Singapore Airlines KrisFlyer - AU traveller quoted on Bloomberg - SQ "arrogant"

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-26/singapore-girl-s-charms-fade-as-airline-battle-heats-up.html

"“They have this arrogant attitude that they’re the best so people will continue to use them no matter what,” said Mark Roberts, 48, a mining metallurgist from Melbourne who flies business class to Asia and Europe about 15 times a year.

Thai Air, Emirates

Having flown exclusively with Singapore Air since 1998, in recent years he has increasingly chosen Thai Airways International Pcl and Emirates. “I felt like I was being taken for a fool” by changes in Singapore Air’s loyalty program and the last-minute swapping of older aircraft on premium-priced routes.

“It’s almost a lucky dip whether I get the product I paid for,” he said."

While I agree with the comments, SQ is not the only airline with this issue. e.g. The said pax should try travelling on CX on regional routes...

Just found out about the article through a local friend.... I hope someone at SIA reads it and will react...:rolleyes:

He should be lucky enough to choose a TG flight where some of the "royal" family like to fly.. let's see if he enjoy the smocky air then.. or when some EK falcon are onboard :D

SQ does offer the most consistent product from all asian carriers, this comes with some kind of coldness, or arrogantness you could call it, just as, for example, LH does have it.

I doubt SQ will whine much about someone who prefers TG over them.. he'll come back after the 3rd technical equipment swap, or the second downgrade due to royal happenings :p

Yaaaawn....

SQ is market share only because of one thing: trying to maintain the most profitable airline by charging high fares, but the product is not that much better anymore to justfy it. That Thais and Emirates inconsistent product and service is truly an alternative I doubt, probably if you look at the price.

Why are the Middle East Carriers gaining market share: More destinations compared to any other airlines on the OZ-routes, thats why SQ is loosing. Why go through FRA if you can fly to HAM directly?
And CX isnt really a fair comparision: they are gaining mainly on their China network (via Dragonair) from OZ. So what?

SQ is market share only because of one thing: trying to maintain the most profitable airline by charging high fares

Nothing wrong with that. It's a valid business model.

Yaaaawn....
Why are the Middle East Carriers gaining market share: More destinations compared to any other airlines on the OZ-routes, thats why SQ is loosing.


On Australia routes, it probably has less to do with destinations and more with price. Many people are prepared to suffer the slight drop in service for the bigger drop in price vs. SQ's high fares. And there is no "non-stop vs. one-stop" comparison - you must stop somewhere, and there's little difference between stopping in Singapore or the Middle East.

And I think you mean "losing", not "loosing".

And there is no "non-stop vs. one-stop" comparison - you must stop somewhere, and there's little difference between stopping in Singapore or the Middle East.

It's about one stop vs two stops. From memory, I think Emirates has about 27 non-stop destinations from its hub in the middle east. It's extremely challenging for an Asian airline to offer such a diverse list of destinations. Mind you, QF has only 2 European destinations from SIN, and I have to admit that they are doing extremely well given pax must choose FRA or LHR T3 as transfer points.

Nothing wrong with that. It's a valid business model.

I didnt say its wrong, its anyway their decision.


On Australia routes, it probably has less to do with destinations and more with price. Many people are prepared to suffer the slight drop in service for the bigger drop in price vs. SQ's high fares. And there is no "non-stop vs. one-stop" comparison - you must stop somewhere, and there's little difference between stopping in Singapore or the Middle East.

If i would have the choice to fly one-stop Middle East versus 2-stop (Sin and somewhere in Europe) the price would not be my first worry.
If I would have the choice between middle east carrier and SQ and both offer one-stop, I personally would fork out the money to fly SQ. But I agree most travellers would choose the cheaper one.

And I think you mean "losing", not "loosing". Yes, Thanks ;)


Mind you, QF has only 2 European destinations from SIN, and I have to admit that they are doing extremely well given pax must choose FRA or LHR T3 as transfer points.
Ask QF managment and you will hear a different story. IMHO, if they arent able to set-up a crew base in Asia and fly with asian staff the Asia-Europe sectors, we will see QF disappearing entirely from Europe in the mid-term. Their cost-base is too high to compete and they cut back their Europe just recently.

His issue seems to be the swapping of the A380/77W/744/773 on/off the MEL route over the past 6 months!

"and the last-minute swapping of older aircraft on premium-priced routes."

I still think SQ has one of the best (I did not say THE best) service and quality consistency out there... compared to others like TG or QR for example. I like TG but sometimes, I'm very disappointed by the food or the seats... I don't find that as comfortable (did I use that word in combination to flying Y class? :D) and I hear so many average stories on QR ex Asia to Europe via Doha.

