Why couldn't CX upgrade its meal service? I can't believe the main dish is still going to be served on a casserole type dish despite being an oval shape instead of rectangular. SQ only uses casseole type dish on light entree. All main courses are served on actual plates with better presentation and portion as well.

As OP commented on this particular topic on the CX J menu section, I thought that it could hold a better place with its own thread and changed the post to a thread and perhaps we could get a discussion going.

Meals on Cathay
 

This is NOT SQ but CX. We are talking about 2 different airlines here so it is unfair to keep comparing SQ to CX. One airline has 'governemental' influence whereas the other has public shareholders.

Excuse my ignorance but how does Governmental influence effect serving dishes?

The amount of money that an airline has when deciding on how budgets are spent or saved.

I don't have a problem with this if the meals are acceptable. The way CX serves its entrees allows me to see the actual meal before ordering. Sometimes what you read is very different from what you see!

SQ meals in J can be a disaster. They are somewhat inconsistent. With CX, you know what you're getting, which is a good, but not great J meal.

Most people who spend a lot of money flying CX in J don't seem to have any real problems with the way the meals are served. If you don't like it, fly SQ.

Many people don't realize this, but CX and SQ, often pitted as rivals, compete on few routes. For example, going to HKG to Europe or Australia, flying SQ would take 4-6 hours longer.

CX...SQ....CX...SQ....
omg.... everyone has his own preference but the real problem is.... *if other airlines could provide similar services/meals*

I have a preference between SQ and CX but i'm more than happy if my flight plans bring me to fly the other carrier.
:)

SQ is a public company albeit with Government majority ownership.

In terms of control it is in general no different than with a wholly owned private company, save for the regulatory BS. If you have control, you can do anything that isn't illegal.

Many (or most, I dare say) Public companies in Asia are far from public. From a corporate governance standpoint, Cheung Kong is not at all like Procter & Gamble, for example.

These companies are controlled by one party, and one party only. Be it a person, a larger company, or the government. I work for one of these companies. It is very different. In my company, there is one man that has authority over everything and has unlimited powers - the Chairman & CEO and controlling shareholder. He cannot be fired. He CAN be a total authoritarian.

I cannot think of one large cap in the US that is like that. Even mid caps controlled by one party are rare. Many ill informed individuals take issue with this arrangement. I, in turn, think it is great. Think about it: If the share price goes up, the CEO's net worth goes up. If it goes now, his net worth goes down. If the company makes a lot of money, he cashes in via dividends. Who cares about pay packages when a sizable chunk of the profit lands in your pocket, anyway? My CEO makes around 100,000 in salary - that's not even VP level nowadays. He makes tens of millions in dividends, which incidentally, also incur no tax liability.

Take everything I said above and change the Chairman to the Government. Trust me, there are a billion ways a government can give any company a break, especially one as sizable as SQ. I not accusing them of anything, just pointing out a simple fact.

I understand what you are saying but back to Guy Betsy's statement would be fair to think that the Singaporean government would micro-manage SQ right down to what dishes they serve meals on, and if they did, where is the cost saving in CX not choosing to?

No, but the Government (essentially here the Parent organization of SQ) could act in a way that would allow the company to enjoy certain competitive advantages, which could convincible indirectly reduce cost to the point where the company could offer a superior product. Indeed, this is very much a hypothetical situation and is nothing more than somewhat unfounded speculation.

So to answer your question, my answer (and it did not even take a blink of an eye to consider this) is no. There would not be reasonable grounds to believe that the Government of Singapore would take part in deciding what dishes SQ J meals are served on. ;)

My initial response detailed the fact that SQ is, in essence, not a "Public" company in terms of Corporate Governance. I am glad you understood my point, and I have no further arguments regarding this matter.

Mr. Moderator, I do apologize for taking this thread off topic.

FYI - the only people who can purchase shares in SQ are SQ employees!

I think you may find you are mistaken.
http://www.singaporeair.com/saa/en_U...stor/stock.jsp

Thank you... I think they may have changed recently. I knew at one time that one may not just go and buy SQ shares but have to go through certain third parties who had connections in SQ to buy the shares for them under nominees' names etc.

But anyway, this topic is going OT...

So let's get back to the topic of meals...

Chicken Rice anyone?

I used to rave about CX meals but have found in the last year that they have slowly started going downhill (I fly mostly Y with the very occasional J flight). Flew Air NZ a few times (in Y and Y+ which is pretty much J food) and found that the food left the CX meals well behind.

All personal preference of course.

To balance that though, I do think the new CX seats are a great initiative.

Airline meals are definitely cyclical, on all airlines, even the best ones. NZ has always marketed having superior meals as a feature, going back to the TE days, but went downhill quite badly circa 2000. To the credit of NZ, they fixed it when they did the service repositioning (abandon F, create J+/Y+). The industry as a whole was on a "pax don't care about meals" trend, and this has now reversed with lots of airlines improving their meal service (even if they are then charging for it). Given this trend, it seems inevitable that CX will be doing another meal revamp later in 2007.

Interesting comments number_6. It is certainly true that when someone is telling you about a flight they took, you invariably ask what the food was like. While it's certainly not a dealbreaker when choosing airlines, but if enough people have told you that the food on airline xyz is terrible, it'd make you think twice about long haul with that airline.

One other observation I have is that the Y - J gulf in food is quite big on CX (from my experience). This is probably a smart move, as it does give prem pax incentive to spend more $ on flights. I was surprised (but pretty happy) that when I flew Y+ with Air NZ over Xmas that all Y+ pax got J meals. Y+ also got the same alcohol and snack menu, as well as priority boarding, so the only real differences were in the lie-flat seat and the amenity kits (which were considerably nicer). Oh, and automatic lounge access. This has of course let to Y+ seats being very hard to get at peak times. Perhaps CX is deliberately keeping Y food so-so and ensuring that J food is very good.

Anyway, just a few thoughts on a Wednesday afternoon...

I do believe NZ is now jacking up their Y+ prices to compensate for their increased levels of service.

Sometimes what you can see can't help either. In the many years I have flown with SQ and CX (SQ more than CX), I have experienced much better food quality on SQ J than on CX J. If I am ever doubtful at SQ, I usually ask to see the picture of the food presentation before I make my choice. To me, ordering chef creation is usually the best choice - especially those from Sam Leong, Ah-Yat, Matthew Moran, Gordon Ramsay, and Yoshihiro Murata.

The problem with CX J pre-plated casserole dish main courses is that it lost on the presentation and it tends to get over-heated / over-cooked. This is unfortunate because all the light entrees (salads) leading up to the main courses are usually served in a nicely design volcanic rock colour and beige plates. To get the main course in a rectangular /oval shape white casserole dish is just so anti-climax of the whole dining experience. The casserole dish just does not go together with the zen-like setting of the tray. It doesn't do justice to the zen shaped salt and pepper shakers either.

No, I am not going to stop flying CX just because of the pre-plated casserole type food but I do want CX to improve its meal quality in J because I believe CX needs this to stay competitive in the J market. Also, if I can have a wonderful dining experience with SQ J, why shouldn't I expect the same from CX J? ;) After all, I am comparing the 2 best airlines in the world.

I would tend to agree that CX food is probably its weakest link in a very strong chain. the Y food is usually ok but never great, and even in J it can tend to be a bit hit and miss. I find QF in Y and J has a more consistent food product, now if only they could make the rest of their product as consistent as CX;)