WestJet Rewards - WestJet to launch premium economy

The premium economy product, to be rolled out across all three 737 aircraft types, will involve reconfiguring four rows or 24 seats. Simultaneously, the airline will add eight seats to each of its 737-800s, taking the number of seats on board to 174 from 166. Doing so will take the seat pitch down to 31 or 32 inches from 34 inches currently, which will bring the seat pitch in line with what is currently being offered on the airline's -600s and -700s.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/westjet-to-launch-premium-economy-add-seats-on-737-800s-374955/

I wonder what the seat pitch will be?

I think this is a good move, but it will be interesting to see how it changes the egalitarian ethos of the airline and its passengers. When I fly WS I pay for an exit row seat as I find the regular econ seats to be too tight (I buy E+ on UA as well), so having more options to get more legroom pleases me.

Doing so will take the seat pitch down to 31 or 32 inches from 34 inches currently

Give 'em an inch...

Can't say this new makes this occasional WS flyer too happy as losing a few inches on a longer flight will be missed, though it'll depend on how much the buy up to PE would be.

From the WS press release: "CALGARY, Aug. 1, 2012 /CNW/ - WestJet today announced it will introduce premium economy seating across its entire fleet. The reconfiguration will introduce four rows of extra legroom seating with 36 inches of pitch and convenience features such as priority boarding as well as complimentary on-board amenities. The reconfiguration will begin in August and will be completed in December 2012."

Priority boarding makes for an interesting addition. 36 inch pitch isn't too bad. Cost is really the unknown.

So we lose an inch on most seating and 3 inches on the 800. Sucks for the most part.

WestJet has been profitable with it's single economy layout. It makes no sense to change this when other airlines, with a variety of different cabins, have lost money or declared bankruptcy. WestJet caters to a certain travelling niche, with which it has been very successful. Now, in order to create additional room for the first 4 rows, everyone else loses out. IMHO, they're moving in the wrong direction. WestJet customers should email feedback on this new initiative. How about the novel idea of TAKING OUT seats to provide the extra room?

Bollocks move, WS.

Now resenting an upcoming 6 hr YVR-CUN charter on the 738 even more.

Interesting, WS getting rid one of the few comfort advantages it has, better than average seat pitch.

Now it's better pitch if you pay, less for same money.

Wonder why they are making this move, not exactly smart in the big picture.

Very interesting development . . . but disappointing.

It seems that Westjet is taking away from its core customer base in order to provide extra space to those willing to pay more.

Squeeze the regulars in order to appeal to a new market.

It's not just Westjet adding Premium Economy. In order to fit that in, they're moving to Diminished Economy in the rest of their cabin. And I have a hunch that they won't be dropping their Diminished Economy fares to make up for the diminished comfort in the main cabin.

Dropping to a 31" seat pitch might seem like only a nominal change. But, if you're 6'2" or taller (I am) it's very, very uncomfortable. The difference between a pitch of 32 and 31 is huge. And it's that much worse when the person in front of you decides to recline their seat into your personal space. (It goes without saying that dropping the 34" standard seat pitch on some of their aircraft is a massive disappointment.)

I realize that some of their aircraft will remain at 32" pitch, but I'm concerned that they want to follow the U.S. trend of chasing revenue by compacting seats.

It will also be interesting to see if the strategy works for them -- with a FFP, international codeshares and a premium cabin, Westjet is now straying far off course from their inital business plan that led to their success.

Very interesting development . . . but disappointing.

It seems that Westjet is taking away from its core customer base in order to provide extra space to those willing to pay more.

Squeeze the regulars in order to appeal to a new market.

It's not just Westjet adding Premium Economy. In order to fit that in, they're moving to Diminished Economy in the rest of their cabin. And I have a hunch that they won't be dropping their Diminished Economy fares to make up for the diminished comfort in the main cabin.

Dropping to a 31" seat pitch might seem like only a nominal change. But, if you're 6'2" or taller (I am) it's very, very uncomfortable. The difference between a pitch of 32 and 31 is huge. And it's that much worse when the person in front of you decides to recline their seat into your personal space. (It goes without saying that dropping the 34" standard seat pitch on some of their aircraft is a massive disappointment.)

I realize that some of their aircraft will remain at 32" pitch, but I'm concerned that they want to follow the U.S. trend of chasing revenue by compacting seats.

It will also be interesting to see if the strategy works for them -- with a FFP, international codeshares and a premium cabin, Westjet is now straying far off course from their inital business plan that led to their success.

Yes, it will be interesting to see if they lose some of their core business. My guess is that they won't, but that's purely speculative. I think the added legroom will appeal to frequent business travelers on yield rich routes. They are facing the age old question of growth: is it better to maintain what you've got at the expense of growth, or risk what you have in order to expand?

Seat pitch is a fixed measure, but the actual space you have in front of your knees (at 6 ft 1 I'm acutely aware of milimeters of difference) varies depending on how the seats are constructed. It has been my impression that WS's 737-600 and 700 are a little tighter than AC's Embraer fleet because of that (or at least pre 2012 on the Embraers as I seem to recall that the last bunch of rows have been tightened up--haen't been on one this year yet). It's one reason I pick AC over WS on Embraer routes (I find the AC airbus fleet and the 737s to be comparably tight). In any case, taking away from pitch won't improve things and might end up being that little bit too much. Adding Y+ will make me look to WS more frequently, though, that's for sure. I'm pretty much a free agent these days and have no allegiance to any FF program so it's all about the most comfortable experience with the best schedule. The best price helps, too, of course.

Couple of things to ponder.

There might not be all that much difference on the 600/700s. From seat guru and my own recollection, the last row only had 2 seats on one side of the a/c and a lot of wasted space on the other side of the aircraft. So if WS reconfigured the whole area, they could drop the last stub row and get additional room required for Y+.

One thing is guarranteed, the missing exit row seat on 700s and 800s is going away. The 800s seats are being expanded by 8 (from the PR). To get to 8 additional seats is 1 extra row of six seats plus reconfiguration of row 14 for an additional 2 seats.

My guess is that the seat pitch behind the exit rows on the 600/700's will not change unless they are moving the lav's somewhere. So rows 5 - exit row may be reduced.

On the 800's they are probably adding 1 row of seats behind the exit row and then shifting the seats around in front of the exit row.

I don't think they will be moving the location of the exit row seats, save for adding in the missing window seat.

