with the airline. The airline should be able to tell what that could mean for its business. If individuals want to calculate the shift in their personal spending, they can definitely include that in their communication.

(Before, I would have asserted some confidence that SQ would care about the effect on its intangible assets, like customer loyalty and brand equity, and the long-term impact on revenue growth. But these days I'm less confident about that.)

[StarG]

I am also of the opinion that it is better to send individual letters rather than collectively. They might just dismiss the collective letter as a group of PPSes/FFs with extraordinary demands. If we send many individual letters, the unhappiness will seem to be more widespread and less organized. Sending a petition-like collective letter might even increase their defense barrier. I hope I am making sense.

JMO.

[Singapore_Air]

I shall join you in your quest if that is permissible.

Ruth Kelly left the Company. Rumored because she was non-Singaporean. A more constructive rumour is that her pay scale was higher than that of local employees.

[KeithMEL]

Ruth Kelly left the Company. Rumored because she was non-Singaporean. A more constructive rumour is that her pay scale was higher than that of local employees.

I don't think those rumours are credible. I'm sure it's not uncommon to have non-Singaporeans working for SQ in executive positions. Case in point - their VP of Public Affairs Stephen Forshaw, who's also their chief spokesperson downunder. Random rant: He led a rather lacklustre campaign (politically anyway) for the SYD-LAX route access - one of the reasons, IMO, why SQ didn't get the route.

Anyway - back to the point. I'd be more than happy to join the petition if you think it's worthwhile including my name.

[MAN Flyer]

I think we should all individually fire off a letter/email or whatever registering our disquiet about this. We can then see what sort of a response we get before organising something jointly.

If you just look at the demographics of us lot on here, they'll be getting complaints form all four corners anyway, which will hopefully make them relaise all is not well with the masses. I have got a reply from my email last night saying 'noted, it's going in our November report'.

Isn't it Angela we should be writing to about this ?.

[MovieMan]

I am also of the opinion that it is better to send individual letters rather than collectively. They might just dismiss the collective letter as a group of PPSes/FFs with extraordinary demands. If we send many individual letters, the unhappiness will seem to be more widespread and less organized. Sending a petition-like collective letter might even increase their defense barrier. I hope I am making sense.

JMO.

While I understand the strength of individual letters, I also see the strength of sending a single letter addressed to an actual person (not 'Dear Sir/Madam'), with a credible/verifiable list of signees. That can certainly have a very strong impact as well. However, it is obvious we should not make it sound like a "petition"-type deal where we just did something like collect signatures at the SKL. Of course sending individual complaint letters is still encouraged!

[jjpb3]

I agree with MovieMan. The two ways of expressing discontent have complementary objectives. The individual letters (whether they're posted, emailed or faxed) will show that the changes aren't welcome across a diverse set of individual circumstances.

A joint letter -- as MovieMan stressed, as long as it doesn't sound like a signature-collecting drive by a group of overzealous individuals, or a list of unreasonable demands out to hijack SQ's business agenda -- can signal that frequent flyers do talk to each other and share their unhappiness with each other. It's the kind of informal network that should cause an airline to pause and consider carefully what it is proposing to do. Or so we hope. This letter, IMO, should be sent by post, not by fax or email.

My two cents' worth .

[MovieMan]

Well, thank you jjpb3 for fleshing out what I was trying to say! I agree completely with your $0.02's worth!

[StarG]

Understood your point of view, jjpb3& MovieMan.
Hope SQ will listen to our voices, one way or the other (or both)!

[LightSpeed]

Now - the reason I'm starting this thread, is so that we can all contribute to writing a single letter to SQ re: the horrible new KF.

Great initiative; thanks.
I'll certainly add my signature to this.

[9V-JKL]

Hi lightspeed Welcome!