Don't want to be picky on details but when I earlier looked at a random date on KVS on an LX 333, it showed 9 seats (4A, D, G, K, 5K, 7K, 8A, 10A, and 12A) out of 38 remaining seats reserved for elites. The last 7 seats are already taken so not sure how many were elite or not, but that's at least 20%. The difference on LX, though, is that different people flying under different circumstances might prefer different types of seats. In other words, as a SEN or HON couple you would likely prefer the seat pairs (I would). With the AF-CX-AA reverse herringbone, this would simply not be the case and even as a couple one would not gain anything from choosing the central pair of seats (in fact it is one of the reasons why some people dislike reverse herringbone).

I think proportions have to be comensurate to whatever is effectively needed for elite passengers. To be honest, on routes like the one we are talking about here (CDG-JFK), I think that having half of the J passengers elite plus is a very likely situation, and with the reduction in the size of the J cabin, I could expect it to be even more, so in that case, why not keep enough preferred seats for what you effectively know will be your elite pre-assignment needs? If AF over-estimated, it is not as though non-elite pax will not be able to get window/solo seats as of course, every elite seat not taken will become available to all at OLCI. If AF estimates its elite needs (50% of the cabin) correctly and decided to only keep half the windows available for elite pax, and make the other half available to pre-assign to all passengers, then what it would mean is that if some of us, platinum-whatever need to book a trip to New York a week ahead of travelling, then we won't have a window available while some people without status will. I am not saying that this would be scandalous - it is perfectly fine to prefer priority to go to those who book early - but I'm not sure what the grounds would be to suggest that prioritising one's elite passengers would be wrong either. It is just a choice, and frankly, if I am asked, I prefer airlines to give priority to their elites rather than to those who book earliest. As mentioned, how many seats your elites will need is an empirical question and I don't think that any of us have got the data to know for sure what is being underestimated or overestimated.

As mentioned, the BA solution is far more radical, with essentially no passenger who is not elite or full fare getting a chance to pre-assign for free (and even for payment, significant chunks of the cabin are reserved for OW Emerald and Sapphire). As mentioned, some people hate that system, but most elite passengers love it, and since in a parallel thread we were talking about elite privileges, it is important to acknowledge that both the BA choice and this new (and frankly unexpected) AF preferred seat designation do two things at the same time: worsen the travel experience of non-elite passengers AND improve the travel experience of elite passengers at the same time. It is not MiNi (which makes some people worse off and nobody better off), it is not the progressive decline of catering (which made everyone worse off and nobody better off), it is a zero-sum game arbitration which, for once in a very very long time on AF makes the life of elite and elite plus passengers better at the acknowledged expense of everyone else.