Aug 3, 2020, 2:21 pm
July 1983 Royal Pacific Service 747
Jul 17, 2019, 11:24 am
#46
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
There's plenty of indicators of how I am right. One way of looking at Polaris lounges is they are a product that FF'ers can't access based on status or points.
I think you will actually see more of this in the future. Luxury works just fine so long as it is exclusive to wealthy people. But any product widely available for free is not going to be as luxurious.
Jul 17, 2019, 11:26 am
#47
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: 1A
Programs: UA GS, NH Diamond, Hyatt Lifetime Globalist (formerly Courtesy Card sadly), Amanjunkie, CLEAR
Posts: 3,713
"There were less upgrades back then. I remember flying from NRT to LAX on an almost brand new 744 in 1997 and I was one of only two passengers in F."
This is key. RP service was a soft product for very wealthy people. It required lots of FA's, extremely labor intensive catering operations, plenty of training, and very high quality foodstuffs.
The reason we don't see First Class like this anymore, simply speaking, is because premium cabins now attract a significant number of nonpaying customers. You just can't give this stuff away, even to very loyal customers (and with credit cards and the like, plenty of people with tons of miles aren't even loyal customers), and make a profit. On the other hand, if you could somehow limit it to people who pay $9,000 roundtrip to Tokyo and keep frequent flyers out, it might be profitable.
This is key. RP service was a soft product for very wealthy people. It required lots of FA's, extremely labor intensive catering operations, plenty of training, and very high quality foodstuffs.
The reason we don't see First Class like this anymore, simply speaking, is because premium cabins now attract a significant number of nonpaying customers. You just can't give this stuff away, even to very loyal customers (and with credit cards and the like, plenty of people with tons of miles aren't even loyal customers), and make a profit. On the other hand, if you could somehow limit it to people who pay $9,000 roundtrip to Tokyo and keep frequent flyers out, it might be profitable.
Jul 17, 2019, 12:05 pm
#48
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
I routinely pay more than $10K USD round trip from Cali to Tokyo, and I certainly do not get anything near the levels of service of United’s past. Very frustrating to be carrying the airline while receiving declining service year over year. I can’t say NH or JAL offer something significantly better either. Everything has been marginalized these days and there is no recourse other than the very significant step up in cost to flying semi or fully private, which appears to be an even poorer value. Overall as tech advances and populations grow, it’s funny (read: sad) how service ALWAYS declines.
If they made it more exclusive, they might improve the service. As they did with the Polaris lounge.
Jul 17, 2019, 12:16 pm
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,391
Your explanation makes no sense at all. The main reason that you get F service on international flag carriers is that they're often not trying to make a profit. And, even those that have been known for F are cutting back (e.g., SQ).
If you're going to ofter F in the first place, the incremental costs for a couple of passengers to fill seats that you're not able to sell are relatively minimal. The problem isn't the "nonpaying" customers; it's the fact that there aren't enough paying customers.
Jul 17, 2019, 4:30 pm
#50
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: USA
Programs: UA Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,193
When airfares were regulated, the airlines could count on the revenue and differentiate themselves by level of comfort and service. The airlines do other things to ensure they make a profit when airline seats are commodity items and fares ratchet down. Yes, I miss the feeling of luxury and service from flying in the 70s and 80s. I don't miss the airfare or feeling like I had to "dress up" for the flight (no kidding, that's what I was instructed to do when taking flights in the 1970s).
Jul 17, 2019, 5:25 pm
#51
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
You do realize that us awful, misbegotten, scum of the earth "FF'ers" can access the Polaris lounge with an upgraded ticket, right?
Your explanation makes no sense at all. The main reason that you get F service on international flag carriers is that they're often not trying to make a profit. And, even those that have been known for F are cutting back (e.g., SQ).
If you're going to ofter F in the first place, the incremental costs for a couple of passengers to fill seats that you're not able to sell are relatively minimal. The problem isn't the "nonpaying" customers; it's the fact that there aren't enough paying customers.
Your explanation makes no sense at all. The main reason that you get F service on international flag carriers is that they're often not trying to make a profit. And, even those that have been known for F are cutting back (e.g., SQ).
If you're going to ofter F in the first place, the incremental costs for a couple of passengers to fill seats that you're not able to sell are relatively minimal. The problem isn't the "nonpaying" customers; it's the fact that there aren't enough paying customers.
People who pay boatloads of money for luxury goods want exclusivity. They want a velvet rope. Many, many companies profitably serve such markets. They do so by maintaining that exclusivity.
Jul 17, 2019, 6:05 pm
#52
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,391
The simple fact of the matter is that F is going away, globally, because it's been proven, time and time again, that it's unprofitable.
Jul 17, 2019, 6:27 pm
#53
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Denver, Colorado
Programs: IHG Spire, Hilton Honors Gold, Marriott Titanium, Mileage Plus Gold
Posts: 1,736
You do realize that us awful, misbegotten, scum of the earth "FF'ers" can access the Polaris lounge with an upgraded ticket, right?
Your explanation makes no sense at all. The main reason that you get F service on international flag carriers is that they're often not trying to make a profit. And, even those that have been known for F are cutting back (e.g., SQ).
If you're going to ofter F in the first place, the incremental costs for a couple of passengers to fill seats that you're not able to sell are relatively minimal. The problem isn't the "nonpaying" customers; it's the fact that there aren't enough paying customers.
