Sep 16, 2015, 12:29 pm
Last edit by: Prospero
Two routes will be moving to LGW South ahead of the formal move date.
from 11 January 2017: BA2273 will depart for JFK out of the South Terminal
from 12 January 2017: BA2272 will arrive into the South Terminal from JFK
from 19 January 2017: BA Naples flights will operate in/out of the South Terminal
Customers on these flights should check in at Zone A within the South Terminal
from 25 January 2017: all other BA flights will operate in/out of the South Terminal.
The BA First and Terraces lounges in the North Terminal closed on the evening of 04 January 2016. BA passengers can now use the No.1 Lounge and My Lounge in the North Terminal until the date BA moves its operations to the South Terminal (currently estimated to happen in November 2016), where there will be a new British Airways lounge. The new British Airways lounge in the South Terminal is anticipated to follow the latest concept found at EDI, GLA, IAD, CPT and SIN, and will include a dedicated area for First and oneworld Emerald passengers. It is not yet clear what form this area will take (ie. whether it will be a separate First lounge or include a Concorde Bar/Dining concept). For more information, see here and here
For information on the temporary lounge arrangements in LGW North, see this thread:
Temporary BA Lounge at LGW North - No. 1 Lounge - Photos, reviews, questions
By way of guidance, the above Lounge thread is for direct questions and experiences on the No. 1 lounge, whereas the thread here below is suitable for discussing the broader issues arising from the move to South.
from 11 January 2017: BA2273 will depart for JFK out of the South Terminal
from 12 January 2017: BA2272 will arrive into the South Terminal from JFK
from 19 January 2017: BA Naples flights will operate in/out of the South Terminal
Customers on these flights should check in at Zone A within the South Terminal
from 25 January 2017: all other BA flights will operate in/out of the South Terminal.
The BA First and Terraces lounges in the North Terminal closed on the evening of 04 January 2016. BA passengers can now use the No.1 Lounge and My Lounge in the North Terminal until the date BA moves its operations to the South Terminal (currently estimated to happen in November 2016), where there will be a new British Airways lounge. The new British Airways lounge in the South Terminal is anticipated to follow the latest concept found at EDI, GLA, IAD, CPT and SIN, and will include a dedicated area for First and oneworld Emerald passengers. It is not yet clear what form this area will take (ie. whether it will be a separate First lounge or include a Concorde Bar/Dining concept). For more information, see here and here
For information on the temporary lounge arrangements in LGW North, see this thread:
Temporary BA Lounge at LGW North - No. 1 Lounge - Photos, reviews, questions
By way of guidance, the above Lounge thread is for direct questions and experiences on the No. 1 lounge, whereas the thread here below is suitable for discussing the broader issues arising from the move to South.
BA to move to LGW South Terminal Nov 2016 [revised to 25 Jan 2017]
Jan 10, 2016, 6:03 am
#631
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
That wasn't the point I was making which was that one of the contributors to this thread seemed to be implying that many of us here are chancers traveling on highly discounted fares ather than "proper passengers". I agree fare paid shouldn't make a difference if BA is willing to offer the product at the price (cash or Avios). My point was that a tiny fraction of passengers are travelling on full non-discounted fares and whether this amounts to 1% or 5% is immaterial in the broad scheme of things.
I suppose you could have a semantical debate over what is a non-discounted fare (flexible, non flexible etc) but I agree with your point there. I was actually responding to FrancisA's separate but related point.
Jan 10, 2016, 6:29 am
#632
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,211
If I remember correctly it'll be November before the new lounges are up and running. I'm no Bob the builder but to me that seems an awfully long time to remodel and fit out an inside structure?
Can anyone explain why it'll take this long?
Can anyone explain why it'll take this long?
Jan 10, 2016, 6:31 am
#633
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London/Cape Town
Programs: BA Gold VS Silver KL Gold
Posts: 29
Nov move...no way
There is a lot of talk regarding BAs move to the South Terminal as happening n Nov 2016.
Gatwick and BA management are already looking at delaying the move until 1/3/17. So that means over a year of appalling lounges....beans on toast, and no champagne. But it must be saving BA a fortune!
Gatwick and BA management are already looking at delaying the move until 1/3/17. So that means over a year of appalling lounges....beans on toast, and no champagne. But it must be saving BA a fortune!
Jan 10, 2016, 6:32 am
#634
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: London
Posts: 17,007
Jan 10, 2016, 6:39 am
#635
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,211
They should have consulted me first. We were able to move lock, stock and barrel 7000 miles in the space of several weeks. They're just going a few hundred yards up the road.
Jan 10, 2016, 6:42 am
#636
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London/Cape Town
Programs: BA Gold VS Silver KL Gold
Posts: 29
@HIDDY BA has moved out so that the conversion to the Virgin Clubhouse can begin immediately. That means that there will be no break in the Virgin Atlantic lounge offering when the move happens. It's the BA Premiums that are suffering through all this. I dare say that BA is getting quite a lot of compensation for all this!
