Originally Posted by
London_traveller
I disagree with the policy (clearly) as I think it's unfair to people paying high prices but not able to choose a seat. I think it's particularly anachronistic given the CW product has fallen behind the curve. So the comparison is with many other airlines who provide seat selection for premium passengers as a core part of the service (many of them offering a better product to boot).
No offense intended by my language (genuinely), but that is the way I see it. The best comparison I can give is think how you'd react if BA charged non-status CW passengers for alcohol onboard. To me the policy is as weird as that would be. CW is meant to be a premium product.
I have no problem with people who disagree or agree with the policy (I haven't said what my pov is on this thread), or what you have just posted. However, I did have an issue with your earlier post the way you framed those who put across the legitimate points and arguments for the current policy as "apologists" (there are legitimate points and arguments against too of course as you have noted). It is needlessly insulting, doesn't help the discussion, and suggests a lack of empathy/understanding for those who disagree with you. I know of no discussion on this board that has ever been helped by calling the other side apologists.
Anyway, apologies for going a little O/T, and back to the actual topic of discussion
