advertisement


the end of the airbus A380

gintonic said:
is that all?

When I spent a decade or so flying for work I was often taking 50+ flights a year - perhaps up to 80-100 per year at its peak, with many long haul. It mattered greatly which aircraft, which seat etc

these days I rarely fly, my 12 years flying around for work taught me to hate flights.
Click to expand...
Yes. I suspect it is above average. You business elites are not really the market, though, are you?
 
Same goes for the Jetstar flights to SE Asia, apparently, except that they try to sell you food and entertainment. That poses the question: how many people would be prepared to pay for airline food.
 
I've only been on one a handful of times but was extremely impressed by how quiet and comfortable it was.

I imagine it's failed because competitors are offering a more effective package, that tends to be the route cause of most commercial problems.
 
The KL-LHR route business is incredibly over-subscribed. Lots of expats and civil servants. The business return is usually UKP6000 and makes huge profits for the airlines.
 
^^ Business Elites are exactly the market: they subsidise cattle class behind. One of the reasons airlines are in a spot of trouble is that there are fewer Business Class passengers paying full price.
 
avole said:
Same goes for the Jetstar flights to SE Asia, apparently, except that they try to sell you food and entertainment. That poses the question: how many people would be prepared to pay for airline food.
Click to expand...

Air France allowed us to choose the food when booking; it wasn't too bad bearing in mind the cost of getting a plate of food to the location.

I'd happily not eat most other airline food, Aseana was particularly disgusting. A discount for no food would be great.

Last week we made sandwiches; being weak willed bloaters we ate them in the airport though.
 
wacko said:
Business on Singapore Airlines is as good as flying gets. I'd choose the airline before the actual plane.
Click to expand...

Not tried that one but The new QSuite on Qatar business is the best I have experienced. Dine when you want, individual mini cabin with door, huge screen and lots of storage. The service is top of the line as well. My current favourite to Asia.

 
TPA said:
I've only been on one a handful of times but was extremely impressed by how quiet and comfortable it was.

I imagine it's failed because competitors are offering a more effective package, that tends to be the route cause of most commercial problems.
Click to expand...

It's actually just too big. Needs custom airport facilities, and if it fails, it required two other aircraft to compensate. Airbus are selling plenty of smaller aircraft, it seems the days of the mega plane are numbered. Flexibility is preferable to outright capacity.
 
davidsrsb said:
Which have been built and now sit embarrassingly empty upstairs.
Click to expand...

Some have but it is still limiting for flexible operations as not all airports have them and often only one or two gates. It is a major pain for bus transfer as well.
 
wacko said:
Business on Singapore Airlines is as good as flying gets. I'd choose the airline before the actual plane.
Click to expand...
Singapore First Class is another league altogether. I was upgraded from Business once a while ago. My enduring memory was how big my infotainment screen was and how far away it was located. They could have inserted another seat between me and passenger in front, and we'd still have enough room to swing a cat.

Singapore Airlines is consistently great, even in the cheap seats out back.
 
This always amuses me. Businesses no longer need to send people round the globe, but they do, because it is a perk, plus a means of making their executives feel important.
I don't find any long haul flight cheap, whether front, back or middle.
 
James said:
Singapore First Class is another league altogether. I was upgraded from Business once a while ago. My enduring memory was how big my infotainment screen was and how far away it was located. They could have inserted another seat between me and passenger in front, and we'd still have enough room to swing a cat.

Singapore Airlines is consistently great, even in the cheap seats out back.
Click to expand...

Well yes probably. I was referring to the real world: does anyone actually pay for First out of their own pocket ? Business on a good airline is certainly very much good enough.
 
We bought First Class on BA to Phoenix a couple of years ago. It was a worthwhile experience, espcially the Lavatory in First that has window looking out over the clouds. This was reccomended by Manicatel several years ago - one of the many perks of his job.

We also got two windows per seat and were able to eat together facing each other (just like in a restaurant).

And the best thing the First Class fare was cheaper than the Club Class fare, but we had to slum it in Club on the way back, the prices were back to normal.

The Airmiles I get from a Club Class transatlantic trip go a long way to getting Club Class European flights on air miles.
 
avole said:
Businesses no longer need to send people round the globe, but they do, because it is a perk, plus a means of making their executives feel important.
Click to expand...

That’s simply not true.
There are still a number of industries and regions where face to face contact is important and/or essential, and where the supplier (and it’s technology and expertise) is located a long way from the customer. In many of those circumstances telephone or video conference is not feasible or practical, or culturally acceptable. In many situations it’s not practical to bring the customer to the tech, it’s not possible to bring the tech to the customer, so one travels to and fro to get things done/approved/signed. Travel for work enough (ie get sent) and it rapidly ceases to be a perk and becomes a chore, or just part of the job. You can leave to another job, but that doesn’t mean the need goes away.
 
Heard all those arguments before, sadly, things don't change Perhaps I should have qualified my statement, however; perhaps only 80% of business travel is not necessary.
 
Having heard the arguments before doesn’t make them go away, or make them incorrect.
I think you underestimate the effect of globalisation on everyday life, and the attached need to deal with people in far flung places. I work for a small manufacturing company that is based in rural Switzerland; one of about five or six in the world that make this sort of product . We have a couple of customers in Switzerland, but 50% of our business is in (read our output is sold to) Asia/Africa/LatAm. We may ship contracts back and forth for signature, but the negotiation takes place face to face, not to mention signing-off production, dealing with QC issues, etc. While my industry may be small, this pattern of travel is common in many other sectors.
What may have reduced quite drastically is company internal travel in FS, consultancy, etc. The London office no longer travels as much as it did to the Hong Kong office, or the Singapore office to the Lagos one.
As a result of the above, I’d say that it’s the reverse, about 80% of the business travel that does occur is necessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top