CX considering [confirmed] having 10 seats per row?
 

I just received a Cathay Pacific Insights survey asking me to share my long haul experience on other airlines. I think the point of the survey was to ask me how I would feel about having 10 seats per row (instead of 9) and what I would be willing to sacrifice seat width for - some of the options given include having more movies on board, having better food, free wifi, having an extra crew member, having better headsets and having cheaper fares.

IMHO, it seems like CX is keen to improve its bottom line WITHOUT improving the travel experience. I say this because the food offering has been steadily declining (remember when we had sandwiches as snacks in Y a few years ago?) and, having done some "enhancements" to the Marco Polo programme, the bean counters are wondering if they should take the opportunity to "enhance" the economy seating as well.... :rolleyes:

To be fair to CX, I'm surprised it has taken them this long to even ask.

The bottom line is 67pct of the global 777 fleet is configured in 10 across in coach, when counting seats (admittedly skewed by EK). If competitors are doing it to lower average seat costs, at some point CX will feel the pressure. It's not CX forcing the hand here....it's consumers' relentless demand for cheaper seats regardless of the discomfort.

I really hope they don't, but can't fault them for at least asking. At a minimum I think CX is really missing out on a marketing opportunity by failing to stress they are now in the minority offering a somewhat "civilized" (shudder) economy experience 9 abreast on their 777s.

I've filled in the survey as well, basically stating that I would never consider flying on a 777 with a 3-4-3 config no matter which airline it is, or how good everything else is.

Since AC switched their 777 to 10 across for their HKG-YVR route, I've never been on it in Y. So if CX switches, I will move to another carrier for sure, even for regional flights.

They should have known the answer :confused:

What else can you choose for non-stop HKG-YVR?

If I need to fly out back, I'm picky enough to go for stopovers if it means avoiding the 777 and taking the 333. Even 3-3-3 on the 777 feels claustrophobic already being at the window.

Perhaps a one stop http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/catha...-cx-loses.html ? Won't be that bad in Y as you won't face the J meals / angle seat issues.

Unlike BR/NH, most...if not all, of JL's tpac itinerary only cost of a few hours transit. Nothing crazy / overnight.

I hate to say it, but going 10-across in Y will also provide greater differentiation for PEY, which will probably be a selling point that CX would use to promote it. Unfortunately, an 8-across PEY and 10-across Y layout seems to be where the industry is headed even for transpac now, with the newest 777 configs for NH, CI and AC all configured that way. And though they don't have PEY cabins, Y in AA is moving toward 10-across as well, and the rumor is that UAs 77Ws will also be configured that way.

Agree. Simply unbearable even for flight to KHH... Particularly everything else won't be good at all...

But I can foresee that CX may push something out like regional Y with 3-4-3 on a 773... (Fortunately 333 can't have 3-3-3 right?)

For long and ultra-long haul PEY load factor is much better and Y loading is not as high as the regional route so combining with the sharp cut in MPC recognition for Y class I guess 3-4-3 transpac won't happen...

Maybe it's because I'm not particularly tall (5'9), but I can honestly say that I cannot tell the difference seat comfort wise in 3-4-3 economy vs. 3-3-3. I've flown 14+ hours in both configurations, 3-3-3 on both United and Korean 777s on a couple occasions and 3-4-3 on Air France on many others. I actually found the 3-4-3 on Air France slightly more comfortable than the 3-3-3 on United, possibly because the AF plane had newer seats, but as far as seat width goes I find that Flyertalk has an extremely exaggerated view of the difference between the configurations. Obviously I seem to be in the minority here, but I can't really say it's that big a deal.

More De-Valuation
 

If I were CX Finance I would consider this move as well. However I am a passenger on CX (For Now).

I prefer a aisle seat. Having flown on AA 3-4-3 found was being bumped non-stop throughout the flight because the aisles were too narrow for the FAs with carts and less than considerate fellow passengers bumping into the seat.

Most passengers are probably not aware when booking if the seating arrangement is 3-3-3 or 3-4-3, but I best frequent flyers most definitely are.

If given a choice of 3-4-3 or CX versus 3-4-3 on another airline, this could make previously less price sensitive flyers, i.e. CX DMs and GOs more likely to jump ship, or is CX obsessively determined to make this happen with such a move?

Nicc HK

I already avoid the 777 in Y where an A330 is available. If they go 10 across I'll start looking at other airlines.

CX considering having 10 seats per row?
 

Given past experience when CX sends out a 'survey', I reckon that this is a done deal and an attempt to find/massage data to justify (like 'passengers don't care if better amenities are provided'..).

Will be the end of CX Y travel for me.

I guess my comment is, if all 777s go to 10 abreast then would people still leave CX? As it stands, 2/3 of 777 seats in service today are 10 across with probably more conversions on the horizon. BR is 9, but CI is 10. EK is 10. AA is 10. While ANA is 9 IIRC, JAL is going to 10. There are major competitors switching and it's only going one direction, unfortunately.

I know there will be heaps of disappointment, but I really don't know how much choice folks will have. Especially with CX effectively saying back of the bus is not a treasured place for elites anymore but rather dirt cheap fares for travel mercenaries who don't need loyalty points....only the cheapest seat. (At the end of the day, loyalty points in their purest form are a bundled rebate meant to be profitable for the airline).

And its end demand for those cheap economy seats are what drives this race to the bottom. I think we're going to be in a world where premium economy serves the niche of a "civilized" economy class (and perhaps allowing elites to earn in this class), with narrow lay-z-boy style seat while the back is an even worse version of cattle car.