Originally Posted by
bertheike
Well I think, they check what availability have customers which want to travel to Thailand?
From Europe there is not much better then themselve !
LH, BA, AF, are around the same, LX may be is a litle better and OS, KL SK ,AZ even don't offer a first class.
Between the USA and Thailand is not that much competition, and most US carriers are more than 3rd. world in point of service.
So the only competitors come from Asia SQ, CX and may be EK !
But who ( from Europe, Australia ) want's to fly via SIN/HKG ? The price is higher, it takes at least 4 h. longer and the incovinience to have one more stop. May be from the near east market, they have a real competitor with EK, but there they seem to be no big number. They fly daily once with an old airbus 220 seats and EK 3 times with it's newes equipment 77W at least 1000 seats daily.
Your point is certainly valid (although each pax has his own ranking of airlines and I would put LH & BA above TG primarily coz consistency). however, transit pax, like myself, have many choices. Clearly price is another relevant parameter. however, transit pax, like myself, have many choices. I wonder what is the % of transit premium pax on TG. But the cost-cutting in F coupled with a rise in fare (the price difference is now smaller and not worth the stress of flyiong TG), means that I have stopped using TG for the time-being. Frankly, they are loosing a lot of revenue from French pax originating in HKG; the new SQ Biz class product is available on all segments HKG-SIN-CDG at a cost below TG F HKG-BKK-CDG: IMHO opinion it is better overall then TG F. Of course this assesment takes into account the Internet/phone service and consistency.