Do you think Emirates is superior to SQ?
Dec 5, 2013, 1:37 am
#91
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,265
As I am still quite convinced that legally, EK is in not position to overrule Airbus.
Anyway, the article about EK exploring 11-abreast would not have materialised if Airbus categorically flat out refused it.
If they wanted it badly why would they not have done so from the start? Before Airbus started to brag to the world that Boeings are shabby sardine cans (which they are now)? They ought to have started with 11 abreast and none of this would come back to haunt them.
Dec 5, 2013, 1:46 am
#92
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,265
How you value this, yes that is an opinion.
..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. 
Dec 5, 2013, 2:34 am
#93
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: AUH
Posts: 8,267
Why? I am not even convinced that EK actually endorsed that article and that EK has serious plans to degrade the A380 to 11 abreast.
If they wanted it badly why would they not have done so from the start? Before Airbus started to brag to the world that Boeings are shabby sardine cans (which they are now)? They ought to have started with 11 abreast and none of this would come back to haunt them.
If they wanted it badly why would they not have done so from the start? Before Airbus started to brag to the world that Boeings are shabby sardine cans (which they are now)? They ought to have started with 11 abreast and none of this would come back to haunt them.
Remember that until AF/KL (I think) decided to go 10-across on their 77W, the 777 also used to be a 100% 9-across on the airlines that adopted it. But once the novelty of the better economics of the original 777 wore off, some people start thinking of ways to squeeze more out of the aircraft.
PS. Even 8-across on the A330/A340 are not sacred - D7 have 9-across on theirs.
Dec 5, 2013, 5:11 am
#94
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Singapore, Warsaw, Surfers Paradise
Programs: KrisFlyer Gold>>>Silver>>>Blue, Finnair Silver, Royal Caribbean Diamond
Posts: 5,174
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.
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.
I don't quite see most of your arguments as facts, and when you mention something specific it often is besides the point - like "I don't like the doors on SQ suites" (definitely a deal breaker!) or "EK has vastly superior IFE" (making the assumption that everyone is after the same thing as yourself in terms of film/tv/music selection).
Or another one of your "facts" that EK is regarded as the most luxurious airline because it featured in the movie Sex and the City.
Plus you tend to use excuses a lot, like EK has to ghetto-down its Y because they need to fly poor labourers around. Or how EK need to show off because they have a culture of expressing their "excessive wealth" and because they're owned by the dictators who run this little bubble of theirs. Here's a better way to express that: rip out a row of seats in Y and be the only airline with so few seats across (or in EK's case, they'd have to rip out two on the 77W for that to happen
). That would be impressive and a sign of quality. The opposite is a sign of desperation and trying to churn out every possible $ at the expense of passenger comfort.You seriously want to discuss facts?
"9 vs. 10 across seating doesn't make EK a budget airline" - call it as you want, but it does turn econ - which is already tight as it is - into a sardine can. Fact? Fact. Stepping up to J I saw 2-3-2 as opposed to 1-2-1, so 7 vs. 4 across. Once again, must be very tight in there compared to SQ where everyone has unrestricted aisle access. Fact? Fact.
When a passenger gets shaken down for extra cash due to 3 kg over the limit is that something that is associated with premium carriers or budget airlines? I think we all know the answer to that one. SQ won't even blink at this for econ pax, whereas EK will even harass a suites passenger in an effort to extort extra cash from them.
Oh, and if you have a ticket in First and EK switches metal to a configuration with no F (oh yes, can happen!), what happens? No partial refund, no nothing. You pay for F but simply fly in J. Welcome to EK.
Service-wise you said it, not up there with SQ.
On a side note, how many years in a row has Singapore Airlines topped the Travel+Leisure awards for best international airline? Last time I checked Air New Zealand overtook EK.
Enough fact-talking...
To sum things up, the things you mention are generally irrelevant to most people. Pigs will fly before someone shows up posting how they decided to choose a different airline over SQ due to the IFE, that would just be too funny. Kind of like refusing to fly SQ because someone can't stand Changi - it simply isn't going to happen.
Same with the motorised door - not exactly the most important thing that wins over customers' hearts. But you can bet that there are people who given the choice would easily prefer a 1-2-1 setup in biz over 2-3-2. Someone would be crazy not to...
Dec 5, 2013, 7:33 am
#95
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: perth
Programs: SPG(LTG), QANTAS gold, Korean, Accor Plat
Posts: 1,500
Suites have no relevance to the vast majority of passengers. Based on my experience flying on Singapore flights that regularly are half full when other airlines are getting high loadings would indicate that people don't value what Singapore Airlines are offering.
Firstly for frequent flyers Krisflyer sucks bigtime. Minimal benefits and no upgrades. Emirates I averaged 25% upgrades so for me Im glad they have the extra business seats so I can get the upgrade to them. Redemptions with Singapore points is poor value. Ive found competitor full value fares cheaper than the fuel surcharges and taxes they put on their redemptions. Emirates on the other hand have redemptions with no fuel surcharges.
Emirates inflight entertainment is far superior to Krisworld. Many more channels and huge variety. Lots of language options.
I don't even know what half of you are talking about in regards to service. You get some drinks, you get a meal what more do you expect?
Im not saying SIA isn't a good airline but they are losing ground in destinations and value to an extent they will be classed as a boutique provider in the not too distant future. Singapore was a hub but they are gradually being bypassed.
