djjaguar64

How is it diluted? Less champagne for you?

aster

Ek keeps trying to chase SQ when it comes to portraying the image of a top carrier. And of course they follow up with Suites after SQ was the first to launch them - kind of like how Apple launches the iPad and suddenly the chasers run around frantically trying to put out a similar product.

Electric doors do you say? Wow. Are you allowed to use them when the fasten seat-belt sign is displayed?

EK is all about gimmicks. I don't get excited about airline lavatories as it is, so why on earth would I get an orgasm when thinking of some make-shift shower up in the sky? Fair enough if I was an astronaut faced with the prospect of spending several more months in orbit, but down here I prefer a shower on the ground.

It doesn't matter how many drones EK assigns per cabin compared to others if the service on SQ is spectacular. Just like having 10 waiters jumping around me wouldn't make my experience any better at a restaurant. Leave it to the experts to set this right - would SQ be better if more people jumped around you offering your drinks? Nope. They already have enough to create a top-class service.

IFE? SQ's system is great, I have yet to see a better one. It certainly gives me everything I want by providing loads of great films from various categories, including special sections where I can watch Korean, Chinese and Japanese films that I would never get the opportunity to see elsewhere. So forgive me if EK will show the new Superman movie a week earlier as I won't be watching it anyway.

fly747first

Entirely incorrect. EK introduced Private Suites with electric doors when it acquired A340-500s, which were launched way before the A380 was even doing its testing trials.

EK F (well, on A380 and B777 aircraft fitted with Suites) is my favorite and I have never been told that I can't close the Suite doors when the fasten seat belt sign is on. However, I do see the cabin crew looking into my Suite to ensure that my seat belt is indeed fastened.

You clearly dislike EK and that's fine, but that doesn't change the fact that for starters, EK was the world's very first airline to launch Private Suites AND on non-A380 aircraft (to be fair, at the time, there were no A380s).

Now if we were talking about J, there is no question that SQ's J defeats EK J's in every possible way.

FN-GM

To be fair you not exactly being balanced yourself.

fly747first

I'm just stating the facts, that's all... to state that EK launched its Private Suites to outperform the SQ A380 Suites is flat out wrong because EK launched the very first Private Suites years before the A380 even existed and the EK A380 and B777 Suites aren't really that different, except for a few extra features such as the automatic window shades and showers (A380 only), but the base product itself isn't drastically different than the one EK introduced with the A340-500 fleet.

weero

I thought that Airbus will not offer such a product? They take great pride in their coach cabins.

weero

Uncalled for ad hominem.

fly747first elaborated in detail what he finds better aboard EK with facts and numbers and did not merely praise the airline for its halo, glamour, or reputation.

His posts were very insightful.

stargold

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/emira...east-a380.html

To be perfectly frank, their current "campaign" for a minimum seat width in Economy re. A350 is no more than an attempt to create a favourable point of comparison vs. the 77X. I don't think they actually care any more about Economy passengers' seat comfort than Boeing does - i.e. it's always down to the individual airlines, not the aircraft manufacturers.

weero

Isn't the manufacturer ultimately responsible for the seating certification? I doubt that the airline could easily (other than of course via economic pressure) overrule the manufacturer here.

Plus Airbus heavily advertises this position and it is a very valid one. Backpedaling on this one will be embarrassing.

If you visit Airbus' website they shove this ad into your face, I doubt it is just a temporary fad.

I think it would also make a great piece of EU regulation to required an 18" minimum. Sure OS would have to make some adjustments but overall it would indeed bring reason back.

stargold

I don't think Airbus is in any position to be saying no to EK. Especially with the latest order, I'd imagine it's very much a case of "Jump" and "How high?"

Anyway, the article about EK exploring 11-abreast would not have materialised if Airbus categorically flat out refused it. But my reading is that's not the case here. They might not think it's a good idea, but if EK demonstrate the safety and other requirements of the 3-5-3 config then I just don't think 3-4-3 is something Airbus is desperate to "defend" at any great cost, especially not against their best customer.

Nothing is sacred anymore in the airline world, as it is slowly beginning to be apparent...

aster

Hmm, first to contemplate 11-abreast in A380 econ? They've already done the same on the 77W, squeezing in a 3-4-3 layout compared to SQ's 3-3-3.

Y is probably not much different depending on the aircraft. It's probably quite painful on the 77W and if EK's A380 goes in the same direction then things will really look bad. Suites also lose out to SQ to be honest, not by a large margin and both have their good points but SQ is still the top choice (not taking prices into account).

On a side note my apologies about the whole 'who was first to have suites' issue - I was thinking of the 'big bird' in the sky, the grandest plane that every A380 operator can proudly display as its flagship aircraft. But if we look at smaller planes then I agree that others might have plugged a suites-like product ahead of the A380 ever entering into service...

aster

His posts are always very insightful, plus it's always great to discuss something from various angles. ^

I am not convinced personally by electric doors, more staff than necessary dancing around me in a premium cabin or IFE that I would never call better in terms of offering, but these are all opinions and it's great that we can all pitch in with our opinions. If we all had the same approach we'd all be living in the same country, driving the same model of car, eating the same food, drinking the same beer/wine + have exactly the same model of phone/tablet/laptop/etc. The world would be one, boring place.

fly747first

Remember the social stratification of Dubai: a large truly rich class and an even larger poor, immigrant class so naturally, EK has figured out that it can optimize its Y class revenues by being able to offer more seats at lower prices. To EK's credit, they aren't the only airline doing it on 777s (for example, AA, AF, EY, KL, 9W, and the list goes on).

