SQ F Class business shall be eaten by EK if SQ does not change its FBack to Forum
AnonymousGuest15 Oct 2008
I travel quiet a lot on both EK & SQ both medium haul & long haul in F all the time.
After comparing the 2 airlines have found the below mentioned results.
EK has upgraded its F in almost all the 777s & A340 Series to either Suites OR partially divided seating which provided ample privacy.
Where as for SQ the new F is only avialable either on A380 with Suites which provide complete privacy or in the 777-300ERs which the SQ calls suites and sells at the premium just like the A380 but in reality this is a worse product when compared to EK’s F with the partially divided seating because it offers hardly any privacy at all from the other pax’s. All the other planes with SQ have the old style arrangement which the EK has on the A330 which it now uses majorly on short haul and is also in the process of replacing the F with the new style partially divided seating just like in the 777’s. SQ is not changing the old arrangement that it has in any of its planes as of now. So this is one major reason why SQ is worse than EK in F.
The only plus is that the SQ seat is very wide on the 777-300ER. But the negative’s are much much more. Firstly to convert it into a bed and vice versa you always have to call the FA. This is not a good option especially hen you wake up and the other pax’s are sound asleep in the middle of a long flight. Believe me its a very irritating process when you are woken up by this noise of 2 FA’s coming and converting the bed back to a seat. Where as in EK you can do all this by your self without calling any one and without attracting the fellow pax’s attention. So another reason why EK is above SQ.
Even when we compare the F&B menu in F on both EK & SQ I have found the SQ offering to be inferior in more than 1 way. For example the Vodka choice on board in SQ is Smirnoff. Gosh I think the F&B director in SQ has no idea that what is a Vodka. On one hand the serve JW Blue Label Scotch & Krug & Dom etc etc & on the other hand they serve Smirnoff. What a total MISMATCH. They should atleast serve KAUFMANN or CIROC or STOLICHNAYA. Another reason for the inferior grade is that the choice itself in the menu is not as wide as for EK. Would like to add that although SQ uses superior cutlery from Givenchy but only if they could correct these small things then they would atleast be equal to EK if not better.
Then ofcourse the chauffer drive service that EK offers in so many destinations which SQ does not. Also the EK private lounge’s which are exclusive and are not shared with other airlines which means that they are NEVER as crowded as the SQ lounge’s which it shares wih many other airlines.
Lastly SQ is charging a premium for the suites on 777-300ER’s where as EK is giving the better product in the partially divided seating arrangement and not charging any premium for the same. Last but not the least the new F of SQ is avaialable on very few sectors where as the EK product is today avialable on almost all the medium haul and long haul sectors.
I hope that some one from SQ reads this and wakes up finally in SQ because other wise they are sure to loose quiet a good number of F pax’s to EK in the near future. SQ can not get business by merely giving away Givenchy pyjama suits. They need to do much more…………………..15 Oct 2008
The previous writer makes some excellent points about the differences between the new products on EK and SQ. One minor plus in SQ’s favor, however, is the quality of the food in both business and first (I cannot comment on the vodka as it is not my spirit of choice).
Much more important for me, though, is the difference in service. On both the ground and in the air, SQ puts EK to shame. SQ is that unbeatable combination of professionalism and (great) attitude that EK, perhaps in its rush to catch up, is not able (or willing?) to offer.19 Oct 2008
Excellent points, TravelRich. I’ve flown eleven EK segments in the past year (three in J, eight in F). Whilst F was relatively comfortable (esp. in the Suite config), the service was very poor, indeed. I found the advertised “four crew for First pax” to be untrue on all segments. Crew were rushed, careless, poorly trained and had a “we couldn’t care” attitude. The menu sounded great, but was too much for the staff to get out in anything under four hours. The old style “trolley” service in F on the 777s is nice, but by the time you get your food it is stone cold since it has been out and about since leaving the galley and stopping by two or three other pax before it makes it to you. This never happens on SQ, and the crew just seem to never run out of charm, poise and quality service. I’ve always enjoyed EK in the past, but in the last year or so, their service standards really have slipped down. I vote for SQ!29 Oct 2008
Cant really comment on EK first class since I’ve only flown it once, BOM-DXB in the old-style seats on a 330. They were comfortable enough, though the crew kept chattering loudly in the galley, all through this late-night flight, making sleep impossible in the first row. And since there are only two rows in the cabin, I doubt the other passengers fared much better! For my money, Cathay offers a superior product in this short-haul sector, in Business Class.
As for SQ, I havent tried the Suites on the 380 but have travelled First on the new 777ER. And, in fact, welcome the “openness”….closing a door on a small space would probably make it claustrophobic! But, they have no ankle-support in the deck-chair position, especially for a short man (5’6′) like me. Your thighs and upper-calves are supported; and your heels are on the foot-rest in the “cavity” in front….but in the middle, nothing. And this can be tiring!
As for the old seats on SQ….if one doesnt “know” them, they take a VERY long time to get used to. And are more arm-chairs than beds. Now these DEFINITELY need a total overhaul!!30 Oct 2008