What would be a reasonable price to pay for Y+?

a) 10% premium over average Y fare paid
b) 20% premium over average Y fare paid
c) 50% of a comparable J fare?
d) other

Looks like they are following what JetBlue has been doing for quite a while with their even more space seats! Maybe $30-60 each way? I certainly will take advantage of this for my cross country flights if pricing stays reasonable, maybe they can throw in a snack box to sweeten the deal?

I was really waffling between AC and WJ on my YYZ CUN flights in October. My preference was WJ because of the leg room even though their new 737's do not have any IFE.
However after this announcement I went ahead and booked AC as I get free IFE, and free seat seat selection YYZ CUN and service charges on Air Canada are about $60.00 less.
WJ is really opening a can of worms for themselves. Their agents never heard of gate lice and the DYKWIA psgrs. IT will really change their culture very much!
Bad move!

As per the press release, the only real change in the "regular economy" seat pitch will be on the -800 series aircraft. The majority of the fleet is still -700 series. The change on the -800s will bring it in line with the -700s and -600s.

The addition of "premium economy" seats is just another value added service. You are hungry, you pay for food. You don't want to watch free tv, you pay for a movie. You are tall and you want more legroom, you pay for a seat with more room. See the pattern?

Westjet is still getting you safely from Point A to B on one of the newest fleets in North America and the staff will still work hard to make your travel as stress free as possible, all the while with a smile. Seems like everything will be okay!

If you want to fly non-stop from Vancouver to Cancun this winter, your choices have narrowed as Air Canada have bowed out of the market.

Now one has to wake up at 4:30am for a 7am flight to Toronto and you finally get to Cancun at about 8pm the same day.

The non-stop leaves at 9:40am and arrives at 5:30pm in time for cocktails!

I'll take the non-stop in premium economy and my IPAD over the round-about route EVERY time!

:)

Well, the WS website says the 600 and 700 are an average of 32" NOW. The new config will have 31" so there is a reduction on every 600 and 700 aircraft.

Another factor in knee room is seat thickness. Newer generations of seats that have now become available are approximately 1.5" thinner than the seats fitted to most aircraft, as they have a much more optimised design that still meets crash worthiness requirements.

I love the Westjet PR claims that nobody will even notice the difference in the rest of the cabin, i.e. the vast majority of the cabin, where rows have been squeezed closer to create the space for the front three rows.

I avoid any carrier with a 31" seat pitch like the plague, which is why I try to stay away from most US carriers and only fly AC or Westjet (til now).

As a frequent business traveller (1) I will not sacrifice my comfort for an airline's shareholders and (2) I will not pay a premium for the "luxury" of the ability to move my legs and not have my kneecaps crushed. (Two reasons: first, principle. You want my business, you don't take away my personal comfort. Second, my employer lets me choose my airline but will not allow expensing of premium economy surcharges.)

Westjet: 31" pitch = FAIL

WS advised me they were looking at charging the equivalent of 50% of J fare on an equivalent route for their Y+. Either this person is not in the know or they are drinking some kind of special Kool-Aid in Calgary! If you want to do a Y+ section fine but don't kill my knees in the process as I can't expense anything but the basic fare.

It's not so much asking us to pay more for more that I have an issue with. It's paying the same thing for less.

The extra 16" have to come from somewhere. The -600s and -700s now have 32" pitch throughout. They are saying these planes will have 31" / 32" pitch, which suggests to me that they are considering changing 16 rows from 32" to 31" pitch. The seats aren't changing, so no gain in legroom there. I would love to be proved wrong.

I'd pay something equivalent to what Jet Blue charges for a premium economy seat, but not 50% of J. That's insane!

If you want to fly non-stop from Vancouver to Cancun this winter, your choices have narrowed as Air Canada have bowed out of the market.

Now one has to wake up at 4:30am for a 7am flight to Toronto and you finally get to Cancun at about 8pm the same day.

The non-stop leaves at 9:40am and arrives at 5:30pm in time for cocktails!

I'll take the non-stop in premium economy and my IPAD over the round-about route EVERY time!

:)
Or fly via the U.S. There are other airlines out there besides AC and WS.

WS advised me they were looking at charging the equivalent of 50% of J fare on an equivalent route for their Y+. Either this person is not in the know or they are drinking some kind of special Kool-Aid in Calgary! If you want to do a Y+ section fine but don't kill my knees in the process as I can't expense anything but the basic fare.

If that's the case, there can't be any way that will succeed. 36 inch seat pitch in a three across row doesn't = half a J seat. UA's E+ works because it isn't much of a premium, and even then many of the seats go to members of their FF program as a benefit.

The $30 - $60 charge that a poster above cites as Jetblue's practice looks to be about right to make this successful.

It's not so much asking us to pay more for more that I have an issue with. It's paying the same thing for less.

The extra 16" have to come from somewhere. The -600s and -700s now have 32" pitch throughout. They are saying these planes will have 31" / 32" pitch, which suggests to me that they are considering changing 16 rows from 32" to 31" pitch. The seats aren't changing, so no gain in legroom there. I would love to be proved wrong.


Bingo! Very well put -- that's exactly what they're doing.

Westjet's actions are that much more disappointing given the ludicrous spin that they're putting on this. In order to create their new Y-plus section, they're taking away from the comfort of their existing product (but keeping prices the same). It's a shame they can't just be open and honest about that. Instead they're shrouding it with all of the silly statements about "people won't even notice" and "we're still within North American airline standards". What hogwash.

Or fly via the U.S. There are other airlines out there besides AC and WS.

In my world, non-stop trumps everything else, be it one stop, or the horrible inconvenience of driving to a border airport to save a few bucks, and worse, having to deal with an extended drive home after a long days traveling to begin with. Ugh.

Time and convenience is worth WAY more than collecting points I'll never use or being able to sit in airport lounges eating $5 worth of free dried out egg salad sandwiches and diet cokes whilst waiting hours for flights when I could already be half way to my destination!

In my world, getting there is not fun. Being there is fun, or better yet, profitable!

:)

This is a disappointing move.

And, really, the first row is to be avoided. I would maybe pay a couple bucks NOT to sit there, even if it provided a furlong of legroom.

I'm afraid that this new pricing approach will not stop with less legroom for the vast majority of their passengers. This might result in several tiers of tickets, where the cheap fare would have extra charges for things like luggage and checkin.

I've only started flying Westjet last year. I enjoyed it and I like the idea of employees holding the majority. So I got a RBC Westjet World Mastercard and picked Westjet over Porter on some flights (for myself and other people).

