My friend just returned from Buenos Aires on BA - said he would never fly them again. He was just in Y but said that the crew were miserable...
I currently have no desire to try them long haul, my four flights with Virgin have been good enough to make me not even wonder what the competition is like... but I know that if I had travelled with them years ago I may now be saying something different.
And haven't the majority of trip reports been overwhelmingly positive? I am sure people have commented along the lines of 'some consistency at last'...
I have to say that a lot of the feelings expressed here strike a cord with me also. The manner in which virgin actively pretends to engage on things such as the next generation entertainment system and its wifi-capability while boasting of its new purchases of 787's (I note they did a similar thing with the purchase of A380's which they then quietly postponed). While at the same time turning round and removing things that made the flying experience unique is terrible. For example abolishing the booking service from the cowshed after trials (does anyone remember a period where you couldn't book at LGW?) show they can serve 20% more Upper Class passengers. Well this is fundamentally wrong. They will be serving whoever is in the clubhouse, those with a lot of time on their hands will probably get a treatment and those without will not. This to me kills the key demographic of the businessman or woman who wants a haircut before flying to his/her meeting, nobody is going to wait on the off chance that they might get a slot.
As for the concept of treating more people; When you are offering longer treatments you are going to treat fewer people not more. So on the one hand we are being told that it is so they can see more people and on the other they are offering treatments that last longer. Totally contradictory, my view is that they feel they will be able to up-sell these new treatments better in person. As for claiming that customers asked for this well why didn't they do one of their many surveys or 'facebook consultations' the simple answer is because yet again they are trying to spin something. I would urge everyone to email and let them know that this is a bad idea.
Frankly it's all very well telling me that in a couple of years I will be flying on a shiny new jet with wifi but in 2005 I was told that by now I'd be in a shiny new A380 and that didn't happen. The key point in my view is that while looking to the future is fine they need to be addressing the erosion of the current product. Something like appointments at the cowshed cost them nothing to do, except now they are attempting to make money off it, to do that to your top consumers who are already paying a premium makes me think that bad things are to come.
Ok got that off my chest so I feel a bit better.
As for the concept of treating more people; When you are offering longer treatments you are going to treat fewer people not more. So on the one hand we are being told that it is so they can see more people and on the other they are offering treatments that last longer. Totally contradictory, my view is that they feel they will be able to up-sell these new treatments better in person. As for claiming that customers asked for this well why didn't they do one of their many surveys or 'facebook consultations' the simple answer is because yet again they are trying to spin something. I would urge everyone to email and let them know that this is a bad idea.
Frankly it's all very well telling me that in a couple of years I will be flying on a shiny new jet with wifi but in 2005 I was told that by now I'd be in a shiny new A380 and that didn't happen. The key point in my view is that while looking to the future is fine they need to be addressing the erosion of the current product. Something like appointments at the cowshed cost them nothing to do, except now they are attempting to make money off it, to do that to your top consumers who are already paying a premium makes me think that bad things are to come.
Ok got that off my chest so I feel a bit better.
quote:Originally posted by seanpep
Ok got that off my chest so I feel a bit better.
Good for you [:)].
I was thinking earlier, am I not seeing the big picture with these reductions in services ... ? I concluded not (of course). I liked the cake stand, I liked the IFBT, I liked getting my hair cut before a flight because I'm so damned busy that an hour in the clubhouse was like a breath of free time and the staff are often so fantastic and entertaining, I like being offered polo mints by a FSM (if that one's true, about that going too), I liked T10, I liked seeing flowers, dammit, on the bar, I liked real champagne in Premium before take off and the offering of a drink before the meal, I liked a 32kg bag limit (because my #1 has a shopping habit like not other), I liked being able to take a CDC from LAX to Palm Springs without haggling ... I loathed the red satin cushions though [:0].
All these things made restricting oneself to VS options and often paying at the upper end of the range acceptable. As every snip goes by, it exposes the limitations that VS presents with no corresponding saving or enhanced flexibility (it's sometimes easier, for example, to use EK Skywards on a United First trip to SFO than VS miles on VS metal!).
Yes, times are tough, but this VS management attitude expressed in what we are seeing seems to imply to me something much worse - or, as Richard says, that they have totally lost the plot when it comes to understanding what made VS a strong brand and why people remained loyal to it.
Two years ago, I'd have said there are no options because the competition is so bad; yet today we have CO and DL installing very appealing flat beds on their planes and both are reknowned for great onboard food. BA has a very good product, even AA has upgraded (badly) whereas UA is getting noticed for potentially the best transatlantic business cabin. All of these are offering AVOD that is as good as VS though many still have sour cabin crew (and thank god at VS the staff still seem able to manage to meet the grade).
VS was once leagues ahead. Steve Ridgeway seems intent on making it one of the also rans.
