The F pax could have been award pax, J pax upgrading with miles, opups.
Not to mention that discounts for J are becoming more popular.
CX I have been able to get into J at least several times as a GM.
(Though if there are too many AMEX cardholders I will be pi$$ed if I don't get opup priority.)
But, is an empty F seat and an outstanding eVIP that much better than a used eVIP and a full F cabin?

yes, but also at the same time that AA is announcing their new INTL product which for the majority of 777 routes will mean the loss of F and just the new AA Business class production (with lie-flat seats).

Yeah, I agree for 'short' transatlantic flights. But LAX-LHR in F would be nice use of time. As well as DFW-LHR. And I would hope that F stays around for TransPac flights.

SQ is a bit more protective here too, right? They limit (or don't allow) F aware redemptions outside of their own FF program. On CX you can book from any OneWorld carrier's FF program. I was thrilled with my recent F booking on CX from SEA-SFO-HGK & return in F. Even beat out the experience on a QF A380 in F.

Are you referring to US-based Amex cardholders or ones in Hong Kong? Is there a perk that Amex holders get op-ups?

Is that already reality on UA? Was looking for a SFO-FRA flight in December earlier today and could have sworn I saw a seat map with only BF and E+/-.

CX has also been cutting back ever since introducing "premium economy", and only the high-demand, flagship routes such as HKG-JFK have first class. Sad, really, as CX F is truly amazing, but a lot of times those in F are actually AAdvantage members and rarely paying passengers.

AMEX PLT Cardholders in Canada and OZ get free CX Gold.

sux that I'm in US :cool: (yes, just kidding. I'm happy with my perks)

Well, based on previous posts mentioning why anyone would buy a US carrier F product when they can use a eVIP or SWU, the answer is yes, from the airline's point of view. They prefer to "protect" the prestige of F from "give away" upgrades, and upgrade only if you are really paying a substantial amount more.

Goes back to what was already said, why pay for F if there is an expectation of upgrading for free (or at least from status). Foreign carriers do not give out SWU/eVIP as freely as US based carriers; not to mention, many of their qualifications are based on revenue, or are harder to qualify for their elite level for (please note I mention some, not all, foreign carriers).

It would be interesting to pull up a side by side comparison between the foreign carriers and their mileage/upgrade policy compared to US-based. I suspect we (US airline customers) have been relatively lucky compared to the foreign ones in terms of mileage earning and redemptions.

Aren't many of you flying UA or AA precisely because you can upgrade to F. Many companies will pay for C but few pay for F. It seems like here many will fly domestic carriers because they can upgrade for cheap, but take away that upgrade and you might fly a foreign competitor.

UA can not sell F seats on ORD-NRT. It might end up having a cabin full of upgrades. But many of those people might not have bought a ticket on UA at all if it wasn't for the upgrade. I think many FT'ers would buy ORD-NRT on NH or JAL when the company is paying, but then end up buying on UA or AA because they can upgrade to F.

The company I work for, a very large tech company, will only pay for coach INTL tickets unless you are doing more than some number of Intl flights each year. So, for at most 2 Intl flights I do in a year (and mostly 0 in a year for work), I'm stuck in coach. I really disliked the long flight LAX-SYD on the QF A380 even in that semi-exit row seat that didn't have a seat infront of it (just the slide from the exit door). Thankfully a F award ticket came available the night before my return and I gladly spent my own miles to do that instead of being in Y again. I'll stick to short domestic flights for work now unless I'm at least in Business class.

I am stuck with presence of client/employer.
I can time for opup chances by looking at availability on CX.
(Though I don't fly CX because they are the best, I fly them because they are better than AC.)

I have heard the other point - the airlines within an Alliance should have similar products. Thus UA should have the same product for F as LH, SQ etc. If the products are not similar, then why have an alliance.

It is a chicken or egg situation. People won't fly UA F since it is not as good as other *A carriers. But with current sales UA can't justify upgrading.

AF cut back on F, and only offers 4 F seats on its 777, with no upgrades. F on 747, 340, 330 has been gone for some time.

To some extent the airlines are just going back to what they used to offer 25 years ago. International J was the same as a USA domestic F seat, and International F was like today's J (maybe not as good) with a 60" pitch seat (not lie flat). Some carrier's premium Y is the same as domestic USA F.

Maybe they just went overboard for the last 25 years. Although 30-40 years ago we had jumbo jets on domestic service with piano bars - but old style (non-lieflat seats). Maybe the airlines can go back to old seats and add in piano bars.