Dec 5, 2013, 11:09 am
#96
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Singapore, Warsaw, Surfers Paradise
Programs: KrisFlyer Gold>>>Silver>>>Blue, Finnair Silver, Royal Caribbean Diamond
Posts: 5,174
To change the subject, we've been looking at suites for much too long, which geminidreams pointed out quite accurately. The biggest differences between airlines are mainly in J. A good benchmark for this has always been the rule of thumb here at FT, that even the best airline's J is not going to compare with an average airline's F. ^
Now when it comes to F and we put suites aside - assuming that suites are the ultimate way to travel which isn't necessarily the case as many people do not like being boxed in - then neither SQ nor EK have such a strong position any more. Why would anyone choose them over BA or LH F? Or one of the Korean or Japanese carriers' F products?
Now when it comes to F and we put suites aside - assuming that suites are the ultimate way to travel which isn't necessarily the case as many people do not like being boxed in - then neither SQ nor EK have such a strong position any more. Why would anyone choose them over BA or LH F? Or one of the Korean or Japanese carriers' F products?
Dec 5, 2013, 11:38 am
#97
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: DXB / WAW
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 726
As for the whole SQ vs EK thing being superior. Even if SQ is better in some areas, their prices are ridiculous. I have quickly checked SQ LHR-SIN-LHR in J and it is roughly GBP 4000. EK for the same, albeit not direct flight, charge almost half the price and all flights on A380 with 1-2-1 setup. Now, is the SQ J really twice superior to EK J on A380? I really doubt it.
Last edited by stiwi; Dec 5, 2013 at 11:44 am
Dec 5, 2013, 2:54 pm
#98
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast
Programs: AA CONCIERGE KEY & 1MM, HILTON DIAMOND
Posts: 11,970
I must confess that I love the intimate feeling because the SQ R cabin is usually very lightly booked, but that cannot be a good RM strategy for the airline as a whole and most of the time, I still choose EK because of the nicer suites in my opinion at a fraction of the SQ rate.
Dec 5, 2013, 5:07 pm
#99
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: perth
Programs: SPG(LTG), QANTAS gold, Korean, Accor Plat
Posts: 1,500
The only time I paid excess baggage on Emirates was my first trip when I rocked up with 75 kg in Y. In Y as a gold the baggage allowance is 46 kG, silver 42kg . It is only the last month that you can get equivalent in SIA. I always had more issues when connecting with other airlines!
Dec 5, 2013, 6:37 pm
#100
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,265
..But the commercial reality is, they don't need to. With the competition between A vs B, neither company are in a position to flat out refuse to entertain airlines' reasonable initiatives. Of course, reasonable in this case being only related to safety rather than passenger comfort.
And isn't seat with highly linked with DVT? But legal pressure on airlines has always been extremely mild, so I doubt that even hard medical correlation would impede this evolution.
PS. Even 8-across on the A330/A340 are not sacred - D7 have 9-across on theirs.
You mentioned the 340 .. is there any airline that operates a 3-3-3 340? Or a 2-5-2 one for that matter?
Dec 5, 2013, 7:56 pm
#101
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Asia
Programs: KF Gold | IHG Amb | SPG LTG | HH Gold
Posts: 548
Valid arguments. Sometimes is down to personal choice really.
I choose airlines based on 1) convenience and 2) comfort.
Based on where I'm from, I never find EK convenient at all.
SQ is brilliant, albeit very pricey - yes, service is sometimes patchy, but this seems to be affecting every airline lately.
Do I really care about EK if I travel on Y/J? Absolutely not. I might think otherwise if I have the chance to go on F though.
I choose airlines based on 1) convenience and 2) comfort.
Based on where I'm from, I never find EK convenient at all.
SQ is brilliant, albeit very pricey - yes, service is sometimes patchy, but this seems to be affecting every airline lately.
Do I really care about EK if I travel on Y/J? Absolutely not. I might think otherwise if I have the chance to go on F though.
Dec 5, 2013, 10:51 pm
#102
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Singapore, Warsaw, Surfers Paradise
Programs: KrisFlyer Gold>>>Silver>>>Blue, Finnair Silver, Royal Caribbean Diamond
Posts: 5,174
On a side note, look at BA and 2-4-2 config in J. I haven't flown with them for more than 1 year and just did SIN-SYD-SIN in J. It reminded me straight away how good job did they do with reverse seating. The two middle E F seats are like mini private cabin. You really get great privacy, despite someone is sitting literally next to you. I have yet to find an airline which would give greater privacy in J for couples.
Dec 6, 2013, 5:52 am
#103
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,265
On SQ's 77W and A380, the foot space also overlaps the body space of the passenger in front, hence by that logic these arrangement are 8 abreast as well.
Dec 6, 2013, 7:00 am
#104
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: AUH
Posts: 8,267
Although ultimately, the real test is how many seats they stuff into the same space. In that regard, the forward cabin of the BA A380 contains 25 seats, whereas the SQ A380 contains 18 seats.
Dec 6, 2013, 10:22 am
#105
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Australia
Programs: SQ & QF
Posts: 1,302
[QUOTE=geminidreams;21907705]Don't know where you get 1-2-1 setups as all the 777 and 330 flights I have been on its 2-2-2./QUOTE]
You must be on regional aircraft, Long haul aircraft such as the A340, A380 & 77W have 1-2-1.
You must be on regional aircraft, Long haul aircraft such as the A340, A380 & 77W have 1-2-1.