[travelworld2]

it might be Spring 2016, of course…

[AnthonyDunn]

An interesting update on BA’s future intentions courtesy of a recent Gold Guest List lunch – and as reported on Headforpoints.com:

http://www.headforpoints.com/2015/04/20/new-british-airways-developments-from-the-gold-guest-list-lunch/

So much for the “positive response” to the new enhanced, err reduced seat pitch in CE….!

[FCTraveller]

Interesting stuff. What I found most worrying in this is their intention to introduce economy fares where silver/gold benefits such as lounge access, priority check-in and boarding will not apply. This will wipe-out one of the most valuable benefits of tier membership. Whilst I am quite happy to fork out big money for business and first in long haul, I find that paying £500-£1,000 for a return short haul flight to Europe is simply not worth it and I’m sure I’m not alone. BA’s competitors on key routes now have far superior products in J and F. They have already lost my business to the middle east and far east and even AA has come out with a much better business class seat on transatlantic routes. Now they are chipping away at Executive Club benefits. My loyalty to BA is fast disappearing.

On another subject there was another interesting link on the above concerning BA’s plans to introduce a security channel from the First Class check-in area straight into the lounge area airside at T5 (ie, old Zone R) and the history and cost of the Concorde Room door from the South Security Area. Turns out BAA has been gouging BA (or rather us, as customers) for millions of pounds by way of compensation for passengers not having to have a walk through their overpriced shopping mall. £1,000,000 a year for the Concorde Room door and an undisclosed even more extortionate charge for their proposed First Class channel. How dare they!

[AnthonyDunn]

It’s been decades now since the original BAA decided that, in order to “keep landing fees down” (!?), they needed to turn their termini into shopping malls connected to runways…. It might be outrageous of HAL to charge a cool £1M per annum for the CCR door (and possibly even more for the new F/BAEC Gold/OW equivalent diversion door) but they’ve got lots of overseas shareholders to mollify.

[Stamford777]

Because of the petty diversion that HAL force BAEC members to take to get to the lounge, I refuse to patronize any of the airside businesses in T5.

[openfly]

@GreenScot. The EDI-IBZ and several other routes ex-EDI/GLA/ABZ are Cityflyer services during the LCY weekend 24 hour closure, every sat. Good use of their aircraft.

[SimonS1]

@FCTraveller

I would take the contrary view. Provided there is choice I have no issues at all with BA introducing a new ‘no frills’ tier or ticket.

That way people will be able to chose between the regular Y price (which includes Avios, TPs, reserved seat, lounge access if qualified etc) and the no frills price.

That wouldn’t be wiping out benefits as you will still be able to choose your existing fare bracket and existing benefits. Equally there are plenty of travellers who aren’t interested in these things so will enjoy the lower price.

[IanFromHKG]

That might be true, SimonS1, if you are the one choosing the flights yourself. If someone else is choosing them for you…

In one sense I can understand why BA are doing it – they clearly aspire to be an LCC and a “premium” (well, lower-end premium, anyway) carrier at the same time. Honestly, I don’t think that is feasible. Personally, if I were London-based and a regular traveller on short-haul BA and occasional long-haul (especially TATL) – a fairly typical BA elite member, in other words – I would probably be shifting my allegiance at this point. After all, there doesn’t appear to be any change to oneworld rules, so it seems to me that it would be advantageous to switch loyalty programme to another oneworld member (say, AA) because oneworld elites would still get oneworld privileges including priority boarding and lounge access. For the passenger, this would necessarily mean that to get the relevant number of qualifying segments, s/he would try to ensure that their long-haul flights are on that oneworld carrier’s flights. And given the TATL JV, maybe BA just dont care, as they get the revenue anyway. But the irony is that for the short-haul flights they will end up providing the passenger with exactly the same benefits they have taken away and are getting a reduced fare for… Unless, of course, BA contract out of yet another oneworld rule – they have already contracted out of the oneworld emerald baggage rules for HBO fares, and contracted out of the priority luggage handling rules, and contracted out of preferred seating allocation for elites on HBO fares (although this carve-out isn’t referenced on the oneworld site, so perhaps it is only for their own elites) – in fact, it makes you wonder why they bother remaining a oneworld member at all!

[AnthonyDunn]

@ Ian_from_HKG – 23/04/2015 08:20 GMT

I was having a conversation returning into LHR from BUD with the CSD and he was saying that the attempt to become a LCC, through the back door, at LHR simply does not work: the customers are revolting – most notably about the reduced CE seat pitch. They are paying for a full-service carrier and expect to get what comes with the ticket price. It’s now almost become an issue of you fly CE in short/mid-haul because you want the tier points because there is, otherwise, almost no discernible benefit.

