CONFIRMED: BA B787 & A380 layouts
#77
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,916
on the 787 QR is going 4 across 1x2x1 using a J seat similar to the new AA version. It will be interesting to see seat and configuration AA will have on its 787s however it will be quite a swing that AA has a superior seat product to BA. It seems CX and JL also now have a better seat product than BA.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qatar...liner/2198185/
Even going back to the CW "Craddle" vs. the fury monster on AA it's hard to recall AA ever having a J seat on par with BA. Same could be said historically of JL and CX seat products.
While I know the JV means all revenue shared, at the end of the day, alliances come, go and partners change. One would think BA needs to protect preference for its product - obviously hard product in J being an important component of the offering.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qatar...liner/2198185/
Even going back to the CW "Craddle" vs. the fury monster on AA it's hard to recall AA ever having a J seat on par with BA. Same could be said historically of JL and CX seat products.
While I know the JV means all revenue shared, at the end of the day, alliances come, go and partners change. One would think BA needs to protect preference for its product - obviously hard product in J being an important component of the offering.
#78
Join Date: May 2009
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 769
I'm not too sure why some people are disappointed to find that the a380 has products consistent with the rest of the fleet. This isn't Concorde. It's not a revolutionary aircraft that serves a different market or purpose. It's just bigger. If you look to other airlines, their offering is largely consistent with their other fleet plans.
I'm fully aware of the arrangement...
This is generally sums up my point. Complacency isn't good for business. AA is making the investment. If BA sits around saying we get 60% of the revenue regardless and then a large amount of traffic shifts over to AA, AA might begin question the terms of the agreement.
Furthermore, jointly marketing two airline's products where one is notably better than the other would in my opinion look worse than comparing two competitors - especially when the price tags are the same. It just doesn't look good and could affect people's choices on routes that aren't under the JV.
You'll have companies that lead and those that follow. Leading has held BA in good stead in the past. JVs allow an for a good opportunity to lead together.
Furthermore, jointly marketing two airline's products where one is notably better than the other would in my opinion look worse than comparing two competitors - especially when the price tags are the same. It just doesn't look good and could affect people's choices on routes that aren't under the JV.
You'll have companies that lead and those that follow. Leading has held BA in good stead in the past. JVs allow an for a good opportunity to lead together.
Last edited by destere; Dec 11, 2012 at 7:52 pm
#79
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,916
I'm fully aware of the arrangement...
This is generally sums up my point. Complacency isn't good for business. AA is making the investment. If BA sits around saying we get 60% of the revenue regardless and then a large amount of the traffic shifts over to AA, AA might begin question the terms of the agreement.
Furthermore, jointly marketing two airline's products where one is notably better than the other would in my opinion look worse than comparing two competitors - especially when the price tags are the same.
You'll have companies that lead and those that follow. Leading has held BA in good stead in the past. JVs allow an for a good opportunity to lead together.
This is generally sums up my point. Complacency isn't good for business. AA is making the investment. If BA sits around saying we get 60% of the revenue regardless and then a large amount of the traffic shifts over to AA, AA might begin question the terms of the agreement.
Furthermore, jointly marketing two airline's products where one is notably better than the other would in my opinion look worse than comparing two competitors - especially when the price tags are the same.
You'll have companies that lead and those that follow. Leading has held BA in good stead in the past. JVs allow an for a good opportunity to lead together.
#80
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Delhi
Programs: Emirates gold *alliance silver jet airways platinum tridentprivilege gold.
Posts: 1,817
Also
because they don't fly from London to new York, and they don't fly nonstop from Delhi or Bangkok to London. Having said that, when I ( or my company) pays for First I would choose 9W or TG on the BKK and
DEL certainly not BA.. not ditto for CW where BA still trumps. On LON-NYC No contest in F or J. BA wins
These considerations apart, in F of course I would choose most ( non US) airlines over. BA if you are cosmopolitan about your product preferences ... EK SQ, CX TG EY, LH, NH, OZ all have a far superior F product.
But J. Is a different story. More complicated. Head to head EK A380 is a very attractive product. So is SQ, if you don't get 747UD. Ditto CX otherwise I think BA still trumps em... Even given the uninspired rote offering on the 380
Last edited by rathin100; Dec 11, 2012 at 10:35 pm
#81
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,210
Yup....doesn't matter how good your F product is it's the quality of your long haul J product that brings in the money. Something which Lufthansa and several other big named competitors have for some inexplicable reason never been able to get right.
#82
Join Date: May 2009
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 769
Suppose it's part of the reason why BA wanted to retain the same number of seats in the F cabin when NF was developed - redemptions and upgrades.
#83
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,916
The big point is they didn't seem to want to create sub-fleets with various numbers of F seats. I guess once you figure Hi-J, Low-J etc you can have too many configurations which would muck thinks up with IRROPs.
#84
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 12,046
The Qatar Super Diamond is a bespoke design exclusive to QR. It is graceful and elegant with huge amounts of personal space, an extremely large tray table and double sideboard stowage. Incidentally, it uses the same (or at least a very similar) seat shell material as NGCW.
AA's J seat is off-the-shelf and entirely like the CX Cirrus. It is a bit clunky and lacks sideboard surface space.
#85
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,127
I thought that initially but then I thought that unless they opened more than one door on the lower deck, disembarking would take ages on a full plane for those in WT/WT+. Someone will have spent ages working this out and I don't envy them the task.
#86
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,127
#87
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,127
#88
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,127
#89
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,127