Ok got that off my chest so I feel a bit better.
Good for you [:)].
I was thinking earlier, am I not seeing the big picture with these reductions in services ... ? I concluded not (of course). I liked the cake stand, I liked the IFBT, I liked getting my hair cut before a flight because I'm so damned busy that an hour in the clubhouse was like a breath of free time and the staff are often so fantastic and entertaining, I like being offered polo mints by a FSM (if that one's true, about that going too), I liked T10, I liked seeing flowers, dammit, on the bar, I liked real champagne in Premium before take off and the offering of a drink before the meal, I liked a 32kg bag limit (because my #1 has a shopping habit like not other), I liked being able to take a CDC from LAX to Palm Springs without haggling ... I loathed the red satin cushions though [:0].
All these things made restricting oneself to VS options and often paying at the upper end of the range acceptable. As every snip goes by, it exposes the limitations that VS presents with no corresponding saving or enhanced flexibility (it's sometimes easier, for example, to use EK Skywards on a United First trip to SFO than VS miles on VS metal!).
Yes, times are tough, but this VS management attitude expressed in what we are seeing seems to imply to me something much worse - or, as Richard says, that they have totally lost the plot when it comes to understanding what made VS a strong brand and why people remained loyal to it.
Two years ago, I'd have said there are no options because the competition is so bad; yet today we have CO and DL installing very appealing flat beds on their planes and both are reknowned for great onboard food. BA has a very good product, even AA has upgraded (badly) whereas UA is getting noticed for potentially the best transatlantic business cabin. All of these are offering AVOD that is as good as VS though many still have sour cabin crew (and thank god at VS the staff still seem able to manage to meet the grade).
VS was once leagues ahead. Steve Ridgeway seems intent on making it one of the also rans.
There's a plane at JFK, to fly you back from far away
all those dark and frantic transatlantic miles
all those dark and frantic transatlantic miles
But are the cuts something that just had to be done. If VS don't make these cost saving cuts will VS struggle to keep afloat?. We have all seen the huge losses made by BA and if VS are making similar style of losses then cuts might be needed to just keep them going. Would we rather have VS in it's current, cutting state for a few years in the hope that when better times come they will once again be on top or VS at the top now, making big losses and going under in a year or two?
Maybe I am far off the mark, maybe VS are now happy to be a middle of the road airline, but just maybe they are doing things now because they have no other choice, things they would rather not, but needs must.
Maybe I am far off the mark, maybe VS are now happy to be a middle of the road airline, but just maybe they are doing things now because they have no other choice, things they would rather not, but needs must.
I think this is somewhat like Pandora's Box. Once opened, the thing (in this case, bean-counting and cutting) can't be put back.
It either has to run it's course or something pretty drastic has to happen to 'press reset'.
One does wonder if VS has ended up being the 'wrong size' - is it still stuck in the position of being a gangly teenager, all out of proportion - top heavy in high-salaried management, and over-reliant on outsourced services (provided by an outsourcing market place that is in the process of consolidating, hence higher prices coming down the pipe) to deliver the product?
Would the VS of today be in a stronger position and in better control of it's costs if it was still doing the things which had been outsourced?
Mike
It either has to run it's course or something pretty drastic has to happen to 'press reset'.
One does wonder if VS has ended up being the 'wrong size' - is it still stuck in the position of being a gangly teenager, all out of proportion - top heavy in high-salaried management, and over-reliant on outsourced services (provided by an outsourcing market place that is in the process of consolidating, hence higher prices coming down the pipe) to deliver the product?
Would the VS of today be in a stronger position and in better control of it's costs if it was still doing the things which had been outsourced?
Mike
The way I am looking at it is, VS is now very much like NZ (just without the good food but with the fuel surcharges), if it were to stay like that I could live with it.
The problem I am having is every time there is one of these cuts it is billed as an enhancement, if they were to just come out and say 'we are doing this because we need the money' I would be happier.
I am wondering if once the new fleet comes in and VS starts flying more efficient aircraft if we will start to see a return to the glory days.
The problem I am having is every time there is one of these cuts it is billed as an enhancement, if they were to just come out and say 'we are doing this because we need the money' I would be happier.
I am wondering if once the new fleet comes in and VS starts flying more efficient aircraft if we will start to see a return to the glory days.
quote:Originally posted by Neil
But are the cuts something that just had to be done. If VS don't make these cost saving cuts will VS struggle to keep afloat?......
....... maybe VS are now happy to be a middle of the road airline, but just maybe they are doing things now because they have no other choice, things they would rather not, but needs must.
Those used to be exactly my thoughts, Neil.
I had the belief that the powers that be at VS knew what they were doing; and that their tactics would enable them ride out the storm and they would bounce back leaner and stronger.
I am now beginning to think that they have cut far too far. They have devalued the brand, causing their regular high revenue passengers to look at alternative carriers.