Your explanation makes no sense at all. The main reason that you get F service on international flag carriers is that they're often not trying to make a profit. And, even those that have been known for F are cutting back (e.g., SQ).
If you're going to ofter F in the first place, the incremental costs for a couple of passengers to fill seats that you're not able to sell are relatively minimal. The problem isn't the "nonpaying" customers; it's the fact that there aren't enough paying customers.
Jul 17, 2019, 9:16 pm
#54
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,391
Perhaps, but if they do that, the service will get worse, not better -- they'll justify additional cuts by the fact that the lounges are empty.
Jul 21, 2019, 11:46 pm
#55
formerly 1984SW
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Merida, Yucatan, Mexico
Programs: UA
Posts: 1,058
No. The kimonos were worn only by "International Service Representatives" (interpreters) who were forbidden from performing F/A duties, so couldn't get you a drink, serve you a meal, etc. They translated announcements into Japanese and would assist F/As in the aisles with any translation issues. Other than that, they wandered the cabins asking folks if they needed any information for their destination. On HNL flights (after Pac Day) they also carried a Polaroid camera to take photos of Japanese honeymoon couples.
Jul 21, 2019, 11:55 pm
#56
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Denver, Colorado
Programs: IHG Spire, Hilton Honors Gold, Marriott Titanium, Mileage Plus Gold
Posts: 1,736
No. The kimonos were worn only by "International Service Representatives" (interpreters) who were forbidden from performing F/A duties, so couldn't get you a drink, serve you a meal, etc. They translated announcements into Japanese and would assist F/As in the aisles with any translation issues. Other than that, they wandered the cabins asking folks if they needed any information for their destination. On HNL flights (after Pac Day) they also carried a Polaroid camera to take photos of Japanese honeymoon couples.
Jul 22, 2019, 12:03 am
#57
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
The problem is not that people (and in specific OPM travel) will not pay for "First" its that International Business with direct Aisle Lie Flat seats was nice enough that few people would pay for a bigger seat (the old UA First suites) OR an even more expansive suite. Put another way, J is nice enough at $7K that the value proposition to pay $15+K for "First" is not so great.
But this says nothing about whether people will pay for better soft product. The biggest cost of all is flying the seat around. The cost to send that seat accross the pacific is vastly greater than the soft-product costs (not service, extra FAs are more expensive). Lots of ways to look at "costs" - opportunity costs or just a pro-rata share of the available floor/weight, but either way its is several thousand $$$s to run a lie flat seat TPAC and back. The soft product at the cheapest (UA and now more and more AA) might run $40-50 max each way. A much higher level of product might run an extra $20 each way. Compared to flying the seat, its chump change, to offer decent wines, coffee/expresso, tea, and food, as well as better bedding.
But this has little to do with the demand for "first class" vs in the days of yore. That has mostly to do with today's J seat being BETTER than the old First seat, and too few people willing to pay a lot more for some type of suite product vs a direct aisle lie flat seat.
Jul 22, 2019, 12:26 am
#58
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,568
The problem is not that people (and in specific OPM travel) will not pay for "First" its that International Business with direct Aisle Lie Flat seats was nice enough that few people would pay for a bigger seat (the old UA First suites) OR an even more expansive suite. Put another way, J is nice enough at $7K that the value proposition to pay $15+K for "First" is not so great.
As much as I miss the old F suite on the IPTE birds, UA made the right decision to toss it and go with all business up front. Unfortunately, they are short-changing the Polaris soft product so badly that they are making Polaris unattractive.
Jul 22, 2019, 8:44 am
#59
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,391
The problem is not that people (and in specific OPM travel) will not pay for "First" its that International Business with direct Aisle Lie Flat seats was nice enough that few people would pay for a bigger seat (the old UA First suites) OR an even more expansive suite. Put another way, J is nice enough at $7K that the value proposition to pay $15+K for "First" is not so great.
Or, you can look at it another way: 2019 Y is lousy 1983 Y. 2019 PE is lousy 1983 C. 2019 J is soft-product lousy, hard-product improved 1983 F. And the only thing people have proven willing to pay for is the hard product.
Jul 22, 2019, 11:41 am
#60
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
This. Earlier this year I purchased 2 PE seats on LH for a TATL vacation. 2 months before departure LH offered a very decent deal on upgrades to LH business, and I took the offer. 3 days before departure, LH offered me an upgrade to F, and I passed - the extra cost wasn't worth the incremental increase in seat comfort.
As much as I miss the old F suite on the IPTE birds, UA made the right decision to toss it and go with all business up front. Unfortunately, they are short-changing the Polaris soft product so badly that they are making Polaris unattractive.
As much as I miss the old F suite on the IPTE birds, UA made the right decision to toss it and go with all business up front. Unfortunately, they are short-changing the Polaris soft product so badly that they are making Polaris unattractive.
And, thus, there is no market for F. We're saying the same thing.
Or, you can look at it another way: 2019 Y is lousy 1983 Y. 2019 PE is lousy 1983 C. 2019 J is soft-product lousy, hard-product improved 1983 F. And the only thing people have proven willing to pay for is the hard product.
Or, you can look at it another way: 2019 Y is lousy 1983 Y. 2019 PE is lousy 1983 C. 2019 J is soft-product lousy, hard-product improved 1983 F. And the only thing people have proven willing to pay for is the hard product.