For me, when I fly less than 3 or 4 hours, I look at prices. But flying long hauls, I'd rather pay a bit more and either fly direct or get a better service.

But again, SQ should really try to give some sparkles back to its name.

His issue seems to be the swapping of the A380/77W/744/773 on/off the MEL route over the past 6 months!

"and the last-minute swapping of older aircraft on premium-priced routes."

TG is also well know for its last minute and frequent equipment change, probably not on the MEL-BKK but elsewhere.

On Australia routes, it probably has less to do with destinations and more with price. Many people are prepared to suffer the slight drop in service for the bigger drop in price vs. SQ's high fares.

It's not all about price. From the UK, at least, carriers like EK may have similar Y fare pricing to EK.

As others have noted, I believe the main reason is that the Gulf carriers can offer so many more departure points from Europe than can SIA or other Asian carriers.

Look at the networks of EK, QR and EY in Europe. You can depart from cities like Helsinki, Stockholm and Oslo in the north. From cities like Budapest, Zagreb, Rome, Athens etc in the south.

..“I felt like I was being taken for a fool” by changes in Singapore Air’s loyalty program and the last-minute swapping of older aircraft on premium-priced routes.

“It’s almost a lucky dip whether I get the product I paid for,” he said."
While I like the general sentiment presented, I find it hard to listen to people whom it takes 10+ years to notice such a thing. Someone who just buys into some airline's propaganda without sampling the competition is just an incompetent source IMHO.

But maybe the article is just curt. I mean if he actually did sample Emirates some 8+ years ago, he'd probably never try them again.

I agree with the issues TG has and many here list but their package comes at a much lower price and is often well worth it.

It's not all about price. From the UK, at least, carriers like EK may have similar Y fare pricing to EK.
What an interesting tautology.

I heard that SQ often does match SQ's pricing too.
As others have noted, I believe the main reason is that the Gulf carriers can offer so many more departure points from Europe than can SIA or other Asian carriers..
They likely could ... but the European network density of SQ is really good and likely not the cause of complaints.

They can even forward passengers on LH once in Europe. And given the abysmal experience those customers will have there - especially in domestic C - SQ will look even shinier in comparison.

1. Fares are not competitive from Australia.
2. New web site remains bug ridden many months after introduction.
3. Food is appalling and hasn't changed in years.

On my recent trip from Melbourne in F (in one of the last 744 services and an almost empty cabin on the 11 am flight) I noted the downgrade of the amenity pack which no longer features cologne and instead is full of useless face creams. Although a relatively minor change, it is not a step in the right direction.

The only positive change recently has been the revised redeemption capabilities in Krisflyer now making saver awards available on the 777-ER and 380.

For me, when I fly less than 3 or 4 hours, I look at prices. But flying long hauls, I'd rather pay a bit more and either fly direct or get a better service.

Well, the majority of the market seems to be saying that SQ's better service comes at too high a price and they will settle for a little less service for a lot less money.

But again, SQ should really try to give some sparkles back to its name.

Look at the current sparkling record:
- Still no arrivals lounges after BA has had them for ?? years.
- Still no sleeper service on 6 hour red-eye routes e.g. SIN-PEK/NRT etc.
- Still making customers suffer a website that other airlines talk about.
- Still charging more than anyone else.

= still no change. So I am still flying with OW airlines in spite of being in SIN :)

While I like the general sentiment presented, I find it hard to listen to people whom it takes 10+ years to notice such a thing. Someone who just buys into some airline's propaganda without sampling the competition is just an incompetent source IMHO.

+1^

Maybe SQ pipes something else into its cabin ventilation systems :D.

+1^

Maybe SQ pipes something else into its cabin ventilation systems :D.
:D

SQ has a lot of unique strengths, I am willing to concede. The most consistent and universal one: they have by far the best coach product for non-elites.

If you want to save money, have no award to book, and want to send your parents somewhere .. SQ is pretty much the best choice out of any market sans Australia or Switzerland where they charge obscene premiums.

For elites it is already a lot worse: overpriced single traveler fares vs cheapo family packages, lots of non-earning fare classes, no preferred seating...

But even for a *G like me SQ war good enough until they crippled the A380. Ever since they killed the upper deck to many European destinations, I haven't used SQ. I pay the difference to QF or BA premium coach myself and learned how infinitely superior their product is. In all aspects.

This is why I have no respect for the 'hero' on that article. If you buy midhaul C, then SQ will screw you much sooner than as a coach traveler, and you are morally obliged to try other carriers.

Obviously bragging about being entitled to premium travel on the "best and most overpriced airline in the world" was much more important to this guy. And the pipe dream only ruptured when one of his colleagues interrupted him with "... but don't they run an Economy Plus-alike premium cabin on the 773 for flights nearly 8 hours long?"...

