How I would transform BA short-haul
Oct 12, 2020, 1:10 pm
#31
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 3,440
I think a lot of people on here underestimate the importance of premium leisure traffic. BA have really found a gem in the addition of all these European holiday flights. The wealthy travellers and celebs want to fly in business when they’re going to Ibiza, Rhodes, Mykonos etc. The only other options are charter airlines and LCCs, which don’t fit in with a ‘Luxury European Holiday’. BA has a monopoly as the only ‘premium carrier’ on UK Beach flights, thus prices can be eye watering. So pulling out of LGW and many holiday destinations wouldn’t be wise and trust me the premium pax won’t be switching to Vueling.
As for better seats upfront, it’s just won’t work. Right now BA can have an A320 land with 12 rows of CE from VCE, and in 50 minutes have it ready to go to LUX with 3 rows. This flexibility is key to returning a profit on routes, as cabins can be configured for the demand. If you do have 6 fixed rows of CE, you’ll get CE sell out fast on route one (preventing you from offering more seats even if demand is there) and on another CE be empty while ET is sold out (again preventing you from selling more seats). If you then have subfleets with different numbers of fixed rows, you’ll run into so many operation difficulties and people will end up getting downgraded.
If BA want to make CE better, it’ll have to come from soft products. Although I don’t think the pre-pandemic offering was bad at all.
As for better seats upfront, it’s just won’t work. Right now BA can have an A320 land with 12 rows of CE from VCE, and in 50 minutes have it ready to go to LUX with 3 rows. This flexibility is key to returning a profit on routes, as cabins can be configured for the demand. If you do have 6 fixed rows of CE, you’ll get CE sell out fast on route one (preventing you from offering more seats even if demand is there) and on another CE be empty while ET is sold out (again preventing you from selling more seats). If you then have subfleets with different numbers of fixed rows, you’ll run into so many operation difficulties and people will end up getting downgraded.
If BA want to make CE better, it’ll have to come from soft products. Although I don’t think the pre-pandemic offering was bad at all.
Oct 12, 2020, 1:20 pm
#32
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Programs: TK Elite Plus,BAEC GGL,ITA Executive, AFKL Gold,QR Gold,HH Diamond,Bonvoy Gold,ALL Gold
Posts: 14,186
As for better seats upfront, it’s just won’t work. Right now BA can have an A320 land with 12 rows of CE from VCE, and in 50 minutes have it ready to go to LUX with 3 rows. This flexibility is key to returning a profit on routes, as cabins can be configured for the demand. If you do have 6 fixed rows of CE, you’ll get CE sell out fast on route one (preventing you from offering more seats even if demand is there) and on another CE be empty while ET is sold out (again preventing you from selling more seats). If you then have subfleets with different numbers of fixed rows, you’ll run into so many operation difficulties and people will end up getting downgraded.
If BA want to make CE better, it’ll have to come from soft products. Although I don’t think the pre-pandemic offering was bad at all.
If BA want to make CE better, it’ll have to come from soft products. Although I don’t think the pre-pandemic offering was bad at all.
I think a lot of people on here underestimate the importance of premium leisure traffic. BA have really found a gem in the addition of all these European holiday flights. The wealthy travellers and celebs want to fly in business when they’re going to Ibiza, Rhodes, Mykonos etc. The only other options are charter airlines and LCCs, which don’t fit in with a ‘Luxury European Holiday’. BA has a monopoly as the only ‘premium carrier’ on UK Beach flights, thus prices can be eye watering. So pulling out of LGW and many holiday destinations wouldn’t be wise and trust me the premium pax won’t be switching to Vueling.
Oct 12, 2020, 1:29 pm
#33
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 491
This part I completely agree, having fixed premium seats on short-haul aircraft would not work for BA's model.
For this part, I could tell that someone who pays for Club Europe in high-season dates to tourism destinations like Ibiza, Rhodes, Mykonos would not mind paying the extra fuel cost for their car or extra cost of a taxi to Heathrow in order to fly in the premium cabin. If I'm not mistaken, there is no other European legacy carrier flying out of LGW that would fit the population and demographic you specified, even with a connecting itinerary.
