Given that there's barely any difference between Y and J on food these days (except the way it's presented) I don't see there's much scope there.

The expensive part of air travel is the part that takes place in the air.

A J seat takes up a lot of room, plus more crew. A Y+ seat does not.

Also those perks are not seen as particularly valuable by most people.

You can pay to go in a lounge in most airports, but the great majority of travellers do not, and stay with the public areas. OTOH, there's nobody who wouldn't want a flat bed seat for their long-haul flight, and no amount of ground service is going to detract from the fact that that's the selling point. That and the other parts of the in-air product that convey an air of exclusibity - i.e. food and service.

They can do all they like on the ground, offer lobsters and caviar in the lounge (don't forget that you can probably buy those things in public parts of the airport for a fraction of the cost difference between Y and Y+), but as long as the in-air product is still economy, people will still want to fly J.

There is still big difference, even though I do not like J food anyway. There are still signature drinks, champagne, better appetizers, and noodle soup in J. However, I do not care much about the J entrees these days.

I think BR's original approach was "just a little more than regular Y". Their very original goal was to have more Y+ than Y - the first 2 744s were configured that way. They quickly realized it did not work and shrank the Y+ cabin.

With the latest rebranding (from Evergreen Deluxe to Elite), they really shrank the cabin. They also put PTV in Y now. I think their goal was to increase the fare premium - I think they did but still not to the extend carriers like BA/VS do. It seems many other carriers basically price Y+ more like Full Fare?

And to those who do not fly UA, UA's Y+ is not really a separate bookable cabin class. You pay for the upgrade as an option (either per flight or annual pass) and all UA elites (not *A - you can be a *A elite paying full fare, you won't get Y+ on UA) have access to it for free. The seat is the same as Y just 2+ inches of pitch.

When will Y+ start? I don't mind upgrade from Y to Y+ if more legroom, with leg stand and more amenities than Y :)

I'm not a frequent flyer but do make one long-haul flight annually to India from my home near Vancouver. Over the years i've flown with KE and SQ but for the past several years I've flown CX Y, mainly due to good timing and connections, but also have been quite satisfied with service. As mentioned on the thread discussing the new CX seat and the extreme discomfort it caused me, I switched to BA this year and flew to BOM via LHR in Y+. I'm still in India now, but I can comment on Y+ as it is implemented on BA. The YVR-LHR leg was on a 747 with 2-4-2 seating, 38" pitch, and dedicated toilet. The LHR-BOM leg was 777, also 2-4-2, 38" pitch, but with no dedicated toilet (washrooms at the far end of the Y cabin). At check-in in YVR an attendant directed me to the upper-class line while at LHR I stood in the Y line. Catering was Y except that wine was served in glass rather than plastic, noise-canceling headphones provided, and the Y+ cabin was served first, so in effect, had dibs on entre choices.

The 6-7 inches of extra pitch is really noticeable and welcome, as is the 2-4-2 configuration which means many more 'good' seats even though the actual size difference in the seat is not particularly noticeable as you still share an armrest with the adjoining seat. Recline is still nothing special; BA claims an extra 2" of recline so it is not an extreme improvement. The 747 set-up with cabin washroom was definitely a more pleasant situation although the forced hikes through the Y cabin were a reminder of how much of a superior product Y+ was despite lack of any frills. My rough calculation would be an overall 30% increase in space; it is clearly a significant upgrade for a long-haul flight and, for me, well worth the 50% premium that I paid over a discount Y. Milage premium is 25%, even for discounted ticket.

I've long been a low-budget traveller and never really considered upgrading to Business as could never justify the 4x price premium. I'm retired now, and turning 70 this year, so am coming around to the concept of spending a bit more to look after myself a little better. CX Y+ might be an alternative, but if it was only on long-haul sectors, it wouldn't work for me if the connection was on Y as I will never again board a flight with those new seats! KE now connects well YVR-BOM and their Y has 34" pitch so that is another alternative, but I will probably look for a good deal on a Biz ticket in future.

You are one of the customer bases CX is targetting for as well as some business travellers.

CX is considering Y+ is due to very tough competition on European route, rather than NA routes. Think about the major European carrier: On London route, BA QF VS all have Y+; on Paris route, AF has Y+...And between Amsterdam and Guangzhou/Peking, CZ/KL offer Y+. On Rome route, AF, BA offer transit flight via CDG/LHR with Y+ option. Cx is forced by European competition to consider the option of Y+

Again the Y+ product is still in initial process. CX has the idea of how the Y+ product would be, but not make any final decision yet. What they are doing right now is to learn what the revenue potential, buying habits and perceptions from its loyal customer base. And i can assure you that there is big difference in perceptions between the European members (including those NA members travel via Europe a lot) and NA members. CX is collecting information in order to see the profitability for the Y+ product as well as the attractiveness of the Y+ product. Personally I do not see CX make the final decision about Y+ until tis September or later. They may have trials on some aircraft from June/July but I doubt it. They may not proceed to the introduction of Y+ if members feedback showed negative messages or the profitability is too low to adjustfying the cost.

The only thing we can do now is to let CX knowing that we are interesting in Y+ and express our interests to ask CX going ahead ASAP.