It could well be that the grass isn't any greener on the other side, but that is a big gamble for VS to take, and even if the grass is about the same shade and the same texture - Would the people who have left, want to come back to a middle of the road airline?
I hope I am wrong but, judging by the posts in this thread, VS could have made a massive - and very costly - error of judgement.
Nick
But are the cuts something that just had to be done. If VS don't make these cost saving cuts will VS struggle to keep afloat?......
....... maybe VS are now happy to be a middle of the road airline, but just maybe they are doing things now because they have no other choice, things they would rather not, but needs must.
Those used to be exactly my thoughts, Neil.
I had the belief that the powers that be at VS knew what they were doing; and that their tactics would enable them ride out the storm and they would bounce back leaner and stronger.
I am now beginning to think that they have cut far too far. They have devalued the brand, causing their regular high revenue passengers to look at alternative carriers.
It could well be that the grass isn't any greener on the other side, but that is a big gamble for VS to take, and even if the grass is about the same shade and the same texture - Would the people who have left, want to come back to a middle of the road airline?
I hope I am wrong but, judging by the posts in this thread, VS could have made a massive - and very costly - error of judgement.
Nick
I am seriously concerned with the 'message' some of these cuts give to the marketplace.
Are they in such desperate straights that cutting a cake stand actually can make a difference?
Consider what they gain from this - perhaps 2kg and a few cakes.
What is the actual saving?
Now divide that by the number of pax in UC.
A few pence on each ticket.
Could things be so bad that they could actually think those few pence could 'save the airline'?
One single UC pax lost, for one single flight, would negate the gain from the cut.
OK - a cake-stand alone is unlikely to cause someone to change their allegiance - but this drip, drip of cut,cut certainly seems to be felt by many on this board. Going from remarks made, a number of members have changed to other carriers.
And if it is thought that VS is so desperate to need to do this - that could do enormous harm.
Are they in such desperate straights that cutting a cake stand actually can make a difference?
Consider what they gain from this - perhaps 2kg and a few cakes.
What is the actual saving?
Now divide that by the number of pax in UC.
A few pence on each ticket.
Could things be so bad that they could actually think those few pence could 'save the airline'?
One single UC pax lost, for one single flight, would negate the gain from the cut.
OK - a cake-stand alone is unlikely to cause someone to change their allegiance - but this drip, drip of cut,cut certainly seems to be felt by many on this board. Going from remarks made, a number of members have changed to other carriers.
And if it is thought that VS is so desperate to need to do this - that could do enormous harm.
quote:Originally posted by Nottingham Nick
I had the belief that the powers that be at VS knew what they were doing; and that their tactics would enable them ride out the storm and they would bounce back leaner and stronger.
I know that due to the...ahem..labrynthine nature of Virgin Group's financing we'll never know, but is it possible that VS management are not entirely the masters & mistresses of their own fate in respect of decisions about how best to achieve margin ? Presumably there are shareholders, banks and bond holders out there who are demanding returns and conditions that may not allow for extra investment to drive the increased margin within the timescale that payments have to be made. You only have to look to the issues in Dubai over this weekend to see what the impact of the threat not making a payment on a bond can do.
I had the belief that the powers that be at VS knew what they were doing; and that their tactics would enable them ride out the storm and they would bounce back leaner and stronger.
I know that due to the...ahem..labrynthine nature of Virgin Group's financing we'll never know, but is it possible that VS management are not entirely the masters & mistresses of their own fate in respect of decisions about how best to achieve margin ? Presumably there are shareholders, banks and bond holders out there who are demanding returns and conditions that may not allow for extra investment to drive the increased margin within the timescale that payments have to be made. You only have to look to the issues in Dubai over this weekend to see what the impact of the threat not making a payment on a bond can do.
We can get better, because we're not dead yet
As far as I know, VS is still a separate held entity from the rest of the Virgin group, as such it doesn't really affect the Virgin group as a whole, however I am sure that what it does enable VS to do is borrow money from the group at better rates than the banks can offer....If need be.
PJH has raised quite valid point IMHO. Most of the posts on here point straight to the upper echelons of management stating, perhaps justifiably, that they are out of touch with the customers and indeed a lot of the staff.
Whilst VS is a separate entity, and interestingly enough has a number of special purpose vehicles set up for the leasing of aircraft etc (as is the norm), they are still very much accountable to the banks and other investors (read SQ). I am not for a minute eluding that VS are well and truly up the creek but if we think about it logically some of the cuts do make sense. So VS toddles off to the bank to ask for a new credit facility or perhaps an increase in an overdraft (for any reason, perhaps because a number of invoices havent paid say), the bank take a look at it and say yes provided that you can guarantee you will pay us back the overdraft in double quick time and by the way we want to take security over 5 planes. VS cant meet the repayments so its only option is to to cut costs to save money (as increase air fares wont work because you cant guarantee you will make more money doing that).