For this part, I could tell that someone who pays for Club Europe in high-season dates to tourism destinations like Ibiza, Rhodes, Mykonos would not mind paying the extra fuel cost for their car or extra cost of a taxi to Heathrow in order to fly in the premium cabin. If I'm not mistaken, there is no other European legacy carrier flying out of LGW that would fit the population and demographic you specified, even with a connecting itinerary.
Oct 12, 2020, 1:33 pm
#34
Join Date: Mar 2020
Programs: British Airways GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond & Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,612
I think a lot of people on here underestimate the importance of premium leisure traffic. BA have really found a gem in the addition of all these European holiday flights. The wealthy travellers and celebs want to fly in business when they’re going to Ibiza, Rhodes, Mykonos etc. The only other options are charter airlines and LCCs, which don’t fit in with a ‘Luxury European Holiday’. BA has a monopoly as the only ‘premium carrier’ on UK Beach flights, thus prices can be eye watering. So pulling out of LGW and many holiday destinations wouldn’t be wise and trust me the premium pax won’t be switching to Vueling.
As for better seats upfront, it’s just won’t work. Right now BA can have an A320 land with 12 rows of CE from VCE, and in 50 minutes have it ready to go to LUX with 3 rows. This flexibility is key to returning a profit on routes, as cabins can be configured for the demand. If you do have 6 fixed rows of CE, you’ll get CE sell out fast on route one (preventing you from offering more seats even if demand is there) and on another CE be empty while ET is sold out (again preventing you from selling more seats). If you then have subfleets with different numbers of fixed rows, you’ll run into so many operation difficulties and people will end up getting downgraded.
If BA want to make CE better, it’ll have to come from soft products. Although I don’t think the pre-pandemic offering was bad at all.
As for better seats upfront, it’s just won’t work. Right now BA can have an A320 land with 12 rows of CE from VCE, and in 50 minutes have it ready to go to LUX with 3 rows. This flexibility is key to returning a profit on routes, as cabins can be configured for the demand. If you do have 6 fixed rows of CE, you’ll get CE sell out fast on route one (preventing you from offering more seats even if demand is there) and on another CE be empty while ET is sold out (again preventing you from selling more seats). If you then have subfleets with different numbers of fixed rows, you’ll run into so many operation difficulties and people will end up getting downgraded.
If BA want to make CE better, it’ll have to come from soft products. Although I don’t think the pre-pandemic offering was bad at all.
Regarding seats - you either have 2 fleets (small CE and large) or you commit to a fixed number and manage selling cost appropriately. Remember these will be more expensive than existing CE costs. And if they cant fill them, there is always POUG at check in. revenue will still be up.
Oct 12, 2020, 1:34 pm
#35
Join Date: Mar 2020
Programs: British Airways GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond & Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,612
This part I completely agree, having fixed premium seats on short-haul aircraft would not work for BA's model.
For this part, I could tell that someone who pays for Club Europe in high-season dates to tourism destinations like Ibiza, Rhodes, Mykonos would not mind paying the extra fuel cost for their car or extra cost of a taxi to Heathrow in order to fly in the premium cabin. If I'm not mistaken, there is no other European legacy carrier flying out of LGW that would fit the population and demographic you specified, even with a connecting itinerary.
For this part, I could tell that someone who pays for Club Europe in high-season dates to tourism destinations like Ibiza, Rhodes, Mykonos would not mind paying the extra fuel cost for their car or extra cost of a taxi to Heathrow in order to fly in the premium cabin. If I'm not mistaken, there is no other European legacy carrier flying out of LGW that would fit the population and demographic you specified, even with a connecting itinerary.
Oct 12, 2020, 2:04 pm
#36
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 3,440
I agree these premium travellers would be happy to go to LHR, but what about slots. By 2024 when LHR is full again, what happens. Do they drop all the old LGW routes? Or do BA go back to LGW?
I disagree with the comments that it’s only the LHR flights that attract a premium and are for classier travellers. So are you telling me that there were only cheap travellers on Dubrovnik, Jersey, Bari, Naples etc? I highly doubt it. BA would have got celebs and wealthy travellers on them routes, not everywhere can be served from LHR. As for DLM and RHO, they only got the LHR services this year, but the routes were going for years before. The decision must have been a result of seeing premium travellers on the flights from LGW.
If they could fit everything in LHR forever then yes maybe LGW should go. But they can’t and as soon as traffic recovers, there won’t be room for all the old LGW routes. So does that mean they get binned off to Vueling?