Edit: But, then again, Porter is in a very different financial situation, so they might just follow suite with extra charges for luggage, checkin, etc. And Porter has already raised their prices in the last half year or so. On those routes where I could have used them, they have hardly been competitive any more. Their smaller planes do have downsides.

Another factor in knee room is seat thickness. Newer generations of seats that have now become available are approximately 1.5" thinner than the seats fitted to most aircraft, as they have a much more optimised design that still meets crash worthiness requirements.

I don't think they will get in new seats. Yes, this way they could increase the number of seats on the plane.

But a) they would have announced the new seats with great ado
and
b) they would probably need more flight attendants on each flight that actually sells all those seats
and
c) it would reduce the load factor if they can not sell a good portion of these extra seats (which, in turn, might increase their refinancing costs, but that is just speculation).

b) would make extra seats not financially viable in most cases, I think. But I don't have the financial numbers to crunch.

With thinner seats they could keep legroom for most passengers as is AND increase it in rows 2-4. But that would require actual investment for a better product.

Having thought a bit more over the whole thing: Maybe the higher revenue from Premium seats will enable WS to be more agressive on pricing with the normal seats?

What do you think?

Having thought a bit more over the whole thing: Maybe the higher revenue from Premium seats will enable WS to be more agressive on pricing with the normal seats?

What do you think?
Unlikely. Higher revenue on premium seats will mean more profit not lower fares.

What is a reasonable profit margin for an airline?

I should ask its a question of opinion. I knows what the profitable airlines ate making. Just curious what is reasonable in a customers mind?

Personally, I don't feel cramped on the 737-700 models so this decision won't bother me too much. Although, losing 2 inches might bother those who already feel cramped on WestJet's Hawaii routes especially.

What is a reasonable profit margin for an airline?

If you were to start a transportation business where you had almost no control over revenues, but the costs didn't change much no matter how many people you transport, and the government taxed every level of the business as if it were a carton of cigarettes, and each vehicle/boat/aircraft cost close to at least $40 million and you needed at least 25 to get any sort of market penetration, would you take that sort of risk to make 5%?

I wouldn't!!!

:)

If these folks are already feeling cramped on the Vancouver-Hawaii -800 series service at 34 inches, then they will be pleased with the premium economy product, or perhaps need to consider another airline with business/first class sections, which they will probably pay much more for. I think 34 inches has been quite the anomaly and quite luxurious in the economy seating market.

WS advised me they were looking at charging the equivalent of 50% of J fare on an equivalent route for their Y+. Either this person is not in the know or they are drinking some kind of special Kool-Aid in Calgary! If you want to do a Y+ section fine but don't kill my knees in the process as I can't expense anything but the basic fare.

they are dreaming if they think people will pay that much.

If these folks are already feeling cramped on the Vancouver-Hawaii -800 series service at 34 inches, then they will be pleased with the premium economy product, or perhaps need to consider another airline with business/first class sections, which they will probably pay much more for. I think 34 inches has been quite the anomaly and quite luxurious in the economy seating market.

Meaning past WS passenger had it better than they deserved and that's now been corrected? Perhaps but that doesn't mean this WS pax is happy to see that oversight rectified. Just MHO, of course.

I am always able to book an exit row seat (usually the one with infinite legroom for $30. Makes me wonder what else will be on offer to coax people who won't spend $30 today to supposedly spend far more in the future.

Clearly targeting now-WS passengers while punishing those who have been loyal to the airline with less legroom and the reality of being treated as second class citizens.

I respect the right for people to have an opinion but some of the thoughts shared in this thread are pretty overly dramatic.

The seat pitch on the -600 and -700 aircraft is currently 32" (31" in some seats). the seat pitch on the -800 aircraft is currently 34". As I understand it there won't be any changes to the -600/-700 aircraft as this change will bring the -800 fleet in line with the -600/-700 fleet.

The addition of premium economy seating gives customers the CHOICE of paying more for the additional legroom - legroom (36") that was never available on any of our aircraft.

If you don't want to pay extra, you get the same type of seating that you've been accustomed to. What's the big deal?

The seat pitch on the -600 and -700 aircraft is currently 32" (31" in some seats). the seat pitch on the -800 aircraft is currently 34". As I understand it there won't be any changes to the -600/-700 aircraft as this change will bring the -800 fleet in line with the -600/-700 fleet.

That just doesn't add up ... it's physically impossible that the seat pitch on the -600s and -700s won't change! There's no other way to fit in this new premium section without squeezing the remaining seats tighter! Where else would all of the premium leg room come from? (They're not making the plane any longer, after all.)

On the 600s and 700s, there will be many more seats with a reduced seat pitch of only 31". That's tight. And that's worse than Westjet customers get now. A definite downgrade for their core, bread-and-butter passengers.

On the 800s, sure we've all been oh so lucky to have all of that legroom up until now (as my namesake lurker from Westjet stated above), but seat pitch on those aircraft is also dropping to 31" or 32" standard. That's worse than Westjet customer get now on those same aircraft. (And if you happen to be sitting in a 31" row, it's going to be noticably worse.) A definite downgrade for their core, bread-and-butter passengers.

If you don't want to pay extra, you get the same type of seating that you've been accustomed to. What's the big deal?

Nobody here has raised any issue about Westjet offering a premium product or charging for it.

The issue is that they are taking away space and comfort from their current customers in order to create that new premium product. If I choose not to pay extra, I get less space and comfort than I get today. Period.

Create a new premium product? Great move, Westjet! I hope it works for you.

Create a new premium product, which either will either negatively impact my comfort as a passenger on your planes or will force me to pay extra to avoid that negative impact? Bad move, Westjet! Grrrrrr.

:td::td::td:

That just doesn't add up ... it's physically impossible that the seat pitch on the -600s and -700s won't change! There's no other way to fit in this new premium section without squeezing the remaining seats tighter! Where else would all of the premium leg room come from? (They're not making the plane any longer, after all.)

On the 600s and 700s, there will be many more seats with a reduced seat pitch of only 31". That's tight. And that's worse than Westjet customers get now. A definite downgrade for their core, bread-and-butter passengers.

On the 800s, sure we've all been oh so lucky to have all of that legroom up until now (as my namesake lurker from Westjet stated above), but seat pitch on those aircraft is also dropping to 31" or 32" standard. That's worse than Westjet customer get now on those same aircraft. (And if you happen to be sitting in a 31" row, it's going to be noticably worse.) A definite downgrade for their core, bread-and-butter passengers.



