sbm12

You've yet to demonstrate that there is such a market in any reasonable volume. You're going to struggle to sell many seats of a "premium" offering when you're not including check-in counters (and you'll need those anyways for checked bags), meals, lounge access, etc. Skipping priority boarding and bag tags isn't an issue on a 50-60 passenger flight but the other bits will be. And those aren't really things which cost much to provide anyways.

The expensive parts - having an operational plane with a qualified crew and sufficient fuel to make it between the airports where you're paying for gate space - are not changing in the business model you've described. And that means you still need to have very close to the same level of revenue to make such an endeavor reasonable. Bringing in a significantly smaller amount of cash won't really work if the savings are the ~$50-100/passenger in various amenities like meals and lounge access.

Cassie55

Your timing is off.

AA pulled out of STN in 1993 (and it was ORD not JFK). Eos didn't start flying from STN until 2005 and Silverjet until very late 2006 (or possibly early 2007).

txflyer77

SAS can charge pretty much whatever they want on that route and the oil companies will pay it. I'm sure they've got some solid corporate contracts with Conoco and Shell guaranteeing business on that route.

Being a *A member SAS also has lots of IRROPs options out of IAH via UA and LH.

TravelerMSY

The inflight and ground catering is a small fraction of the ticket price. The additional jet fuel required to fly you and your heavy biz class seat that consumes the space of 3 Y seats is the big expense.

Don't you think if there were a huge market for biz class seats that the majors would already have larger biz class cabins? And they do discount the seats frequently- they just don't do it explicitly in the price, rather by allowing kiosk or mileage upgrades from lower classes.

LondonElite

That's not right. AA briefly had a STN service to JFK between October 2007 to July 2008.

sbm12

It isn't all that much extra fuel for the seats so much as much less revenue if you're selling them at Y prices anyways but only selling a third of them (and really more like an eighth).
http://hub.aa.com/en/nr/pressrelease...ondon-stansted

JFK-STN launched on 28 October 2007. It was a direct response to the all-biz operations.

http://hub.aa.com/en/nr/pressrelease...ondon-stansted

It was cut in July though AA doesn't bother to put a date on its press releases so I don't have the specific year. I believe it was 2008 based on maxJET and eos's demise shortly prior.

florin

I agree. For a long haul flight, I would sometimes pay for a better seat, but something like €100 for 2 extra inches is just not worth it to me. I have, however, paid close to €300 to UG to C for a MUCH better seat. The Y+ offerings nowadays are too much in favor of the airline (they offer too little for too much money); a more balanced approach is needed, IMO. Maybe it will take some time to level off.

An all biz no-frills airline would not work and that has been proven by several examples. What may work and may even end up happening eventually is a decent Y+ product, with much better seats and no additional biz benefits such as lounge access and excess luggage, priced reasonably enough to get people to buy it. (That or simply sell reasonable UGs to J when seats are available, as some airlines already do.)

FFlash

[QUOTE=florin;24071577]I agree. For a long haul flight, I would sometimes pay for a better seat, but something like €100 for 2 extra inches is just not worth it to me. I have, however, paid close to €300 to UG to C for a MUCH better seat. The Y+ offerings nowadays are too much in favor of the airline (they offer too little for too much money); a more balanced approach is needed, IMO. Maybe it will take some time to level off.
QUOTE]

Thanks for all posts here, now I have learned this has been tried before and it seems not the right timing.

But I am sure time will change and current products are forced to change.

In the meanwhile, I might only be then looking into something of "premium" cabin of Norwegian or alike, which I do not buy, since the seat is not good enough. Same goes for legacy premium economies, airlines have set them in between business and economy with a slider % between the attributes and then set a too high price on it. For me they fail completely in being mediocre at everything.

As an intermediate, I might expect if any LCC comes up a revamped cabin with no-frills but few lie-flat seats in front. For leasure travel

FLLDL

The current airline which most closely resembles your idea is La Compagnie which flies between Paris and Newark in an all business configuration.

Their fares are substantially less than the competition in business and in many cases are competitive with coach ($1400 or $1500 roundtrip).

I do think that there is a market for business-lite products. The main issue is that it will be very difficult for a standalone startup like this (or like Maxjet, Silverjet, Eos etc) to be the one to successfully introduce this to the market as the competition has enormous advantages from vast route networks, flexible fleets etc etc.

Artpen100

I think another issue has been that many international frequent flyers fly to more than one location. So an all-business airline would seem to work only when (1) it is materially less expensive and (2) there are enough regular flyers on that route to fill a plane. Otherwise, you might give your business to the few airlines that fly a lot of places, so the FF miles you accrue you can use for upgrades on those flights when available. I flew Openskies a few times years ago (when they were still all-business/first) from IAD, though I did not find it that much cheaper than AF or UA much of the time. I have not had an opportunity to fly Le Compagnie EWR to CDG, though their prices are, at least for now, significantly lower. I'd be interested to try it, but that is not a route I take often. But NY are probably has a lot of people who do.

lhrsfo

This already exists and does work on many major airlines and in various iterations. It's hugely nicer than economy but a) it's not lie flat (more akin to what US airlines call First Class, b) it usually comes with slightly better food and wine than economy (but not much better) and c) it's not free, unlike US airlines' E+ offerings.

BearX220

This is exactly what British Airways, Air France, Air New Zealand, Cathay Pacific, and others provide with their Premium Economy products, which have no analogue among the US-based carriers.

Remember that business class was born decades ago as a way to give business travelers a little something extra for their money when they were proscribed from booking into first class. It was meant to be a sort of super-coach. Fast forward 30+ years and business class is now more opulent and comfortable than the old F cabins ever were -- standards in premium cabins have crept up steadily -- so these Premium Economy products are sort of throwbacks to the original mission of business class.

ryanbryan

ScootBiz on Scoot, Business Class on AirAsia X, Premium on Norwegian and StarClass on Jetstar are all examples of pretty much this existing already.

MSPeconomist

Business class initially was full fare coach, a way to reward people who were buying full fare tickets, perhaps because mulitcity routings were needed in the days of TATL RT fares all requiring advanced purchase and seven day stays. Revenue management was in its infancy and there was pushback as passengers started to realize the range of fares being flown on any given flight, with multiples of three being common rants then. IIRC SAS was one of the early ones, then TWA and BA with others following. IIRC business class appeared in the early 1980s.

florin

Out of your examples, I can only speak for AF and that is a far cry form what we are talking about here. What you have is basically Y seats but with a bit of additional space (a few inches extra for pitch and recline). The price is significantly higher than Y (several hundred more). IMO, this is no different than Y+ on other airlines (e.g. DL, KL) because falls under the "too little for too much money" category.

This is where we disagree. I laugh when AF sends emails about Premium Economy, saying how it's more private, more quiet, as if that section is apparently towed behind the airplane and it has no engines. It's simply Y+ with a different marketing strategy (requiring a different fare as opposed to a sum that you can pay at any point to "upgrade").

It's nothing like the old business class because you don't get other C benefits (additional luggage, lounge access, better food/drinks). I'm fine with just the better seat if it were indeed significantly better and the price were reasonable (as opposed to slightly more legroom and recline for several hundred dollars/euros/whatever)