If I were IAG, I’d be focused on keeping slots at LHR/LGW. Any spaces at LHR will be eaten up by ME3/US3 or the Chinese. For LGW, Wizz are poised take on more slots. Keep enough warm because they’ll need them soon enough. For LCY, I’d be less worried. There’s no realistic carrier who will come in and stop BA getting their foot in the door again.
I disagree with the comments that it’s only the LHR flights that attract a premium and are for classier travellers. So are you telling me that there were only cheap travellers on Dubrovnik, Jersey, Bari, Naples etc? I highly doubt it. BA would have got celebs and wealthy travellers on them routes, not everywhere can be served from LHR. As for DLM and RHO, they only got the LHR services this year, but the routes were going for years before. The decision must have been a result of seeing premium travellers on the flights from LGW.
If they could fit everything in LHR forever then yes maybe LGW should go. But they can’t and as soon as traffic recovers, there won’t be room for all the old LGW routes. So does that mean they get binned off to Vueling?
If I were IAG, I’d be focused on keeping slots at LHR/LGW. Any spaces at LHR will be eaten up by ME3/US3 or the Chinese. For LGW, Wizz are poised take on more slots. Keep enough warm because they’ll need them soon enough. For LCY, I’d be less worried. There’s no realistic carrier who will come in and stop BA getting their foot in the door again.
Last edited by BAeuro; Oct 12, 2020 at 2:09 pm
Oct 12, 2020, 2:49 pm
#37
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 494
While we are redesigning the BA short haul business ...
Why not go for a 3-class cabin? Two or three rows of CE, with four-across comfortable seats and a high class service, then a variable number of rows of ET+, with seating and service like current CE, and finally the rest, as ET with six across and basic food and drink?
Alternatively, or in addition expand Cityflier to provide direct CE service out of non-London airports such as MAN, NCL, EDI/GLA and even BHX? That would permit a much later departure for such places than is currently possible via LHR, and would suit my personal European travel needs very well (and perhaps work well for other people).
Why not go for a 3-class cabin? Two or three rows of CE, with four-across comfortable seats and a high class service, then a variable number of rows of ET+, with seating and service like current CE, and finally the rest, as ET with six across and basic food and drink?
Alternatively, or in addition expand Cityflier to provide direct CE service out of non-London airports such as MAN, NCL, EDI/GLA and even BHX? That would permit a much later departure for such places than is currently possible via LHR, and would suit my personal European travel needs very well (and perhaps work well for other people).
Oct 12, 2020, 2:50 pm
#38
Join Date: Mar 2020
Programs: British Airways GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond & Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,612
I agree these premium travellers would be happy to go to LHR, but what about slots. By 2024 when LHR is full again, what happens. Do they drop all the old LGW routes? Or do BA go back to LGW?
I disagree with the comments that it’s only the LHR flights that attract a premium and are for classier travellers. So are you telling me that there were only cheap travellers on Dubrovnik, Jersey, Bari, Naples etc? I highly doubt it. BA would have got celebs and wealthy travellers on them routes, not everywhere can be served from LHR. As for DLM and RHO, they only got the LHR services this year, but the routes were going for years before. The decision must have been a result of seeing premium travellers on the flights from LGW.
If they could fit everything in LHR forever then yes maybe LGW should go. But they can’t and as soon as traffic recovers, there won’t be room for all the old LGW routes. So does that mean they get binned off to Vueling?
If I were IAG, I’d be focused on keeping slots at LHR/LGW. Any spaces at LHR will be eaten up by ME3/US3 or the Chinese. For LGW, Wizz are poised take on more slots. Keep enough warm because they’ll need them soon enough. For LCY, I’d be less worried. There’s no realistic carrier who will come in and stop BA getting their foot in the door again.
I disagree with the comments that it’s only the LHR flights that attract a premium and are for classier travellers. So are you telling me that there were only cheap travellers on Dubrovnik, Jersey, Bari, Naples etc? I highly doubt it. BA would have got celebs and wealthy travellers on them routes, not everywhere can be served from LHR. As for DLM and RHO, they only got the LHR services this year, but the routes were going for years before. The decision must have been a result of seeing premium travellers on the flights from LGW.
