Originally Posted by
AJNEDC
Are you serious with the desirability of seat comment? We are not talking about economy seats. we are talking about seats that are configured in a 1-2-1 layout where you are told you are paying for a premium service. We are talking about seats where most people close the blinds and don't look out the window anymore as a current thread is stating. We are talking about paying $3,000 or $5,000 or more for a ticket, not $500, and then being asked to pay additionally for something that should be included in the value proposition at such price points
But we're not talking about 1-2-1 seats - the policy dates back to the 2-4-2 Club World layout that many on here will also get outraged about. In that layout, there are absolutely huge differences in desireability, and first-come-first-served seating would result in the customers who regularly fly full J fares being stuck in the central "love seat" pairs because all the once-a-year holiday makers took the windows five months before departure. I agree that the policy is far less necessary on Club Suite flights - though I don't see it going away because as noted, BA think it works for them.
Originally Posted by
Beltway2A
It's absolutely nickel-and-diming with BA, charging over 100 quid for a seat in a 2-4-2 is laughable. There's no option to buy a J fare with seat selection, BA just has enough hub-captive pax to make it worth it. It's been a long time since they've been competitive in J
Except BA set these prices
so that people don't pay them. They don't
want most people to pay, because as stated above that would leave the late booking full-J passengers in the love seats. I can see no sensible definiton of nickel-and-diming in which the company would rather
not take the money.
Originally Posted by
scubadu
One of the challenges in having a rational discussion about this is that most average consumers (and sadly a very high percentage of FTers) can't seem to do math. There have been times in the past where we did in fact pay for seat assignments in the BA premium cabin, BUT, the BA ticket was significantly cheaper than the same ticket on other carriers that provided seat assignments for "free." BA often has very affordable tickets when one uses strategies like AARP discounts, Chase 10% discounts, etc. Many on FT seem to just have this "moral aversion" to certain fees/policies without doing the math on the overall, all in pricing, which at the end of the day is all that matters. They willingly pay $600 more for a ticket that includes a "free" seat assignment to avoid paying $120 for an actual seat assignment, which is ridiculous. But they feel victorious because they avoided the perception of being "nickel and dimed" (even though in reality, they actually were nicked and dimed)
Exactly this. People would rather be outraged over a charge for what "should be included", and will wilfully ignore the actual reasoning when it is offered. Companies do many things that are morally outrageous - charging money for services is not one of them.