My point, however, is that EK is an extremely affluent airline and overall, EK and "budget airline" just don't go together, because despite a tight Y configuration, it provides 4-course meals (they used to do 5-course meals in Y but that hasn't been the case lately), menus, and even amenity kits to passengers booked in its lowest class-of-service. Further, even Hollywood, which as we know doesn't have the smartest cookies haha, tends to favor Emirates as having the world's most luxurious First Class (think of Sex and the City 2... the girls were flying to AUH but the design of the First Class cabin was clearly Emirates, not Etihad's).

To specifically address the issue of 11 seats across the A380s, EK has made it clear that it would only do so for the high density, 630-seat version which wouldn't really be assigned to say, markets like JFK and LHR served by the standard 3-class A380 version. Again, given the large number of poor immigrants working in Dubai, from a strategy perspective, I can understand why EK would want to offer that many seats to attract more immigrants who are looking for the cheapest fare, not luxury. This isn't a new concept really, before the jet era, it was no secret that ultra luxurious lines like Cunard and White Star made a significant portion of their profits from Third Class/Steerage passengers who required little space in exchange for low rates.

Now on the other end of the spectrum, is it excessive to have 6 cabin crews looking after a maximum of 14 F passengers? Of course! But as several critics have stated, Dubai and Emirates are like Singapore on steroids. And yes, EK is not afraid to show off and they don't care that Skytrax doesn't want to award them a 5 star rating when EK is already much better than QR.

aster

The movie was about heading off to Abu Dhabi at the expense of a sheik, so naturally they were going to fly some exquisite airline to make things interesting and not... Delta. I would hardly say that this is a sign from Hollywood that Emirates is the world's most luxurious airline.

That was one lousy film btw (I did like part one though).

Right, so they want to be both a budget carrier and a premium airline all at the same time? Singapore has a similar issue as both countries are actually build by cheap, "imported" construction workers. But over here they have other airlines to handle the budget side whereas Singapore Airlines maintains a high standard even in econ (choice of 3 dishes to choose from, very good IFE, better choice of alcoholic beverages than LH C, etc.).

Interesting that you mentioned Cunard. My parents sailed with them last year and didn't really like it due to these various levels/classes, etc. They prefer the Silversea approach and in fact I just waived them goodbye yesterday on another cruise. On the way back they'll do the usual, fly in on SQ suites and after a few days continue on EK suites. They do enjoy EK, but they rate the SQ suite experience higher.

And this is all onboard, because if I were to throw in that EK will shake down a Suites passenger for extra cash due to being 3kg over the luggage limit then that smell of a budget airline mentality would be hard to dissipate.

Don't you get the impression these are all gimmicks, and more of a cultural thing? The decor with all the gold, more people serving you, the need to make things look expensive as a prime criterion. Does that constitute true class? As mentioned maybe it's a cultural thing just like people from certain countries like to hang 2 kg of gold on them when they go out.

Overall in these parts of the world, from Europe to Australia, SQ is seen as the quality airline, almost in a league of its own. This has long been the case, even with the old F on the 747, but I would agree that the A380 has helped propel SQ's already solid image to new heights. Not just because of Suites, but also a J product that is the best one in the sky.

As mentioned, Y is good, J is great, suites are suites and don't need commenting on, but bottom line is they don't need to do any juggling act by turning into a budget carrier at the back, trying to hype up media attention with some make-shift shower in the front, and then forgetting about the middle.

fly747first

I think you are rather confused at multiple levels so I will try my best to clarify:

My reference to Cunard and White Star, as I explicitly stated, was to the pre-jet era when these lines did not function as cruise lines and followed a distinct 3-class structure (much like their American and European counterparts at the time).

True class is highly subjective and I did not make any comments about such in my post above. From my own experience and my colleagues', we much prefer EK's rich Suite decor over SQ's cheap, fake wood and flimsy plastic doors that often do not close well. It is sad that even a struggling airline like 9W can manage to have better non-motorized Suite doors than SQ. On the other hand, SQ's truly 5-star cabin crews are in a class of their own and EK has a long way to get their cabin crews to that level of sophistication and graciousness. Many people claim that SQ's cabin crews are robotic, but I have never shared that opinion and continue to find them to be outstanding.

As for culture, Dubai and the UAE in general have never been modest about disclosing their excessive wealth. I'm not sure why you'd expect EK to do the opposite since it is owned by high ranking officials of Dubai.

You go above and beyond to defend SQ at all levels but I try to stick with facts. Again, EK is not a budget airline and has simply learned how to market itself much better than SQ by catering to both the rich and the poor. SQ failed at offering all J class flights and its Suite load factors are quite poor. I have been on so many flights that R is booked to either one or two pax that I wonderful how SQ doesn't adopt better RM strategies whereas on EK, F tends to have very high load factors with mostly paying passengers.

If you don't mind me asking, have you actually flown EK? The reason I ask is because you claim that "whereas Singapore Airlines maintains a high standard even in econ (choice of 3 dishes to choose from, very good IFE, better choice of alcoholic beverages than LH C, etc.)." First of all, with that logic, one could argue that SQ doesn't deserve to be 5-star airline because it doesn't offer freshly squeezed orange juice like EK and even TK do. EK's ICE is vastly superior to SQ's and pretty much every other airline out there as evidenced by the many awards it has won; it is available for free in all classes. Again, EK, just like SQ, provides menus and amenity kits. Overall, I do think that SQ's Y is slightly better than EK's, but two entree options versus three or 9 vs. 10 across seating doesn't make EK a budget airline, because if that were the case, then we would have to redefine ultra low cost for SQ's Scoot, which doesn't even offer leg rests in its premium cabin. To be completely honest, I expected far more from SQ when it launched Scoot, but sadly, even Air Asia has a much better premium cabin.