If they could fit everything in LHR forever then yes maybe LGW should go. But they can’t and as soon as traffic recovers, there won’t be room for all the old LGW routes. So does that mean they get binned off to Vueling?
If I were IAG, I’d be focused on keeping slots at LHR/LGW. Any spaces at LHR will be eaten up by ME3/US3 or the Chinese. For LGW, Wizz are poised take on more slots. Keep enough warm because they’ll need them soon enough. For LCY, I’d be less worried. There’s no realistic carrier who will come in and stop BA getting their foot in the door again.
Slots wont be maxed out as frequencies will be split between LHR and LGW
Oct 12, 2020, 3:10 pm
#39
Join Date: Feb 2018
Programs: Mucci, BAEC Silver, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 1,038
I agree these premium travellers would be happy to go to LHR, but what about slots. By 2024 when LHR is full again, what happens. Do they drop all the old LGW routes? Or do BA go back to LGW?
I disagree with the comments that it’s only the LHR flights that attract a premium and are for classier travellers. So are you telling me that there were only cheap travellers on Dubrovnik, Jersey, Bari, Naples etc? I highly doubt it. BA would have got celebs and wealthy travellers on them routes, not everywhere can be served from LHR. As for DLM and RHO, they only got the LHR services this year, but the routes were going for years before. The decision must have been a result of seeing premium travellers on the flights from LGW.
If they could fit everything in LHR forever then yes maybe LGW should go. But they can’t and as soon as traffic recovers, there won’t be room for all the old LGW routes. So does that mean they get binned off to Vueling?
If I were IAG, I’d be focused on keeping slots at LHR/LGW. Any spaces at LHR will be eaten up by ME3/US3 or the Chinese. For LGW, Wizz are poised take on more slots. Keep enough warm because they’ll need them soon enough. For LCY, I’d be less worried. There’s no realistic carrier who will come in and stop BA getting their foot in the door again.
I disagree with the comments that it’s only the LHR flights that attract a premium and are for classier travellers. So are you telling me that there were only cheap travellers on Dubrovnik, Jersey, Bari, Naples etc? I highly doubt it. BA would have got celebs and wealthy travellers on them routes, not everywhere can be served from LHR. As for DLM and RHO, they only got the LHR services this year, but the routes were going for years before. The decision must have been a result of seeing premium travellers on the flights from LGW.
If they could fit everything in LHR forever then yes maybe LGW should go. But they can’t and as soon as traffic recovers, there won’t be room for all the old LGW routes. So does that mean they get binned off to Vueling?
If I were IAG, I’d be focused on keeping slots at LHR/LGW. Any spaces at LHR will be eaten up by ME3/US3 or the Chinese. For LGW, Wizz are poised take on more slots. Keep enough warm because they’ll need them soon enough. For LCY, I’d be less worried. There’s no realistic carrier who will come in and stop BA getting their foot in the door again.
I do not believe the comments in previous post about premium customers being happy to move from LGW to LHR. Most short haul flights are not THAT long and the BA offering is not that dissimilar to EZY and most people I speak to (where I reside) would rather slum it in EZY for an hour or two then spend that time on the M25. At the risk of bringing it back to my travel patterns (but I am sure I am not the only one flying 1-2hrs regularly) - 70% of my pre-covid flying was domestic, I like BA and status and the lounge work for me so used over EZY. Currently domestic is all my flying, but with no BA service from LGW it is all EZY. Why would I hump round the M25 to LHR having to allow an extra 2 hours in in-leu of the M25 traffic gods only to pay BA more for the pleasure for what is essentially a similar service? Even with an improved service - this would not compare favourably to just buying a drink/snack on-board from EZY but end up costing even more.
Don't under estimate the south east corner !!
That said I get that LH is different and in my case brave the M25 for these. (Praying to the traffic gods as I drive up the slip road).
Oct 12, 2020, 3:15 pm
#40
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,061
... and in a world where half of shorthaul pax are connecting, frequencies (at least pre-covid) matter. If you have 2 a day from LHR, some people have to wait 8 hours, where today the max is (say) 4. If the passenger has a choice of connecting hub, total journey time matters. Schedules are still built around the GDS rankings, given how much is sold indirect. And for the Goldie at a business meeting, having a robust schedule to the same airport means they can worry less about having to be rerouted (imagine leaving your car at Heathrow to find yourself sent back to Gatwick).
