Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Cathay Pacific | Marco Polo Club
Reload this Page >

Densified 777 10 abreast: Reviews and Experiences

Densified 777 10 abreast: Reviews and Experiences

    Hide Wikipost
Old Sep 9, 18, 11:30 pm   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: bart simpson
Wiki Link
Confirmed:
SCMP, Oct 2, 2016: Hong Kong’s Cathay Pacific to introduce 10-abreast seating in its Boeing planes
SCMP, March 31, 2017: Hong Kong Cathay Pacific passengers to feel the squeeze in push for profits
SCMP, March 31, 2017: Inside Cathay Pacific's new condensed economy class

48 long-haul 777s to be retrofitted. 17 regionals (including the 5 ex-Emirates aircraft). Five of the earliest 77W long-haul fleet (all first-class) to be phased out.

New seat details
Seat legroom: 32" (no change)
Seat width: 17.2" (down 1.3")
IFE screen: Long-haul - 12" (up 3"); Regional - 9" (no change)
Extra personal storage
New six-way headrest (similar to A350 but not like-for-like)
Wi-Fi
Thinner seats but extra padding

Economy class retrofit from mid-2018 to 2020
10% more economy seats
19 extra Y seats to 201 in 4-class 777: for 294 passengers.
28 extra Y seats to 296 in 3-class 777: for 368 passengers.
40 extra Y seats to 396 in regional 777: for 438 passengers.

Previous discussion on Cathay's decision to densify: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cath...er-row-44.html
Print Wikipost

Old Aug 27, 18, 9:25 pm
  #121  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by percysmith View Post
Oh the 77P
New row 53DEFG. Back two cabins are renumbered from 54 as a result

Making front Y cabin middle seats the cabin to avoid
But I suspect this impacts me and the missus less than others, because we are short enough to live with UO's 28 inch seat pitch happily.

YMMV but marginalising measures impact different passengers by different levels. It makes airline selection harder <-- especially on ex-HKG routes where wedon't have a choice about the seat or at least shop airlines to make sure any savings from densification accrue to us.
percysmith is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 6:38 am
  #122  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vancouver
Programs: CX DM, SQ TPP, QF GO LIFE, OZ*G LIFE, Marriott TIT LIFE, WOH GLOBALIST LIFE, HH DM, BA GO LIFE
Posts: 598
Flew on CX 10 Abreast 77W and It Was Great ^

Just got off from 10 abreast CX 77W and the experience was wonderful - loved the Gogo inflight wifi which worked wonderfully.
380Flyer is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 6:46 am
  #123  
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Melbourne,Australia
Programs: JMB Crystal, Asiamiles
Posts: 7
How long was your flight? I am going to fly from HKG to NRT on extra legroom seat on 77P soon.
calv1225 is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 6:52 am
  #124  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Programs: British Airways Gold
Posts: 2,553
Originally Posted by 380Flyer View Post
Just got off from 10 abreast CX 77W and the experience was wonderful - loved the Gogo inflight wifi which worked wonderfully.
Imagine how much more wonderful it would be at 9 abreast
Singapore_Air and royng like this.
ajeleonard is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 7:26 am
  #125  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 121
Easy to say from business class haha
bhyq is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 9:55 am
  #126  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
Originally Posted by ajeleonard View Post
Imagine how much more wonderful it would be at 9 abreast
don't need to, it exists, but most customers chose to fly EVA and EK, clearly preferring to be squashed.
Kachjc is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 4:09 pm
  #127  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: HK
Programs: QF Emerald. CX Nobody
Posts: 2,794
when economic expansion is still underway sure there is marginal buyer of ten abrest CX seat... when we hit downturn, those marginal buyers at bottom will disappear thats when cx will really suffer filling is seats whilst others that have protected yield will survive the storm.

what competitor got to market is health risk from 10abrest cabin... use scary photos of DVTs to have smear campagine on airlines with ten seats...
fakecd is offline  
Old Sep 11, 18, 11:51 pm
  #128  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: SFO/HKG
Programs: ex-UA 1K, AA EXP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 477
Originally Posted by fakecd View Post
when economic expansion is still underway sure there is marginal buyer of ten abrest CX seat... when we hit downturn, those marginal buyers at bottom will disappear thats when cx will really suffer filling is seats whilst others that have protected yield will survive the storm.

