bmchris

Spot on. To keep things real:

1. These companies don't hire or keep you unless you're billing considerably more than they pay you;

2. If they could find someone cheaper to do the same thing, they would;

3. Turnover is significant (voluntary as well as involuntary).

Longboater

I would wager against a reduction in size of J on the 77W. Its been confirmed 13 reconfigured 777s, rather than this current management's initial plan, will have 45 in J. What's the purpose of having the 77W as the flagship aircraft, which this current management is making a big deal in selling their new services to HKG and SYD, if they only have three more premium seats than the 772? Even if they do an about face with the size of J on the 772, I find it very hard to believe that management would cut the size of J on the 77W unless they decide its time for F to go, which again this management has stated its staying due to sales.

Once the full 20 77W order is complete and the 772 CIP is complete, I expect there will be proper adjustment of the 77W fleet. Moves like initially going all 77W on JFK-LHR and MIA-GRU are more along the lines of offering the best product available than serving the markets according to their yields.

However, in all of this initial confusion, this announcement confirms MCE is going ten abreast on the entire 772/77W fleet. Due to the pace of the 772 CIP, I expect at least half of the fleet will have W installed at the time of CIP. Given the current 77W configuration, it appears the configuration with W added will be 8F/52J/24W/220Y with 40/50 Y seats being considered MCE. This assumes MCE seat pitch will remain 36 inches.

bmchris

Looking at Cathay, their config would support your view.

AA: http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Ame...777-300_ER.php

CX: http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Cat...77-300ER_A.php

itchief

I agree with you that MCE will likely go 10 abreast. This will make it consistent with the 787 MCE. Same seats as main cabin just a little extra leg room.

Longboater

Due to ten abreast in Y, AA can still seat over 300 on the 77W. Speaking of CX, their W's hard product and AA's new W hard product are almost identical. Only difference is AA will use leather and CX cloth. Same seat pitch and very likely same seat width. JonNYC mentioned on his twitter account that its a certainty that AA will announce LAX-HKG next year. Having J/W as a matching hard product to CX will serve AA well once they launch the route.

Phasers

Did I miss an announcement somewhere where the 777 retrofits were no longer going to be 37 in J? I thought only the initial 777s would be 45 J?

Edit: From the wiki in the CIP thread:

ccengct

I'm delighted by the announcement. In my experience, SWU from Y to C long-haul is largely a myth... so why sweat a change to the SWU policy if one can never use the current policy anyway? In particular I look forward to sitting in W on a paid ticket while the rest of humanity fights for SWU from Y or a place in MCE.

thecurtisw

Completely disagree. I am thrilled with this news and I'd politely argue that what you've described is the small picture, not the big picture. I'd say SWUs become less valuable, for sure, but more useful because they would likely be easier to clear because of all the people who won't want to buy W. And op-ups from W to J are more likely than Y to J. I regularly fly W on CX and QF to Australia. Obviously it's not J, but it is perfectly comfortable and I have no trouble getting a respectable night of sleep.

Plus getting 1.5 EQM per mile, assuming they match partner valuation, is another great reason to book W.

But all in all, if EXPs who are actually upset by this choose to not fly W, that makes it even better for those of us who do.

AAExecPlatFlier

Aince we believe or know that these are the CX PEY seats (but with leather), one thing came to mind. Only the first row of CX has the leg extension. The rest have just the footrest that comes down from the seat in front of you. I wonder if aa is going to all leg extensions or do the mix that CX does.

thecurtisw

Gary Leff posted today that he received confirmation that only the bulkhead will have legrests, like CX. This is the one part I'm bummed about. QF has legrests on all W seats. Flying CX, I make sure I get bulkhead and if I can't at booking, keep checking until it's available.

JMN57

Can you tell us if it has been determined yet?

Couple of observations:

1) J is the new F
2) If they let one do a confirmed to W from Y & waitlist for J on a SWU, that would be pretty good.
3) If they did #2, it would be also good to do a pay for W / get confirmed J with SWU if available
4) W (PE) daytime long-haul would be OK but redeye would not be so great without the lie-flat J seat(somebody posted this earlier)

Longboater

They announced it back when the first 777 was undergoing CIP that half of the 772s would be CIPed with 45 J before the first 772 was fitted with 37 J. This was to be done due to aircraft swaps between CIP and non-CIP 772s. All of the 772s were planned to have 37J/252Y. That apparently has changed and now 13 will keep the 45 J version. Makes sense to have a small subfleet of these aircraft to operate flights to LHR/GRU that are not operated by 77Ws. The 289 seat was going to have ten abreast MCE anyway. I'd be stunned if MCE is not ten abreast across the 772/77W fleet once W is installed.

bse118

Other than the potential SWU issue why are people comparing W to J?

The apt comparison is to Y. W is going to be superior to Y in basically any circumstance. It's not a business class competitor, so why compare it to J class amenities?

Mark_T

... and that of course would allow them to convert the current MCE 'cabin' on the 77W to PEY...

Barring any surprises that give any of these changes an up-side, I'm expecting to fly AA a lot less, if at all in 2017.

Longboater

I looked at the premium economy page on AA's website. Appears to match CX and row one will have the leg rest. Row one will be fairly competitive to reserve, wouldn't surprise me if AA decides to charge a little extra for that row.