Originally Posted by
Reply1984
This is not an apple to apple comparison. You know how the LCC business model works. Just like I will not complain when Econ light is more expensive than PEY essential.
And again, before complaining CX not providing ‘premium service’ on some specific routes, please come back to earth and think about the mass market first.
And why HK local consumers need to care about how LCC works vs FSC?
A normal HK local who travels twice a year for leisure mostly to regional destinations would find check luggage allowance much more necessary that FT ppl here as they dont have the luxury to do 36/48 hr getaways every month or every other. Neither do they know / care ECON light vs PEY essential unless OTAs can prompt such content when booking.
For my own Xmas trip to DAD with families this year, I had to opt for HX priced at HKD3.2k with 23kg bag allowance. UO priced at HKD3.8k - 3.9k when I made the booking. And for a 5-6 day stay, all the fam need to carry their own suitcase.
However, if I put on my FTer / DM hat, an biz open-jaw routing via HGH is the most "economic way" if I need to go to HGH. So does UO works best for the interests of average joe in HK? Hardly. Does "the privileged group" get higher ROI from their CX/UO game? Yes.
Then, the flip side of this subject is does UO work best for CX group that eventually could make CX stronger and benefit all consumers as ends? Def not now...When we complain slow network expansion / pilot layoffs / tough time for crew / horrible A321, it all traces back to the financial difficulties from COVID. Customers of all segments are essentially on the same boat. I hope CX wont degrade itself to likes of IB so that fares and products are "comparable" to LCCs while we grieve our investment in SP and MPC.