Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25812946)

And there are none in the Pier or any kind of Day Room. Cathay makes it clear with the new The Pier that they are getting rid of the cabanas because they take up too much space and they don't want their pax to use the lounges as pseudo-hotels per a The Pier staff. Once again, I think CX is making a mistake with this decision. While HKG is not DBX or DOH, it is still a hub airport with sufficient amount of traffic around the clock. Even an airport like FRA where there are much less traffic after 10PM understand that business travellers value their nap time and day rooms are a welcome addition. It's perfectly justifiable not wanting to turn lounges into pseudo-hotels, that I can agree with but to eliminate day rooms, no, terrible idea. And you know what happens with these new CX lounges? So some guests instead just commandeered public space, took off their shoes & soxes and turned certain area into their "private beds". It looked absolutely awful and 3rd world like. I saw it last month, it wasn't pretty.

Originally Posted by jsfrSE (Post 25814116)

No, it was Qatar and not the UAE who pushed in 2012-13 to have ICAO's headquarters moved to Doha.

Originally Posted by jsfrSE (Post 25814116)

As for the Canadian government inferring that the UAE is a terrorist country, you should get your facts straight and read the last sentence of the second paragraph:

http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca....aspx?lang=eng

Originally Posted by Toronto Star, January 2011

The United Arab Emirates’ top diplomat says he’s been “insulted” by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s war of words aimed at his country but floated a possible olive branch, saying he’d be willing to visit Canada if invited.

[...]

the Harper government openly questioning whether the Arab nation — which has hosted Western militaries and sent troops to Afghanistan — is a trusted ally.

Originally Posted by Daffie (Post 25814329)

:confused::confused::confused:

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25812946)

I am struggling to see what makes you think HKIA is this incredibly efficient. Maybe I am missing something terribly here but the distance between each gate at HKIA in my experience is at least twice or more of an average U.S. airport such that to walk even just the distance of 10 gates to get to where you need to be - it's going to take significantly longer in a straight line path no matter how you count the time.

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25812946)

Also, HK has always comes across to me, as a place where the rich get preferential treatment whereas the peasants and the cattle class are left to rot. It's very hard for me to vision an accurate experience of an economy class pax ex-HKG since I have not personally been one as far as I can remember although I have heard quite a bit of horror stories re: how Cathay mistreat economy class pax especially if they are not westerners or on package tours and were left stranded in the airport and etc.. Are these stories not true? I find it hard to believe HKG will be more humane towards economy class pax than some of the more egalitarian major European airports, especially the German ones, just strikes me as quite improbable knowing the prevailing culture in HK vs. Germany.

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25815123)

There are no cabanas in the newly re-opened the Pier. If you had actually been there since its re-opening, you wouldn't be confused.

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25812946)

I am struggling to see what makes you think HKIA is this incredibly efficient. Maybe I am missing something terribly here but the distance between each gate at HKIA in my experience is at least twice or more of an average U.S. airport such that to walk even just the distance of 10 gates to get to where you need to be - it's going to take significantly longer in a straight line path no matter how you count the time.

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25812946)

There was a time when U.S. carriers (UA, AA) actually had respectable Int'l First Class not so long ago. Without a doubt, the U.S. has the market for First Class traffic but both airlines, along with DL, have largely moved away from an Int'l First Class strategy and it ain't because the U.S. can't support sufficient First class traffic, not at all. So it begs to ask, if First Class class only needs to marginally better than J, why is that the U.S. carriers can't utilize their home court advantage and maintain their market share of First Class pax to/from the U.S. in the past decade?