Jan 10, 2016, 7:17 am
#637
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Buckinghamshire
Programs: BAEC Gold Guest List, Hilton Honours Diamond, Accor Gold
Posts: 2,303
In regards to the point above, I believe it when I see it - if BA wanted to provide champagne in the lounge, they would have done it from the start. Failure to do so is potentiality damaging their F pax impressions and damaging the business from the start of their arrival at Gatwick.
Jan 10, 2016, 8:08 am
#638
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,211
@HIDDY BA has moved out so that the conversion to the Virgin Clubhouse can begin immediately. That means that there will be no break in the Virgin Atlantic lounge offering when the move happens. It's the BA Premiums that are suffering through all this. I dare say that BA is getting quite a lot of compensation for all this!
I guess we'll never know the real reasons.
Jan 10, 2016, 8:23 am
#639
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Programs: BA Gold, IC Ambassador, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Fairmont Platinum
Posts: 3,166
Temporary BA Lounge at LGW North - No. 1 Lounge - Photos, reviews, questions
In regards to the point above, I believe it when I see it - if BA wanted to provide champagne in the lounge, they would have done it from the start. Failure to do so is potentiality damaging their F pax impressions and damaging the business from the start of their arrival at Gatwick.
From what I have seen, the LGW management have little idea about the products for which they as responsible - hence the decision to close the F lounge at 3pm "as the last F flight has left"; when most regular LGW users know that the F lounge is the same sort of GCH lounge as the GF in T5 - few real F pax, but lots of GCHs.
The decision on Champagne was probably a result of a similar lack of knowledge.
If that is not the case, perhaps someone could explain how removing an inexpensive item which is advertised as one of the reasons to purchase a premium flight with BA is a rational business decision..
At an airport where now a substantial part of your traffic is occasional non-status leisure pax, why remove a key differentiator? Any one can pay for a lounge, buy Champagne and BOB good and drink while flying a vast variety of LCCs. The fact that the Champagne, lounge and substantial food and drink was included was the BA product was its USP.
Not in the Brave New World of BA's LGW management, where a full fare F passenger has to pay for a glass of mediocre NV Champagne!
Jan 10, 2016, 8:33 am
#640
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Clearly someone had to be the first mover. Presumably if BA stayed put someone else would have had to go temporary to allow the South Terminal to be sorted?
Jan 10, 2016, 9:04 am
#641
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Your belief is I presume based on this being a rationale decision made by BA management who know that removing Champagne will be a significant reduction in lounge benefits.
From what I have seen, the LGW management have little idea about the products for which they as responsible - hence the decision to close the F lounge at 3pm "as the last F flight has left"; when most regular LGW users know that the F lounge is the same sort of GCH lounge as the GF in T5 - few real F pax, but lots of GCHs.
The decision on Champagne was probably a result of a similar lack of knowledge.
If that is not the case, perhaps someone could explain how removing an inexpensive item which is advertised as one of the reasons to purchase a premium flight with BA is a rational business decision..
At an airport where now a substantial part of your traffic is occasional non-status leisure pax, why remove a key differentiator? Any one can pay for a lounge, buy Champagne and BOB good and drink while flying a vast variety of LCCs. The fact that the Champagne, lounge and substantial food and drink was included was the BA product was its USP.
Not in the Brave New World of BA's LGW management, where a full fare F passenger has to pay for a glass of mediocre NV Champagne!
From what I have seen, the LGW management have little idea about the products for which they as responsible - hence the decision to close the F lounge at 3pm "as the last F flight has left"; when most regular LGW users know that the F lounge is the same sort of GCH lounge as the GF in T5 - few real F pax, but lots of GCHs.
The decision on Champagne was probably a result of a similar lack of knowledge.
If that is not the case, perhaps someone could explain how removing an inexpensive item which is advertised as one of the reasons to purchase a premium flight with BA is a rational business decision..
At an airport where now a substantial part of your traffic is occasional non-status leisure pax, why remove a key differentiator? Any one can pay for a lounge, buy Champagne and BOB good and drink while flying a vast variety of LCCs. The fact that the Champagne, lounge and substantial food and drink was included was the BA product was its USP.
Not in the Brave New World of BA's LGW management, where a full fare F passenger has to pay for a glass of mediocre NV Champagne!
Maybe BA thought after review the number of GCHs was such that they could use the business lounge after the last F flight has left? And maybe they figured re the Champagne that the cost wasn't one they wanted to pay in the temporary period - accepting LGW is a hub it wouldn't be the first time this has happened in a third party lounge.
It doesn't mean I agree with what has happened, however just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean LGW is suddenly being run by buffoons.
I suspect the likely outcome (assuming the level of complaints is high) is that the airline will 'row back' and some form of compromise will be reached, maybe a glass for each F/GCH via a voucher.
Jan 10, 2016, 9:22 am
#642
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Programs: BA Gold, IC Ambassador, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Fairmont Platinum
Posts: 3,166
You keep repeating the line about BA management not being aware of the proposition but it would really surprise me if BA weren't aware who was using the F lounge.
Maybe BA thought after review the number of GCHs was such that they could use the business lounge after the last F flight has left? And maybe they figured re the Champagne that the cost wasn't one they wanted to pay in the temporary period - accepting LGW is a hub it wouldn't be the first time this has happened in a third party lounge.
