Originally Posted by
EdmFlyBoi
It would seem difficult to market a 2-2 PY cabin when the aircraft is flying in North America and I am curious as to how you think they might market it? AA is reconfiguring their A321's that were used on transcon routes where they had F (1-1), J (2-2), and Y (3-3). 2-2 is marketed as J on domestic, transborder, and sun routes, so it what would be done if the XLR is put on those routes? I see it as a pretty big challenge from a marketing and fleet utilisation perspective if it was J, PY, and Y (although I am sure it could be done).
I think the main "marketing" challenge is trying to explain to people why J on a 320 is the same as PY on a 321XLR.
Short of re-branding all non-lie-flat seats to PY, the
internal marketing would be inconsistent. And then it's "why would I pay the same price for PY on AC as business on UA?"
Originally Posted by
Doors Closing
Lack of PY in NA might be tolerable yet TATL routes have a PY value proposition that is hard to ignore. Indeed, the TATL/TPAC PY cabins tend to be packed, hitting the sweet spot for many people.
An avid PY pax, and anyway not a great fan of narrow bodies on TATL/long-haul, the doing away with PY seems like a real miss
I'm curious what their general flight time cutoff is where people actually start buying PY instead of Y. The difference in distance between YUL-SFO, YOW-FRA, and YVR-NRT is about 1000 miles each. But it could simply come down to company travel policies resulting in certain routes selling a lot of PY, and others (like within NA) not.
I rarely buy Y on intercontinental flights, because the upgrade priority sucks. It's unlikely I'm going to buy Y on a TATL currently set to be operated by the XLR, because if there's an equipment swap, suddenly my "top of list" priority becomes "middle of list".