[rferguson]

Good points Scott.

I think the whole ‘First Class’ offering in North America is very different. Their frequent flyer programmes tend to be extremely generous with upgrades (I believe some tiers have near unlimited upgrades space available) and if those digital display boards all the US carriers have at the gates with ‘cleared upgrades’ listed I would say they are actually selling very few F class seats and the majority are upgraded frequent flyers. However the onboard catering can be pretty poor from my experience. From some of the best meals i’ve ever had on a plane (AA JFK-LAX) to a ‘snack basked pass’ on a near three hour flight (US PHL-MIA).

Likewise the way they compete with low cost carriers seems a little different. They have essentially become a low cost carrier in ‘coach’ ie charge for everything – bags, food, drinks, even blankets on some carriers. But at the same time their fares are fairly similar to the Locos. Which has led to the birth of the ‘ultra loco’ such as Spirit which even charges for overhead locker space. In europe the legacy carriers have continued to offer things like free bags, free snacks and drinks but to charge more for it. Although some airlines like SAS are blurring the lines.

IMHO Australia offers the best domestic Business Class out there. I’ve never flown Virgin but have Qantas J many times. And their service from the lounges to onboard is superb. However given the financial woes of the QF and Virgin domestic operations will be interesting to see if we see a ‘european J class model’ infiltrating the market at some point.

[CXDiamond]

Perhaps they have determined that a thirty inch pitch is acceptable by having Wee Willie test the seats.

So they will be fine for the ‘vertically challenged’ but a nightmare for the rest of us.

I agree that Qantas offer the best short haul business class and interestingly they offered it at a high standard even when there was no competition and were able to sell it. People will pay for quality.

[IanFromHKG]

Just out of curiosity, let me conduct a thoroughly unscientific straw poll for those readers who are (currently) regular CE flyers.

Would you pay (say) 50% more if your CE cabin looked like this?:

http://www.ausbt.com.au/cathay-pacific-debuts-new-regional-business-class-this-week

[DerekVH]

Ian_from_HKG

+1

[dutchyankee]

Hi Ian, I definitely would on my flights to LED and ATH. On shorter flights in europe, BA is now the same as LH, LX, and the rest, so now more reason for me to continue building points on M&M by flying with LX as much as possible as they are superior in every other way within europe.

[MartynSinclair]

I am NOT a regular CE pax and no it would not tempt me to pay on a revenue ticket.

However, on flights of say 2 hours +, it would tempt me if avios seats were available….

[Senator]

@Ian_from_HKG , perhaps a slight apples and oranges comparison for two reasons?
a) Average length of flight considered “regional” by Cathay I would suspect is quite a bit longer?
b) Using wide-body vs. narrow-body planes allow for more options in terms of spacing?

I honestly believe if there was a market for this within purely European space, someone would have invested. The only European carrier going in this direction is Turkish Airlines who has confirmed that the offer on the newest A321s and B737-900ERs is the future for the entire fleet. I do suspect however, even within their network from IST to European destinations the average flight time is longer than 3 hours.

As a novice I predict that the lines between what we today call LCCs and legacy carriers will blur more and more. I think LCCs will move their value prop up-market and legacies their value prop down-market.

[IanFromHKG]

Senator:
(a) For CX I believe the cut-off is at five hours – below that, regional, above that, long-haul. However, the vast majority of regional flights are under four hours. The same business class seat is being introduced by Dragonair, which (with one or two exceptions such as Bangalore) is exclusively short-haul
(b) I am not sure why that would be the case. However, CX is exclusively widebody, and Dragonair is primarily narrow-body. Yet, as mentioned above, Dragonair are also introducing the exact same regoinal product

Furthermore, I wasn’t comparing, I was trying to get a feel for whether people would be prepared to pay more for a truly premium product. I know I would if the pricing was correct. Perhaps there are insufficient people willing to pay the premium that woudl justify such a product, particularly given the constraints involved in having a “non-convertible” cabin. I also acknowledge that the European and Asian markets are very different. However, I can’t help wondering why legacy European airlines are charging more towards the LoCo model in terms of hard product while still lauding the benefits of being a full-service airline, while at the same time further blurring the distinction between the two in terms of what they actually offer (crap seats, hand-luggage-only fares which is only a reverse form of charging for check-in bags, and so forth).

From what I have read, virtually every airline which is operating as a full-service carrier is dependent for the bulk of its profits on premium passengers. Alienating those passengers and blurring the distinction between the product they receive and that which is provided by LoCos does not seem to me to be a recipe for success.

