Bloomberg article on SAS - can’t be good
Aug 2, 2019, 8:42 pm
#76
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,175
I’m confused as to why you dislike the A330/A340 so much.
In Economy virtually every other airplane comes with a worse layout than the classic 2-4-2 one. 757 is way to narrow, the 767 is decent with its 2-3-2. the 3-4-3 in the B777 is horrible as is the B787 with its 3-3-3, A350 a bit better but still worse with 3-3-3, the A380 and B748 are nice because the cabins are rather wide, although I usually dislike being in huge cabins. (luckily I don't get to fly Y that often anymore).
In Business the seats usually don't depend on aircraft type and noise wise I found the A330/340 to be one of the most comfortable ones available currently, maybe only suceeded by the A380 and A350.
What is it you dislike about the A330 so much? As you can tell A330 and A340 are my most favorite ones, but it usually comes down to the airline and the cabin.
The old SK J cabin with the smaller overhead bins in the middle helped a lot, but now SK has the full size bins as the smaller ones were really too small. Which is probably why I did not really mind for a long while while I was a mostly SK passenger.
While I don't like the A330 and A340, I still don't get to the point of deciding my route based on it. I have a couple of times shifted my Cathay flight from Tokyo to Hong Kong a bit to book a 777 instead. But the gamble there is that the regional seats on the 777-300 are not nice, and Cathay are anyway notorious for swapping aircraft on the Tokyo Hong Kong route. So mostly I still just go by timing and connection time.
The economy class seating on the 777 and 787 are rarely a problem, in that my economy class flights are mainly JAL, and they are still 3-3-3 and 2-4-2 on these types. Here I very actively pick JAL for long haul economy, as they are in all aspects (except IFE selection) a stellar carrier. A side effect is of course that picking JAL keeps me in 787 and 777, and eventually A350. But I like the A350. Also the odd 767 for Asian short haul.
Aug 3, 2019, 1:49 am
#77
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Preferable @30.000 feet
Programs: More than one
Posts: 1,673
It mainly comes down to the shape of the cabin walls, that removes a lot of the feeling of space. It came mainly from flying Cathay where the business class seats feels (for a Cathay business class seat) rather cramped. But after that point I have been getting that cramped feeling in the cabin. It is far less spacious than the 777.,A380,A350, 787. The windows are also really small which helps build the feeling of confined space.
The old SK J cabin with the smaller overhead bins in the middle helped a lot, but now SK has the full size bins as the smaller ones were really too small. Which is probably why I did not really mind for a long while while I was a mostly SK passenger.
While I don't like the A330 and A340, I still don't get to the point of deciding my route based on it. I have a couple of times shifted my Cathay flight from Tokyo to Hong Kong a bit to book a 777 instead. But the gamble there is that the regional seats on the 777-300 are not nice, and Cathay are anyway notorious for swapping aircraft on the Tokyo Hong Kong route. So mostly I still just go by timing and connection time.
The economy class seating on the 777 and 787 are rarely a problem, in that my economy class flights are mainly JAL, and they are still 3-3-3 and 2-4-2 on these types. Here I very actively pick JAL for long haul economy, as they are in all aspects (except IFE selection) a stellar carrier. A side effect is of course that picking JAL keeps me in 787 and 777, and eventually A350. But I like the A350. Also the odd 767 for Asian short haul.
The old SK J cabin with the smaller overhead bins in the middle helped a lot, but now SK has the full size bins as the smaller ones were really too small. Which is probably why I did not really mind for a long while while I was a mostly SK passenger.
While I don't like the A330 and A340, I still don't get to the point of deciding my route based on it. I have a couple of times shifted my Cathay flight from Tokyo to Hong Kong a bit to book a 777 instead. But the gamble there is that the regional seats on the 777-300 are not nice, and Cathay are anyway notorious for swapping aircraft on the Tokyo Hong Kong route. So mostly I still just go by timing and connection time.
The economy class seating on the 777 and 787 are rarely a problem, in that my economy class flights are mainly JAL, and they are still 3-3-3 and 2-4-2 on these types. Here I very actively pick JAL for long haul economy, as they are in all aspects (except IFE selection) a stellar carrier. A side effect is of course that picking JAL keeps me in 787 and 777, and eventually A350. But I like the A350. Also the odd 767 for Asian short haul.
Aug 6, 2019, 2:23 pm
#78
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,589
We just flew Got-CPH-NCE in Plus. I found SAS to be OK. I was surprised to see how empty the planes were, maybe 25% of the seats were occupied.
The GOT lounge is OK, the CPH one has good looks but it was a 15 minute walk form the B gates. Onboard, small sandwich and a beer on the first short flight, nicer salad box followed by chocolates on the longer flight. Luckily on both flights empty middle seats. I would do it again but wonder how they can survive with such empty flights.
The GOT lounge is OK, the CPH one has good looks but it was a 15 minute walk form the B gates. Onboard, small sandwich and a beer on the first short flight, nicer salad box followed by chocolates on the longer flight. Luckily on both flights empty middle seats. I would do it again but wonder how they can survive with such empty flights.
