Swanhunter

Why? Because by and large last minute fares are in the more expensive fare buckets and thus yield more. Bearing in mind a J2BA can be 3 or 4 times more expensive that I, BA makes a far greater yield from those fares than the 5% interest on the I fare. Anecdotally, later bookers are also more likely to be frequent travellers (certainly true in my case and that of 20 or so colleagues).

So, by giving late bookers the choice of 13 or 14E you are alienating your more profitable and more frequent travellers. Which doesn't seem like hugely clever business sense.

Or you could argue that as those booking I class got such a cheap fare they should be grateful for that alone and expect nothing else.

jhm

BA already discriminate against I-class fares as you can't pre-allocate a seat without status. The question seems to be whether:

(i) a last minute J booking with or without status;

should always trump:

(ii) an I-class booking with status,

to which there seems to be no easy answer. Cue all the discussions above about someone who books a one-off J class compared to someone who books an I-class every month etc!

Flying Doctor

I agree with the last statement. It is hard to sort this one out. However, as many others seem to be saying in agreement with me you need to appreciate just how much more you have to pay for a full J2BA. Moreover, many who travel frequently do have to book things at the very last minute. I am never able to use the discounted fares as I need to book with 24 hours notice. Whilst none of us expect the 'red-carpet' treatment it does start to irriate when you constantly get told that only 13/14 E/F are left and that the flight is full. Thats all,

FD

jhm

I don't disagree with your points (but presumably part of the reason for the increased cost of a J2BA is simply to compensate for the fact that a pax can miss the flight which means loss of revenue for a J seat which BA may otherwise have been able to sell).

kered

Ok right !!

But by having the best seats in the house, blocked out for Golds & Silvers only, they could still get to nab them, while leaving the rest for everyone else. Rather than the way it is, where no-one without status can get a seat in advance

I'm guessing you're talking about CE rather than CW there. I must admit to focusing my posts more on CW.

Therein lies one of most sticky parts of the whole thing.

Oh I don't know, as many have said there is no simple solution it seems & one thing is for sure, no matter what policy is in place, not everyone will be happy. We could talk ourselves around in circles, getting nowhere & in fact that’s exactly what we’re doing. Pity these discussions are really only amongst ourselves, it would be great if these posts were popping up a screen somewhere in WaterWorld !

All I know is that it seemed to work much better the way it was before this current policy came into being.

It's just irksome to see that when you spend so much money to travel in business class & yet can't assign your seat in advance, when pretty much every other airline allows you to do so.

Of course we shouldn't forget here that this stupid policy is not restricted to CW. With the majority of passengers in WTP & Traveler being affected by this. In fact I'd say that one of the biggest areas of potential disquiet is going to be in Traveler this summer, when holiday makers find themselves scattered all over the cabin.

At least for those traveling in CW, no matter where you end up sitting you do have wonderful service, a pretty decent meal & a 6ft bed to stretch-out on !

Land-of-Miles

Speaking as someone who often books full Y in Europe at the last minute, it is not as if the changes have had a very positive effect upon seating availability for me as a Gold (and god help me when I drop to Silver next month). I only see aisle and window seats towards the very rear of the aircraft when booking, if I am lucky enough to have booked a few days in advance I tend to see more availability some day or 2 before the flight is due to leave (but before OLCI) opens.

The same applies in CE, when I try to upgrade myself, and since my client will not pay anything beyond Y, I always try to upgrade myself at my own expense. Tonight I cannot even do this since tomorrow evenings LIN flight is sold out.

I really have not found these changes to be positive as a Gold (I have found the situation worse than before with an inability to access seats I am supposedly "entitled" to) and can see things being only worse as a Silver, to the extent I will probably start flying AF and AZ instead of BA (and strangely getting a C seat at no extra cost through some quirk of my client's travel policy).

LH and integrated partners have a perfectly rational system, blocking seats for elite status holders. This has always worked well for me, both for trips planned in advance and last minute trips, so I fail to see why it cannot work for BA.

CT-UK

Wonderful Service and a decent meal can't be taken for granted on BA all depends on the crew and the catering.
Yes I can stretch out in as I am a short ... so I am OK with that.

