Cathay Pacific Asia Miles - Flimsy new product: teething issue or something bigger?

There is a recent post about the new Y seats (in the review of new economy thread) about failed AVOD. Another poster here (in the downgrade to economy thread) had issues with the new F reclining in two different instances. I personally have had AVOD problems in J on both 74A and 77W, and seat reclining issues in 74A in F. I had a hinge broken so my screen, even though AVOD worked, couldn't come out another time on a 74A.

Question: Is this a teething problem expected for all new products, or are the problems here to stay? The idea is great...if everything worked well there's no comparison IMO between the new J and F and the old product, the new one is much better. But it's impossible not to wonder what's going on. I never did CX when they switched a while back to the old "new" config..for those of you who have done CX since then do you remember similar problems? My hunch is it depends on the economy...if the economy eats it big time, I actually think CX will pull it together in order to get more business. If Asia keeps going gang-busters I think you can forget about the great experience..."If you're so rich and needy just fly corporate" is the phrase you don't need to hear but you know CX mgmt is muttering.

Previous J had some teething problems but nothing like the new config.

This is my biggest beef with the new product: it looks and feels cheap. It doesn't feel like it will last, and it's already falling apart. Parts of J are held together with velcro and come apart when you raise your seat. The seat doesn't fit into its surrounds well. The armrests are broken so they flop around by your sides rather than supporting your arms. The headphone holders are useless.

The concept is great, the execution is poor.

There have been numerous letters in the South China Morning Post this week voicing negativity about the new J class. Speaking to a number of FA friends, they have all been told that if passengers complain about the new configuration, their response must be that the majority of their passengers like the new config, and that passengers chose the config during their market research.

Does the emperor have no clothes?

btw this may end up being an even bigger teething problem for CX:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article2708778.ece

It says in the article that Contour supplies CX with their seats. I thought they were actually from B/E Aeropsace?

Comfort and privacy at the fore of Cathay business class design 376 words
12 January 2008
South China Morning Post

blah blah blah...

...our new business class has nothing to do with the airline attempting "edgy new hipness", as he seems to think, but rather with the comfort and privacy...

...the concept behind the new design was passenger-driven.

...business class passengers wanted, above all else, a completely flat bed that would provide both sleeping comfort and privacy.

The new configuration meets both of these essential requirements.... the great majority of our business class passengers have reacted positively.... We have been carrying record numbers of passengers in recent months since its introduction.... when introducing a new product such as this, not everyone will be satisfied, and we do appreciate customer critique that will help us further improve our service delivery.

... a number of major airlines are now installing similar configurations in their premium class cabins.

We value their custom, as indeed we value the custom of the some two million passengers who choose to fly Cathay Pacific every month.

Dane Cheng, general manager, corporate communication, Cathay Pacific Airways

Talk about arrogance here... I read a few of the SCMP letters to the editor as well and in general, believe that the reviews of the new seats are indeed very mixed and CX is definitely aware of the mixed feedbacks, but in total denial and tries to twist the tide. It may not be a 50-50 love hate... but it is definitely not 100% love! I also think all the readers are concerned with the drop of service standard with CX, which has become very visible lately. F/As are still above average, but not as good as before. On my last KUL-HKG flight, the pursuer once again did not do her round on saying greetings to elite passengers. I am actually going to keep track of it from now on.

About the F/A reaction, they know the company does not care, so they don't care either... I am sure most pursers know about the problem and have reported to the company, and they just come up with this explanation, as they are possibly bombarded with all these complaints on all their flights.

I have actually heard more negative reviews than positive ones so far...

Most of them have voiced concerns:
1. The poor quality of the seat - look and feel cheap...
2. One aunt claims that the new J cabin looks like a line of coffins...
3. Decor really does not work...
4. Tray table cannot be moved around... you can't leave the seats throughout the meal service.
5. Partition is welcomed but too high
6. All are highly suspicious that CX actually cramps more seats than other airlines, who use the same herringbone layout. (I flew VS upper class and AC new XM suite... and felt that CX seats are more cramped despite the same herringbone design).

The only good thing is that they go completely flat.

Well CX has monopoly over most of the HK to North American routes... so really no competition here... Of course the number of passengers have increased with all these new flights left and right?