Then there is the fiasco around the volumes of luggage being dragged onboard by people taking the p*ss re: HBO fares. BA short-haul is heading in the direction of an accident waiting to happen. It would appear (from the GGL lunch session reported above) that at least this has been recognised by the goons at the Waterside and action is being promised.

[JohnnyFox]

Vueling seems a ‘good’ and modern brand, and my recent experience on Iberia Express AMS-MAD suggests both those can deliver a perfectly good model for BA Lite or LCC. Obvious trick is to move those routes to Gatwick (and any regional routes where BA is daft enough to compete with EZY) where mixed fleet staff and operating costs are lower, and keep LHR intact as the full-service product.

I see they’re starting to sell improved Y meals on selected long-haul for £15-18 a go. Wrong move – long-haul Y food isn’t terrible but on European flights over two hours it’s universally dire and there’d be much more takeup there. Of course since the change in seat pitch (I ‘enjoyed’ 31 cramping inches this week LGW-VCE-LGW and I’m only 5 foot 8) that would erode almost all differentials between CE and Y, particularly if you have EC silver or pay for lounge access, but what the hell – it’s a bankrupt product anyway.

[SimonS1]

@Ian_from_Hkg

I agree about the challenge if someone else is choosing the flights (and footing the bill), however of itself I don’t see that as a reason not to offer people a choice between frills/no frills.

I suspect the devil will be in the detail really. Maybe no frills will really be just that and benefits will be removed regardless of which OW scheme you use. BA may have challenges re OW but there are always ways and means/exceptions as the priority baggage shows.

Maybe they will take the opportunity to do a restructure which sorts out the baggage issue, and perhaps Vueling will indeed have a role to play.

[IanFromHKG]

AnthonyDunn – 23/04/2015 09:44 GMT : BA short-haul is heading in the direction of an accident waiting to happen. It would appear (from the GGL lunch session reported above) that at least this has been recognised by the goons at the Waterside and action is being promised.

That’s not the impression I got at all – what I saw was that they recognised it, but aren’t going to do anything about it.

[AnthonyDunn]

IFHK: A cut and paste from the Headforpoints article:

“There [may/will?] be a substantial increase in policing what is taken onboard by ‘hand baggage only’ customers. BA accepts that the current hand baggage and priority boarding system on short-haul is not fit for purpose, partly due to increased levels of cabin baggage. Gold and Gold Guest List members may be allowed to board first so they can take the overhead space.

My square brackets.

[IanFromHKG]

I suppose I was focusing more on the issue which caused the greatest grievance:

“BA admits that the feedback from customers about legroom with the new short-haul seating has been disastrous. There are no plans to remove a row of seats to improve business class legroom, however.”

And on other issues:

“The decision to scrap free domestic Reward Flight Saver redemptions was decided on financial grounds despite knowing it would alienate many customers and will not be reversed.
The decision to stop free seat allocation on Hand Baggage Only fares was decided on the same financial grounds. BA has received substantial negative feedback – not surprising when you can spend well over £500 on a Hand Baggage Only fully-flexible ticket and still find that you cannot choose a seat whatever your status – but no change is planned.
The new Club World washbags (‘pathetic’ was the description used by my source) are to stay. ” And so forth.

So if you look at it overall, and paraphrasing somewhat – “The introduction of HBO fares has caused problems, which we won’t fix other than by getting Gold/GGL members the opportunity to board first, but we are going to continue looking more and more like an LCC by making them pay for allocated seating, and very much more like an LCC in policing carry-on. We will spend more money on catering and clean our planes slightly more often than we do now, and we will refurbish some tired lounges , and give the same direct access to lounges in T5 that Virgin have offered in T3 for donkeys’ years, and we will give WiFi but only on short-haul [Personal comment – will this be free???]. But we aren’t going to improve the amenity kits, we certainly aren’t going to fix the reduced seatpitch which everyone hates, nor the free domestic RFS redemptions because we really don’t care about the regions [yes, I know that isn’t in the article, but it is fairly implicit!]. In case all that doesn’t make us enough like an LCC we are going to introduce a new LCC-type fare so those of you forced to take the cheapest tickets can kiss your frequent flyer status benefits goodbye”

I stand by my earlier comment

[SimonS1]

Indeed Ian your analysis may well be correct.

Probably best summarised as “we know some of our clients will be unhappy, however whilst expressing their dissatisfaction we do not believe that many will move their higher value business away from BA”.

And I suspect they will be right.

[Author]

Posts