Aug 7, 2015, 5:53 am
Last edit by: NWIFlyer
Hand Baggage Only fares (HBO) are available on domestic and EuroTraveller routes. They are offered at a lower price to those able to travel without checked baggage on point to point journeys only - they are not offered with connections, stopovers or with Club Europe. There isn't a special fare bucket for HBO, it's just a discount to all domestic/ET fare buckets, so even expensive flexible tickets offer HBO. The discount varies depending on route. For example, going HBO on LHR-DUB gives a £10 discount; £15 on LHR-PRG; and £20 on LHR-ATH. Online Travel Agents often book into these fares (including building stopovers) and are sometimes less than transparent about the baggage restrictions during the booking process. HBO fares do not earn OnBusiness credits.
BAEC status passengers from Bronze upwards get advance seat choice with these tickets.
How to get seat allocation if HBO and without status:
- Pay up. You can pay up at OLCI if you don't like the seat. Costs vary from £7 to £21 per sector as a minimum, with differential pricing employed for better seats (e.g. an exit row on LHR-DUB was £23 in June 2017). Usually, but not always, this invalidates the cost saving of HBO. You can also pay up in Manage My Booking (MMB) before OLCI.
- Cancel OLCI at the "confirm contact details" stage. Go in again and/or later and you may be offered another seat.
- Corporate travel bookings still offer seating to HBO in some cases. Sometimes this ability is temporary and doesn't stick.
- Ask check-in or the lounge agent for a better seat, so far this seems to be possible. Lounge agents won't be able to assist where they aren't part of the ground handling for BA (e.g. LBA).
- If your airport has a Self Service Check In (SSCI) machine AND you do not print your boarding pass (see below) then you can select another seat there provided check-in is still open, typically up to 46 minutes before take off. So if you are being allocated a rotten seat and you can see better seats available, you can take a risk and complete/commence check-in later.
SSCI machines are available at: LHR, LGW, LCY, MAN, EDI (on the general purpose airport machines, but only those by the BA check-in area), NCE, BRU, OSL, BLL, AAR, MUC, AMS.
They are NOT available at: ABZ, BHD, GLA, LBA, NCL, DUB, CDG, ORY, SVG, DUS, TXL, MAH, CFU, OLB, CTA, CAG, FDH, ANE, UIP, BIO, HER, SVQ, PMI, BRI.
You can also do this operation the night before at LGW and LHR, details here.
By "printing boarding pass" we mean not selecting that option at OLCI, or saving, emailing, faxing and/or downloading the boarding pass on the App.
HBO fares - Have to pay to select seat in advance [free for GCH/SCH/BCHs @ 14 Jun 17]
Mar 3, 2015, 2:47 am
#466
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 2,644
What problem is this solving? Not enough people making the middle seat at the back their first choice? Punishing HBO won't reduce problems with lack of overhead space
Mar 3, 2015, 2:48 am
#467
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: in a cabin
Posts: 6,522
Those here who say that GCHs/SCHs would not normally buy HBOs really don't have a clue about what people that travel for work really have to go through.
- if anything, this is the sort of fare that very frequent fliers would buy - do you really think someone who travels 200 segments a year wants to wait 66 hours per year for bags (avg. 200 sectors, 20 minutes on average wait)? Also, a frequent traveler knows that bags make it more difficult to move to a different flight if you are already checked in...
- a lot of corporate TAs make you book the cheapest fare and that is HBO
I really don't understand who was the absolute moron who decided to come up with this idea. I am very sorry to say, but the person / team who thought that this was going to be a good idea should have their heads checked.
- if anything, this is the sort of fare that very frequent fliers would buy - do you really think someone who travels 200 segments a year wants to wait 66 hours per year for bags (avg. 200 sectors, 20 minutes on average wait)? Also, a frequent traveler knows that bags make it more difficult to move to a different flight if you are already checked in...
- a lot of corporate TAs make you book the cheapest fare and that is HBO
I really don't understand who was the absolute moron who decided to come up with this idea. I am very sorry to say, but the person / team who thought that this was going to be a good idea should have their heads checked.
BA have been losing the plot for a while now. Their ignorance and arrogance towards customers is insulting. I see it as hubris. Just wait until the current bull market busts... BA will be giving us seats for free.
Mar 3, 2015, 2:51 am
#468
Join Date: May 2012
Location: ATL
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 200
I'd say first and foremost, profitable. In their defence, they're achieving it at the moment. There's no denying that their strategy has worked in the short term, but one does have to question if it is even remotely sustainable
Mar 3, 2015, 3:02 am
#470
Join Date: May 2012
Location: ATL
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 200
Fair point. Certainly there seem to be quite a lot of apoplectic people on FT. I wonder what the general feeling is in the broader customer base. My colleagues who are/were Gold and Silver have been drifting away for a while, truth be told.