SQ has a lot of unique strengths, I am willing to concede. The most consistent and universal one: they have by far the best coach product for non-elites.

I totally agree.


But even for a *G like me SQ war good enough until they crippled the A380. Ever since they killed the upper deck to many European destinations, I haven't used SQ. I pay the difference to QF or BA premium coach myself and learned how infinitely superior their product is. In all aspects.


+1^
For me the aircraft is immaterial - BA/QF WT+ is only one third more than SQ Y for SIN/LHR so I see no reason to stick with SQ Y as the pain reduction is worth it. However that's just me as there are many who are unwilling to pay for that.

What an interesting tautology.

I heard that SQ often does match SQ's pricing too.

They likely could ... but the European network density of SQ is really good and likely not the cause of complaints.

They can even forward passengers on LH once in Europe. And given the abysmal experience those customers will have there - especially in domestic C - SQ will look even shinier in comparison.

Excuse the typo. What I obviously meant to say is that EK can be the same price as SIA, at least in Y, especially if connecting flights to a hub airport like LHR or FRA are taken into account.

As for SIA's European network ... it's not that good as you claim. In fact it has barely grown over the years compared with the Gulf carriers who have expanded dramatically in the UK, mainland Europe and Scandinavia.

Here in the UK/Ireland, SIA continues to serve just two airports: LHR and MAN. Contrast that to the Gulf carriers can offer pax the convenience of departing from LHR, LGW, BHX, MAN, GLA, NCL and DUB.

Look at Germany where SIA restricts itself to FRA and MUC. By comparison, the Gulf airlines offer departures from DUS, HAM, TXL (soon to be BER), FRA, STR and MUC.

Yes, SIA can feed pax on LH into FRA or MUC in the same way as it feeds UK pax with BA (now that Bmi is going soon) into LHR from UK regional points. But that means an extended journey time and in the case of LHR, a change of terminal.

I can fly with EK ex-GLA or ex-NCL to SYD/MEL with one stop.in DXB. With SIA I require a flight to LHR, a change of terminal at LHR and then a stop in Singapore !

..I can fly with EK ex-GLA or ex-NCL to SYD/MEL with one stop.in DXB. With SIA I require a flight to LHR, a change of terminal at LHR and then a stop in Singapore !
True. But then I can fly FRA-SIN on SQ without a stop in a legally and politically 'rough' place.

But I am glad that Qater and EK exist. SQ and its kin would long be unbearable if it weren't for their competition. In fact they are to some extent. So I hope for even more headwind.

..+1^
For me the aircraft is immaterial - BA/QF WT+ is only one third more than SQ Y for SIN/LHR so I see no reason to stick with SQ Y as the pain reduction is worth it. However that's just me as there are many who are unwilling to pay for that.
One World is winning big time the past year IMO. With premium coach actually being real (not like the E+ product of UA or the unbookable premiums of TK, NH, and SK), are growing route network etc etc.

I much prefer the A380 over any other bird but I am not sitting in an overpriced SQ seat when the family next to me paid the same for the entire family and when I can get WT+ for 35% more.

And while UA is playing LCC and CO during the integration, I was quite happy on AA. I haven't flown a single UA mile this year and won't do so until the worst wakes are over.

True. But then I can fly FRA-SIN on SQ without a stop in a legally and politically 'rough' place.

But I am glad that Qater and EK exist. SQ and its kin would long be unbearable if it weren't for their competition. In fact they are to some extent. So I hope for even more headwind.

Well said.

I have always skipped the option to switch planes in the Gulf. Even before I moved to Singapore I would always make a stop-over here when flying between Australia and Europe. It's part of the ritual (and something I've always looked forward to as well)!

Whereas I can still understand EK being an option to/from Australia/Europe, I don't quite see how they are going to compete for customers living in Singapore or some of the other bigger cities in the region. I simply don't even care what rates EK or Qatar have nowadays as there is no way I'm breaking up a Singapore to Europe trip in the Middle East. A while back Qatar was actually 1/2-price for SIN-LHR return and still I passed up the "chance." Haven't checked the prices since then...

The middle east option makes a lot of sense to/from AU with a large number of destinations that can be reached in just one-stop. However, from SIN, you simply get on the direct flight that takes you where you want to go to (ignoring airline/alliance loyalty, sales fares, etc).

..I have always skipped the option to switch planes in the Gulf. Even before I moved to Singapore I would always make a stop-over here when flying between Australia and Europe..
Only argument could be the fare.

The Gulf carriers have no Premium Coach yet and for an individual pricing is better than on say SQ. But while EK still has some of the older planes in operation which have an abysmal seat size, there is no way that I will try them.