Nobody here has raised any issue about Westjet offering a premium product or charging for it.

The issue is that they are taking away space and comfort from their current customers in order to create that new premium product. If I choose not to pay extra, I get less space and comfort than I get today. Period.

Create a new premium product? Great move, Westjet! I hope it works for you.

Create a new premium product, which either will either negatively impact my comfort as a passenger on your planes or will force me to pay extra to avoid that negative impact? Bad move, Westjet! Grrrrrr.

:td::td::td:

There are lots of rows in the 600's and 700's where the pitch is 33" and one or two rows even have a little more. . :)

Those will all disappear to a standardized pitch.

31 to 32" pitch is pretty standard in North America for economy seating. I don't see what the big deal is. If you need more space, pay for it on WJ or pay WAY more and fly someone else!

When I order a quarter pound burger, that is what I expect to get! Why should some pay the same for their quarter pound burger and get a third of a pound instead?



:)

When I order a quarter pound burger, that is what I expect to get! Why should some pay the same for their quarter pound burger and get a third of a pound instead?

For years, one might argue that Westjet has sold their customers that "third of a pound" burger. They sold it to everybody - each and every one of their customers - at a set price. It was a key part of their value proposition to their customers.

Now, they're cutting away at that core product. They're reducing it to only to a "quarter pound burger" (or in some cases, a slightly less than quarter pound burger) -- yet will still charge us all the exact same price for it.

That cuts away from a part of their value proposition. Whether you think their fares up until now have been a great deal or not (for the seat pitch they've previously offered), the bottom line is that they're going to start selling a slightly diminished product yet not changing their price.

The fact that they're going to start making 'half pound' burgers available as an option doesn't change that fact.

And, IMHO, it really doesn't matter if some might think that the 32 to 34 inch seat pitches were an amazingly good deal up until now. Take away product quality from me by taking away comfort (without discounting your price accordingly) and I'm mad. Even if Westjet apparently thinks that the previous quality/seat pitch was just too good to be true (i.e. slightly better than industry standards).

And talking about 'industry standards' -- that sounds like it's straight from the PR pieces that Westjet HQ turned out. When I used to have nice kneespace on their planes, and the seat in front of me will now be touching my knees, do you think I'll sit their happily thinking "Ahhh, this is perfectly in line with industry standards. What a wonderful experience this is." Nope. Will I be thinking, "Gee, what an unbelievably good deal Westjet used to be when they used to have slightly-better-than-industry-standards-seat-pitch at industry-standard-pricing? How lucky it was for me that I was able to enjoy that?" Nope again.

Take away from my leg room and charge me the same, and I'm angry. (Even if I will now have the option to buy a different product for more money.)

As many have said throughout this thread, nobody begrudges Westjet for creating and selling a premium economy product. What we're all @#$ed at is the fact that they're doing so by taking space away from their main product and their main customer base (and yet not taking away from the price of that product). Who cares if I could choose to pay more to avoid it? That's not the point.

It's downright disrepectful of their current, loyal customer base.

I don't think they will get in new seats. Yes, this way they could increase the number of seats on the plane.

But a) they would have announced the new seats with great ado
and
b) they would probably need more flight attendants on each flight that actually sells all those seats
and
c) it would reduce the load factor if they can not sell a good portion of these extra seats (which, in turn, might increase their refinancing costs, but that is just speculation).

b) would make extra seats not financially viable in most cases, I think. But I don't have the financial numbers to crunch.

With thinner seats they could keep legroom for most passengers as is AND increase it in rows 2-4. But that would require actual investment for a better product.
New aircraft will have thinner seats, but a retrofit won't happen on existing ones while the seats are still serviceable. For example, the Recaro 3510 seats give over 1.5" more knee room at the same seat pitch than the 3410 seats that most of the WestJet fleet has at the moment.

FA requirements change at break points of 120 and 160 in Canada (1:40) and 150 in the US (1:50), so 166, 174 and 189 seats on a 737-800 require the same number of FAs.

Routes and demand are matched to the equipment, so a 737-700 with a higher density seating plan could conceivably replace a low density 737-800 on a given route, giving a higher load factor. Seat densities on 737-700 vary from about 136 to 148 in a single class cabin and from 166 to 189 on an -800. An 80% typical WS load factor on it's 166 seat -800 equates to a 90% load factor on a max seating density -700.

There are lots of rows in the 600's and 700's where the pitch is 33" and one or two rows even have a little more. . :)

Sorry, I'll have to call you on that one. There are not lots of rows with 33" pitch. If there were, it would be advertised as 33" with a few 32". Instead, we have mostly 32" with a few rows of 33" and a few rows of 31". But the 33" rows cannot make up the 16" required for comfort seating, so we'll end up with lots of 31" and a few 32".

The exit rows will have to keep their additional pitch so they do not block the exits, unless WS is planning to shorten the seat cushions like Zip did, in which case the seats become more uncomfortable. There is also some room at the rear of the cabin, but you'd have to lose the recline on the last row of seats if you want to use that space to reduce the number of 31" pitch rows -- again, more uncomfortable.

The bottom line is WS simply cannot add in the comfort seating and keep the number of seats the same without reducing the pitch/comfort elsewhere.

I'd have no complaint if they had the reduced pitch only on aircraft with thinner seats, like AA is doing. But this is not what's happening.

I see one of the most profitable airlines in the world, one that made a return of more than 10% last quarter, doing this to make even more money while its core passengers suffer. And there is a huge difference to me between 31" and 32" on a 4-hour flight!

(For similar complaints, look at the posts on the AC board from 12 years ago when they reduced the pitch of the first few rows of Y seats on the A320 to 31" so they could fit in more seats.)

I see one of the most profitable airlines in the world, one that made a return of more than 10% last quarter
WestJet 2Q2012 revenue $809M, net earnings $42.5M, net profit margin = 5.3%

A random selection of other companies' 2Q2012 net profit margins:
Apple = 29.6%
Ryanair = 7.7%
Telus = 12.3%
Suncor = 14.2%
Spirit Airlines = 10.0%

WestJet 2Q2012 revenue $809M, net earnings $42.5M, net profit margin = 5.3%


I was referring to WS's return on invested capital of 11.4% last quarter.

When I order a quarter pound burger, that is what I expect to get! Why should some pay the same for their quarter pound burger and get a third of a pound instead?