BA seem to be positioning themselves in what consultants love to call "the mushy middle" I think - neither a LCC or a premium airline. They have no USP or clear market position beyond their stranglehold of LHR.
BA seem to be positioning themselves in what consultants love to call "the mushy middle" I think - neither a LCC or a premium airline. They have no USP or clear market position beyond their stranglehold of LHR.
Mar 3, 2015, 3:03 am
#471
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold, A3 *Gold
Posts: 887
If BA retain my business after this it is because I live near Heathrow, If I lived near Gatwick I'd be off to buy an EasyJet Plus card and a Lounge Pass and would be enjoying a better standard of travel than BA now offer. That is sad.
Mar 3, 2015, 3:03 am
#472
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: LHR
Programs: BA GGL/GfL, A3 Gold, HH Diamond, IHG Gold
Posts: 320
If BA found that the HBO reduced yield, surely they could have restricted the availability of the HBO fares? They do that anyway - sometimes there are cheap 'normal' fares, but no corresponding HBO fares. Or they could have increased the fares by a couple of quid.
I put myself in the category of passenger raised above by continentalclub, who often travelled without checked luggage before HBO fares became available. What I can't believe is that a drop in revenue from those passengers would have come as a surprise to BA. Surely the company knows better than anybody that frequent travellers will often go without hold luggage, and have data to back that up.
I'm at a total loss to understand what they're attempting to achieve with this policy.
Mar 3, 2015, 3:08 am
#473
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Programs: BA Gold, IC Ambassador, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Fairmont Platinum
Posts: 3,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancisA
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul4040
Can you explain why you think free seat selection - even for top tier passengers - should be removed as a consequence of saving the airline ground handling fees?
The idea of going HBO is supposed to give the airline an advantage by having fewer bags to process. HBO isn't a more restrictive fare and was never advertised as such. It's simply a discount - a thank you - for not checking a bag. It's counterintuitive that passengers should be penalised for this.
BA always set out that HBO fares were not the standard product. They seem to have misjudged their popularity with the consequence that they now have real issues with excessive hand luggage. That also has a cost.
As a result they are addressing that issue.
If HBOs were intended to appeal to ultra price sensitive LCC-type customers, they should have pitched it more at that market with fewer frills even for status passengers. No seat selection and no lounge access from the start might have been prudent.
As it is, frequent business fliers have been using HBOs as their default fare and I doubt that that is financially viable to BA. In light of experience BA have acted to make HBO fares more of a lite product - hardly surprising given that they are a commercial organisation.
It's OK saying offering generous concessions to status passengers breeds loyalty, but those that have said that have also said that they'll fly elsewhere every time BA make a change that they don't like. Hardly unerring loyalty!
As I understand it, the discount on the fare for not checking in a bag is roughly equivalent to the saving BA makes on not having to handle your bag - what's financially unviable about that? And what difference would it make to financial viability if 1% or 90% of passengers bought HBO? A £20 discount on full Y doesn't strike me as financially unviable.
Originally Posted by FrancisA
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul4040
Can you explain why you think free seat selection - even for top tier passengers - should be removed as a consequence of saving the airline ground handling fees?
The idea of going HBO is supposed to give the airline an advantage by having fewer bags to process. HBO isn't a more restrictive fare and was never advertised as such. It's simply a discount - a thank you - for not checking a bag. It's counterintuitive that passengers should be penalised for this.
BA always set out that HBO fares were not the standard product. They seem to have misjudged their popularity with the consequence that they now have real issues with excessive hand luggage. That also has a cost.
As a result they are addressing that issue.
If HBOs were intended to appeal to ultra price sensitive LCC-type customers, they should have pitched it more at that market with fewer frills even for status passengers. No seat selection and no lounge access from the start might have been prudent.
As it is, frequent business fliers have been using HBOs as their default fare and I doubt that that is financially viable to BA. In light of experience BA have acted to make HBO fares more of a lite product - hardly surprising given that they are a commercial organisation.
It's OK saying offering generous concessions to status passengers breeds loyalty, but those that have said that have also said that they'll fly elsewhere every time BA make a change that they don't like. Hardly unerring loyalty!
As I understand it, the discount on the fare for not checking in a bag is roughly equivalent to the saving BA makes on not having to handle your bag - what's financially unviable about that? And what difference would it make to financial viability if 1% or 90% of passengers bought HBO? A £20 discount on full Y doesn't strike me as financially unviable.
The financially unviable bit is offering full frequent flyer benefits on the HBO fare.
The saving on baggage handling is only real if increased volumes of hand luggage don't cause other costs, like missed departure slots while trying to stow everything.
I was also hinting that offering lounge access on HBO fares probably eliminates any profit BA make from the ticket.
Some say that status passengers are loyal customers. Given that silver status might as well be given away with cornflake packets (or AMEX cards) and gold can be achieved by a holiday jaunt across the USA, I doubt that is always the case.