I am not saying this is what is going on, clearly its a lot more complicated. But just as the bank can pressure its regular customers if they are late with mortgage repayments or go overdrawn, the bank and other institutions can also pressure its large corporate customers. If VS can't provide a long term solution, however right or wrong, its only option may well be to make cut backs in the in-flight service. Of course VS will not admit this to us but they could well be under huge pressure like anyone else.
So yes it is sad to see the carrier making cost cuts and to see the effect its having on service and peoples attitude towards the company. However IMHO I would much prefer to go without a preferred gin rather than see the airline go bankrupt and ultimately people be without jobs. It is all too easy for us to blame the airline and the senior management, yes they do have a role to play, but it is worth remembering that they may not like making the service cuts just as much as we don't like seeing them.
Whilst VS is a separate entity, and interestingly enough has a number of special purpose vehicles set up for the leasing of aircraft etc (as is the norm), they are still very much accountable to the banks and other investors (read SQ). I am not for a minute eluding that VS are well and truly up the creek but if we think about it logically some of the cuts do make sense. So VS toddles off to the bank to ask for a new credit facility or perhaps an increase in an overdraft (for any reason, perhaps because a number of invoices havent paid say), the bank take a look at it and say yes provided that you can guarantee you will pay us back the overdraft in double quick time and by the way we want to take security over 5 planes. VS cant meet the repayments so its only option is to to cut costs to save money (as increase air fares wont work because you cant guarantee you will make more money doing that).
I am not saying this is what is going on, clearly its a lot more complicated. But just as the bank can pressure its regular customers if they are late with mortgage repayments or go overdrawn, the bank and other institutions can also pressure its large corporate customers. If VS can't provide a long term solution, however right or wrong, its only option may well be to make cut backs in the in-flight service. Of course VS will not admit this to us but they could well be under huge pressure like anyone else.
So yes it is sad to see the carrier making cost cuts and to see the effect its having on service and peoples attitude towards the company. However IMHO I would much prefer to go without a preferred gin rather than see the airline go bankrupt and ultimately people be without jobs. It is all too easy for us to blame the airline and the senior management, yes they do have a role to play, but it is worth remembering that they may not like making the service cuts just as much as we don't like seeing them.
All very valid and interesting points, Will, but just to pick up on two of them...
quote:Originally posted by willd .....as increase air fares wont work because you cant guarantee you will make more money doing that...
...However IMHO I would much prefer to go without a preferred gin rather than see the airline go bankrupt and ultimately people be without jobs....
They are two key issues, and I tend to disagree, at least in part, with your reasoning.
Many posters - especially those who fly the leisure routes, have indicated that they were happy to pay a supplement if the Virgin experience is much better than their competitors. It has been said many, many times on here that the small things make a massive difference.
Increase the fare by say 10 to 20; and ensure that all of that extra money is spent on food, drink and yes, even amenity kits. [;)] These are the things that get repeat custom - especially in Y - but with the food - in UC too.
I agree that losing one's favourite tipple is preferable to a bankrupt airline, but will repeat that I believe that loyal repeat customers are a big factor in the survival of the airline, and saving a few quid on a bottle of gin will lose you thousands in lost ticket revenue.
Nick
quote:Originally posted by willd .....as increase air fares wont work because you cant guarantee you will make more money doing that...
...However IMHO I would much prefer to go without a preferred gin rather than see the airline go bankrupt and ultimately people be without jobs....
They are two key issues, and I tend to disagree, at least in part, with your reasoning.
Many posters - especially those who fly the leisure routes, have indicated that they were happy to pay a supplement if the Virgin experience is much better than their competitors. It has been said many, many times on here that the small things make a massive difference.
Increase the fare by say 10 to 20; and ensure that all of that extra money is spent on food, drink and yes, even amenity kits. [;)] These are the things that get repeat custom - especially in Y - but with the food - in UC too.
I agree that losing one's favourite tipple is preferable to a bankrupt airline, but will repeat that I believe that loyal repeat customers are a big factor in the survival of the airline, and saving a few quid on a bottle of gin will lose you thousands in lost ticket revenue.
Nick
I have to agree with Nick. Over on the BA board at FT there have been several regular flyers that havent managed to gain the alloted number of points for their membership year renewal but BA has comped them (even one story of a chap who was silver but got very close to Gold so BA renewed him as Gold). Its little things like this that might very well cost the airline a little more in the short term but is likely to pay in the longer term. BA have made cuts too, particularly with the meal services and number of crew onboard but if you can take with one hand but give with another it might just keep a large number of your regular travellers from going to competitors. Virgin seem to be doing a lot of taking but not enough giving and in those scenarios it really is the small things such as losing the free hair cut or bottle of T10 onboard that rightly or wrongly pushes a traveller to another airline.
