I could not disagree more. The vast bulk of his arguments are related to advantages which are available for customers flying upfront. This, it seems to me, completely misunderstands (or pretends to misunderstand) the argument being made about the LCC-fication of BA. The argument is not that flying BA in any class on any route is a similar experience to flying an LCC. It is patently not the case that flying BA in F from LHR to LAX is similar to flying Ryanair from STN to DUB and nobody has argued that. The point, rather, is that the experience in the short-haul economy cabin has become virtually indistinguishable from an LCC and is in fact an LCC-type experience for the customer. Alex can bang on all he likes about the CE experience and premium check-ins (heck, why not talk about F and the CCR while he is at it) but this is absolutely, completely and utterly irrelevant to the point being made when one talks of the LCC-fication of BA.

If we look at the few arguments that he makes which are not related to offering a premium cabin, he tells us that being able to select a seat and investing in WIFI is what makes BA different from an LCC. Is he serious? How can one say that with a straight face when the one airline that does currently offer WIFI on short-haul and has done that for quite some time is an LCC? As to seat selection, again, one would have to have an extremely short memory to forget that this is something over which the LCCs stole a march on most network carriers. So, far from distinguishing it from LCCS, these things reflect BA taking a leaf out of the LCC rulebook.

He then tells us that flying from LHR and LGW is what makes BA a non-LCC airline. Fair enough for LHR but LGW?? Who is he kidding? Surely he does know very well that the second and third biggest European LCCs fly from LGW, so much so that he is doing his utmost to try to push No 3 out of LGW.

So, apart from flying from LHR, that leaves us with: 1) having an FF programme and 2) offering connections. One could quibble that some LCCs do offer these things (including the grand-daddy of all LCCs (SW) as well as a certain Spanish LCC Mr Cruz will be rather familiar with) but it is fair to recognise that LCC fidelisation programme are extremely rudimentary compared to network carriers FF programmes and that the focus of LCCs is indeed on point-to-point even when they offer some (limited) connection opportunities. That said, let us not forget that BA has itself also limited the connection benefit by now refusing to interline baggage on connections on separate tickets, thereby weakening one of the very few features that distinguish it from an LCC.

So, to sum up, all that BA has to offer to somebody at the back on a short-haul flight that an LCC would not offer is BAEC, LHR and connections to OW flights. Rather meagre, I would say, and certainly very, very far from being that very long list that Alex blurts out, In effect, Alex's reply is an implicit, albeit unwilling, recognition that for an ordinary punter on a point-to-point flight, the experience on BA is virtually indistinguishable from that on an LCC.

It may well be that BA has no choice; it may well be that there is not enough of a sufficient market out there willing to pay more than the absolute minimum on short-haul. I don't know.
But let us not pretend that what is happening here is anything other than the LCC-fication of Euro-Traveler and let us be honest enough to recognise that there is now very little to distinguish BA from LCCs for ordinary punters at the back on point-to-point itineraries.