Then also flying via the Middle East just doesn't feel as 'safe' to me as via Asia. Not even because of the fear to be arrested when bringing along hayfever medication or having the Israel stamp in the passport but because I'd seriously not know what to do there when I'd be stuck there for a few days when Europe plays volcano once more...

Only argument could be the fare.

The Gulf carriers have no Premium Coach yet and for an individual pricing is better than on say SQ. But while EK still has some of the older planes in operation which have an abysmal seat size, there is no way that I will try them.

Then also flying via the Middle East just doesn't feel as 'safe' to me as via Asia. Not even because of the fear to be arrested when bringing along hayfever medication or having the Israel stamp in the passport but because I'd seriously not know what to do there when I'd be stuck there for a few days when Europe plays volcano once more...

:rolleyes:
Sometimes I really want to know out of curiosity: do middle eastern airlines like EK or QR serve booze in their flights? Same for any pork dishes in the meals? I have no personal experience but I wonder if these things could become issues for considerations if flying some airlines.

:rolleyes:
Sometimes I really want to know out of curiosity: do middle eastern airlines like EK or QR serve booze in their flights? Same for any pork dishes in the meals? I have no personal experience but I wonder if these things could become issues for considerations if flying some airlines.
QR and EK do serve alcohol. EK has no pork products which matches the same mysterious 'value system' which JetStar Asia is selling.

And while I don't understand it, it is fairly popular and common here. I recently even received an invitation to a Halal wine tasting...

I would tend to agree with the "Melbourne Mining Metallurgist"... I have had no interest in flying SQ due to their high fares and relatively crap "regional" product... (I had a shocking J flight a few years ago from Dubai to Singapore, which was on those awful J regional seats. Put me off for life).

Unless your flying in suites on the A380 all the way to your chalet in the Swiss alps, there is no point paying top $ for SQ. Often, you can shave $'000s off the SQ J fare by travelling on a sale fare on another carrier.

SQ will have to remain relevant, financially AND product-wise - to survive.

Qantas and SQ are both suffering... Maybe they should just merge and fight the Gulf carriers together :)

Qantas and SQ are both suffering... Maybe they should just merge and fight the Gulf carriers together :)
Should OW and *A merge?

Would be cool for a few weeks, I reckon ....

Should OW and *A merge?

Would be cool for a few weeks, I reckon ....

The Last Alliance (http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Last_Alliance_of_Elves_and_Men) anyone?

Is OW even an alliance? Last time I checked they wouldn't even recognise each other's status when it came to extra luggage allowances...

Is OW even an alliance? Last time I checked they wouldn't even recognise each other's status when it came to extra luggage allowances...

Whatever it is, it's still better than skyteam.

Is OW even an alliance? Last time I checked they wouldn't even recognise each other's status when it came to extra luggage allowances...
Augmented luggage limits are not granted Alliance wide that is true.

Heck, QF doesn't event grant their own elites luggage benefits on all routes. But their earning rules are generally much better and their lounges win too.

luggage limits are not granted Alliance wide that is true.

It seems like the wild, wild west when it comes to OW. Take Finnair for instance. If you have OW status then they'll give you the thumbs up and give you extra luggage. But if a Finnair status-holder flies with Qantas then they'll be left out in the cold... with no luggage benefits.

On the plus side they do handle mileage-accruals well. Doesn't matter what OW metal you fly, if you purchase a BA flight then you get miles as if BA was the operator (even if it's a Qantas codeshare)...

It seems like the wild, wild west when it comes to OW. Take Finnair for instance. If you have OW status then they'll give you the thumbs up and give you extra luggage. But if a Finnair status-holder flies with Qantas then they'll be left out in the cold... with no luggage benefits.


As Weero says, extra luggage is not a published OW-wide benefit. Aside from this, I find OW is more consistent than *A on check-in privileges, lounge access and mileage earning.

While I like the general sentiment presented, I find it hard to listen to people whom it takes 10+ years to notice such a thing. Someone who just buys into some airline's propaganda without sampling the competition is just an incompetent source IMHO.


It's the past 2 or so years than SQ has been chopping and changing the product on the MEL-SIN route

A380
B744
B77W
B773
B773 R

It's the past 2 or so years than SQ has been chopping and changing the product on the MEL-SIN route

A380
B744
B77W
B773
B773 R
Yep! I got the 773 'boot' on that route too :( . It wasn't funny.

As Weero says, extra luggage is not a published OW-wide benefit. Aside from this, I find OW is more consistent than *A on check-in privileges, lounge access and mileage earning.
You get elite mileage boni across quite a few carriers, especially on premium fares. Of course there are black holes like CX coach but you get that on SQ and LH in the *A too.