More of these enhancements and WS will soon have this consumer exclaiming "where's the beef?"

If they install thinner seats people will think they increased seat pitch. I flew on LH's new Y seat and the pitch was 30" and it was actually fine. Not sure how comfortable the seats would be for a 4 or 5 hour flight, but the pitch felt greater than TAP's 32" with their big Y seats.

If they install thinner seats people will think they increased seat pitch.

Not happening.

Westjet has not said anything about installing new or thinner seats.

They made it clear in their announcement that they're going to be removing and then re-installing their existing seats with tighter seat pitch.

It's not so much asking us to pay more for more that I have an issue with. It's paying the same thing for less.

+1 !!


I had an interesting conversation with our corporate travel agent about this earlier this morning.

Her take: It’s simple. They’re taking some space away from most of their “guests” in order to sell it back to a handful of them as a luxury.

She doubts that Westjet’s loads in Economy Minus class will be impacted at all by this, so Westjet gets all the upside of a new revenue stream, while us “guests” get the new experience of knees rubbing on seats. So it’s good for Westjet and Westjetter owners, I suppose, but bad for us people who actually sit in their planes.

Interestingly, she said that most of the customer questions they’ve had about it so far are coming from Alberta, where this seems to have had the most media attention. It’s that ‘hometown airline’ thing I guess. It seems it’s gone relatively unnoticed by the traveling public – so far – elsewhere in the country. (She’s based in Mississauga.)

She pointed out (accurately, and somewhat sadly) that it’s the trend across the airline industry. Remember the good ol days when American Airlines boasted “More room throughout coach” – with a TV ad campaign showing seats coming off the plane on baggage conveyer belts? (IIRC, that was just pre 9/11) That's long gone.

Now, almost all airlines are treating the basic customer as moo-cattle. Dial the inflight comfort down to pretty bare bones – without dialing down fares accordingly, naturally – and then try to get people to pay extra for "better than bare bones" by calling it a luxury.

So disappointing that Westjet is following this downwards trend just like most of the others.

Let's just hope AC doesn't follow suit by squeezing their seats down to a 31" pitch too. (Before anyone jumps on this statement, yes, I know they do have some seats at 31" pitch today -- but it's the definite exception. Most AC pitches are 32" or slightly better.)

They're reducing it to only to a "quarter pound burger" (or in some cases, a slightly less than quarter pound burger) -- yet will still charge us all the exact same price for it.

This is called size inflation. If you've ever been to a grocery store you will know WS isn't the only business doing this.

What would be a reasonable price to pay for Y+?

a) 10% premium over average Y fare paid
b) 20% premium over average Y fare paid
c) 50% of a comparable J fare?
d) other

If BA is an example, T is usually around $300 more than O.

If they install thinner seats people will think they increased seat pitch. I flew on LH's new Y seat and the pitch was 30" and it was actually fine. Not sure how comfortable the seats would be for a 4 or 5 hour flight, but the pitch felt greater than TAP's 32" with their big Y seats.

+1 - I found LH's thin seats w/ 30" pitch to be comparable to 32" pitch with regular seats on other airlines.

+1 - I found LH's thin seats w/ 30" pitch to be comparable to 32" pitch with regular seats on other airlines.

But again, Westjet has made it clear that they're not changing seats!

They're re-using their existing seats -- just compressing them tighter in the cabin to make space for their new $+ section.

(And I must admit I'm confused. My understanding of seat pitch was always pitch = distance between 'front of your seatback' to the back of the seat in front of you. Therefore, how thick or thin the seats are should have nothing to do with seat pitch -- and should directly reflect how much legroom is available to the passenger. Some seats are designed better than others, i.e. those where a reclined seat has less impact on the other passenger's space, or where there are 'carve outs' for knees . . . but ultimately a 32" pitch should equal a 32" pitch regardless of which type of seat is used.)

That's all moot for Westjet though -- as they've made it clear they're doing seat compression in the main cabin, not seat improvement.

(And I must admit I'm confused. My understanding of seat pitch was always pitch = distance between 'front of your seatback' to the back of the seat in front of you. Therefore, how thick or thin the seats are should have nothing to do with seat pitch -- and should directly reflect how much legroom is available to the passenger. Some seats are designed better than others, i.e. those where a reclined seat has less impact on the other passenger's space, or where there are 'carve outs' for knees . . . but ultimately a 32" pitch should equal a 32" pitch regardless of which type of seat is used.)

Seat pitch is the distance from one part of a seat to the same part of the next seat, so if you make the seatback thinner, there is more legroom.

Her take: It’s simple. They’re taking some space away from most of their “guests” in order to sell it back to a handful of them as a luxury.



I would like to see how they would position this new 'class' in SABRE and on westjet.com. If they just say 'Y' booking holders get it for free (by manipulating the seat map availability - like non-Y do not see the first X number of rows), they may win some last minute Corporate traffic. If they create a separate service class they will not get any revenue from me, as I can only fly in Coach/Economy on Canadian domestic routes...

I would like to see how they would position this new 'class' in SABRE and on westjet.com. If they just say 'Y' booking holders get it for free (by manipulating the seat map availability - like non-Y do not see the first X number of rows), they may win some last minute Corporate traffic. If they create a separate service class they will not get any revenue from me, as I can only fly in Coach/Economy on Canadian domestic routes...

These will not be giving these seats away and they will be coded with a whole new booking class for sales in CRS as without it there would be now way to distinguish between economy and premium economy.

These will not be giving these seats away and they will be coded with a whole new booking class for sales in CRS as without it there would be now way to distinguish between economy and premium economy.

How would this differ, say, from how UA sells E+? I too have economy class restrictions for work-related travel, but it is easy to buy an economy ticket and then buy up to E+ as a separate transaction so that I'm only claiming the economy ticket. Sometimes these things are about optics (e.g., I buy a low fare ticket and submit that along with my Exec boarding pass and nobody cares in our financial services department how I ended up in an Exec seat so long as the extra charge--if there was one--doesn't show up on the invoice), so I hope WS understands what restrictions people have with corporate travel.

How would this differ, say, from how UA sells E+? I too have economy class restrictions for work-related travel, but it is easy to buy an economy ticket and then buy up to E+ as a separate transaction so that I'm only claiming the economy ticket. Sometimes these things are about optics (e.g., I buy a low fare ticket and submit that along with my Exec boarding pass and nobody cares in our financial services department how I ended up in an Exec seat so long as the extra charge--if there was one--doesn't show up on the invoice), so I hope WS understands what restrictions people have with corporate travel.
It depends...
UA does not currently sell E+ as a separate class of service - they sell it as an enhancement that frequent flyers get free and others can pay a relatively small premium over the regular economy price to purchase - similar to buying exit row seating on WS today. The problem with this system is that at this time people buying on public travel sites (e.g. Expedia) can not access the premium seats when they buy the ticket.