I will have a couple CX long haul J flights these years, but so far I have not booked one involving the new J... CX is no longer my top choice... I am actually planning to fly more on JL this year - same sliding seats, but at least a nice lounge at NRT, better Japanese food, and most important, get to look out the window comfortably.

Carfield

Double posted

One SCMP reader has a lot of time on his hands and has replied quickly:

----------

Cathay must think again about its new business class seats 379 words
15 January 2008
South China Morning Post
12
English
(c) 2008 South China Morning Post Publishers Limited, Hong Kong. All rights reserved.

I refer to the letter ....

All is clear: Cathay Pacific believes it has done well. In time, we customers will adjust to the "new product".

I would suggest Cathay's management think again. It seems to me that this is a rather serious competitive misjudgment. I would switch carriers to avoid hours in Cathay's seat.

I encountered the new seat two weeks ago. Needing to work on a computer, I considered asking to be moved to a seat in economy. Instead, I stayed, and got to witness something unusual. The new seat forged an instant community in business. My neighbours engaged the flight attendants in impassioned conversations centred on the question: "Why?" Passengers commiserated and compared notes on the seats on other carriers.

That said, every other feature is wrong. What looks good on Cathay's website just doesn't work in the air. As the independent and authoritative www.flatseats.com notes....

All this begs the question: Why, in adopting a flat seat years after its competitors, did Cathay decide to reinvent the wheel? Why didn't it simply combine British Airways' second-generation seat with Cathay's superior service?

Finally, as Cathay is a public company and relatively few fly business class, does this matter to Hong Kong? Yes. ....... We are home to one of the best airlines. But that airline offers a business class service that is notably inferior to that of ....Singapore Airlines.

Dick Groves, Wan Chai

----------------

FlatSeats.com as "independent and authoritative"? @:-)

Well CX has monopoly over most of the HK to North American routes... so really no competition here... Of course the number of passengers have increased with all these new flights left and right?

HKG-SFO: UA, SQ (and O8 whenever they may start SFO/OAK service)
HKG-LAX: UA
HKG-YYZ: AC
HKG-YVR: AC, O8
HKG-NYC: CO (EWR)

SQ1/2 will eventually move to the 773ER or 380 with the very wide and highly acclaimed new J. UA's slowly rolling out the flat beds. AC's YYZ 773ER/772LR already have the flat bed herringbone and eventually the YVR flights will be switched over. When CO receive its 787, it may also operate EWR-HKG with most likely flat beds.

Passengers do have choices.

Well yes there are competitions but limited...

CX
SFO: Twice daily nonstops
LAX: Thrice daily nonstops
JFK: Twice daily nonstops (plus one one-stop daily)
YVR: Soon twice daily flights
YYZ: one daily + three weekly via ANC

LHR: Four daily flights

I think that's why CX can raise F/J fares on the North American routes eight times last year and acts so arrogant?

But I agree with the SCMP reader, SQ is just miles ahead...
It is sad to see how the new CX management functions! So out of touch with passengers...

Carfield

HKG-SFO: UA, SQ (and O8 whenever they may start SFO/OAK service)
HKG-LAX: UA
HKG-YYZ: AC
HKG-YVR: AC, O8
HKG-NYC: CO (EWR)

SQ1/2 will eventually move to the 773ER or 380 with the very wide and highly acclaimed new J. UA's slowly rolling out the flat beds. AC's YYZ 773ER/772LR already have the flat bed herringbone and eventually the YVR flights will be switched over. When CO receive its 787, it may also operate EWR-HKG with most likely flat beds.

Passengers do have choices.

Just to follow-up, SQ is definitely going to run the A380 on SQ1/2 (SIN-HKG-SFO). Either way you're right...SQ is going to be running their new product on the route. My hope is the A380 will generate buzz and maybe force CX to step it up on SFO and LAX routes. Oasis has now stated they will do HKG-SFO instead of HKG-OAK. Also, UA is starting SFO-Guangzhou service in June on 777s.

AND I thought I'd mention here...UA just rolled out a highly-acclaimed flat bed (non-herringbone, mind you) in their J...it's on most of their 767s right now and they're in the process of retrofitting their 747s and 777s. The reviews seem to be pretty great

On another post here: Just did a quick round-tip to SIN, on neither legs did I get greeted by ISM.

I still hope though CX mgmt is saying one thing and doing another, I always get those surveys and fill them out pretty honestly.

