YuropFlyer

While I won't totally decline your claim of the pig with lipstick (ie, the bling bling factor of EK) I still don't understand some points that people complain about EK.

First of all, the "density" of the 777 is pretty much industry standard. I've flown AF and EK with the 10 abreast, and I've found it to be absolutely doable. Actually, the legroom in the EK 777 was - for Y - pretty good. And I'm 1.85m..

In C, while they indeed still do have a few airplanes with really old seatings, it's mostly superior to what LH offers (which is still either NEK or the old C in about 80%+ of their flights) - so yes, sometimes the pig wears lipstick, but often it's a beautiful unicorn. Plus I've really had RARE exchange of equipment with EK. What I book I get. Compare this with LH group.. just had another LOVELY switch to middle seat for my flight to London tomorrow due to "technical reasons" (and being under the 48 or 72 hours or whatever three should, couldn't even select anything else..).. there is no better way to tell your SEN customers to fu** off..

weero

Sure the differences are rather minor but that is exactly why personal preferences come into play.
I find it intolerable for longhauls and hence the prospect to be delegated to a terrible coach, (I know again) no alliance network, and the prospect of being fed tortured animals' meat make it an easy decision for me not to touch EK.

Especially if all LH, SQ, and hopefully soon LX will sport PE.

TRAVELSIG

Air Asia founder warns Lufthansa against low cost long haul:
"I think it’s very risky, I would advise against it."

Some interesting thinking in the article about density increases and possible CGN hub for the new LCC long haul venture:

http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...cost-long-haul

N1003U

"...By contrast Lufthansa says its new venture will fly at a lower cost but still maintain the same full service offering that it (Lufthansa) provides..."

Isn't this essentially the same promise that we were given with regard to 4U? We know now how that has turned out.

...He believes that full-service carriers should chose whether to be low-cost or premium: "History has shown that any full-service carrier that has gone into low-cost has suffered. But I can see why it’s tempting..."

Sound advice. But unfortunately once the decision is made, the selection bias against contrary evidence sets in...

N1003U

In one of his later interviews as CEO of LH (which I unfortunately can’t find at present) someone asked Christoph Franz how he felt about being known as the CEO who converted LH’s non-hub traffic into an LCC. He answered by saying something like he would rather be remembered that way instead of as the CEO who simply closed down LH’s non-hub services.

It seems to me however, that shutting down LH service is exactly what is happening. Sure, 4U is operating where LH used to on the non-hub routes, but I would like to hear from anyone who uses 4U on a regular basis who thinks it is working from a customer service perspective. 4U certainly does not seem to be working financially. Given the particulars, can one even consider 4U from a customer perspective to be real LH service? Last year at the Dialog event, I was told with a straight face from 1m away across a cocktail table that 4U Best (assuming the route you want to use offers a Best fare) is as good, and perhaps in some (unspecified) regards better than LH NEK C. Is there anyone here who uses 4U and/or Best service who finds that statement more than a sad joke? If so, I would enjoy hearing a contrary view.

The next step is to transfer routes such as BKK and (who knows, DEN?) over to the long-haul LCC and continue removing international F-offerings (Intl. F being one of the products where LH actually seems to be competitive). What happens when all of this low-cost nonsense blows up in their face? Sell off the LCC assets and try to move on?

So it looks to me like LH is, in fact, simply retrenching (albeit slowly and painfully, and in far too complex fashion), becoming more provincial, and focusing its mainline service on its core DE/CH (jury is still out on A) customers--the core of LH seems to look more like it’s days before the massive expansion in the 90s/00s.

My question is this: why didn’t LH just take the simpler route to what is the inevitable end anyway? This intermediate nonsense is making me crazy as a customer. If you don’t know how add enough value on wide scale to cover your inflexible cost base, then you are better off to face that fact and start focusing right away on where you can compete, instead of distracting yourself on expensive and painful boondoggles. The investors, employees, and customers would all appreciate the clarity.

primetime23

I have flown 100+ segments on the new 4U in the last year (mostly domestic point to point with no connections) and can't say anything bad about them - friendly FA's, a bit more legroom, priority boarding working reasonably well, lots of overhead space, better catering (0,5l bottles!!! and free choice of food, sandwiches are not bad at all). Their customer service is quick e.g. they were happy to refund the fare difference between Best and Smart when there was an aircrraft change in under a week.

The only time I did not have a good experience was when I had a 4U / LX codeshare with a connection in ZRH as I wasnt able to reserve seats, get boarding passes for the connecting flight etc.

weero

You mean those words would not comply with FT posting standards?
Haha - the only overlap of the LX and LH universe is their concerted effort for the stingiest domestic seat. Anything else doesn't work.

N1003U

Thank you for the insight. 100+ segments is indeed a good sample set.

That is very good to hear. I hope your experiences with 4U are that same as for a majority of the customers. If that's the case perhaps there is hope that 4U can reach a critical mass become profitable. I O&D primarily from FRA (and less often from ZRH), so I don't get many opportunities to fly 4U. Most of my anecdotal data was not as enthusiastic as your Germanwings experience, but my data set has its own biases.

This is one case where I hope I am wrong. I would like to see 4U succeed, but from the numbers so far, it doesn't look all that promising.

Here is another question for primetime23 or others with a lot of experience flying 4U: do you get the feeling 4U operates as an integrated part of LH Group, or more of a separate LCC that happens to be owned and operated under the LH Group organization? Said another way, is it easy to use 4U to seamlessly transfer between he 4U world and the LH/LX/OS/SN network, especially on routes where a feeder on 4U is the only option?

I find it interesting that the overall experience was positive but the integration with other LH Group airlines is not so great (e.g., as a codeshare).

IAN-UK

And in those areas, of course, is the greatest cost advantage the LCC enjoy. No network responsibilities, and none of the headaches of interlining.

The intermediary, hybrid, version of an LCC, yoked to the networks of legacy carriers, is in a sad position. Or perhaps it's the legacy owners of the LCC who are in the saddest position, assuming the networking costs and shovelling them under their own carpet.

primetime23

this time I was actually quite serious... I have turned a bit into a 4U fanboy (at least when I have a best fare and travel from CGN to TXL).

But you are right, the integration part with LH / LX doesn't seem to work very well

primetime23

IMHO they feel as integrated as LX... E.g. I cant check in at the LH counter for a 4U flight (due to different IT systems) and vice versa. Lounge staff cant even change a seat, because they dont have access to the 4U systems etc.

In general, LH or LX staff treat 4U like their redheaded stepchild, so not a great experience when codesharing / transferring etc. I guess because it takes so much more effort to get something changed. Every time I talked to LH staff at some of the smaller airports (TXL, CGN etc.) they are very eager to point out that they are of the "old LH breed" and want nothing to do with 4U.

Cant really comment on the financial performance as I havent looked at the numbers. But from a customer perspective I feel that 4U works reasonably well (keeping in mind that I am paying LH level prices too): lounge access, even status recognition on board and I like that most FA's defend the best row overhead compartments like a mother lion their cubs.

weero

And it is getting worse ... when I was rebooked onto LX, I could not even use my miles or surviving eVouchers as "the system doesn't accept it - you must be an LH FTL" .. which is true but not a very good argument ...

mmff

My (anecdotal) experience shows the same and I like it, too.

primetime23

But with you we never know if the system is flawed or if its just another negative Weero-halo effect type of incident, which doesnt happen to travellers who are not being hated by the LH group...

weero

Nah ... as then the instruments would not work on LH and they do ...