actually, this is one area I 100% understand their strategy.

Customers whinge and fight and scream and then consistently refuse to pay up for economy class. So you can complain all you want on FT but the dollars in the register speak a different story. From the success of Ryanair to Emirates Y (hello: "premium" carrier EK practically pioneered 10 abreast 777 in Y class), CX is forced to compete with other carriers' who have denser cabins in Y. On heaps of intra-Asia routes CX is facing LCC competition: KUL, KIX, NRT, SIN, HAN, MNL, ICN, PVG, and I'm probably missing a few others. But all of those routes have direct competition from LCCs. They are putting fares rock bottom. Customers aren't paying up for CX's premium Y fare classes. So....what would you do? It's not like CX lives in a vacuum.

CX telegraphed all this to us with the super fan fares, followed by the MPC overhaul that blatantly disadvantaged Y class customers in favor of J and F (something I don't understand: why CX doesn't seem prepared to reward PEY customers for loyalty, but that's for another thread). Occasionally I'll book super cheapo CX fares regionally - I fly enough that I don't have to worry about requalifying - and I am blown away at the insanely low prices I can find to TPE, SIN, and other locations if I'm willing to restrict my scheduling options. And everyone here has seen the downgrade in catering/service across the board, including Y class: TPE and MNL are now that box food thing, 33P in economy class has a nearly 50:1 pax:crew ratio, etc.

Anyway, the density increase might ironically help some of the softer aspects in Y class, because depending on the config CX could possibly get 35-55 more seats on a bird, which if you're flying to SIN one-way could be as much as $10k USD extra per flight to CX revenue. If CX keeps 2/3 of that for other purposes and reinvests 1/3 ($3300) on incremental costs per flight, spread across 400 pax that's another $8 USD they can spend/pax in-flight. Doesn't sound like a lot, but that $8 isn't that much less than what CX pays per Y passenger on that route in catering costs. So you could perhaps have an increase in 50-100% in your regional catering budget if you jam extra passengers in. Or, you could also see CX jam more passengers in and then drop prices further. Over the course of several months and quarters of testing pricing and what customers will "tolerate" (read: demand), they will find some equilibrium where demand matches what they're offering. The results will be in where CX can maximize yield and where customers still keep buying the tickets despite whinging here on FT. Ryanair is an extreme example but a beautiful one to understand this dynamic: complaints about that airline are legendary and spread everywhere across the internet you look. And yet....last year they were 5th largest carrier in the world by pax carried. So clearly people say one thing but then do another. Passengers have overwhelmingly expressed their desire to pay as low a price for a ticket as possible, proven again and again and again, so I can't really fault CX even though it sucks for those of us who are willing to pay more.

I'm more curious to understand CX's cuts to J and F, as well as their MPC strategy not to really include PEY pax in the umbrella of "favored" passengers as J and F clearly are. And how CX is clearly focusing on J and F pax (not just with this MPC revamp, but also with decisions like cutting CX service to KUL, etc.), yet at the same time cutting soft benefits to those cabins. They have all the numbers so I'd really love to hear their strategy. Personally I'm not sure if they know how far they lag competitors in J class in particular at the same price point, but that's for another thread.