what competitor got to market is health risk from 10abrest cabin... use scary photos of DVTs to have smear campagine on airlines with ten seats...
In the July figures, CX grew available seat capacity per KM at 3.1% YTD whereas raw passenger growth only grew by 1.8% YTD . Revenue per seat KM also showed a tepid increase at 2.5% YTD so these marginal buyers are already disappearing. You're correct in wondering where these marginal seat buyers are going to come from.

Freight business is doing very well though.
triplefives is offline  
Old Sep 12, 18, 12:07 am
  #129  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,695
Originally Posted by fakecd View Post
when economic expansion is still underway sure there is marginal buyer of ten abrest CX seat... when we hit downturn, those marginal buyers at bottom will disappear thats when cx will really suffer filling is seats whilst others that have protected yield will survive the storm.
I disagree with this. At the bottom of the market, he who has the lowest seat cost per mile will survive the storm. Adding seats is not a negative here.

What will have to happen at the cycle bottom is cuts to capacity. The question is what do mainland Chinese carriers do. They bear the bulk of responsibility for driving down transpac yields for CX. CX adding seats is a natural response to them because it lowers your average seat cost per mile. But it is a smart response. Because they aren't requiring any new aircraft costs, landing fees, etc. for the capacity increases. The mainland carriers are doing it by pouring new aircraft on new routes. I think medium term there will be pullback in their capacity growth.

CX is most certainly no better off if they have 9 abreast instead of 10 abreast in a market downturn. The high end of the market goes first, not the low end.
​​​
Originally Posted by triplefives View Post
In the July figures, CX grew available seat capacity per KM at 3.1% YTD whereas raw passenger growth only grew by 1.8% YTD . Revenue per seat KM also showed a tepid increase at 2.5% YTD so these marginal buyers are already disappearing. You're correct in wondering where these marginal seat buyers are going to come from.

Freight business is doing very well though.

But it's one month! And those capacity increases had more to do with new routes than a few reconfigured 777s.

I am not an apologist for CX by any measure. But with years of data from the other operators, I think it's beyond question that going 10 abreast on the 777 is simply a requirement in this competitive environment....when most major 777 operators have or heading that way. Especially 77Ws on similar mission profiles. #1 operator in the world EK is 10 abreast. (#2 is CX). #3 AF is 10 abreast. #4 Eva is going 10 abreast. You cannot forfeit 25-45 extra seats per plane unless you damn well can be sure you achieve the higher yield! 75%+ 77W capacity will be 10 abreast once CX converts and Eva is done. CX can't avoid it unless they have amazing competitive positioning on board...which we know they don't, sadly anymore.

All of us on this board have whinged about the cost cutting. I can't blame passengers for not paying up for CX in the back of the bus these days. So it's a negative cycle...CX cut costs, pax don't see CX as premium anymore, CX dropped economy fares (particularly from outports and for transit itineraries) to be cheapo / LCC competitive prices, and around it goes. We can criticize many of CX's corporate moves over the last decade, but this one I can't. Now it may be true that CX's race to the bottom helped make this 10 abreast inevitable. But it's definitely the right strategy, as harsh as that sounds.

What are 25-45 extra seats worth on a long-haul flight profile? One way? That's $7-20k worth of revenue being left on the table for one sector of a $600-$800 round-trip cheapo round-trip fare to SFO. (aka US$15-$40k of revenue per round trip left on the table). Most passengers just look for the cheapest way from A to B. I'm not even sure CX is 100% in the wrong going somewhat downmarket, as they've poured on capacity they were bound to have to compete on price in economy class. And $600-$800 is a real price these days transpacific in economy class.
buschoi, 380Flyer, acdaazn and 3 others like this.

