Originally Posted by
PAL62V
Why? Both are advertising a premium experience in their higher class of travel. LHR promotes itself as a world class, world leading airport. Yes, both airlines are funded in a different way however that shouldn't stifle the opportunity to compare. Facts of the matter are clear with the hard product, the food and the way it is presented to the end user - me.
The crew's humour and human touch are the only areas for me where BA have it over much of the opposition. It's a pity they are hampered by the management and BA's customer service in not being able to offer the best in a premium product, because Club Suites are now a very good alternative.
Because QR and BA are a different size, serve different markets, have a staff base which is very different culturally (and which is subject to totally different employment law and conditions), and are funded in a totally different way? And because LHR is on a tightly constrained site in west London with increasingly creaking infrastructure?
Let me be clear - I’m not saying that you can’t compare BA and QR’s service or product objectively. My point is that doing so without acknowledging why the differences exist seems to me to be a childish exercise.
The fact is QR could change BA’s management if they wanted to. I wonder why they don’t?