This is interesting. Whilst there are a minority out there who are rarely happy with CX, the fact that people are willing to write to a newspaper about a trivial item such as a seat in the pointy end of a plane, shows that customers have deep feelings about the issue.

I think CX are in denial. Time will tell.

there is a post in CXtalk tht B-LAG, the next 33B, will hv some modifications on its J seat, it mentioned the partition as well. hope it is true, although one should not make hopes high over the improvement

http://www.cathaytalk.com/showthread.php?p=25872#post25872

AND I thought I'd mention here...UA just rolled out a highly-acclaimed flat bed (non-herringbone, mind you) in their J...it's on most of their 767s right now and they're in the process of retrofitting their 747s and 777s. The reviews seem to be pretty great

I still hope though CX mgmt is saying one thing and doing another, I always get those surveys and fill them out pretty honestly.

The new UA seat is currently only on 1 aircraft, a 767. It seems they wanted to do some testing of it and although it has received some good reviews from customers, remember they are US customers not used to good seats....there are technical issues that UA want to resolve before rolling it out fleet wide. This is a surprisingly good move by UA.

CX, I was eagerly awaiting the new seat but reviews seem quite mixed on this expert site so I booked my flights on SQ instead. Still I hope CX do address the issues and regain what others say they have lost.

The new UA seat is currently only on 1 aircraft, a 767. It seems they wanted to do some testing of it and although it has received some good reviews from customers, remember they are US customers not used to good seats....there are technical issues that UA want to resolve before rolling it out fleet wide. This is a surprisingly good move by UA.

CX, I was eagerly awaiting the new seat but reviews seem quite mixed on this expert site so I booked my flights on SQ instead. Still I hope CX do address the issues and regain what others say they have lost.

The UA seat is actually narrower than the new CX seats. They cram 8 one-side facing seats in one row on B744/B772 - which is pretty much the same width as other airlines' Premium Economy Class cabin. So people who dislike CX seats will surly dislike UA seats even more, if seat width is the issue. However, the high partition in the CX seats makes it feel more clustophobic. Notice that VS/AC's seats partition are at the eye level, while CX's seats partition are at the top of the head level. Lowering the partition can create the feeling of more open space.

Otherwise, I have traveled in the new J on the A33B. I thought the new seats were great for a customer my size. Despite some minor design flaws, It was comfortable, bed was softer than before, ample storage space, TV screens were big, touch button response was faster, great mood lighting, great air show display, refurbished bathrooms, new side panels.... I may be the minority, but I am going to give it a thumps up!

The UA seat is actually narrower than the new CX seats. They cram 8 one-side facing seats in one row on B744/B772 - which is pretty much the same width as other airlines' Premium Economy Class cabin. So people who dislike CX seats will surly dislike UA seats even more, if seat width is the issue.

Note BA have 8 across in J on their 747/777s, so UA will be the same too. The seat may not be the widest, but the lower side panels do give at least the illusion of space.

CX have got this seat wrong on so many fronts that I personally think they're playing a dangerous game.

If you look at the Cathay and Virgin seatmaps for 747 - Cathay do fit in more business class into the upper deck than Virgin. Virgin now have 747s with entire upperdeck seating.

looks like a fine mess from the litigation promised below.:td:
Meanwhile CX PR state in South China Morning Post the new design is 'customer survey driven'
Can those people out there who have contributed to the said 'survey' please respond

"Virgin to Sue Contour Over Upper Class Seats

Virgin Atlantic is suing a seat manufacturer based in Wales over the Upper Class seat design that the airline had patented. Virgin believes that Contour breached a Virgin patent over the herringbone shape design and supplied similar seats to other airlines. Virgin is seeking damages from Contour and that the airlines remove the herringbone designed seats from their aircraft.
http://www.airfinancejournal.com/default.asp?Page=2&PUB=136&ISS=24196&SID=696552

http://www.contour.aero/

The Timesonline
In the cutthroat battle for business-class airline passengers, any competitive advantage is jealously guarded - even the shape of the seats.
Virgin Atlantic is understood to have started legal proceedings to protect the design of its Upper Class product after competitors started to roll out suspiciously similar seats. Industry sources said that Sir Richard Branson’s airline was suing Contour, a Wales-based seat manufacturer, for breach of patents.
Virgin spent £50 million developing the herringbone shape and layout for its Upper Class and introduced it with great fanfare in 2003. Airlines sell business-class tickets, which generate most of their profits, on features such as the flattest bed and best in-flight entertainment. The largest airlines develop their own seats in order to have a unique sales proposition. Virgin has two patents covering the shape and configuration of the seats and the technology used to lower the seat into a bed. Contour built Virgin’s seats, but the company has also supplied herring-bone-shaped seats to Delta, Cathay Pacific, Air Canada and Jet Air.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article2708778.ece

If you look at the Cathay and Virgin seatmaps for 747 - Cathay do fit in more business class into the upper deck than Virgin. Virgin now have 747s with entire upperdeck seating.