It sounds like WS wants to take a differentapproach to UA, defining it as a seprate class of service. This will allow them to charge a larger premium and can be sold as "premium economy" on public sites.

It sounds like WS wants to take a differentapproach to UA, defining it as a seprate class of service. This will allow them to charge a larger premium and can be sold as "premium economy" on public sites.

I can see the advantages to this approach for both sides but also wonder about how many people will truly want to pay that much of a premium (whatever it will be, if it is indeed more than what UA or DL charge). UA's charges aren't insignificant for longer flights (much more than what WS charges for an exit row). For those travelers who are looking to use WS as a connector to other carriers that have F/C/J class service, getting a PE seat rather than an economy seat may well be attractive. I know that when I've flown on AC or UA to connect to a C/J TATL I've never been happy having to sit in economy on the CRJ, which is often the aircraft used for the flights I book through YYC, DEN or ORD.

Headline on CNN.com's travel section today:

JetBlue, WestJet shrink legroom for coach seats

The article and video do point out that it's not just Westjet squeezing their "guests" -- it's a big trend across the whole industry.

As I've said previously in this thread, it's so disappointing that Westjet is just being a sheep here and following everyone else to the lowest common denominator...


http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/22/travel/airline-legroom/index.html?hpt=hp_bn8

Headline on CNN.com's travel section today:

JetBlue, WestJet shrink legroom for coach seats

The article and video do point out that it's not just Westjet squeezing their "guests" -- it's a big trend across the whole industry.

As I've said previously in this thread, it's so disappointing that Westjet is just being a sheep here and following everyone else to the lowest common denominator...


http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/22/travel/airline-legroom/index.html?hpt=hp_bn8
CASM and yield are paramount to airline profitability, brand loyalty has very little sway in keeping customers (a price difference of $5 is enough to sway an average customer from a "good" brand to a "not so good" brand in the airline industry). To maintain yield, revenue per flight has to be maintained, but if the competition is driving prices down due to their higher density cabins (North America wide, not just in Canada) giving them lower CASM, then WestJet can't increase CASM (by removing seats) and maintain yield at lower prices, if there isn't more revenue from a premium offering.

Bottom line, in a free enterprise environment, the customer determines the price and product offering. If they are almost totally fixated on the lowest price, then they will get less from a product perspective. Those who want more from a product perspective will be able to choose a premium seat for a premium price on WestJet.

what I would like to know is how will they do this on the -700?

There is no mention of increasing or decreasing the overall number of seats, so I would assume that the exit rows are staying put. As there are only 11 rows behind the exit row, I can't see them adding in an extra row there, as they would be decreasing the seat pitch by an average of 3 inches per row.

It seems to me that the only place they can take away leg room is between E+ and the exit row, however I can't see them getting in more than 1 or 2 rows of E+.

From the WS press release: "CALGARY, Aug. 1, 2012 /CNW/ - WestJet today announced it will introduce premium economy seating across its entire fleet. The reconfiguration will introduce four rows of extra legroom seating with 36 inches of pitch and convenience features such as priority boarding as well as complimentary on-board amenities. The reconfiguration will begin in August and will be completed in December 2012."

Priority boarding makes for an interesting addition. 36 inch pitch isn't too bad. Cost is really the unknown.

Anyone know when they will announce Premium Economy on their website. I am planning to fly WS in January, but there is no mention of this on WS.com (only the usual exit/row bulkhead). We're now 2.5 months away from their completion deadline... will they wait until the conversion is complete? That sounds like an odd way of doing it (and they already manage different sub-fleets/seat configurations).

I wouldn't want to pay for the exit row, only to find out my flight has PE, and reversely, I wouldn't want to pre-book a regular seat in rows 2-4 in the hopes they get converted to PE by January (only to find the exit row pre-booked by then)...

The current plan is have the entire fleet reconfigured by January, with the -800s being done first, followed by the rest of the fleet, as they go into the hanger for their regular maintenance checks. The current plan is not to charge for the PE seat assignments until the entire fleet has been converted. Hope that helps.

I wouldn't want to pay for the exit row, only to find out my flight has PE, and reversely, I wouldn't want to pre-book a regular seat in rows 2-4 in the hopes they get converted to PE by January (only to find the exit row pre-booked by then)...
Once PE is launched, I suspect you'll be kicking yourself for not booking the exit row. I have a feeling PE will cost far more than an Exit row seat does today.

Once PE is launched, I suspect you'll be kicking yourself for not booking the exit row. I have a feeling PE will cost far more than an Exit row seat does today.

There's much riding on WS price point for PE. Set it too high and it'll turn off their core and hopeful new AC customers while pricing it too low will not return as solid of a return. Worse still would be to pull a "New Coke" and have to bid a hasty retreat from a new product launch gone horribly wrong.

Interesting times...

Only being done on 800 series.

what I would like to know is how will they do this on the -700?

There is no mention of increasing or decreasing the overall number of seats, so I would assume that the exit rows are staying put. As there are only 11 rows behind the exit row, I can't see them adding in an extra row there, as they would be decreasing the seat pitch by an average of 3 inches per row.

It seems to me that the only place they can take away leg room is between E+ and the exit row, however I can't see them getting in more than 1 or 2 rows of E+.

So has anyone flown on the new PE equipment aircraft???

By now Westjet should be 15-25% complete conversion. Any insiders abloe to post the actual percentage completion.

Only being done on 800 series.
Not true. If they were just changing the seat pitch on the -800s to make it the same as the rest of the fleet, there wouldn't be anywhere near as many upset people here. According to the press release:
WestJet today announced it will introduce premium economy seating across its entire fleet. The reconfiguration will introduce four rows of extra legroom seating with 36 inches of pitch ...

what I would like to know is how will they do this on the -700?

There is no mention of increasing or decreasing the overall number of seats, so I would assume that the exit rows are staying put. As there are only 11 rows behind the exit row, I can't see them adding in an extra row there, as they would be decreasing the seat pitch by an average of 3 inches per row.

