subject2load

It sure is a big load of money (assuming true). Such is the way of this wacky world in which we live !

Difficult to know just how tiny a percentage of that figure would have been earned by the various 'supporting actors' but I thought the first FA who spoke to Aniston put in a great performance. Straight out of central casting

eightblack

Actually no. Anistons last movie made her a cool $28M, Jolie made $30M, Sarah Jessica Parker $30M etc

nk15

Interestingly, a lot of the online coverage of the ad suggests that people and reporters alike perceive it as Aniston mocking traveling in coach, they didn't get it that it was a dig against the US3 and other competitors' premium cabins.

However, I assume Aniston and other celebs probably rarely fly commercial, although sometimes they do, mostly internationally. But even then I doubt it Aniston has ever flown the ME3, she probably flies the US3 or European carriers in First direct out of LAX.

CalFlyer

I am not surprised, idea for the ad was good, execution flawed.

subject2load

Hmm. All in the eyes of the beholder of course, but in no way 'flawed', at least not from my perspective.

I'm aware of some of the online criticism knocking around, and no ad can appeal to everyone.

But as for those who seemingly didn't "get it" .....well I do wonder exactly what they were watching

Personally I thought the key line of "er, this isn't an Emirates plane ma'am" was a pretty good clue to the fact that it was different airlines that were being discussed. At no point was there any reference, implied or otherwise, to coach class travel - from what I could hear.

avcritic

So some 32% of EK planes(77/240) have flatbeds in J. Are they at least 1-2-1 or 2-3-2?

cmd320

Your point being? It's pretty easy to limit one's flying to strictly A380s on long segments and save the angle-flats for stage lengths of 2-5 hours (you know, the lengths of flights domestic airlines offer only domestic F). J is a staggered 1-2-1 on the A380.

For your comparison, approximately 20% of the DL fleet and about 13% of the AA fleet have flatbeds in the J cabin.

lighthand

Loved the ad. LOL when watching it, JA still have excellent comic timing.

Reminds me of the Audi ad, where the R8 was on it's way to Ferrari's factory.

nk15

Wow, I just checked seatguru, they have a ton of 2-3-2 (mostly) and even 2-4-2 J layouts. Only some versions of their 380 has 1-2-1. There should be a commercial with JA trying to get out of her J window bed on EK to use the restroom and having to straddle the fat guy sleeping next to her, lol.

cmd320

Wow, the sensationalism. Ever been stuck on an AA 737 on a 6 hour flight from MIA-SEA before? I have much better success climbing out of an angle-flat seat as opposed to a standard seat.

There are zero 2-4-2 J layouts on EK aircraft, that seems pretty limited to UA and BA these days. All A380 J cabins are in a staggered 1-2-1 layout. You should check your facts before you make sensational and inaccurate claims.

nk15

Okay, okay, it is 1-2-1 staggered, it doesn't look crowded at all.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Emira...dfade450065a0b

Btw, Wikipedia says that "In late 2015, Emirates will start taking delivery of planes seating 615 passengers, the most ever seen". I smell a JA clown car commercial coming, showing how you can comfortably fit 615 people on a plane.

ioto1902

True. And once you've experienced aisle access at every seat, you can not go back.
Nevertheless, the seat width is similar to a 2/4/2
A 2/3/2 on a B777 is also a thing of the past.
EK has a real issue with seat width ...

Just remember who introduced 3/4/3 in B777 YCL, and who is considering 3/5/3 in A380 YCL ...

DYKWIA

BA...

eternaltransit

I think it’s worth at this point separating out the two major themes that have been raised, namely issues with the actual product, and effectiveness of the commercial itself (and how it’s perceived). Of course they are going to be connected, but I think the threads are distinct enough that they should be discussed separately.

It’s probably going to be easier with the product discussion, as there are more objective features to point out, rather than the subjectiveness of perception.

Firstly, a point was raised about the availability of the product - what’s shown is an F suite and the J A380 bar and implied shower presence - and at the end an external shot of an A380. While it is true that EK only have the shower and bar on the A380, if you look at it in the context of its initial primary audience, the USA then I think that argument weakens. EK fly to 9 destinations in the United States:
SEA, SFO, LAX, IAH, DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, IAD. Out of those 9 destinations, there are 14 daily flights, 8 of which are operated by A380s - so over half of the capacity has the product shown.

