#11
|
|||
|
|||
I think some of you are being a bit unkind to Choice. I am a member and have on occasions been asked to survey a particular product or service. There surveys are far more representative than the minuscule surveys done by companies which might only be a 10 person focus group or a survey of maybe 100 people. A survey of 9000 would produce highly significant answers.
I have not yet seen the article mentioned but Choice usually include a statistical measure saying something like "any difference less than 5% is not significant". I would refrain from commenting until I see the article and not rely on what newspapers have done to a press release. I should also point out that companies hate Choice because they cannot influence the results. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Joined 1999 @www16Right FlightDiary Airliners Web QR Retired PPL C150/172 PA28-161/181 Pitts S-2B SIM: 12Hr QF B767 B744 CX B742 Nikon D100-D200-D300-D500 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Well they probably lost some more passengers to this choice survey if they had another one today
This was on the 9 news last night and AFP were called as quite a few angry pax. Another Qantas aircraft has had a mechanical problem, with an engine fault grounding a flight out of Brisbane Airport. QF15 was scheduled to leave for Los Angeles at 11am yesterday when a problem was discovered with the wiring in one of the 747's engines, the airline said. The problem was fixed by the afternoon but the aircraft was forced to stay put overnight because the crew members' shift was due to end. The 386 passengers were sent home in taxis or put up in hotels, with the flight now due to depart at 10.30am today. Also yesterday, a Qantas flight was delayed for five hours in Perth after a defect was discovered in a wing flap. A replacement was installed and the aircraft left for Brisbane at 1pm (WST), Qantas said. On Tuesday a Sydney-Singapore flight was forced to turn back when a pilot discovered a problem in one of the engines. On Wednesday, a superjumbo suffered two tyre blowouts while landing at Sydney Airport. Qantas said the situations were not emergencies, and no passengers were put in danger at any time. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
C'mon. It's only natural to root for the "Home Team" but let's face it, being the best is far more than just being a local. QF certainly have their time but competition doesn't stop at one place. That's only good for us and if you choose Qantas as your airline of Choice (no pun intended), then as they hopefully respond to this competition and improve, then you will be the beneficiaries.
As for JQ? Quote:
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Agree.I have flown both with KAL and JAL to europe and both provide a stopover at a nice airport hotel. I think it a its a great way to fly and feel rested. The service on both airlines was great.
__________________
MY PHOTOS http://myaviation.net/?uid=23990 ( updated 05-11-08 ) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Except of course that a survey of 9000 people who subscribe to a consumer affairs magazine is hardly going to be representative of the population as a whole.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Should we remember the numbers that fly versus the number that were surveyed/participated/responded ?
In the general population, those that reply to such surveys are ones with either an outstanding experience to report or the exact opposite - rarely the average user that has a neutral experience. More to the point, without a baseline reference, such surveys can be very "unhelpful" to both the "good" and the "bad" as there is no "line drawn under what each respondent deems to be a "good or bad" experience. I find Choice to be very reliable and a valuable source of information when "they" do the research. The articles they provide that rates products (and services) is very helpful when making decisions on what to buy. I find the "user surveys" to be considerably less helpful and in many instances biased - both positively and negatively ! ! ! ! I am sure most of the carriers rated would find a positive in the outcomes reported. As a consumer and Choice subscriber, I find there to be very little of value in this report. Last edited by Garry Emanuel; 4th April 2010 at 09:11 PM. Reason: Spelling and an omission. |
|
|