You can't work it out from total upper deck seats as to how much more CX squeezes in due to different lavatory configuration etc, but there is a telling measurement which is the number of seats on the left hand side of the upper deck behind the exit row. This area is the same on both CX and VS. On VS there are 5 seats, on CX there are 6 seats.

So it does appear that CX seats are really squashed in.

It is always difficult to measure these things accurately as marketers have all sorts of different ways to spin things.

But stated are the following:

Virgin Atlantic's bed width: 33" across the shoulder area
Virgin Atlantic's seat width: 22"

United Air Lines' bed width: Unknown
United Air Line's seat width: 23.5"

CX's bed width: 32" across the shoulder area
CX's seat width: 23.5"

Having just tried the new J Class for over 20 hours recently from LHR-HKG-SYD straight through I actually think it is a brilliant product.

There are teething problems and some of the materials can be improved, which should take too long or too much work to fix.

Especially on the upper deck you get at least 10 inches more space than lower deck and the 33B

I had no issues in reading the paper (broadsheet) but just reclining the seat a little.

I slept really well which is definitely the top priority thing and I would imagine for many pax will be as well.

The FA have mastered the meal serving process so no biggy.

Also it seems the ottoman is slightly bigger on the upper deck as many pax decided to use it to socialise and chat with people ( I knwo they said no seat, but it is actually fine to sit there when there is no turbulence)

Overall I really like the product and do think CX is pretty smart in not to canablising its F Class markets. If you want more width etc... then pay for F Class.

Overall I really like the product and do think CX is pretty smart in not to canablising its F Class markets. If you want more width etc... then pay for F Class.

Hmmm....

I'd disagree. They've made J so uncomfortable that it's now Y with a bed. If you're flying one way during the day - and especially if you have status - would the temptation be to do the daylight leg in Y?

Interesting however that the 747 seems to be more spacious than the 330 (I only used the latter).

Especially on the upper deck you get at least 10 inches more space than lower deck and the 33B

Also it seems the ottoman is slightly bigger on the upper deck as many pax decided to use it to socialise and chat with people ( I knwo they said no seat, but it is actually fine to sit there when there is no turbulence)


Where is the extra space on the upper deck seats?

Regarding the size of the ottoman, I had a look at the virtual tour on Cathay's website, and looking at the ottoman on the upper deck, they do appear to be slightly bigger compared to the ottoman in the product photos on the website. Is this true or is it just an optical illusion caused by the virtual tour camera?

Extra space upstairs around the head on 74A is from the curvature of the plane and the normal edge of the seat goes to the wall.

And for the "ottoman..." IT IS A FOOTREST!

Hmmm....

I'd disagree. They've made J so uncomfortable that it's now Y with a bed. If you're flying one way during the day - and especially if you have status - would the temptation be to do the daylight leg in Y?

Interesting however that the 747 seems to be more spacious than the 330 (I only used the latter).

74A upstairs is more spacious, I think downstairs inside seats are the same.

Hmmm....

I'd disagree. They've made J so uncomfortable that it's now Y with a bed. If you're flying one way during the day - and especially if you have status - would the temptation be to do the daylight leg in Y?

Interesting however that the 747 seems to be more spacious than the 330 (I only used the latter).
Yes the J seat is narrow but it is still miles better than Y if you're on a long haul flight. With the new J I can sleep from all the way on HKG-LHR, with the old Z-style seats I could only manage 6 hours max.

Hmmm....

I'd disagree. They've made J so uncomfortable that it's now Y with a bed. If you're flying one way during the day - and especially if you have status - would the temptation be to do the daylight leg in Y?



no.

Yes the J seat is narrow but it is still miles better than Y if you're on a long haul flight. With the new J I can sleep from all the way on HKG-LHR, with the old Z-style seats I could only manage 6 hours max.