I am sure there are some decisions that VS wish they didnt have to make, I just wish they'd be man about it and announce it with a 'we're sorry, but we have had to make the following changes' as opposed to pretending these are requested enhancements. Treat your customers like fools and they wont be your customer for long. Give them honesty and ask for another chance with perhaps a sweetner, like renewing long term members when they fall short of 30 TPS and I think VS would find a hell of a lot of loyalty out there.
Thanks,
Sarah
I am sure there are some decisions that VS wish they didnt have to make, I just wish they'd be man about it and announce it with a 'we're sorry, but we have had to make the following changes' as opposed to pretending these are requested enhancements. Treat your customers like fools and they wont be your customer for long. Give them honesty and ask for another chance with perhaps a sweetner, like renewing long term members when they fall short of 30 TPS and I think VS would find a hell of a lot of loyalty out there.
Thanks,
Sarah
quote:Originally posted by Nottingham Nick
All very valid and interesting points, Will, but just to pick up on two of them...
quote:Originally posted by willd .....as increase air fares wont work because you cant guarantee you will make more money doing that...
...However IMHO I would much prefer to go without a preferred gin rather than see the airline go bankrupt and ultimately people be without jobs....
They are two key issues, and I tend to disagree, at least in part, with your reasoning.
Many posters - especially those who fly the leisure routes, have indicated that they were happy to pay a supplement if the Virgin experience is much better than their competitors. It has been said many, many times on here that the small things make a massive difference.
Increase the fare by say 10 to 20; and ensure that all of that extra money is spent on food, drink and yes, even amenity kits. [;)] These are the things that get repeat custom - especially in Y - but with the food - in UC too.
I agree that losing one's favourite tipple is preferable to a bankrupt airline, but will repeat that I believe that loyal repeat customers are a big factor in the survival of the airline, and saving a few quid on a bottle of gin will lose you thousands in lost ticket revenue.
Nick I understand exactly what you are saying but personally I am not sure I agree with you.
Loyal customers are a big factor but what VS have done is realised that the loyal customer will not all move because of the withdrawal of a bottle of gin or if they do someone else will come back to them. It is too much hassle to move airline, change frequent flyer details and possibly get your company to change policy because of the removal of a bottle of gin.
In fact the members of this board contributing to this discussion are VS case in point. We are all sat here complaining about the lack of a cake stand/lack of gin/dumbing down of Y meal service but we are still flying with the airline.
It is a hugely fine balance. VS are well aware that the withdrawal of too many elements of service will push customers but at the moment they know that firstly customers are not leaving en masse (I mean when Tinks starts talking about flying an empty 744 out we know we are in trouble) and secondly for every customer that moves to the dark side there is currently someone else to replace them.
Looking at it from a purely business point of view, which is what VS management will be doing, VS are currently winning the cost cutting game, they are making savings and still managing to get bums on seats and at the same time their loyal customers, on the whole, are still flying with them. The problem for us is that we look at the whole issue rather emotionally. VS don't do this, they look at the figures. When yourself, Decker, HG, Slinky et al stop flying VS then we know that the cost cutting has gone too far.
All very valid and interesting points, Will, but just to pick up on two of them...
quote:Originally posted by willd .....as increase air fares wont work because you cant guarantee you will make more money doing that...
...However IMHO I would much prefer to go without a preferred gin rather than see the airline go bankrupt and ultimately people be without jobs....
They are two key issues, and I tend to disagree, at least in part, with your reasoning.
Many posters - especially those who fly the leisure routes, have indicated that they were happy to pay a supplement if the Virgin experience is much better than their competitors. It has been said many, many times on here that the small things make a massive difference.
Increase the fare by say 10 to 20; and ensure that all of that extra money is spent on food, drink and yes, even amenity kits. [;)] These are the things that get repeat custom - especially in Y - but with the food - in UC too.
I agree that losing one's favourite tipple is preferable to a bankrupt airline, but will repeat that I believe that loyal repeat customers are a big factor in the survival of the airline, and saving a few quid on a bottle of gin will lose you thousands in lost ticket revenue.
Nick I understand exactly what you are saying but personally I am not sure I agree with you.
Loyal customers are a big factor but what VS have done is realised that the loyal customer will not all move because of the withdrawal of a bottle of gin or if they do someone else will come back to them. It is too much hassle to move airline, change frequent flyer details and possibly get your company to change policy because of the removal of a bottle of gin.
In fact the members of this board contributing to this discussion are VS case in point. We are all sat here complaining about the lack of a cake stand/lack of gin/dumbing down of Y meal service but we are still flying with the airline.