Last edited by QRC3288; Sep 12, 18 at 12:14 am Reason: added more details
QRC3288 is offline  
Old Sep 12, 18, 7:34 am
  #130  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vancouver
Programs: CX DM, SQ TPP, QF GO LIFE, OZ*G LIFE, Marriott TIT LIFE, WOH GLOBALIST LIFE, HH DM, BA GO LIFE
Posts: 598
Originally Posted by ajeleonard View Post
Imagine how much more wonderful it would be at 9 abreast
Guess what? None of the passengers on the 10 abreast Y class seating knew any better so it made no difference to them and that's how it is played!
Smart airlines are moving towards 10 abreast seating on the 777s.

I got off from Haneda - Hong Kong CX flight and it was 10 abreast and it was a great experience once again - sorry for busting your bubbles to those that were naysayers.
CX has done a great job with its 10 abreast seating with IFE, seat comfort and the slim seats that gives you a great sense of space.

I must admit that CX IFE on the refitted aircraft are better than what SQ has with their new aircraft. SQ is no longer a major competitor in the YCL space. They have lost the lust in this segment for sure and from my experience.
380Flyer is offline  
Old Sep 12, 18, 8:02 am
  #131  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by QRC3288 View Post
And $600-$800 is a real price these days transpacific in economy class.
Even $600-$800 can be wishful thinking lately. What I have been shocked by in the past couple months is the $500 transpacific fares on Air Canada, ANA, and depending on the route the Chinese carriers.

I agree 10 across on 777 was bound to happen, just as it's 9 across on the 787. Hard for Cathay to compete on price when other competing carriers flew 10 across. I actually flew 10 across long haul on EK and survived due to their strong IFE (and relatively shorter flights) but I am going to avoid Cathay's 777s for as long as possible.
royng likes this.
fallinasleep is offline  
Old Sep 12, 18, 12:18 pm
  #132  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by 380Flyer View Post
I got off from Haneda - Hong Kong CX flight and it was 10 abreast and it was a great experience once again - sorry for busting your bubbles to those that were naysayers.
Full flight?
triplefives likes this.
percysmith is offline  
Old Sep 12, 18, 3:08 pm
  #133  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Programs: Marco Polo Club
Posts: 11
So glad to 380Flyer! I totally agree that the new 10 abreast is great! All naysayers, try it out before judging.
TambaTrio is offline  
Old Sep 12, 18, 6:19 pm
  #134  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: HK
Programs: QF Emerald. CX Nobody
Posts: 2,794
ok lets see how it pans out. something strikes to me that extra 7-20k usd of revenue on cattle class competing for bottom feeder client segment is not what a premium airline shud do. they could have upped the game on front end of aircraft to drive that incremental revenue.

i will never on my own dime fork out for 10abrest on 77W longhaul. I simply dont associate the operator as premium carier worthy of my patronage, they can source bottom feeders away. and for the records i have never took EK for this reason. there are still choices (albeit inconvenient) for hk based Y traveller.

Americas-Jal
europe-Finnair
Oz-QF
Asia-CX (ok 2hr on 10abrest whateva)
fakecd is offline  
Old Sep 12, 18, 10:10 pm
  #135  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: SFO/HKG
Programs: ex-UA 1K, AA EXP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 477
Originally Posted by fakecd View Post
ok lets see how it pans out. something strikes to me that extra 7-20k usd of revenue on cattle class competing for bottom feeder client segment is not what a premium airline shud do. they could have upped the game on front end of aircraft to drive that incremental revenue.

i will never on my own dime fork out for 10abrest on 77W longhaul. I simply dont associate the operator as premium carier worthy of my patronage, they can source bottom feeders away. and for the records i have never took EK for this reason. there are still choices (albeit inconvenient) for hk based Y traveller.

Americas-Jal
europe-Finnair
Oz-QF
Asia-CX (ok 2hr on 10abrest whateva)
I also go out of my way to avoid a 10-abreast Y arrangement. A lot of the carriers with 10-abreast 77W also fly the A380 so there are a few more options than listed (BA for OW, even certain EK flights from HKG are operated with the A380).
triplefives is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: