They just don't think and it is indeed typical of the permanent gap between what AF intends, what AF says, and what AF does:

- step 1 - team 1 thinks and says...: "we want to be a full service airline but some customers go to low cost airlines or SNCF because they are cheaper than us. We can't match those prices with the service we offer but maybe we could offer a more basic service and that way we can offer lower fares that can compete with Easyjet and co with a basic service while retaining our usual service at slightly above our old prices. Our traditional customers will pay a bit more to keep the same service and we will gain new customers by offering new cheaper priced tickets with a low service to people who don't care about service but only about price. Bingo!"

- step 2 - team 2 sees their project and says...: "great idea but you know what, we are already losing money. This concept of disaggregating the product is good but we need to use that to lower costs and increase revenues. What we will do is that we can offer less service for the current price to gain new customers as you said while our traditional customers will surely accept to pay €20 more per way to keep our superior service and that way we compensate our losses. In practice, most people will pay those extra €20 so we'll increase average revenue per ticket by €20 and be profitable again. Bingo!" (start noting how it is progressively stopping to make any form of logical sense, now they expect some new customers to miraculously be more likely to start buying AF at current price with less than current service. Hello?)

- step 3 - some people criticise the project of team 2 as making no sense. Team 3 gets hold of this and argues: "why do you say we are turning low cost or risk reputational capital? You don't understand anything to the airline business! Our model remains exactly the same, we ARE a full service airline, how dare you suggest otherwise? We are simply creating more choice than before!: 90% of passengers will still fly classic but pay a bit more for it, only, now, others have the alternative choice to be punished by MiNi lack-of-service concept, but those will be new customers coming from low cost so it won't cost us anything in terms of reputation as they will be used to even less service and team 1 told us we'd now be competitive with LCC fares" (note that this refers to some original intention to propose lower fares that got completely destroyed by team 2 but les mythes ont la vie longue...)

- step 4-team 4 (distribution and/or IT) gets hold of the new business. They are told that there are now new MiNi and Classic fares and they need to update the fare data, which they do. The new fares are all correctly entered with no particular details and the only consequence that they are what pops in on TAs websites as those are, by default, offering the cheapest available fare on a given flight: Everyone buying through a TA is now automatically getting MiNi as long as there is any R, N, or V class available. This includes the vast majority of AF's business customers who often have to buy through a specific TA and are increasingly asked to fly Y within Europe in the current economic context. So now, those 'traditional customers' who were supposed to be unaffected by the MiNi service which was 'for someone else' and contribute to AF's new profitability by paying €20 more on every one of their numerous tickets are, instead, being forcibly thrown into the New Low Cost Air France MiNi bath. They will experience what it is for a Platinum member to get a middle seat in row 34 of 37, they will not get miles on their flights, and if their wife (or husband) decides to join them on a trip and they buy a separate ticket, they will find out that they cannot sit together unless they go to the airport a good three hours before their Nice-Paris and are lucky enough for two seats together (or 3 or 4 if the kids are joining the party) are actually still available! Those Gold and Platinum customers will forcibly experience punishment class (thanks NickB and beyond you the SK forum people for mentioning the label!), low cost minus or whatever you want to call it.

- step 5 - team 5, revenue managers, look at the situation: Someone in the RM team looks at the figure and will say: "gosh, look at those figures, most people prefer to buy MiNi than classic (without even realising that it is because people are not even given a choice and because those who analyse the figures don't know what the IT people do and the IT people don't know what the concept designers intended etc etc). We must conclude that in the current climate, within Europe, passengers want a "simpler" service (understand low cost minus minus, or to rephrase it that you can treat them like rubbish they won't complain as long as you don't increase fares) and "reasonable" fares, and few people buy classic anyway. Let us remove classic and offer "MiNi minus" (dear Air France, I have an idea for you, why not call this new offer "Air France Ultra Dry") as standard anyway. Let us get rid of food and drink and miles and chosen seats to everyone in economy. Now let us replace "Premium Economy" by the service of the current "economy" - no more meals but just sucre sale and free drinks - and sell that at the current price of Premium Economy while we sell the "new economy" which is really MiNi minus for the old price of classic. That way we'll save on costs and increase revenue and we'll be profitable again. Bingo!"

- Note the evolution from step 1 to step 5 and continue cycle forever............