It is a hugely fine balance. VS are well aware that the withdrawal of too many elements of service will push customers but at the moment they know that firstly customers are not leaving en masse (I mean when Tinks starts talking about flying an empty 744 out we know we are in trouble) and secondly for every customer that moves to the dark side there is currently someone else to replace them.
Looking at it from a purely business point of view, which is what VS management will be doing, VS are currently winning the cost cutting game, they are making savings and still managing to get bums on seats and at the same time their loyal customers, on the whole, are still flying with them. The problem for us is that we look at the whole issue rather emotionally. VS don't do this, they look at the figures. When yourself, Decker, HG, Slinky et al stop flying VS then we know that the cost cutting has gone too far.
It's not as if the T10 was just withdrawn to save weight. It was replaced with another vodka.
I'd rather pay the extra 20 (less than 1% of a non-sale Z) if it meant the on-board experience was better.
I'd rather pay the extra 20 (less than 1% of a non-sale Z) if it meant the on-board experience was better.
Thanks
Darren
Darren
quote:Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
It's not as if the T10 was just withdrawn to save weight. It was replaced with another vodka.
I'd rather pay the extra 20 (less than 1% of a non-sale Z) if it meant the on-board experience was better.
Both those points are interesting. Yes the T10 was actually replaced and not cut, and whilst it has obviously upset some pax on here, it quite equally could have made others happy. It just comes down to personal choice, and that is something any airline can't keep everyone happy with 100% of the time. It's like having different films, menu choices, flavour of ice cream, so that for me is something that really shouldn't even be considered in this discussion.
I personally agree on paying a little bit extra for a better on board service, but there are many who don't. If VS buck the trend and actually put fares up, then they will lose a lot of pax who are just looking to get from a to b at the lowest price possible. You just have to look on a site like The Dibb, where the majority of members want to get on their holiday for as cheap as possible, with many doing indirect flights to save 20/30 per person.
I know it might sound like I am defending VS here, but I just don't think it is a black and white as many are saying it is or the facts are pointing to. Load numbers are still very good, especially in premium cabins, and like Will says, many of us on here are moaning, yet still flying VS.
Neil
It's not as if the T10 was just withdrawn to save weight. It was replaced with another vodka.
I'd rather pay the extra 20 (less than 1% of a non-sale Z) if it meant the on-board experience was better.
Both those points are interesting. Yes the T10 was actually replaced and not cut, and whilst it has obviously upset some pax on here, it quite equally could have made others happy. It just comes down to personal choice, and that is something any airline can't keep everyone happy with 100% of the time. It's like having different films, menu choices, flavour of ice cream, so that for me is something that really shouldn't even be considered in this discussion.
I personally agree on paying a little bit extra for a better on board service, but there are many who don't. If VS buck the trend and actually put fares up, then they will lose a lot of pax who are just looking to get from a to b at the lowest price possible. You just have to look on a site like The Dibb, where the majority of members want to get on their holiday for as cheap as possible, with many doing indirect flights to save 20/30 per person.
I know it might sound like I am defending VS here, but I just don't think it is a black and white as many are saying it is or the facts are pointing to. Load numbers are still very good, especially in premium cabins, and like Will says, many of us on here are moaning, yet still flying VS.
Neil
I've been a bit out of the loop with V-Flyer for a while I'm afraid. Been just too damn busy!
What is the deal with Haircuts at the LHR clubhouse now? On the last two occasions I've flown I've tried to book a cut a few days in advance and they've always been 'full' and advised to check on the day.
Out of all the treatments the cut is the one you want to have booked as if thats not available you have no chance of making other arrangements when you're there.
In the end I went to one of the ubiquitous Mr Toppers in the West End the night before.
What is the deal with Haircuts at the LHR clubhouse now? On the last two occasions I've flown I've tried to book a cut a few days in advance and they've always been 'full' and advised to check on the day.
Out of all the treatments the cut is the one you want to have booked as if thats not available you have no chance of making other arrangements when you're there.
In the end I went to one of the ubiquitous Mr Toppers in the West End the night before.
quote:Originally posted by willd
Loyal customers are a big factor but what VS have done is realised that the loyal customer will not all move because of the withdrawal of a bottle of gin
Since I am more cynical than most, it wouldn't surprise me if T10 being replaced by the vodka thing was because the vodka thing company offered it free for six months as a marketing ploy ... but T10 or vodka is not really the point.
quote:Originally posted by willd
... for every customer that moves to the dark side there is currently someone else to replace them.
Not sure I agree with you on this point, with the number of flights cut (and I anticipate that post Christmas there'll be a shed load more) there obviously aren't the # of bums to fill seats - but your other comments all forge good discussion.
quote:Originally posted by willd
Looking at it from a purely business point of view, which is what VS management will be doing, VS are currently winning the cost cutting game, they are making savings and still managing to get bums on seats and at the same time their loyal customers, on the whole, are still flying with them. The problem for us is that we look at the whole issue rather emotionally. VS don't do this, they look at the figures. When yourself, Decker, HG, Slinky et al stop flying VS then we know that the cost cutting has gone too far.