It seems to me that the only place they can take away leg room is between E+ and the exit row, however I can't see them getting in more than 1 or 2 rows of E+.
If they add 4 rows of premium economy, that's 16" of extra space, or half a row. If they change the seat alignment at the exit row so that the starboard seats align with the exit and the port seats do not (the opposite of what they have now -- 12F with no seat in front of it moves over to the A side), and then decrease the pitch to 31" behind the exit row, they should be able to keep the total number of seats the same, although they may have to eliminate the space currently used to recline the seats in the last row. Just a guess.

No aircraft are in service. Those that are done or are being done are waiting for TC approval. Not a fast process.

No aircraft are in service. Those that are done or are being done are waiting for TC approval. Not a fast process.

Thanks for the update.

TC Approval. :confused: What is causing the TC approval hold up? I don't remember this occuring on any of the AC seat adjustments (e.g. moving 320s from 20J/120Y to 14J/132Y). Is there something else being done at the same time as PE implementation?

Any updates? Did anyone get to try one yet? They said all aircraft will be completed by December 2012, so quite a few a/c must have this now?

Not mine to OGG last Sat. Will be on the return today. On time performance of Maui flights is abysmal of late.

Not sure but I think the December 2012 date is now being pushed to 2013.

3 aircraft, none flying. All 3 waiting for TC approval.

Return from Maui we had a 737-800 with the TVs and as per the post above the old generous legroom seating throughout Y. I would fly WS to Hawaii everytime if they kept the current seat pitch.

Saretsky said focus groups that saw a prototype of the changes couldn't distinguish the difference and new seat technology with thinner seats will give passengers the illusion that space has actually increased.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/business/westjet-passengers-may-get-entertainment-on-own-tablets-phones-1.1046412#ixzz2Cp45WMXh

I can definitely tell the difference between the new thinner seats and the old thicker ones. Have to agree it does give the illusion of more legroom.

I can definitely tell the difference between the new thinner seats and the old thicker ones. Have to agree it does give the illusion of more legroom.

New seats explains the reason for TC approval holdup. SO this change to PE is not just moving seats up and down the track but has a whole new seat design. If the seat gives the illusion of more legroon, is it possible the new seat has non-standard configuration (e.g. move the magazine rack farther up the seatback, hard shell seat like the new LH european seats, etc.

...and with new seats does that mean the TV offering is being pulled out of the aircraft that are so renovated?

They've said that all new planes will have thinner seats. Presumably that means that the old planes, which make up the vast majority of the fleet, will keep the old seats with reduced seat pitch.

Regardless of how they try to spin it, this is not a good thing for most "guests".

I was on a brand new -800 of WestJet's last month. The seats are ok - they are the typical hard plastic back - I remember them being white but it's possible they are light grey. They do seem tall - but that could be an illusion. Comfort was fine - I flew it YYC-LAX. They had ZERO tv's in them. That was why I made a complaint to WS. As we were boarding the gate agent said - oh - you are on one of our brand new planes - and there is no entertainment system so you may want to go get a magazine. Nice to tell us as we were boarding. So everyone came prepared for tv's. And think about who goes to LAX. Parents with kids. YUP - parents brought the kids headsets so they were not prepared for this shocking surprise of NOTHING to do. If they knew ahead they could have brought toys or music or something. So there I was listening to kids whining all the way to LAX because all we had to do was sit and stare directly ahead of us at a white plastic seatback.

Also note - they do not provide a power outlet. So - how are all these people with their own iPads or the ones rented going to keep them charged while watching movies on a flight say to Hawaii or Florida. Hmmm?

But, to stay on topic, the seats were fine as I recall.

Ya, we heard you the first time <_<

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/19598932-post3.html

I was on a brand new -800 of WestJet's last month. The seats are ok - they are the typical hard plastic back - I remember them being white but it's possible they are light grey. They do seem tall - but that could be an illusion. Comfort was fine - I flew it YYC-LAX. They had ZERO tv's in them. That was why I made a complaint to WS. As we were boarding the gate agent said - oh - you are on one of our brand new planes - and there is no entertainment system so you may want to go get a magazine. Nice to tell us as we were boarding. So everyone came prepared for tv's. And think about who goes to LAX. Parents with kids. YUP - parents brought the kids headsets so they were not prepared for this shocking surprise of NOTHING to do. If they knew ahead they could have brought toys or music or something. So there I was listening to kids whining all the way to LAX because all we had to do was sit and stare directly ahead of us at a white plastic seatback.

Also note - they do not provide a power outlet. So - how are all these people with their own iPads or the ones rented going to keep them charged while watching movies on a flight say to Hawaii or Florida. Hmmm?

But, to stay on topic, the seats were fine as I recall.

Dear god what did people do before electronics? Sorry but the entitlement of airline passengers to have anything and everything is beyond ridiculous.

I don't care so much about inflight TV. I don't have a TV at home so why would I need one on a plane? These inflight entertainment systems are heavy and thus expensive to fly back and forth. Not to forget the electricity, the rights to show the stuff, maintenance, etc.

However, I do understand WestonC. Passengers would want to know in advance that they are being removed.

And, yes, charging outlets would be a plus. More important than inflight TV. (Then again, they often come together - either both or nothing).

Dear god what did people do before electronics? Sorry but the entitlement of airline passengers to have anything and everything is beyond ridiculous.

It's all about expectations. WestJet has been advertising LiveTV for ages; people therefore expect it. If they knew it would not be available, they likely would have brought something else.

Over the last few years, WestJet has not done well at managing expectations. And when guests complain, WestJet blames them for having unrealistic expectations -- hardly the sort of customer service we saw in the early years.

Agreed. People expect TVs because Westjet has said they have TVs. There is nothing wrong with having such an expectation. I also expect to be able to buy a salad in row 3 but sadly this did not happen on my recent MEALTIME flight.

Dear god what did people do before electronics? Sorry but the entitlement of airline passengers to have anything and everything is beyond ridiculous.

Wow - quite rude a reply for someone making a simple statement in response to the thread.

As mentioned - it is about expectations. WestJet advertised the entertainment system - we boarded our flight with no books or magazines etc. because we expected the entertainment system. We had nothing to help us pass the time. It's expectations.

Let's look at it another way. You expect to be able to take 1 free checked bag on WestJet. If they suddenly changed the rules without informing you or advertising and you went to the airport to check in with your 1 checked bag and they said it will cost you $30.00 - I'm sure you would be on here complaining. Or what if they said - no more baggage - it's you only.

That's the point of the comment.