Aug 6, 2019, 2:39 pm
#79
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Preferable @30.000 feet
Programs: More than one
Posts: 1,673
We just flew Got-CPH-NCE in Plus. I found SAS to be OK. I was surprised to see how empty the planes were, maybe 25% of the seats were occupied.
The GOT lounge is OK, the CPH one has good looks but it was a 15 minute walk form the B gates. Onboard, small sandwich and a beer on the first short flight, nicer salad box followed by chocolates on the longer flight. Luckily on both flights empty middle seats. I would do it again but wonder how they can survive with such empty flights.
Aug 7, 2019, 3:06 am
#80
Moderator: SAS
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: BLL & CPH & ZRH
Programs: LX, SK EBD (*G)
Posts: 3,153
25% occupation is not the standard on SK. I can't recall when I last were on a flight which were less than 75% occupied and I have had more than 50 SK flights this year alone and a good part of them outside rush hour. If I remember correct, SK have an average load factor around 85%.
On ZRH-ARN/CPH I can confirm that the load is probably around 75%, there are always a few seats left in the Cabin, in comparison on Swiss on the late night CPH-ZRH flight the last 6 rows are usually empty, the late ARN-ZRH flight is usually really full, while the Noon ZRH-ARN flight is usually 75% filled as well, so I'd say SK and LX have similar load factors on these routes.
CPH-GOT is usually completly booked out, every time I flew there wasn's a single seat left.
The late night BGO-ARN on the other hand was about filled 10%, C had like 12 empty rows. We really weren't more than 20 people on the plane, but it made for a really comfortable and nice atmosphere. I.e. Boarding was very relaxed, no announcements etc. most of the people were probably regular commuters.
Last edited by Nick Art; Aug 7, 2019 at 3:29 am
Aug 7, 2019, 7:16 am
#84
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,742
I have never understood why they place the seat at the window rows so far away from the windows that you can hardly see anything but the sky once you are airborne. Am I the only one who pick the window seats because I like to be able to see the landscape we are passing?[/left]
Aug 7, 2019, 11:42 am
#85
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
GOT and even little MMX have a history of having scheduled common carrier flights to Belgrade. But those haven’t been by SAS for some decades at least, IIRC.
Aug 7, 2019, 1:39 pm
#87
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Etihad doesn’t have the backing to subsidize other carriers like it used to have. Air Serbia is basically going to have to float or sink on its own without counting on Etihad as its savior.
SK has flown flights on routes where it faces competitors with lower variable cost structures than SAS faces, but SAS just isn’t as big into serving the immigrant communities settled in Sweden as it is into serving routes where premium cabin demand is more robust.
Aug 7, 2019, 2:08 pm
#88
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: SJJ/AMS
Posts: 4,647
Aug 7, 2019, 2:33 pm
#89
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
I think SAS’s approach to its route network seems to be all about serving what it considers “mainstream” destinations. And speaking of the Gulf carriers like EY, they built their business around catering to non-“mainstream” destinations where it was about providing service to immigrant labor and related VFR traffic. SAS just seems to not see that as an important element of competing. On the other hand, the EU3 carriers make their networks work by combining SAS’s approach with the kind of approach EK/EY/QR counted upon too.
SAS has been doubling down on counting on US-Europe/Europe-US traffic as it’s main refuge in a competitive environment, but there is a limit to what that can do for SAS when the EU3 are in a better position than SAS (to provide that and more) and have governmental waivers and favors allowing them to collude with their own partner US3 airline.
SAS has been doubling down on counting on US-Europe/Europe-US traffic as it’s main refuge in a competitive environment, but there is a limit to what that can do for SAS when the EU3 are in a better position than SAS (to provide that and more) and have governmental waivers and favors allowing them to collude with their own partner US3 airline.
Last edited by NewbieRunner; Aug 8, 2019 at 2:53 pm Reason: Moved part of post to the Forum Kafé thread
Aug 7, 2019, 3:26 pm
#90
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
SAS seems to be skipping the boat to Poland for the most part too, at a time when I encounter way more Polish-speakers in southern and eastern Sweden than Serbo-Croat-/Bosnian-speakers. That said, I’m expecting that the FYR-connected population in Sweden is still at least double that of the Sweden-residing, Polish-connected population in Sweden.
CPH has VFR flight demand from ethnic Polish people in Sweden and also from Polish Danes — a growing number of whom also seem to live in southern Sweden. But I am not holding my breath waiting for SAS to do anything majorly different than it has been doing for that VFR traffic too. But I can’t complain since my routes tend to be the mainstream routes for SAS.
I just need an SAS route to MSP and DEN, then I’ll be in heaven.
CPH has VFR flight demand from ethnic Polish people in Sweden and also from Polish Danes — a growing number of whom also seem to live in southern Sweden. But I am not holding my breath waiting for SAS to do anything majorly different than it has been doing for that VFR traffic too. But I can’t complain since my routes tend to be the mainstream routes for SAS.
I just need an SAS route to MSP and DEN, then I’ll be in heaven.
Last edited by NewbieRunner; Aug 8, 2019 at 2:58 pm Reason: Moved part of the post to the Forum Kafé thread