It is definitely MILES better than Y Class and definitely WIDER than Y Class. Even durign day flights I really like having the freedom and SPACE to lie on the bed and read a book, use my laptop or just look out the window, which is NOT possible before.

upper deck is definitely a better seat as when I extend the bed to the full FLAT position my feet barely touches the end of the ottoman, however on the 33B I do realise it is shorter.

The ottoman is definitely bigger as well as I tried sitting in it and it fits relatively ok, however ont he 33B i do realise the Squeeze:D

I defintiely disagree it is better to sit in Y compare to the new J Class seats.

As for the name, it is an OTTOMAN according to the CX website, just like the BA Club World Ottoman.

I think that's why CX can raise F/J fares on the North American routes eight times last year and acts so arrogant?

On a side note, the fare raising continues... Fares going up by another 3-8% on January 22nd for NA routes in business and first class...

Note BA have 8 across in J on their 747/777s, so UA will be the same too. The seat may not be the widest, but the lower side panels do give at least the illusion of space.

CX have got this seat wrong on so many fronts that I personally think they're playing a dangerous game.

Indeed, there are no secret. In a competitive world, a J seat is a J seat, not a F seat. To be able to gain length and be flat, the seat must be narrower. BA got a lot of complaints at the start of their NCW years ago and a few people preferred the old (not lie-flat) cradle seat. They hated a narrow seat facing either back or front. VS, the precursor in herringbone had a lot of criticism as the new CX seats does, but the seats/AVOD had few technical defects and they were quickly corrected. I do believe that pax needs to adjust to a new confiugaration such as BA front/back facing narrow seats or the herringbone seats. Most regular BA or VS traveller do not complain anymore. Personnally, I would not hesitate an instant between the new CX seat and the old one for a longhaul flight where I sleep.

I think that there are two issues though:
1) Seats developped in the recent past (say a year or two) are much lighter than those developped a few years ago (e.g. VS, ANZ). And it badly shows in reliability. BA has just introduced a new NCW (now available on all 7474s), but the materials and structures are so flimsy that it is a debacle. They saved a few tons (and oil cost), but the result is unreliable. CX probably did the same.
2) BA, VS and the like only use these seats on longhaul products. IMO again, the flat beds beat the lie-flat seats by a mile when I need to sleep. But they are not well suited for the shorthaul routes. And many OPs have used the new C seats on shorthaul.

Hi Just to let people know I have just heard that Cathay are about to sack the person responsible for the new J and some heads will be rolling it has not gone done well lets see if this Sia Kung bar talk is true? Lets hope they can put out a good J class!

She's already gone according to PPRUNE.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3849113&postcount=8

I love this guy's post at PPRuNe:

There continues to be plenty of feedback in the HKG press and cocktail party circuit about the new flat-bed seats in our long-haul business class. The product and engineering teams are listening to all the feedback - good, bad and indifferent and are working on a design modification to address a number of the specific issues. We didn't actually believe the cabin crew when they said it was cr@p, we wanted it straight from the public first!

The general design philosophy of the individual seats in a herring-bone lay-out will not change however, this is the only design that allows us to squeeze a inhumane amount of people in our cabin.

If we are to introduce a flat seat in CCL without significantly reducing the number of passengers carried, we would have to admit we cocked it up again, so the only two real options available to us are the herring-bone layout or the front & rear facing pairs of seats.

We personally think that we can compete better with SQ and EK with the rear facing seats that way when you take of , you will feel like your are about to Kiss your A** good bye. Unless you have a nice blond sitting facing you, that way you can look at a the terror in her face or straight up her skirt...who says we do not listen to our passengers!

The variables are the seat-width, the height and contour of the partitions and the detailed design of TV, table, shelves, arm rests etc, we are basically going to change the seats completely without having to admit that the first one was a load of utter Cr@p. We will be reviewing a mock-up of the design mods later this month before deciding on the cheapest possible option, even if it does not work.

This time we are considering the mortuary look. In this model we can put the beds on trays and in a draw, that way we can put 2-3 levels of packs and we can even tell the pax we have our own cabins like EK and SQ.

The good news is that the new FRCL, EYCL and IFE system, for the 3-4 times it has worked continues to be generally well received.

I love this guy's post at PPRuNe:

Haha wow. Perfect.