Back on topic I just got hit with the dam seating policy myself for the first time. Well for my wife actually, I just booked her a CW ticket to PHL to join me 2 says after I go out for a meeting and an F return on the way back on the same flight as me and in the same cabin. We are both sat next to each other on the way back buy she can't book any seat on the way out. The CSR on the phone even said the policy was bad. She is worried that she will get a middle love seat between men she doesn't now and isn't happy about that.

Fingers crossed F opens up on the way out so I can change her booking.

bernardd

I confess I don't know how the process works for non-status groups in WT & ET. Are all seats unassigned when OLCI opens up, at which point it's a total free for all? Or is there a program somewhere that assigns seats immediately prior to the opening of OLCI, in which case I (rashly and naively) assume that will try to keep groups on the same PNR together at the expense of the single traveller. If it's the latter my guess is families traveling together for summer holidays will be fine, though I fear singles may get a higher proportion of middle seats than under the old system.

leaveamessage

I did slate the policy when it was first mentioned and before it was introduced.
Having taken lots of CW flights since, I can honestly say it works ok (as a silver) and its not as bad it as it first seemed. Ive had 62K on all but one of these , and 62A for the other one- all of those have been booked around 3 weeks out.

In fact, the only time it has caught me out slightly, is a one way MFU booking I made this afternoon exactly 3weeks out- where 62AK/64K and lots of others have all gone- but then it is middle of july and the plane seems pretty busy already.I will be checking closer to departure to see if I can grab 64A after any bassinet assignments are done.
On the inbound, I've got 28J in WT+, which previously was down to the OLCI fastest finger first lotto.

I think a tweaking of the current policy will help. My parents for example, fly VS in Y all the time (no status). They will be on the phone as early as possible to get their preferred seats. They are reluctant to switch to BA because of things like this, and I can see why TBH.

Bottom line- you can't please all of the people all of the time.

kered

To the best of my knowledge the same criteria apply to WTP & World Traveller.

Wherein, only if you are paying full fare or have Silver or Gold status, you can pre-assign your seats.

(I can’t imagine too many holiday makers are on full fare World Traveller tickets.)

If nether of those conditions apply to your booking, then you can’t get a seat assigned until you either OLCI, or as I would suspect in the case of most holiday makers, present your self at the check-in desk.

The only caveat being if there’s baby in the group, then pre-assignment opens up to that group.

So the potential for chaos & ranting & raving at Check-in is huge. But with inflexibility of the policy, the ground staff can do nothing.

So imagine those passengers disquiet, when they learn because they have no status they’re going to be scattered around the cabin

virtualtroy

Phew... 9 pages in just a day (and I sorta read all of them). Obviously emotions run high on the issue, but how to break the impasse of views between those who maintain status with BA (or other OW carriers), those who spend hard-earned cash on a more comfortable trip and would merely like to sit with the person they're travelling with and those who step up at the last moment and pay over the odds.

One of the key points of a loyalty programme is surely to give its members the ability to select from preferential seating. Reserving an allocation for the latter is common sense. Once it's gone, fair dues.

As for those who have taken advantage of lower fares, usually many months ahead, they should also be entitled to a fair selection of seats. Significantly, the seat allocation should stick once agreed, unless there's a genuine change of equipment. Ex-LGWs will relate to this point.

So what about those who turn up last-minute? While they may be providing top buck per seat to the airline, there's no compelling reason why they're otherwise the most commercially valuable passenger to that airline (otherwise, surely they'd be a loyalist, rather than an occasional user). If the seat allocation for loyalists has already gone, followed by the seat allocations for those who booked far in advance in anticipation of a particular experience... TOUGH.

Clearly, if you're of genuine value to BA, Special Services will always have a way of overriding this?

Just my tuppence...

kered

Probably the most balanced, well written view on this very emotive subject I’ve read in a long time.

You hit the nail right on the head with everything you’ve said virtualtroy ^ ^

Swanhunter

Which is what I posted a little while back. The policy is never going to make everyone happy, just as I won't always get the seat I wanted. But where we are currently seems to upset more people, more often than the old one.

sunrisegirl

Agreed ^

jhm

... but perhaps there's an equally large (but not quite so vocal) number of people who're happy with the new seating policy!