It doesn't mean I agree with what has happened, however just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean LGW is suddenly being run by buffoons.
I suspect the likely outcome (assuming the level of complaints is high) is that the airline will 'row back' and some form of compromise will be reached, maybe a glass for each F/GCH via a voucher.
Maybe BA thought after review the number of GCHs was such that they could use the business lounge after the last F flight has left? And maybe they figured re the Champagne that the cost wasn't one they wanted to pay in the temporary period - accepting LGW is a hub it wouldn't be the first time this has happened in a third party lounge.
It doesn't mean I agree with what has happened, however just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean LGW is suddenly being run by buffoons.
I suspect the likely outcome (assuming the level of complaints is high) is that the airline will 'row back' and some form of compromise will be reached, maybe a glass for each F/GCH via a voucher.
The previous BA LGW management made a concerted effort to attract premium pax and upsell BA premium products.
They designed the new check in area with excellent J and F provision in the right place, worked with LGW's owners on the Premium Gatwick security arrangements, enhanced the catering in both F and J lounges to levels never seen before at LGW (remember current LHR offering is new, post 2008), and improved the drinks offer (the F lounge offered dessert wines never even seen in the CCR). LGW pioneered promoting AUPs and offered POUGs first too.
The new BA LGW team closed the F lounge because "the last F flight had gone" and "the lounge require extra cleaning". The temporary lounge arrangements make no concession whatsoever to either F pax or GCHs receiving a better product at BA's second largest airport and a home hub.
The Champagne debacle may reflect a lack of knowledge of the core product or ignorance about the market in which BA compete; either way this is an exceptionally poor and short-sighted decision.
That's the logic behind my assessment.
Perhaps someone more experienced in these matters could tell me how this will benefit, strengthen and improve BA premium business at LGW?
Jan 10, 2016, 10:37 am
#644
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
I do indeed keep on repeating this view because I believe that it is true and supported by the evidence.
The previous BA LGW management made a concerted effort to attract premium pax and upsell BA premium products.
They designed the new check in area with excellent J and F provision in the right place, worked with LGW's owners on the Premium Gatwick security arrangements, enhanced the catering in both F and J lounges to levels never seen before at LGW (remember current LHR offering is new, post 2008), and improved the drinks offer (the F lounge offered dessert wines never even seen in the CCR). LGW pioneered promoting AUPs and offered POUGs first too.
The new BA LGW team closed the F lounge because "the last F flight had gone" and "the lounge require extra cleaning". The temporary lounge arrangements make no concession whatsoever to either F pax or GCHs receiving a better product at BA's second largest airport and a home hub.
The Champagne debacle may reflect a lack of knowledge of the core product or ignorance about the market in which BA compete; either way this is an exceptionally poor and short-sighted decision.
That's the logic behind my assessment.
Perhaps someone more experienced in these matters could tell me how this will benefit, strengthen and improve BA premium business at LGW?
The previous BA LGW management made a concerted effort to attract premium pax and upsell BA premium products.
They designed the new check in area with excellent J and F provision in the right place, worked with LGW's owners on the Premium Gatwick security arrangements, enhanced the catering in both F and J lounges to levels never seen before at LGW (remember current LHR offering is new, post 2008), and improved the drinks offer (the F lounge offered dessert wines never even seen in the CCR). LGW pioneered promoting AUPs and offered POUGs first too.
The new BA LGW team closed the F lounge because "the last F flight had gone" and "the lounge require extra cleaning". The temporary lounge arrangements make no concession whatsoever to either F pax or GCHs receiving a better product at BA's second largest airport and a home hub.
The Champagne debacle may reflect a lack of knowledge of the core product or ignorance about the market in which BA compete; either way this is an exceptionally poor and short-sighted decision.
That's the logic behind my assessment.
Perhaps someone more experienced in these matters could tell me how this will benefit, strengthen and improve BA premium business at LGW?
Maybe that's what their brief from Waterside Towers was - try and trim the cost base a bit to make LGW (more) profitable. Hence the cuts to staff packages and the 'enhancements' to the lounge proposition.
Jan 10, 2016, 10:42 am
#645
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: LHR, LGW
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 3,440
FrancisA...very much in agreement and well put.
Interesting to know their is new BA management at LGW, I wasn't aware of this. (maybe I need to brush up my BA insider knowledge!!) Once again is forum has been fantastic insight and I will continue to appreciate all the advice whilst also offering any relevant experience or advice myself whilst trying to work my way to gold eventually!
I will certainly see what reception I get on my first No.1 Lounge experience next weekend and will post if anything interesting happens.
Interesting to know their is new BA management at LGW, I wasn't aware of this. (maybe I need to brush up my BA insider knowledge!!) Once again is forum has been fantastic insight and I will continue to appreciate all the advice whilst also offering any relevant experience or advice myself whilst trying to work my way to gold eventually!
I will certainly see what reception I get on my first No.1 Lounge experience next weekend and will post if anything interesting happens.