Originally Posted by
Sink r8
Keeping in mind I'm not fully endorsing the changes, because I don't have all the info, here are a couple of thoughts:
The higher fare Coach pax are getting on no matter what. The only people getting squeezed out are the lower fares. Granted, those represent incremental revenue. And granted, a lot of this is about shoe-horning more into the airframe. But then again, a lot of this maybe about shoe-horning the right kind of things on the aircraft.
So maybe the problem is different on an A320 than a B747. On the Airbus, the First cabin is somehwat competitive with domestic offerings, so maybe this is just a question of tweaking the proportion of each cabin. When you create space by reducing one class, with no galley in the way, you can simply fill the void with the next class and shift the divider.
Maybe on the 747, it's a question of offering a competitive product. Maybe you don't have the option of keeping the same density in B/E, because you can't offer lie-flats without spreading out. So you have to trade a lower number of lie-flats, for a higher number of traditional B/E seats. You can't backfill with Coach seats, because there is no net gain of space, as you said. But maybe what you've done is stop yield erosion across your current B/E cabin. I would speculate that if we continue to carry those 65 seats around, and ANA, UAL, and JAL fly people in lie-flats, we would eventully lose a lot of business. Or yields.
Also, I wonder if there is a weight implication. Maybe there is a net gain in payload, and maybe yields on cargo are better.
I also wonder if there might be a staffing implication: would this change drop on required F/A?
Either way, it's a lot of speculation on my part. But based on the fact we often put people in B/E or First that don't pay for the product, and because the economy seems to have changed booking patterns, I'm not opposed to management working the yield. If they were to do so intelligently, and it led to more money to fight them over, it would be a refreshing change.
Certainly do not disagree with you, especially since lie-flat seats on long haul flights is becoming the norm, Delta has no choice.
Concerning the 747 it is a little harder to redraw the line between B/E and coach anywhere forward of the second loading door. Also the width of the plane (for the most part) makes it hard to make every seat an isle seat and maximize space without putting some seats near sideways.
If the company can manage to sell more or most coach seats in YBM-class, more power to them, however, that will always be a gamble as even business travelers buy discounted fares where possible (advance purchase).
Of cause the passengers with the higher fare will always get on, but that may be at the expense of passengers with lower fare tickets who will be denied boarding followed by compensation.
Having the ability to continue to sell (last minute) Y-fares when coach is sold out and business is not is a way to recover some business seats at decent prices as opposed denying boarding or gambling whether coach will fill in the last few days or weeks.
I suppose the capacity control will work itself out.
Remember when most airlines including Delta got rid of international first class as many companies disallowed that class of service. That meant the introduction of business elite which was in between the two.
With lie-flat in business class, it is like first class has been re-introduced. Perhaps business class should be made even smaller to add premium economy or premium economy elite. I have flown that class of service on some Asian airliners and while not business class, it is certainly something that I gladly will pay extra for.