sxc

As per CXSecrets - https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cath...rd-coming.html


14. ""Dine on Demand"" service in Business Class cancelled, however, new service flow and equipments will be introduced in 2018
15. ""Buy on board"" Menu will be introduced on all MNL, CEB, SGN and midnight sector on SIN, KIX, NRT, CGK and ICN

Discussion of these topics in this thread.

sxc

Buy on board: race to the bottom, and copying of BA continues.

TravelwhileyouEat

15. ""Buy on board"" Menu will be introduced on all MNL, CEB, SGN and midnight sector on SIN, KIX, NRT, CGK and ICN

Hmm, so I'm guessing they are getting rid of the free snack/meal in Y on these sectors which is one of the few things that differentiate them from the many LLCs that ply the same routes. I wonder if it will also affect PEY or J in some way i.e. downgrade of J from meal to snack?

Oh well, it will make it easier for me to book personal trips by just looking at the lowest price (or booking PR from MNL if I want a meal since they actually served me a full hot meal in Y MNL-HKG last time and their new A330 is used on certain flights and is a great improvement).

percysmith

Obviously they're picking on price pressure. Vietjet and Cebu Pacific must be causing a lot of pain. Even shorter routes like HAN and KMG aren't getting their meals canned.

CX/KA are probably pressured the other way on TPE - they can't make do without it given expectations and CI/BR practice.

Cambo

Effective, buy food/drinks on board is a huge money saver. That's simply because when everybody is entitled to free consumptions, you need to have food/drinks for everybody on board, because it's a service included, you can't tell the back part 25% of the passengers "Sorry out of stock". All left-over food and opened bottles are discarded after a flight. Any idea how much expensive champagne gets flushed in the sink ?

Whereas with BoB, it's simply "Sorry, out of stock, we have this left, would you like that ?".

The positive part of BoB is, that the feedback on less then optimal food quality is directly visible (and the opposite around to). So, much more direct pressure to provide sufficient quality food. Food/drinks have changed from a cost-item to a direct profit-item.

Do I like BoB myself: Depends, for very-short-haul I am not so much interested in food on board and a bottle of water would be sufficient. So BoB might be an option, if needed. Water should be free, though.

For mid/long-haul: Everything available should be included for free, where stock availability would be determined by cabin type.

Or let me phrase it: Why the hell do I need food on board, when my land-side to land-side is only up to 2-5 hours ? Do I really eat at home or in the office every odd hour (nop) ?
And suppose I am worried about getting hungry, I could bring some (healthy) cookies myself, only needs some planning

HarbourGent

There is a lot of discussion about this on other fora e.g. the BA one. One reason is that sitting in a plane is quite boring compared to comparable uses of equivalent time. Land to land side is not a relevant comparison for meals vs. snacks: it is time from being able to get a meal to time to being able to get the next meal. That is more than 2 hours on all of these routes and closer to eight or nine on some like Jakarta especially for those who do not want to pay inflated airport prices.
The issue here is not just about whether an airline provides food (or whatever else it starts cutting, as per BA). It is about value. CX already charges a premium on many routes which passengers find unjustifiable, which is why after they cocked up the Marco Polo changes a lot of passengers who decided to try other carriers did not come back. Cutting services without offering better or at least equivalent value makes the airline less not more attractive.
Separately, although BA's Spanish low cost boss has managed to deliver profits, I do not see this as a success model. For the sake of a few years of profits, BA has thrown away large parts of brand loyalty it had built up over decades. I believe it will pay for that down the road.

percysmith

Correct. Same mentality w/ HSBC HK putting banking account holders to e-statements and saying they'll donate all proceeds to charity. The aim is not to shift costs but to cut them.

Perhaps I don't see a direct correlation between the loss of benefit to reduction in fares. It's a bit like AC changing to "Rouge" and charging the same fares.

True, I can plan around it. I definitely need it less than on mid-haul flights (below).

And when I really do need it I can pay for it (even if it is the inflated price).

We always have an empty water bottle and try to plan our way into a credit card lounge. Ideally the airport will have plenty of fountains like SIN.

True. PITA to cut food on mid-haul - I definitely want it. Then it's better for me to have everybody have it, and bundle it in the fare.

ermen

Wonder if it will be 100% BOB for food and beverages or only food?

If the latter that is tolerable for a short flight. And will be nice to have free drinks on board as a way to differentiate that little bit of "premium". Truth be told - i think there is too much food wastage on board. Think its much less for drinks (much easier to reuse unopened cans, bottles etc).

If its BOB for both food and drink. Wow. Suppose the only reason to fly CX (as an elite) is the access to the ground lounges + better baggage allowance + handling. At least the planes are twin aisle - really don't like those 737 like those LCCs and will avoid if I can. Wonder if DM (and sometimes OWE) will get that sneaky bottle of water still lol.

watery

What if, just guessing, free drinks and snacks (like peanut/biscuits) while entrees etc are BOB? Although it might sound too generous for the situation now. Would be good for redeye where the one who eats may actually get better food and faster. Also BKK which is at similar length don't get to the list.

percysmith

Go Because Air all the way <-- charge $20 (GBP2) for hot water

And schedule, unless the LCCs manages to beat that.

It's not a length thing but a profitability thing. Still too much competition from HX and TG I guess

Well for the three routes in question, yes.

(Don't Vietjet fly A320s?)

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/catha...l#post20360468

​​​​​​

CrazyJ82

For the routes going BOB on the red-eyes, I wonder how many pax will really notice. The calculation is probably that the time between dinner and breakfast is the longest stretch most people go without eating in a normal day anyway, and if a lot of pax are falling asleep fairly quickly the food wastage must be pretty high. For the all-BOB shorter routes, I'd guess they figure they don't need to compete with LCCs by offering free food because CX offers much better connection options especially to North America.

Having lived with BOB on BA for a while now, the reality is that for all the complaining on FT, it doesn't matter. I hear a fair amount of grumbling among nearby pax when they discover they need to pay for things, but people keep booking when the long-haul connecting prices and schedules are competitive, or when BA's hub dominance in a major financial center makes its O/D scheduling ex-LHR the most competitive on shorthaul routes.

Kachjc

That is it
CX can no longer consider itself as a premium carrier.

This is what HKG customer want, to be treated like crap and like sardines.
They are merely getting what they want.

as said before
the reason CX is not launching an LCC is because it is becoming the LCC

Ausriver

If CX/KA is going to lower their price, I would be very happy to see this happening.... I don't really eat on short haul Y, a bottle of water is already good enough for me.

cx4ever

Agreed. MNL already has the new lounge, so J pax and other eligible lounge entrants can get bites to eat before getting on the plane (same with the HKG-MNL sector). Y customers probably don't care and just book the lowest-price tickets, so CX is in a price war for economy anyway.

Guy Betsy

Those who have lounge access ... I guess its time to bring a take away box !