|
New Abonné fare for french domestic travel: no more SkyPriority with flex tickets
Just saw this (it's in French)
https://www.afklm-biztravel.com/nos-...etropolitaine/ What I understand from the poor and very unprofessional table is that flex tickets won't offer SkyPriority or go show anymore. You will need the Abonné card and fare. The Abonné fare will be 100€ less than the flex price of the ticket. From the 15th of January 2019 the fare offer will be: - Light: not modifiable and non-refundable, with no checked baggage included - Standard: non-refundable, modifiable for 70 euros, including one piece of checked baggage - Flex: modifiable and refundable, including baggage - Travel Saver: dedicated to customers with a travel saver card, with more benefits than the Flex fare. Taken from https://corporate.airfrance.com/en/n...france-and-hop |
évolue pour vous proposer une gamme de tarifs plus attractive |
I know some will disagree with me here, but I welcome this change (no more SkyP for Flex tickets). Too many pax are eligible to SkyP, it becomes ridiculous. However, removing the go show perk of those flex tickets is questionable. |
Apparently, these changes involve the short-haul network, as opposed to the medium-haul network.
|
Originally Posted by Goldorak
(Post 30457379)
I know some will disagree with me here, but I welcome this change (no more SkyP for Flex tickets). Too many pax are eligible to SkyP, it becomes ridiculous. However, removing the go show perk of those flex tickets is questionable. I agree that SP services are currently, and for a long time now, devaluated because the lines are crowded: at checkin and boarding notably, particularly true on domestic flights. That is indeed ridiculous and frustrating. Bad service and terrible execution for managing customers' expectations. The case raises the question of offer and demand: are the SP lines crowded because there are too many SP pax, because the airline is not properly organized to satisfy the number of SP pax or both? In any case they have of course the ability to play with both offer and demand. And their decision is an attempt to play with the demand. I tend to think they still have some room for improvement when it comes to their own organization and play with the offer. Boarding is a real question though. Now SP-wise, their decision is also creating an incentive for subscribing to Abonné card in order for the pax to get the SP service. Good for their finance (at least I hope for them). But then if the majority of current Flex ticket holders subscribe to the Abonné card, which after all is not a bad choice since the cost of the card can be offset pretty fast, they will benefit from the SP service instantly. And AF and the pax are back to the initial crowded lines. Full, and possibly vicious, circle. |
Originally Posted by bodory
(Post 30457750)
Dear Goldorak :)
I agree that SP services are currently, and for a long time now, devaluated because the lines are crowded: at checkin and boarding notably, particularly true on domestic flights. That is indeed ridiculous and frustrating. Bad service and terrible execution for managing customers' expectations. The case raises the question of offer and demand: are the SP lines crowded because there are too many SP pax, because the airline is not properly organized to satisfy the number of SP pax or both? In any case they have of course the ability to play with both offer and demand. And their decision is an attempt to play with the demand. I tend to think they still have some room for improvement when it comes to their own organization and play with the offer. Boarding is a real question though. Now SP-wise, their decision is also creating an incentive for subscribing to Abonné card in order for the pax to get the SP service. Good for their finance (at least I hope for them). But then if the majority of current Flex ticket holders subscribe to the Abonné card, which after all is not a bad choice since the cost of the card can be offset pretty fast, they will benefit from the SP service instantly. And AF and the pax are back to the initial crowded lines. Full, and possibly vicious, circle. the crowding of priority lanes is not unique to AF. Most major airlines have the same problems, sometimes more prominent on some flights/routes (routes more business-oriented) or with some plane types (hello A380 !). I don’t think it will lead to a huge increase of subscription to the Abonnés card for the sole purpose of benefiting again from SkyP services on domestic flights, but that’s just my personal opinion. |
Originally Posted by Goldorak
(Post 30458102)
good remarks dear Bodory :) the crowding of priority lanes is not unique to AF. Most major airlines have the same problems, sometimes more prominent on some flights/routes (routes more business-oriented) or with some plane types (hello A380 !). I don’t think it will lead to a huge increase of subscription to the Abonnés card for the sole purpose of benefiting again from SkyP services on domestic flights, but that’s just my personal opinion. It would even be better to enforce the zone boarding, and assign each of the "Priority groups" to a zone depending on the number of Elites. Like Business/Ultimate first, then Plat/C2000, then Gold/Flex, then Silver etc. That is what Delta does and it works pretty well to my perspective. And be super strict. |
Originally Posted by olivedel
(Post 30467775)
I must say I incline with Goldorak statement about the number of people using SkyPriority lines, whether they are entitled to or not...
It would even be better to enforce the zone boarding, and assign each of the "Priority groups" to a zone depending on the number of Elites. Like Business/Ultimate first, then Plat/C2000, then Gold/Flex, then Silver etc. That is what Delta does and it works pretty well to my perspective.
Originally Posted by olivedel
(Post 30467775)
And be super strict.
SQ is another example by the way. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:01 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.