Thanks for the name check ... I'm booked on several forthcoming flights but am seriously considering trying something different. Delta's new business class looks appealing for example and their connections are very good. These continual 'service improvements' are resulting in a change of taste and tone from VS and one of my close colleagues has switched to Continental, and he was an avowed VS fan ... [:w]
quote:Originally posted by Neil
I know it might sound like I am defending VS here, but I just don't think it is a black and white as many are saying it is or the facts are pointing to. Load numbers are still very good, especially in premium cabins, and like Will says, many of us on here are moaning, yet still flying VS.
Loads good, yields not good. Yields make margin ... but I agree with you, for many, particularly MAN/LGW flights, price is key and while we here say we wouldn't mind paying ten quid more for better food and a second drinks run, many others don't want to. I hear lots of comments about VS prices, to MCO for example in the summer, and stories of people flying via MSP for example ... It was a point I made earlier, VS is often among the more expensive options to get where you want to be (depending on sales, planning etc.) yet VS is snipping away continually and that can affect people's brand perception of the airline and lessen their desire to choose it over a cheaper option.
Loyal customers are a big factor but what VS have done is realised that the loyal customer will not all move because of the withdrawal of a bottle of gin
Since I am more cynical than most, it wouldn't surprise me if T10 being replaced by the vodka thing was because the vodka thing company offered it free for six months as a marketing ploy ... but T10 or vodka is not really the point.
quote:Originally posted by willd
... for every customer that moves to the dark side there is currently someone else to replace them.
Not sure I agree with you on this point, with the number of flights cut (and I anticipate that post Christmas there'll be a shed load more) there obviously aren't the # of bums to fill seats - but your other comments all forge good discussion.
quote:Originally posted by willd
Looking at it from a purely business point of view, which is what VS management will be doing, VS are currently winning the cost cutting game, they are making savings and still managing to get bums on seats and at the same time their loyal customers, on the whole, are still flying with them. The problem for us is that we look at the whole issue rather emotionally. VS don't do this, they look at the figures. When yourself, Decker, HG, Slinky et al stop flying VS then we know that the cost cutting has gone too far.
Thanks for the name check ... I'm booked on several forthcoming flights but am seriously considering trying something different. Delta's new business class looks appealing for example and their connections are very good. These continual 'service improvements' are resulting in a change of taste and tone from VS and one of my close colleagues has switched to Continental, and he was an avowed VS fan ... [:w]
quote:Originally posted by Neil
I know it might sound like I am defending VS here, but I just don't think it is a black and white as many are saying it is or the facts are pointing to. Load numbers are still very good, especially in premium cabins, and like Will says, many of us on here are moaning, yet still flying VS.
Loads good, yields not good. Yields make margin ... but I agree with you, for many, particularly MAN/LGW flights, price is key and while we here say we wouldn't mind paying ten quid more for better food and a second drinks run, many others don't want to. I hear lots of comments about VS prices, to MCO for example in the summer, and stories of people flying via MSP for example ... It was a point I made earlier, VS is often among the more expensive options to get where you want to be (depending on sales, planning etc.) yet VS is snipping away continually and that can affect people's brand perception of the airline and lessen their desire to choose it over a cheaper option.
There's a plane at JFK, to fly you back from far away
all those dark and frantic transatlantic miles
all those dark and frantic transatlantic miles
quote:Originally posted by willd When yourself, Decker, HG, Slinky et al stop flying VS then we know that the cost cutting has gone too far.
Just flew to SJU with BA/AA. Decided I wanted to ensure I renewed BA Ag so am concentrating on BA flights for a while. VS might have been direct but they had no availability other than coach on the direct routing. Thinking of my current/recent/future flights going back to say the middle of last year I'd say 80% were BA and 20% VS. I still love VS but they are starting to erode the loyalty. Status has to mean something for loyalty to be important. Say being able to have revenue release extra G's a week before a flight. Say being able to book treatments. Say being able to guarantee your choice of meal. And yes for me, being welcomed on board by name. Once status gets you little that flying premium classes doesn't it becomes less important to ensure it is kept.
Don't get me wrong VS are still my carrier of choice but they aren't endearing themselves to me with all of the cuts. I just assume they're a necessary evil and will 'watch this space'.
Just flew to SJU with BA/AA. Decided I wanted to ensure I renewed BA Ag so am concentrating on BA flights for a while. VS might have been direct but they had no availability other than coach on the direct routing. Thinking of my current/recent/future flights going back to say the middle of last year I'd say 80% were BA and 20% VS. I still love VS but they are starting to erode the loyalty. Status has to mean something for loyalty to be important. Say being able to have revenue release extra G's a week before a flight. Say being able to book treatments. Say being able to guarantee your choice of meal. And yes for me, being welcomed on board by name. Once status gets you little that flying premium classes doesn't it becomes less important to ensure it is kept.
