oliver2002

Pearson Lloyd's case study of LH Allegris

https://pearsonlloyd.com/project/lufthansa-allegris/

Kleffen

Is "play" allowed in the new cabin ?

ffgap

It's decent marketing. LH never skimps on that.

The assumption "customers are more different than ever" is true. The implication "we need as many seat types as customer types so there is a truly fitting seat product for everyone" is still flawed.

The concept makes sense only to the extent you sustain a very high match rate from customer type to its preferred seat type.

They'll deliver that on days on which most flights are nowhere near capacity.

But on days with high loads and many changes and rebookings, it's not gonna work out for everyone.

The worst is that you best customers are the ones which book short-term for dates with high premium demand and which tend to rebook frequently.

Your only hope for them is that you are at the same time operationally excellent (no IRROPS, no aircraft type changes) and that your best customers which book the last seats are into the seat types that remain available at the time of their booking.

This is kind of setting up your revenue management to fail because you just multiplied RM's supply-side constraints by a big number.

chris63

Sure, the Allegris plan is nothing short of insane…… how are flex pax going to rebook at short notice in J or F….

ffgap

Maybe you can call it a team-building exercise when you bunk together with one of your staff in a "together" or "share" cabin?

chris63

Very high risk these days where any physical contact could be construed as inappropriate or assault … the cabin permutations are mind boggling, i just want to fly in comfort, other airlines offer exactly what i pay for i receive

Red BP

The Allegris concept works nicely on such concept videos and PPT decks but likely bears frustration potential in the real world.
At any given time a passenger tries to book a seat or a number of seats for a group in the Allegris cabin, he will be limited to the seats available at that moment in time and your desired option like single seat or double seat or seats together in any shape or form may not be available any more.
Cumulative frustration earned is: unavailable seat options + invented and not desired surcharges for left over seat options you are not shopping for + additional hassles and comp potential when you need to rebook or irrop

Let alone Allegris F which is a conceptual fail from A to Z.

sw1x

Behold that it may actually turn around and destroy what was once a great team as closeness makes the team members realize they are not as good a fit as they thought .

dodgeflyer

I agree with everything you say but not the fact that they can deliver when flights are not near capacity. Given the pricing model (was is 8 or 9), seats like "private" and "solo" of which the latter is an aisle exposed seat doesn't actually work unless they have a flexible pricing model.

Even if day before, I can choose any seat, why would anyone choose "solo" over "private". I think you're getting to it as well, but reality is that seating choice for a passenger who's subject to seat payment is that they will not buy into the concept. Why would a passenger choose "focus" over "private", "focus" I think they mean to say "more space, you can have more papers" or perhaps "you can't look out the window [so you can focus]". But then why not call "private", "dream/wander/nonstop you".

I don't mind pay-for business class seats, it is annoying when you don't get and it does drive me towards making more expensive purchases when I am not eligble, but I abhor the "we created a marketing model and naming for you so we can justify our prices".

Nick Art

Nice pictures and an interesting read, thank you for sharing. And oh do I have opinions.
It feels like they were so convinced and focused on what they were doing, that nobody took the time to take a step back and ask themselves if what they were doing, is the way they should do it. Sometimes I feel that in companies a project becomes so important that everybody keeps telling themselves it has to succeed and that it is great and succeeding, which creates a very skewed version of how people see the project within the company, compared to how well it is actually doing or actually is. And if you tell yourself something enough, you might actually start to believe it.
I think the following quote summarises it quite well: "The road to failure is paved with good intentions."

I am unsure what they mean with "play", however, other than on the images, play isn't mentioned or explained in the text... Now I'm not sure they know what they mean with "play".

Play for me is something quite important and part of the creative process and work (and I guess life) itself, so I'm a bit disappointed to see it misused as a buzz-word in this way.

view

The PR text mentions they have also designed and built 1:1 scale models for the 747-8, has anyone seen any cabin layouts for this yet?

hugolover

What’s a Pearson Lloyd?

An airline as huge as LH couldn’t go in-house and talk to their pax and staff about what to do? Insanity.

SMK77

Why is this insightful? LH signed off on the final specs over a year ago and there was no change in aircraft. This process should have been completed long ago - including the prolonged times for certification.

athomas76

Yes, they usually save every cent wherever possible but probably spent a huge amount of Euros for a glossy concept, designed on a desktop by a creative agency which will cause plenty of troubles in real life. Insanity is the right word.

MichielR

Or ask someone to just read this thread for customer insights?