Look I understand your frustration, I understand the expectation. My comment was generalized and not specific to anyone here.

Back on topic.. 600 and 700 are online flying with the new configuration. For some reason the 800 is not yet.

I was on WS473 Dec 20 on row 4. I marveled at the legroom on those seats, which are even roomier than CX's 77Ws. Any chance I was on their premium economy seats, but sold as economy?

Edit: According to Flight 24, C-GBWS operated WS473 that day.

I think the plan is, until all of the fleet is reconfigured and the fare groups are finalized, the PE seats will be sold the same as the rest.

So are they copying the business model of JetBlue now?

Its not a bad idea, JetBlue are printing money right now from what I hear.

WestJet has always modeled themselves around JetBlue. And it seems to be working.

It is not really a case of WestJet modelling after JetBlue or vice-versa. Both airlines have evolved away from the Southwest model. Both WestJet and JetBlue have David Neelman in common, he served on the WestJet board before JetBlue was founded. Due to his connections, WestJet and JetBlue have an on-going relationship with technical interaction between the companies.

JetBlue was based on Westjet, as Westjet started in Feb 1996 and Jetblue started almost 4 years later in Feb 2000.

According to the books published on Westjet and Jetblue, David Neeleman had a couple of key original Westjet people help him with the design of Jetblue, but Clive Beddoe was not involved.

Westjet has almost always been more profitable than Jetblue.

According to the books published on Westjet and Jetblue, David Neeleman had a couple of key original Westjet people help him with the design of Jetblue, but Clive Beddoe was not involved.



Did any of those people snoop in other airlines reservations system while they were there?

Any updates...........

Is there any way to know, based on the seat chart or otherwise, if one is on one of the reconfigured aircraft? I'm flying LAS-YQR on Feb 25 and bought a seat in row 4 just in case, but the exit rows are still wide open so I'm considering switching for the extra legroom back there.

Not yet. I can say that ALL 737-800 aircraft have been reconfigured so any 737-800 operated flights will have the premium economy seating.

I'm 6'2" and I can say that the impact of reconfiguring the aircraft is negligible and I've flown on 7 reconfigured aircraft (2/7 flights in the premium economy seats; 2/7 flights on 737-800 and 3/7 on 737-700).

Is there any way to know, based on the seat chart or otherwise, if one is on one of the reconfigured aircraft? I'm flying LAS-YQR on Feb 25 and bought a seat in row 4 just in case, but the exit rows are still wide open so I'm considering switching for the extra legroom back there.
Only the first 3 rows have the extra legroom (besides the emergency exit area), if you fly on one of the aircraft that has already been re-configured.

Only the first 3 rows have the extra legroom (besides the emergency exit area), if you fly on one of the aircraft that has already been re-configured.

It looks like I'm on the 737-800 on the 25th. I understood, from the WS press release a while back, that the first four rows were to be reconfigured:

"CALGARY, Aug. 1, 2012 /CNW/ - WestJet today announced it will introduce premium economy seating across its entire fleet. The reconfiguration will introduce four rows of extra legroom seating with 36 inches of pitch and convenience features such as priority boarding as well as complimentary on-board amenities. The reconfiguration will begin in August and will be completed in December 2012."

It looks like I'm on the 737-800 on the 25th. I understood, from the WS press release a while back, that the first four rows were to be reconfigured:

"CALGARY, Aug. 1, 2012 /CNW/ - WestJet today announced it will introduce premium economy seating across its entire fleet. The reconfiguration will introduce four rows of extra legroom seating with 36 inches of pitch and convenience features such as priority boarding as well as complimentary on-board amenities. The reconfiguration will begin in August and will be completed in December 2012."

It says four rows not the first four rows. The fourth row is the emergency exit row.

It says four rows not the first four rows. The fourth row is the emergency exit row.

I get you. The E row is pretty much the same as always, then, only re-branded a premium row?

It says four rows not the first four rows. The fourth row is the emergency exit row.

Will this be the case on all aircraft?
-600, -700, -800.

Will this be the case on all aircraft?
-600, -700, -800.
Yes, all will have 24 seats with 36" when the refit is completed. On the -800 the emergency row seats are all 6 seats per row, instead of the 6 and 4 combination that was previously in place.

I don't care so much about inflight TV. I don't have a TV at home so why would I need one on a plane? These inflight entertainment systems are heavy and thus expensive to fly back and forth. Not to forget the electricity, the rights to show the stuff, maintenance, etc.

However, I do understand WestonC. Passengers would want to know in advance that they are being removed.

And, yes, charging outlets would be a plus. More important than inflight TV. (Then again, they often come together - either both or nothing).

I would prefer the power outlet over the entertainment system. Hands-down, that's far more valuable to me.

Having now flown on one of the 737-800s in a seat row with the reduced pitch I can say that it isn't all that bad. As far as I can tell, the new seats must be thinner as there was more knee room for me than on the 737-600/700s I've been on in recent times (I usually rub, just). If this is the future, I'm ok with it, actually, though of course I'd love more legroom. The 600/700s really are very uncomfortable for me.

The crew (LAS-YQR) was sadly indifferent, going through the motions more than anything. I've had a few crews like that on WS in the last few years (amongst the many good ones), which is surely a sign of what happens when you get big. Sad, though, that the airline can't consistently maintain the high standards they were able to for so many years.

If you buy Main Cabin Extra on a joint AA/WS itinerary, will WS put you in the PE section?

Also, has WS hinted on wether elite members on American Airlines would get at the very least exit rows (which aren't technically premium economy) ?

What is the layout of the 737-700 now?

Based on seat maps ive previewed for flights in November it looks the same as before in terms of exit row location, which leads me to believe that only the rows ahead of the exit have reduced pitch, is this correct?

I want to ask this too.... Are there any normal Economy seats still left on the 737-800 with 33-34" pitch?

And what about the 737-700? Any recommended normal Economy seats/rows?

I want to ask this too.... Are there any normal Economy seats still left on the 737-800 with 33-34" pitch?

And what about the 737-700? Any recommended normal Economy seats/rows?

On the 737-800, I'm pretty sure not. As I note above, my experience in a regular seat a few weeks ago was that it was reasonably roomy. Not 34 inches, but decent and better than the 600/700 series. I go by knee clearance (I'm 6 ft 1 in) and I had some where I push into the seat on the others.

I think the 600/700 series are not all switched over yet, so if it's old style then none are particularly better than others, except for some of the exit rows.