[Anonymous]

[EU_Flyer]

With the arrival of the new WT+ and WT products just around the corner, I am curious as to whether BA will use this as an opportunity to overhaul the entire WT+ product or limit it only to seating.

WT+. compared to other Premium Y products has always been, in my opinion, competitive seat wise but let down by service, which is virtually identical to economy. This includes meal/drink/snacks ect.

Qantas, BA’s codeshare partner in the JSA* and oneworld, offers an excellent Y+ product which includes catering and service standards similar to Australian domestic J class and not that far off what is offered on International J.

Air New Zealand, Virgin Atlantic, V Australia, Air France are a number of airlines that also offer this premium level of service in Y+.

I love flying BA and often do so in the WT+ cabin. Fingers crossed the seat renewal will include a rethink about the rest of the offering.

Your thoughts??

* JSA is the Joint Services Agreement between BA and QF on services from Aus to UK whereby each sells seats on eachother’s services as if they were their own.
Like a codeshare but slightly closer in co-operation.

[RoadKing]

SK also offer better service in their equivalence of WT+.
It started out as they stopped serving food and drinks on European flights in economy. On long haul economy kept food and drinks were limited to one per serving.
Later though, SK has improved seating and service in WT+ long haul and it is much closer to biz class than say the current WT+ is. However much more expensive than WT+.

[theworldtraveller]

I totally agree – WT+ could be a great product if they just made a few changes, and food being the biggest.

Even if they gave you an option to buy an upgraded/Club meal that would be a start. Also, giving out bottles of water and hot towels at the start of the flight would be good finishing touches.

I guess BA does not want to blur the differences between Club and WT+ – But, IMHO the Club seat is what you are paying for and the food/extras would not generally alter which seat I buy.

[EU_Flyer]

Good points theworldtraveller and roadking….thanks

You’re spot on re BA’s fear that an upgraded WT+ could potentially canibalise the CW market but indeed it’s the seat that you’re paying for. However, whenever I fly WT+ I always feel short changed re food and service compared with other products in the market.

That said, if BA is committed to continuing to offer low WT+ fares or cheap online checkin upgrades from Y to WT+ I can understand their reluctance to offer too many complimentary ‘add ons’ if it’s just the seat I’m paying for.

The prepurchased CW meal in WT+ is not a bad idea and could be a money spinner if they price it correctly to make it worth their while.

[DisgustedofSwieqi]

Rather than pre-pay for a CW meal (which speaking from experience are okay, but no more), one might be wise to invest in a carry on food box at the airport, the contents of which are far superior to airline food.

You are right, WT+ purchased early is a very good deal. My family is using it for a transatlantic trip at Xmas this year and though the flight time is only around 6.5 hours, that extra 7 inches legroom and 3 inches recline does make for a far more comfortable journey.

[RoadKing]

I thought I should add that, while one would expect the SK Economy Plus product to be something in the middle between biz and economy, it is pricewise too close to biz for my taste.

I have only once actually bought a flight in EP, other times I have got upgrades. I feel the product is too pricey compared to biz.

As such, I feel that BA’s WT+ is fit pricewise. If I want more food, I will bring it onboard. My opinion is that I would rather not that they raise the price to improve on service. That will leave it less appealing for me.

I think WT+ service / price is good as it is. If, however, they manage to improve service and leave the price the same, that is of course ok. However not likely these days, or?

[seanyjmuclhr]

WT+ on BA is nothing short of a joke. I flew back from BOS to LHR last month in this cabin and felt distinctly underwhelmed at the lack of differentiators from the outbound WT experience. Apart from a slightly wider seat and leg room as well as a glass for my wine with dinner and a few extra tier points, it was definitely not worth paying extra for.

The problem I see is that airlines such as BA are trying to do too much. Why not revert back to just three classes of F, C and Y instead of the four? That way, they could concentrate on being the best product in each cabin instead of spreading themselves too thinly with extra products which really are not worth it.

[continentalclub]

Very many passengers would (and do) consider the incremental charge of as little as £125 to be exceptionally good value to fly from Boston to London with an extra seven inches of legroom, a wider seat, in-seat power, a subjectively quieter cabin, 60 extra Tier Points and 3267 additional BA Miles.

More generically, with the advent of flat beds in Business Class and the exceptional levels of price sensitivity in Economy driving maximum efficiency in seat pitch and service levels, there is simply too wide a gulf between the two cabins.

More and more carriers recognise this and are developing products accordingly. In doing so, they are at least providing their customers with a choice.

[DisgustedofSwieqi]

cc

Spot on.

[seanyjmuclhr]

Point taken, but the incremental charge I paid was $275 (so not quite as low as some would say) and despite the extra TP and BA miles, I just don’t think that the the WT+ product itself is good enough. Especially when you compare and contrast with the PE offerings of those such as NZ and LHR-bound VS.

[continentalclub]

There’s a broad range of products currently flying to which the ‘premium economy’ tag has been applied. That doesn’t mean that there’s necessary much consistency between them in terms of seat, service or price however.

Air New Zealand’s product is undoubtedly at the upper end of this range and so is its pricing. On sample dates in October, NZ is 25% more expensive than BA between London and Los Angeles.

This variance often increases significantly during periods of BA promotional activity.

Some passengers rate the Virgin PE seat more highly than BA’s, but others lament similarly poor food, poorer beverages and a service style which they find less professional. These are all subjective points, and since Virgin’s pricing is more usually comparable with BA’s on mutually-served routes, the differences once again provide passengers with a choice.

However, Virgin’s lack of meaningful alliance membership, no same-carrier shorthaul connectivity and limited overall network mean that there will likely always be a larger market for the British Airways product than for the Virgin Atlantic one, as much as the latter may engender loyalty and advocacy amongst its smaller target market.

For me, originating in the UK regions and taking the LA route in isolation, choosing both Virgin and Air New Zealand would be more expensive given the lack of interline ticketing options (British Airways hold ‘cheap’ inventory for its own connecting passengers that would not be available on a standalone basis), before I even consider the implications of terminal changes and re-checking baggage at Heathrow.

[Hippocampus]

I like the option of WT+ for the extra base and usually quieter and calmer cabin, but the soft product needs a rethink.

It has been well documented that BASSA over-ruled a company instruction to hand out hot towels to WT+ pax. If they won’t allow hot towels, then there’s no way BASSA will accept a more elaborate meal service.

[Author]

Posts