skywardhunter

No thanks. I think those seats suck actually

Will08

Whilst I agree this is most likely what will happen I am not sure why it should be obvious.

Why should 'family a' who happen to travel once a year, have no loyalty to any airline and just happen to be on EK because it was the cheapest flight they could find, be given seats by default that others have to pay for? Status passengers flying flex/flex+, here you go treat yourself to a middle seat!

Dave Noble

Why is it obvious? is emirates different to most airlines and doesn't restrict access to exit row seats to those that meet criteria that include not having infants?

skywardhunter

we're not talking about exit rows. We're talking about extra legroom seats (it's in the title), and my point is that while they're no longer available for free on request at the airport, and have been paid prior to airport check-in previously, families with infants under 2 years have been assigned these seats without paying in the past and I expect that to continue (assigned prior to the 6h window so the payment was indeed waived) and if a flight is full naturally they will fill those seats rather than IDB (and pay the associated compensation and rebooking). To me that is obvious.

That being said, those seats suck and I wouldn't choose them even if they're free. Some extra legroom seats are exit rows (without bassinets, and thus not applicable to the families I referred to), but you fave an FA during taxi, take-off and landing, the seat is narrower and armrest doesn't go up, it's usually colder due to the door, people congregate during flight to use the lab or stretch, FAs encroach on the area from the adjoining galley to prepare meal service and there's no readily accessible seat back pocket. No thanks.

Dave Noble

The thread is, but the comment was specific to a post about exit row seats , so was bemused by it


It makes sense that the bassinet positions would be made available to those requesting a bassinet - seems the norm with most airlines. Also makes sense to me that they wil be allocated free of charge if otherwise the airline would have to deny boarding to passengers

skywardhunter

It was poorly constructed. The first sentence was about exit rows, the second sentence when I said "these seats" I mean extra legroom seats in general

suley

Quite Sad actually, Ironically on the 16th I did fly back to LHR and had done online seat selection the day before but not checked in which was done at the airport, selected row 43 A+B on the seat map which was not Exit Rows yet when we boarded it seemed to be 43 was an exit row with a toilet taking up space at the front. Anyway back to story, so I was suprised, there seemed to be a few people who seemed to have moved with a quite irate child. We sat on our searts and began to sleep, a quick pat with a women asking sorry these are reserved seats, I said yes I had reserved them online, she asked for our boarding passes, I showed her the pass and she thanked and quickly exited left. I thought it was odd as we did not select exit rows and I guess either the updated plane or the airport confirmed the seats

Zol

How very LCC of them, even on an FZ flight a couple of years ago I was allowed to sit in the exit row post door close as they remained vacant and on the return, check-in staff allocated it to me after asking. Don't see what is the big deal, yes it is slightly unfair for paying customers but that is the difference between securing your seat and trying to wing it !

ElJudioErrante

That labelled headrest is also the same now used for the crew only pax seats in Y at rear of cabin.
Not all the front rows are labelled as such because the pax with babies have been put into non labelled front row, and I notice that on my current flight at least that the labelled front rows are near the catering centre bulkheads so as to be easily policed by FAs!
My flight is almost full in Y, so the empty seats in the labelled front row are fairly conspicuous.

Zol

So today if you are travelling with an infant, what do you do? Are you forced to fork out for a first row basinet seat?

skywardhunter

As I said above I doubt that's the case. Pax with infants were assigned bassinet seats at no extra cost prior to airport check-in previously, when the seats were chargeable for regular pax, I don't see why that would change

JamesKidd

Looks like the McKinsey consultants have moved over from Etihad and have now started to work their magic on Emirates !

ft101

Late change from an Long Range to an Ultra Long Range A380 where there are a couple of rows less here.

ElJudioErrante

I'd be very surprised if Mckinsey consultants have nt recommended the merger of the 2

Katykat