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25812946)

I am going to challenge you on that thought, which is a very commonly held perception but I have come to question, with reasons. The conventional logic is that, for example, a business traveller from Europe to Asia/Australia will prefer direct flights instead of making a connection in DXB/DOH. That however has been thoroughly debunked in recent years with the rise of ME3 or even Turkish Airlines for example. ME3 and Turkish have taken away so much premium traffic that the European airlines are under a lot of pressure to compete against them. In fact, it wasn't just the European airlines, even as far back as 2008, Dubai - by extension, the UAE fought a very public battle with Canada over EK's landing rights in Canada. The dispute got so bitter that the UAE retaliated by imposing visas on Canadians, opposed Canada's bid on UN Security Council and tried to remove ICAO from Montreal. Canadian government retorted by inferring the UAE as being a terrorist country. All for what? The Canadian government tried to protect Air Canada from EK's competition. If you look at AC's main routes however, they should have very little competition from EK so why did the two countries go into such bitter battle with each other on AC vs. EK? I don't think you can explain it with the conventional logic. Then lately, the U.S. big 3 carriers are starting to feel the heat from the ME3 and they have been lobbying hard against them. Once again, with such major home court advantage, what do the U.S. carriers have to fear?

Suffice to say, I think both the points you are making and that of percysmith are a little outdated. They may very well be true 10 years ago, but not anymore.

Originally Posted by jsfrSE (Post 25815212)

Day Suites and Cabanas are cousins, as this July article summarizes well:

http://www.ausbt.com.au/inside-catha...nge-day-suites

Originally Posted by percysmith (Post 25816267)

You have not properly appreciated how impatient "Hongkie" people are in this market. Flying indirect for more luxury doesn't sell.

Originally Posted by percysmith (Post 25816267)

So is CX meant to build a LH/QR-standard product to make it competitive in the transit market but is overkill for ex-HKG traffic? Not likely it'll do that.

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25817151)

I think judging from this thread, the HK market may exhibit significant home bias and also the fact that CX has not gone down to a level that would drive its captured audience away, yet. The key word is "yet". But if it were continue to deteriorate and cut, I am afraid only mileage redeemers will be left just like the AA and UA.

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25817151)

I didn't see those Day Suites in the Pier last month and the lounge attendant didn't mention them. All he said was that there are no cabanas in the Pier because they are moving away from such concept. Someone else will have to confirm those Day Suites did in fact make it into the opening from your July press release because their presence eluded me. In any event from the pictures you linked, calling them "cousins" to cabanas would be a pretty big stretch.

Originally Posted by Guava (Post 25817151)

I think judging from this thread, the HK market may exhibit significant home bias and also the fact that CX has not gone down to a level that would drive its captured audience away, yet. The key word is "yet". But if it were continue to deteriorate and cut, I am afraid only mileage redeemers will be left just like the AA and UA.

Don't know if you remember this, just a few years ago, Thai government officials loath at flying Thai Airways because the TG products were so outdated. Complacency is dangerous, if the captured audience doesn't wake up, 10 years from now we may yet see "TG #2" based out of HKG.

Originally Posted by maclover (Post 25811773)

After doing some researches Best HKG-JFK flight in F? following a bad experience with JL F where food was almost non-existent due to being a red eye flight, lounge at SFO was very bad and opened VERY limited time of two hours... OP was shocked about the high taxes to be paid for the redemption.

After being reassured about his concerns Are these fees/taxes normal? I can see why getting a second PJ was important to recover the 70$ out of pocket.

One of the funniest post in a while!

Originally Posted by Paulakers2010 (Post 25814214)

Oh that actually was in one of the threads that I really responded in regards to CX888! :) Sometimes I am delighted to hear some over-entitled passengers/elites who forced UA/AA to change their award chart.

You got some potential to be a great auditor.

Originally Posted by Kachjc (Post 25820054)

this thread makes me want to bang my head...

The Wing is being renovated and the Cabanas are being removed?!

HKIA is less efficient than American airports?!!!

QR's flash product on 3 A380's is superior to CX's product on 33 777's?

1-2-1 is wider than 1-1-1 on the same aircraft?

First passengers need high end branded products because they cannot afford their own?

what about perspective
LH's first class may be amazing
but their J and Y...

it is also hilarious to hear people claim that CX thinking of going 10 across is a sign of a deteriorating product, why can't CX be like ME3?! ( another CX bashing thread)

OH WAIT
who is the champion of 10 across on the 777...


I just can't handle...

Originally Posted by AA_EXP09 (Post 25820098)

Soon to be AC