Oct 12, 2020, 3:21 pm
#41
Join Date: Feb 2018
Programs: Mucci, BAEC Silver, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 1,038
While we are redesigning the BA short haul business ...
Why not go for a 3-class cabin? Two or three rows of CE, with four-across comfortable seats and a high class service, then a variable number of rows of ET+, with seating and service like current CE, and finally the rest, as ET with six across and basic food and drink?
Why not go for a 3-class cabin? Two or three rows of CE, with four-across comfortable seats and a high class service, then a variable number of rows of ET+, with seating and service like current CE, and finally the rest, as ET with six across and basic food and drink?
The curtain never moves forward of row 3.
Replace these with 2 rows of proper short hall business seats, keep the rest of CE as is and call ET+. (so allowing the flexibility currently existing).
Charge much for for the first 2 rows for those that want to pay for it.
New CE and ET+ are then advertised as being a premium cabin with the curtain separating the rest.
NEW CE & ET+ catering and bar service could be the same, but with NEW CE being guaranteed food choice and ET+ getting the remaining options. (Front seats get extra drinks service [as usually happens anyway]
)
Oct 12, 2020, 3:24 pm
#42
Join Date: Mar 2020
Programs: British Airways GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond & Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,612
... and in a world where half of shorthaul pax are connecting, frequencies (at least pre-covid) matter. If you have 2 a day from LHR, some people have to wait 8 hours, where today the max is (say) 4. If the passenger has a choice of connecting hub, total journey time matters. Schedules are still built around the GDS rankings, given how much is sold indirect. And for the Goldie at a business meeting, having a robust schedule to the same airport means they can worry less about having to be rerouted (imagine leaving your car at Heathrow to find yourself sent back to Gatwick).
Oct 12, 2020, 3:26 pm
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Programs: Hilton, IHG - BA, GA, LH, QR, SV, TK
Posts: 17,008
=BAeuro;32742193
As for better seats upfront, it’s just won’t work. Right now BA can have an A320 land with 12 rows of CE from VCE, and in 50 minutes have it ready to go to LUX with 3 rows. This flexibility is key to returning a profit on routes, as cabins can be configured for the demand. If you do have 6 fixed rows of CE, you’ll get CE sell out fast on route one (preventing you from offering more seats even if demand is there) and on another CE be empty while ET is sold out (again preventing you from selling more seats).
As for better seats upfront, it’s just won’t work. Right now BA can have an A320 land with 12 rows of CE from VCE, and in 50 minutes have it ready to go to LUX with 3 rows. This flexibility is key to returning a profit on routes, as cabins can be configured for the demand. If you do have 6 fixed rows of CE, you’ll get CE sell out fast on route one (preventing you from offering more seats even if demand is there) and on another CE be empty while ET is sold out (again preventing you from selling more seats).
Dedicated two-by-two seating for short-haul à la Amercian "First" is a pipe-dream for our fantacists.
Yes, yes, Turkish does it: and that's a fine airline, but one few would point to as a success. And without other airlines adopting the lunacy, there'll be no call for BA to do so.
Oct 12, 2020, 3:29 pm
#44
Join Date: Mar 2020
Programs: British Airways GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond & Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,612
But what might work is going back to having the leading x-rows with extra legroom - accepting that the front rows of economy (usually whistful Goldies) may occasionally get a bonus.
Dedicated two-by-two seating for short-haul à la Amercian "First" is a pipe-dream for our fantacists.
Yes, yes, Turkish does it: and that's a fine airline, but one few would point to as a success. And without other airlines adopting the lunacy, there'll be no call for BA to do so.
Dedicated two-by-two seating for short-haul à la Amercian "First" is a pipe-dream for our fantacists.
Yes, yes, Turkish does it: and that's a fine airline, but one few would point to as a success. And without other airlines adopting the lunacy, there'll be no call for BA to do so.
Oct 12, 2020, 3:32 pm
#45
Join Date: Feb 2018
Programs: Mucci, BAEC Silver, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 1,038
EI, LX, KM, TP IB(Express), AY (Seasonal), A3 (Seasonal) [& OS which were due to start a new service but canceled due to covid)
& Long short haul;
TK, AT & MS