goodison

Whenever I flick through one of these decks my inner monologue starts up with a Mark Steel on the News Quiz style rant.

It's a concoction of fluff, spin and BS which will continue because the financials are good.

binman

Or indeed, in a EU lounge, those ghastly new chairs in CCR or a clapped out 747 with the filthy toilets.

Still let all be British and "jam tomorrow"

HIDDY

The top man always said improvements would take place soon as the airline was on a stable financial footing after the restructuring phase.
That was when he also told those who didn't like they could take their business elsewhere. ^
Strange how he can get away with saying that yet I get into trouble for it on here.

stevie

No it does not. Real improvement is introducing a new seat that can compete with the real leaders. BA is absolutely mid division, as much as you do not want to hear it.

lost_in_translation

Frankly, I'd say this is overgenerous when looking at a lot of BA long haul J routes these days - there are many where I'd say it's firmly planted in the bottom half of the table.

Tobias-UK

And two more examples

orbitmic

To be honest, the thread is about what IAG has announced (both at group and airline levels) as part of its Capital Markets Day.

It seems to me that posters are perfectly entitled to be enthusiastic about any of the announcements made if they feel that they fit the bill without being accused of partiality, but equally, they are perfectly entitled to criticise those announcements as insufficient or inadequate if they believe that they are not good enough without being accused of being cynics.

It seems to me that any opinion posted about the airline is just that, an opinion, and as such valid prima facie. As long as posters are specific about what they like or do not like, and as long as they are commenting on the airline, its strategy, and its products (rather than about posters themselves, which would be irrelevant), I would find it a little unfair (and probably counter-productive) to try and delegitimise their opinions.

Incidentally, substantively, if saying that BA is 'mid-division' in the airline industry is considered offensive and a sign of cynicism, I think we might as well kick out about 90% of the FT BAEC forum membership.

LTN Phobia

My question would be: Given SQ don't operate on most routes in direct competition with BA, do BA really care about them that much to the extent of wanting to spend a huge amount of extra money? Also remember that the new product isn't going to be rolled out to all fleets (not yet anyway) and there are serious issues with SQ J seats which appears to continue with the new J product. "What is that?" you might ask.

It's the fact that you cannot recline your seat deeply without twisting yourself really badly because of the footwell positioning unless you are in the bulkhead seat. It works fine when the seat is in bed mode, but being unable to sit there without substantial discomfort (from having to twist) in a reclined position is not good.

I did not realise this before I tried the product and was pretty horrified. I thought the new one would have solved that issue but no, it appears that it hasn't. Back to restricting myself to Suite/F on SQ...

orbitmic

I'd say definitely not. However, SQ are but one example of competitors upping their game notably in premium (J+F) classes. As such, I am sure that many within BA itself would be keen on the new J hard product coming sooner rather than later. In F, my perception is that BA is simply not aiming for the ultra-premium market so my personal guess is that they will largely ignore what is happening on the SQ, EY, AF, etc fronts.

LTN Phobia

Please see my edited comments (sorry, I don't think it was up there when you replied...) - the new product is not at all rosey with SQ in my view. I'm surprised at the lack of complaint about it, actually (maybe no-one else has a really bad back or something, lucky people!).

Their new Suite, however, is a different matter but they could have gone further with the seat part of it. It doesn't even recline as much as my reclining seat in my office, when they really could have gone further and gone perhaps 70 degrees IMO. I am hardly an SQ basher but I do wish they did a number of things that would have made things a lot better.

Crampedin13A

I would say that if BA views Lufthansa as their main rival that would explain their glacier speed timeline to the replacement of the CW seat which truly was a great seat at it's introduction. However when even an airline like AC has since the 2006 introduction of NGCW totally fitted their fleet with their original pods,then the LX/KL/SN type and now a J seat that blows CW away then it is only the big F cabin to upgrade into that still favours BA from YYZ and YVR to LHR. YUL and YYC are better served in J using AC for the same inflated price that passengers originating in Canada pay. Now I realize the Canadian market is a pimple compared to the U.S. market for BA but I understand it is also very profitable. You would think they would at least make an effort

cornishsimon

im surprised they never opted to convert the ZZZ birds to all Y layout and keep them plying the domestic and short haul trunk routes. EDI, GLA etc as surely the capacity would come in handy when the 763s leave


cs

orbitmic

I must say that I have not experienced that issue on the SQ J seat (either the previous or the 'new business class') myself. I wonder if it might be due to differences in morphologies?

I'm a big believer in the fact that morphologies and sleeping habits have a huge impact on the seats one finds least/most comfortable. For instance, I sleep on my front and without a pillow, and as such, I find it much harder to sleep on seats that have a raised headrest compared to the rest of the seat in sleeping position (e.g. MH 388 seat is a good example) which by contrast, most other passengers do not even notice or have issue with.

LTN Phobia

It might just be the 777-300ER + A350 seats that have this problem. A380 or some other aircraft variants may not have the issue (I only fly Suite when on A380, so I am not familiar with the J product on the A380). But unfortunately it really makes no sense to me to have to angle the legs when reclining steeply - it's uncomfortable.

In fact though if you only have 'a bit of a recline' and 'flat bed', you'd not notice this issue. It's only when you recline it quite a lot and run out of space to have your lower legs/feet in front of you that it becomes an issue.

Still, if BA announced a non-SYD Australian destination and had on-board wifi, I'd go for CW in preference to SQ with those seats.

orbitmic

I'd go JL if only they decided to compete on one stop itineraries! Sadly, much of the time, JL is only interested in flights to/from Japan! I know you have had bad experiences with them especially on regional routes, but given the right planes, JL is still my favourite J product (and favourite F food all round!) and I love Tokyo for a stopover!!

I might still give a go to the QF route to MEL via the new PER nonstop service. Again, I know you have had a far more intense interaction with QF than me and that it has involved its fair share of disappointments, but it is an airline I still quite enjoy (maybe the privilege of not having them as my main airline) and I find them quite innovative in a number of ways. For once, since the day announcements mentioned the lounge improvements as part of the strategy, I'd really love it for BA to imitate QF on the adoption of juicers in its lounges in the morning complete with a large selection of fruit, vegetables, and herbs you can use for your own juice recipe!!!