Another hand I would not ask too much from this product rather than the extra space. If the product being premium, the cost gonna being high. I think one comprimised way of selling the prodcut would be great. (e.g. One brand new designed Amenity Pack between Business and Economy; Economy class food but have one additional choice...I do not think Lounge access is one good idea as Silver member already entitled to lounge and I am sure most of the people purchase this fare would qualifying for Silver very easily. Just imagine how crowed the Wing and the Pire can be if all Y+ passengers are there and that is another extra 28-32 pax each flight...)

Any way let us hope and see!

If most passenger buying for Y+ qualify for Silver easily, wouldn't the lounge be crowded anyways :confused: Anyways, not all passengers will use the lounge (I never use the lounges at HKG as I usually stay outside the security area until the last minute and walk straight to the gate :p)

Maybe introducing Y+ will be a good justification to upgrade the lounges in HKG:D Not that they are bad, but there is always room for improvement (which can be discussed in the other thread;)).

So again ......CX BRING IT ON!!!!!

IC6A, thanks for starting this thread as someone else already mentioned.

I agree with all the enthusiasm about lounge upgrades, service packs, food, etc. However, as already posted ahead of me, it really comes down to the seat. Numerous industry studies commissioned by both airlines and third parties have shown this to be what pax really value.

A US-based blogger wrote a rather informative post about this a few days ago, have a read if you're interested. http://crankyflier.com/2010/01/04/wh...my-ask-cranky/. The gist is this: CX (and many other carriers) offer a BED in business class. That is a huge evolution from even first class a decade ago. The coach seat, well....it remains the coach seat. For 50 years. So the gap between Y and J has gotten pretty wide.

I think Phase 1 for CX (if they even end up doing it) is just getting the decision about how many seats to cram in the Y+ section of the plane. The other ancillaries, while important, will not be able to affect (in my opinion) the success of Y+ more than the size, comfort of and recline of the seat itself. Once that is in place with 4 class airplanes (or even 3 class plane,s with Y, Y+ and J on existing 33B or 34B), an observation period would be needed to interpret pax load and yield data. Once complete (say 6 months), Phase 2 would involve more serious questions about F class. It is difficult to predict what this will do for F loads, but my gut says F will not be written off and instead will stay strong. I say this because of

A.) The success of 4 class planes on BA
B.) The emerging rich in China
C.) HK/China/Asia's acceptance of a more hierarchical status structure

Dear QRC3288, THANK YOU very much for your posting and previouse posts as well. I have to say that I AGREE with you TOTALLY! In the end, the Y+ is one SEAT product. The 4 class concept is very good idea and some airlines have been running it very successfully. The only call back for CX is, CX occasionally use the long haul fleet for Asia medium haul or short haul flight unlike BA/AF. With one 4 class aircraft means less passenger transporated, and with one 2 class selling system, many people will be upgraded...lol...Good news for Fts as well I guess.

I agree with your ideas and oponions. I think CX may have to reduce F seats. Maybe reduce few business class as well. Cx indicat that they will put 28-32 seats upto aircraft type. So that is aout 3-4 rows each aircraft.

And my guess is, when Y+ seats come on. They will be numbered as row 20, 21....etc.

You are quite correct in believing that CX faces its greatest competition on routes linking HKG with Europe.

But also note that NZ is a competitor between HKG and LHR so CX is up against four carriers on that route offering Y +

I don't know about CZ but note that KL's Economy Comfort is not true Y + In fact, it's not a separate class at all. It resembles UA's product in a way. KLM's Economy Comfort seating is a few rows of regular Y class which is made available at a modest surcharge or FOC if you are a high-ranking FFP member.

Details here:
http://www.klm.com/travel/nl_en/trav...my_comfort.htm


But if CX adopts Y + will a legroom of 38 ins be sufficient ? I ask, because the new Y + from ANA will provide 42 ins:

http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...iness,-premium

A further point worth noting is that a couple of airlines which introduced Y + recently have decided to downgrade their regular Y class.

When Icelandair brought in Y + in late 2008 it scrapped free food and drinks in Y class - even on long transatlantic flights like Reykjavik to Seattle.

AF is now installing Y + across its fleet (with the exception of the B747, which is being phased out, I believe) but at the same time it has begun fitting its large fleet of B777s with denser 10-across seating in Y class.

I guess these moves are aimed at widening the gap between Y + and Y and so encouraging passengers to pay more for Y + In years to come, other airlines which adopt Y + may follow the same path and further downgrade Y class.

It's something which needs to be considered.

CX should put in Regional J seats as Y+ seats on long haul flights.

I think CX need to be careful with the Y+ concept in that it needs to be 'more than a (slightly more comfortable) seat'. Part of what CX need to look at is the 'experience' offered as part of Y+, ie, they can't let Y+ be operated as simply being slightly better than the 'Mongkok Air' sometimes currently on offer in Y.

As a guide, a review of Qantas' Y+ provides some food for thought: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/qanta...-thread-8.html

The reason I say this is what can CX offer people prepared to fly Y+ that they can't already get now (for free?) as FF's? For example: increased baggage allowance, lounge access, priority boarding, Bus Class check in, priority bag tags etc are all currently available.

Therefore, the level of service in the air, food, drinks, etc, needs to be of a high standard. Given the current cost cutting at CX and the slight devaluation of J class food and some service, can CX pull this one off?

When I responded to the survey I told them that the negative of the offering was that there were no special services offered eg special inflight meals compared to economy etc.

I hope the same is mentioned by others.