layz

Will they be able to? If only 5% of eligible passengers used it (or was it really 5% of ALL BA passengers using it with only a subset of these eligible anyway - figures can be manipulated in many ways) then an even smaller number would be aware of and actually pay to use it, so I just see the facility closing.

When I flew CWLCY there was currently no arrivals facility as their agreement with the Marriott had expired and the new agreement with the Radisson had yet to have started. The CWLCY arrangement isn't the most convenient options either, it's a taxi ride (paid for by BA I think) to the hotel, then afterwards a further short taxi/DLR ride to Canary Wharf (although you could walk there if you had time and not much luggage)/The City.

ukdoctor

has anyone used the Yotel at LGW south?

orbitmic

Yes. It is just what you would expect of a Yotel: small cabin, comfy single bed, weird all in one shower-sink-toilet area with everthing working fine but better be strategic about the order in which you want to do things as once you have had a shower you couldn't really go and wash your hands without getting all wet, free coffee. I would say that £25 for the Sofitel would be better value if the point is to use as arrivals facility.

oscietra

That's another point; yotel's short pay-by-hour-blocks stay policy means that for a couple, it may well be better to "get a room" - a facility which wasn't available before.

I've used Yotel AMS and it was ideal when travelling alone for a brief arrive-late-leave-early stay, but AMS has the advantage of being airside.

www.yotel.com/hotels/london-gatwick

I honestly doubt if many incoming eligible LGW pax even knew there was an Arrivals Lounge, and even fewer would have wanted to schlep out and find it.

Land-of-Miles

I said this was the logical conclusion of what you said not what you said. If you think that cuts need to be made to sustain "competitive" fares (and I think there is room for some debate there too) where do you stop?

If as you argue low fares are everything and the product, brand and service can be compromised to yield "low" fares then why stop at the arrivals lounge?

I think that you undermine the brand and product equity when you tinker with the product offering like this and start loading on additional costs which were formerly part of an inclusive fare and product offering.

ian001

If BA was the sole user of the LGW facility then I wonder whether Sofitel required a minimum spend guarantee by BA to make it worthwhile for them.

oscietra

I think you are on to the real issue, ian001.

This certainly has nothing to do with any supposed "logic" or fantastical supposition about further reductions.

It's the right decision, could save BA a six-figure sum and apart from being poorly communicated, it makes total sense to me.

pomkiwi

Presumably it is a commercial decision and BA reckon that not providing an arrivals lounge will not make any difference to the number of pax choosing to fly with them from LGW. In a similar way the F lounge at LGW operated somewhat differently from those at LHR when I was last there with a reduced food and wine offering (at least before the LHR enhancement programme). At he moment there is less competetion for premium long haul routes from LGW and BA do not need to spend the money.

I did use the arrivals lounge when I last flew into LGW as I didn't particularly fancy the breakfast options in CW and it suited me to leave LGW 45 minutes later to avoid the rush hour on the M25. The absence of the facility doesn't bother me much (although changes of flight times to and from MRU mean that it is now more attractive to use EK via DXB and I'm not likely to have much other reason to go there rather than LHR).

kdhurst380

I recently complained to CR about the frankly, insulting, Airbus CE product from LGW, and was assured that this was a product that was intended to be phased out. I'm not convinced. More worryingly, said person I spoke to in CR seemed almost unaware of the difference in hard product, initially responding with "well, we do block off the middle seat for you", as if that was to justify my complaint. Apparently popping a CE branded antimacassar on the non-adjustable headrest is enough to call it a CE seat.

I did make the point that surely, business sense for BA means that they should be making every effort to A) ensure a consistent product between bases, B) Aim to differentiate the service quality and hard product from other competing airlines as much as feasibly possible (namely the orange brigade, who in all the years I've flown with, have never had anything to complain about).

Instead, they'd rather dumb down the product, hope that people don't notice, then blame Gatwick/the competition when the chips are down. Do they ever learn?

On the plus side, the 'service recovery' Avios have justified a little holiday to Mykonos next year. Will I spend my hard earnt cash with BA again? Unless things improve, it won't be from LGW, and seeing as all the flying I do is for leisure, the chances have become slim.

The flights in question were on the LGW-ACE route, which we've previously always done with easyJet.

Yesitsme

Just a small note about the exBMI A3xx - they have been sent to LGW due to the hold luggage being loose loaded instead of using containers (containers don't fit). LHR can't "cope" with loose loading (esp T5) so that's why those aircraft have been sent to LGW.

I'm sure it's of no consolation, but us crew don't particularly like working on them either.


________________________
These are my opinions and not those of my employer or anyone else

tom tulpe

Unlike fast track, which all of us.. er...

Fruitcake

Exactly. Family Fruitcake, 4 of us, were caught out by this today. Having been in Jamaica for a week (i.e. we left UK before this was announced) we arrived in the Sofitel this morning, having arrived from KIN in CW.

We took ourselves to the lounge, hoping for a shower and breakfast etc. In fact, breakfast was laid out and we went in and sat down. We were then given a letter from BA by a hotel employee, pointing out that the lounge had been enhanced away - a matter of customer choice / convenience, of course.

The hotel is still running it as a paid for facility, for now - they took pity on us, very nicely, and gave us breakfast - all a bit embarrassing though. It was very clear the hotel management are not at all happy with this and that the BA decision was taken very late in the day. I rang BA customer services this afternoon and they only knew about it on Thursday. They accepted my point (also the hotel's) that this lounge was never very well publicised anyway.

Anyway, I felt a service we had expected in good faith at the time of booking (and departure!) - and had prepared to use - was removed with effectively no notice. Just the hotel's goodwill rescued this somewhat.

oscietra

What do they charge for access now?

HIDDY

If the lounge is still open then BA should honour all ticket bookings made before the announcement.
I'm sure if you complained BA would refund any charges you incurred had the hotel staff not been so obliging.

flabound

per my post (#8) £25