There was a tongue-in-cheek post about available shower miles, but there is a serious point in that: very few airlines have a standardised fleet and standard product on all aircraft (mainly LCCs who have say, all 737 fleets like FR) - yet airline ads generally only show the latest and greatest product. For instance, KEs ad was linked above, where the only product shown was the the Kosmo F seat - that is only available on select planes (the new 777-200ER 248 capacity, older 777-300ER, A380 etc). Proportionally

In fact if we want to get really picky about whether this is borderline bait-and-switch, you probably should have to take into account the length of time people are on an A380 compared to non-A380 products on popular itineraries - and EK do put their A380s on their popular routes - and define the minimum acceptable threshold of availability. Is that 100%? 80%? I think you would find it nearly impossible to find any airline being able to promote their flagship product under those conditions (except perhaps BA’s J seat).

Next there was a meander into cabin arrangements. I don’t think the advert was really making a comment about the hard product, given the couple of seconds of unflattering view of the F suite featured - which as I think most regulars here would admit, is quickly getting behind the times. This is also, imho, true of the J product, which has serious flaws across the fleet (2-3-2, the service arrangements in a full 76 seat J cabin on the A380) and as ioto1902 mentioned, seat width. That’s a discussion for another thread though. EK is quite transparent about the layout on their A380s - you can view it on Google Street View. It can certainly seem crowded on a full flight - but I don’t think EK were making a comment on that one way or another (well, deliberately not highlighting it as advertising is want to do). If the criteria for an acceptable ad is now to show the entirety of a product instead of highlighting features the company wants to, then I think that would send shockwaves throughout the advertising world and that indignation should be louder about advertising for just about anything seen to be a luxury product, be that Apple smartphones, luxury cars, holiday destinations, etc. etc. I don’t think it’s fair to hold up a single company to an impossible (or double) standard.

In response to the post about the upcoming 2-class A380s, I would have to disagree about the cramp factor - feelings of being cramped come from the immediate personal space you have, not on the capacity of the aircraft. For instance, an identically configured 777-200LR and a 777-300ER have the same Y seats - the 300ER does not feel more cramped because it has an extra 10 rows of Y. Similarly, the A380 has two levels - of which the upper deck will hold more Y seats. People on the lower deck will feel no different, Y travellers in the upper deck may feel the same or less cramped due to 2-4-2 seating and the J cabin is smaller, so no change there (or perhaps it will feel less cramped). I think it’s a much harder argument to make for it to feel more cramped just because there are 615 people on the plane.

The seat config of 3-4-3 is of course objectively more cramped than say, a 3-3-3 config, but as this is now becoming standard across lots of network carriers, it is a moot point. EK’s strategy to pack them in and distract them with entertainment and edible meals and lately wi-fi seems to be successful. Perhaps the demographic make up of their core markets also allows them to receive fewer complaints about seat width - which is to say, perhaps most of their travellers don’t notice the seat width as they are smaller in size…

-

As to the perceptions of the ad, that of course is entirely subjective. But once again, I think we have to bear in mind the target audience of the advert, which would appear to be wealthy ex-USA travellers who can afford the premium. The feelings of people who feel negatively towards the ad because it feels insulting to Y class travellers are I think irrelevant to EK here, as unpleasant as that might sound.

We’ve heard it often said that EK is very successful selling to “backpackers” - which is code for cheap tickets (or perhaps by some with more insulting subtext, cheap/poor people). It’s a common refrain in all the various critiques of EK. This market segment cares only about price (hence why 10 across seating is now the defacto delivery choice for new aircraft) - I don’t really think that a carrier marketing its premium product is going to affect their decision making one way or another, even if they might feel insulted. Airline customers all over the world apparently will accept varying levels product in the quest for low fares - Spirit and Ryanair come to mind immediately, the EU shorthaul J and Y product also.

So, is this ad going to stop people buying the cheap seats? No - because they only want cheap. Is the ad going to make currently loyal EK fliers feel better/amused? Likely - it’s the same strategy as luxury car manufacturers. Will it make people talk about EK and the product, aka the shower (positively or negatively? I think it already has. So, it seems that the ad is already successful in that regard.

After all, the point is to encourage strong emotions, not forgettable fluff (look at all the Microsoft hate in the 90s and Apple hate now) - and in turn, exposure.

-

Yep. Slow day at work.

scented

They might have dropped $ 5 million on Jennifer Aniston, but the technical execution of the ad is poor. Especially the scene where they start laughing and it becomes apparent that it is a nightmare is not done well. I would have expected much more from EK. The script is great, shame they weren't able to translate that into the actual ad.