As I see it, BA are doing very well at the moment and can afford to lose the less lucrative end of the market. Witness reversion back to reduced avios earning on discounted Y.
Basically if you live in the regions, fly cheapest possible Y and achieve status through POUGs and TP runs, BA doesn't love you any more!
Mar 3, 2015, 3:16 am
#475
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA GfL, Marriott PlatfL/Ambassador, TP Gold, IHG Spire
Posts: 1,656
I'd say that most GCHs don't give a damn about the price difference between HBOs and non-HBOs. If anything I wish that the stupid thing had never been implemented - it is just annoying the amount of baggage that some pax bring on board to save some 10 quid or so - sometimes I almost want to give some of them the 10 quid and tell them, hey next time check your stupid bag.
What is ludicrous is forcing a frequent traveler to purchase baggage when that's not what that person wants. And as mentioned before, some corporate pax are required to book the HBO fare in the first place, so it's not like they even get a choice.
Mar 3, 2015, 3:20 am
#476
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Programs: IC Hotels Spire, BA Gold
Posts: 8,671
As I see this move, sadly it does have some logic as follows:
1. It probably will free up a little cabin space - not much but it all helps.
2. Those travelling on business will no doubt pay the extra just for the seat selection "perk". However I think many will still bring hand-baggage.
3. It does differentiate the ultra low cost HBO fares as really the bottom end of BA's fare structure. Anything else....you pay extra!
As a shareholder (where the value is the highest for some 15 years) I can see BA getting a alot of extra revenue from this move as I suspect the majority of B, S and G cardholders will now move up a fare notch to be able to select a seat at time of booking or at T-7.
Smart move me thinks......however that's not so say as a Silver I agree with it from a pax perspective.
1. It probably will free up a little cabin space - not much but it all helps.
2. Those travelling on business will no doubt pay the extra just for the seat selection "perk". However I think many will still bring hand-baggage.
3. It does differentiate the ultra low cost HBO fares as really the bottom end of BA's fare structure. Anything else....you pay extra!
As a shareholder (where the value is the highest for some 15 years) I can see BA getting a alot of extra revenue from this move as I suspect the majority of B, S and G cardholders will now move up a fare notch to be able to select a seat at time of booking or at T-7.
Smart move me thinks......however that's not so say as a Silver I agree with it from a pax perspective.
Mar 3, 2015, 3:22 am
#477
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: LHR
Programs: BA GGL/GfL, A3 Gold, HH Diamond, IHG Gold
Posts: 320
Why would those travelling with checked luggage not want to take advantage of the full hand baggage allowance as well?
Mar 3, 2015, 3:23 am
#478
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: not far from MUC
Posts: 6,620
Lounge? Non-existant at SZG and INN, MUC has one but I'd far rather be eating a real meal (and drinking a real beer) in Airbräu.
Priority check-in? HBO, so doesn't apply.
Seat selection? Just got enhanced.
We're down to the bottom of the barrel here, aren't we?
Mar 3, 2015, 3:25 am
#479
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: LHR
Programs: BA GGL/GfL, A3 Gold, HH Diamond, IHG Gold
Posts: 320
I'd suggest that's by no means a foregone conclusion!
Mar 3, 2015, 3:25 am
#480
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Programs: BA Gold, IC Ambassador, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Fairmont Platinum
Posts: 3,166
As I see this move, sadly it does have some logic as follows:
1. It probably will free up a little cabin space - not much but it all helps.
2. Those travelling on business will no doubt pay the extra just for the seat selection "perk". However I think many will still bring hand-baggage.
3. It does differentiate the ultra low cost HBO fares as really the bottom end of BA's fare structure. Anything else....you pay extra!
As a shareholder (where the value is the highest for some 15 years) I can see BA getting a alot of extra revenue from this move as I suspect the majority of B, S and G cardholders will now move up a fare notch to be able to select a seat at time of booking or at T-7.
Smart move me thinks......however that's not so say as a Silver I agree with it from a pax perspective.
1. It probably will free up a little cabin space - not much but it all helps.
2. Those travelling on business will no doubt pay the extra just for the seat selection "perk". However I think many will still bring hand-baggage.
3. It does differentiate the ultra low cost HBO fares as really the bottom end of BA's fare structure. Anything else....you pay extra!
As a shareholder (where the value is the highest for some 15 years) I can see BA getting a alot of extra revenue from this move as I suspect the majority of B, S and G cardholders will now move up a fare notch to be able to select a seat at time of booking or at T-7.
Smart move me thinks......however that's not so say as a Silver I agree with it from a pax perspective.
BA's mistake was not to put in a fully unbundled bottom tier fare at the outset. Now removing seat selection (and in future lounge access, free booze etc) is going to cause outcry.
As for corporate travel policies, if you have to travel with checked luggage, are people really saying they have to take an HBO fare?