Yes, the current configuration provide huge flexibility in terms of CE vs ET seating for short-haul operations. These are the very same operations that are, erm, currently unprofitable. Which to me seems to indicate that the “premium pax make us more money” approach may not be working too well on short-haul BECAUSE it is not sufficiently premium as a product to command proper premium fares. Dumbing down the product is one approach to that dilemma (cost-cutting) but I believe most business leaders would say that improving revenue and obtaining a greater margin is generally better than cutting costs when you are trying to market your product as a premium product.

Hence my question. If there was a true premium product on board, would people be prepared to pay? And you know what? Yes, there will be less flexibility. But then there isn’t much flexibility in long-haul operations, and those are profitable… Perhaps flexibility isn’t really the key, it is generating additional revenue from the space on board the aircraft. If that is capped out by the number of seats available, but the premium charged on those seats is sufficiently high, then maybe – just maybe – short-haul could (a) be profitable (b) improve BA’s branding rather than cheapening it and (c) encourage more connecting long-haul trafffic thereby boosting the profitability of short-haul AND increasing loads on the already profitable long-haul

[dutchyankee]

Hi Ian, in line with what you are saying, as so much of BA`s european flights are operated for connecting traffic, imagine how disgruntled a passenger is when he or she has flown say LAX to LHR in CW or F, and then connects onto a 4 hour flight to Athens or Istanbul , or 3.5 hours to St. Petersburg and is put in a seat with 30 inch pitch. It would and has infuriated me, in particular as both LED and ATH are routes I am on regularly, and the fares especially to LED are astronomical, there are no nonstop flights to LED from the US, and to ATH limited to certain US cities so still a transfer is required. Surely, BA with all its yielding technology could determine the flights with the highest number of highend connecting traffic, and configure their aircraft with say 2 or 3 rows, four accross, or the old styled 5 across with appropriate legroom, to provide some sense of differentiation and comfort that was paid for. I would certainly pay for such additional comfort point to point LHR-LED or LHR-ATH, and would expect it on any flight connecting from long haul premium cabin. By reducing the seat pitch to 30 inches throughout the plane, BA has removed their final differentiator in this market, and for sure, I will now fly on LX to/from LED in future.

[BMBettesworth]

This is a letter that I have sent this morning to Frank van der Post
I let you all know what he says – probably nothing – but it made me feel better to write it!!!!

Dear Mr Van der Post,
As a BA Gold cardholder, I write to tell you of my extreme dismay at the news this morning that BA is reducing the seat pitch in your redesigned club europe product to 30″.
One of the main reasons for paying the premium and travelling in CE has, for me, always been the extra legroom. The meal in CE as opposed to the sandwich is nice as is the ‘enhanced’ service which – incidentally can be very patchy but the real value was the spacious seats – particularly on the left hand side of the airplane.
I am left wandering why BA never seems to listen to the views of it’s passengers – the vast majority of whom, I am sure will think this is a retrograde step. If, as it seems to be more and more apparent, BA don’t wish to offer a premium cabin, then just scrap CE and save us all from death by a thousand cuts.

[openfly]

BMBettesworth…..

Well written. But probably a waste of time. Frank Van Der Poste does not reply to any correspondence. Such arrogance. I suggest that you might get a better result by fwding to <a href="mailto:[email protected]“>[email protected]. You will always get a result from his office.

[BMBettesworth]

Thanks for the advice
Actually the last time I wrote to Van der Post – he not only replied but we had a short correspondence.
However I do not expect lightening to strike twice!
I will however send it to Keith Williams

[SimonS1]

“I am left wandering why BA never seems to listen to the views of it’s passengers – the vast majority of whom, I am sure will think this is a retrograde step”

Actually I doubt the vast majority of passengers on BA really give a stuff about it. Only a minority of customers travel in CE, and of these it would appear very few pay much of a premium – the majority appear to be on upgrades, Avios etc.

In fact you would need to be a mug to pay full CE fares these days.

So on the basis that CE has to be almost given away I wonder why they persist with it.

Seems to me the new ‘enhanced’ seating is a way of addressing this, basically it’s economy travel and for a small upgrade fee you get a few trimmings thrown in such as lounge access (nice), an airline meal, an empty seat next to you (so sit sideways I guess) and the ability to board all of 5 minutes before the great unwashed.

[andystock]

I would only use CE in the future if there was no redemption seats in ET. Anyone know what % of seats are available for avios redemption in CE.

[IanFromHKG]

It is a telling point that as I type this, the side banner on the page is yet another “free upgrade from business class to First”. Let’s face it – BA can’t realistically can’t be recovering a consistently meaningful uplift for its premium cabins or it would not be repeatedly giving upgrades away. Maybe if the cabins were better, they could be priced and sold appropriately?

It all looks a bit like Vauxhall trying to get customers to switch from BMW

[Author]

Posts