KACommuter

I mean the AA lounges are significantly worse than CX in general. If flying HKG/LAX it's the same as one uses the same lounges as if flying CX i.e. CX in HKG and QF in LAX.

Cathay Dragon 666

To be fair. My wife who doesn't like to fly is only Green status with Cathay. But when once her and the kids were late for a connecting flight. She told me there was a Cathay agent waiting for them and took them through security and to the gate (thought she did say the agent didn't bring a buggy and ask my family to run, keep in mind our young daughter was only 4 at the time and forced to run.... I was not happy when I heard this, but my wife didn't make an issue out of it). Thought they did fly business class, but not a DM.

KACommuter

Yup it's very significantly worse.

KACommuter

Hard to say. AA presumably wants more access to China and perhaps this may give them some preference in negotiating code shares in and out of China Southern's hubs. The only hub OW has in China today is HK.

However minority investments into Chinese SOE's rarely give much to the investor, so I suspect this will be money down the drain for AA.

tfung

Only right now coz it's under renovation... but normally, I wouldn't say it's significantly worse... F&B nowhere as good, but seating, workspace and showers in general are fine...

Moscowflyer

I couldn't agree more. I usually use the ex-TPE flights which bring the business class prices down to reasonable levels. TPE-LAX later this year is around US$3,600 or so on CX. If I fly HKG-LAX direct on the same dates with CX it's $11,500! What's most surprising to me is that the direct flight on AA is $3,400, so I booked them. Same 777 aircraft, same seats, similarly average food, different IFE choices - maybe marginally less good but now that I've got an Ipad Pro and downloadable Netflix what do I care - and probably less good cabin service.
For a family of four, AA saved me US$32,000 on the trip. AA is marginally less good than CX on this route but not $32,000 less good when I'm paying the bill.
And of course I can normally book my AA flights online without having the website crash, hang, go in circles or kick me out with an "internal system error" at the last minute. Most LCCs have a better website than CX these days.

FlyPointyEnd

They never bring a buggy for you if you're late for a connecting flight even for a DM. Just last week, we arrived 50mins before my connecting flight to Manila, they just pointed me to what my gate was and told me to go by myself. (we parked at 68 and my flight leaves from 33) I wasn't even escorted through security, so your wife and kids actually got the VIP treatment as a GR. I was flying in Business too.

kaka

they do
except you cannot expect anything if u speak english in full speed

KACommuter

To be fair 50 mins from 68 to 33 is perfectly doable for a normal healthy adult. It won't be stress free but it is practical.

KACommuter

I'm actually sitting there right now yet again, and yes the showers are acceptable and so is the alcoholic B - Taittinger is a decent NV champagne, and the Glenlivet 12 is satisfactory. The F on the other hand scales the heights of culinary achievement with wonders like pork adobo, miso tofu and mushroom stroganoff (all of which look vile), to to be followed by coffee from a Nescafe Milano machine... Best stick with salami and salad.

The only plus is it's dead quiet as everyone else is probably at the QF lounge. But I'm not schlepping over to TBIT when the gate is just opposite this lounge.

no1cub17

Haha - that sounds positively impressive by AA standards, even for an intl F lounge. Actual champagne and not Roederer Estate? An actual single malt? Truly impressive.

Not just that, but an actual vegetarian protein too! Hell is slowly freezing over it seems.

Quality of the food be damned (we've just accepted that food in the USA is inferior to the rest of the world), but really does sound like AA is somewhat trying these days (sometimes).

akiangel

Thanks - glad someone resonates... By the way I do the same as well - if I can't get a good deal from CX I rather fly with non-hk based airlines due to my super POOR experience with HX and UO.... LCC wise AirAsia/Scoot/Peach are potential alternatives (so far there has been no nasty surprises so will see). Full service wise definitely SG/ANA/Emirates/Qatar etc.

Marco Polo

http://www.scmp.com/print/business/c...changing-world

Cathay Pacific is a flawed business model in a changing world

FlyPointyEnd

We landed at T-46mins, by the time we got to the gate it was close to about 40 mins or less. it wasn't that bad, but I'm just pointing out to Cathay Dragon 666 that even on short transits CX wouldn't even provide escorts or buggys to DMs.

brunos

To get back to CX losses, I am a bit surprised that a major cost aspect is barely mentioned.
CX has a very high cost structure. Hong Kong has become very expensive. HK has witnessed a high inflation, especially housing, while being pegged to a very strong USD. CX has avoided confronting unions in the past decade, especially pilots but also FAs. CX has yielded on hiring foreign staff and foreign bases. The strong dollar and high inflation rate in HK, means that CX has seriously lost on competitivity in the past few years. All HK companies face the competitiveness problem, but HK employees work very hard and longer hours relative to neighboring countries. However, CX has primarily relied on clubby Hong Kong in curtailing competition; no need to detail here as most HongKongers understand.. Foreign airlines were happy to profit from the pricing imposed by CX and followed along. But that is changing rapidly as premium fares are dropping. Just cutting costs/benefits for pax is not sufficient.

It will be hard for CX to improve productivity, but there is no alternative for survival. Housing costs are a huge handicap for pay policies, but working longer hours (and cuts in personnel) is in the cards, or else...