Don't get me wrong VS are still my carrier of choice but they aren't endearing themselves to me with all of the cuts. I just assume they're a necessary evil and will 'watch this space'.
quote:Originally posted by Neil
I personally agree on paying a little bit extra for a better on board service, but there are many who don't. If VS buck the trend and actually put fares up, then they will lose a lot of pax who are just looking to get from a to b at the lowest price possible. You just have to look on a site like The Dibb, where the majority of members want to get on their holiday for as cheap as possible, with many doing indirect flights to save 20/30 per person.
Remember that this also goes for corporate travel. I presume there are some enlightened employers out there who value the way their employees after a long flight, but I suspect there are many (mine included) that don't give a monkey's about the onboard / lounge services and just want the lowest cost fare.
quote:Originally posted by slinky09
Thanks for the name check ... I'm booked on several forthcoming flights but am seriously considering trying something different. Delta's new business class looks appealing for example and their connections are very good.
Indeed it does. I wonder if they still call in counsellors if you have more than one glass of wine? [}:)]
Actually a serious point about this will be if V-Flyers who do take the opportunity to check out other carriers post TRs here it'll help provide the rest of us who fly less often with more information to assist us in our decision making.
Paul
I personally agree on paying a little bit extra for a better on board service, but there are many who don't. If VS buck the trend and actually put fares up, then they will lose a lot of pax who are just looking to get from a to b at the lowest price possible. You just have to look on a site like The Dibb, where the majority of members want to get on their holiday for as cheap as possible, with many doing indirect flights to save 20/30 per person.
Remember that this also goes for corporate travel. I presume there are some enlightened employers out there who value the way their employees after a long flight, but I suspect there are many (mine included) that don't give a monkey's about the onboard / lounge services and just want the lowest cost fare.
quote:Originally posted by slinky09
Thanks for the name check ... I'm booked on several forthcoming flights but am seriously considering trying something different. Delta's new business class looks appealing for example and their connections are very good.
Indeed it does. I wonder if they still call in counsellors if you have more than one glass of wine? [}:)]
Actually a serious point about this will be if V-Flyers who do take the opportunity to check out other carriers post TRs here it'll help provide the rest of us who fly less often with more information to assist us in our decision making.
Paul
We can get better, because we're not dead yet
The whole travel industry is now a price driven market. We are all paying less for airfares than we where a couple of years ago in all classes. VS can't afford to increase fares because they have to aline their fare with everyone elses.
If VS increased their fares in order to offer a better service the vast majority of people would go with the lower cost airline.
The only way VS and other airlines can afford to be on business right now is by cost cutting. There is simply no other way round it beacuse we (as consumers) all demand the lowest fare possible.
Regards
If VS increased their fares in order to offer a better service the vast majority of people would go with the lower cost airline.
The only way VS and other airlines can afford to be on business right now is by cost cutting. There is simply no other way round it beacuse we (as consumers) all demand the lowest fare possible.
Regards
Regards
James Mitchell
James Mitchell
quote:Originally posted by HighFlyer
.......Over on the BA board at FT there have been several regular flyers that havent managed to gain the alloted number of points for their membership year renewal but BA has comped them (even one story of a chap who was silver but got very close to Gold so BA renewed him as Gold). Its little things like this that might very well cost the airline a little more in the short term but is likely to pay in the longer term. .........
As are Virgin [y]
Mrs Kered fell short of silver re-qualification this year, but was comped silver on renewal [8D] The good will that that one gesture generated in the Kered household towards VA is huge.
As a result of this we have vowed to give VS their Tier points back by ensuring that we travel UC with them at least once this year.
.......Over on the BA board at FT there have been several regular flyers that havent managed to gain the alloted number of points for their membership year renewal but BA has comped them (even one story of a chap who was silver but got very close to Gold so BA renewed him as Gold). Its little things like this that might very well cost the airline a little more in the short term but is likely to pay in the longer term. .........
As are Virgin [y]
Mrs Kered fell short of silver re-qualification this year, but was comped silver on renewal [8D] The good will that that one gesture generated in the Kered household towards VA is huge.
As a result of this we have vowed to give VS their Tier points back by ensuring that we travel UC with them at least once this year.
If the banks/backers were really making the calls to stop the haircuts and charge for treatments, why spend the xm on the LGW CH refit in the first place? Its not as if they could get the refurb for free is it? And the time to break-even for the refit by charging for treatments is going to be eons.
VS continue to waste money on utter rubbish, yet cut back on other areas that made the brand/experience different. Dare I mention VTravelled? How much is spent each year on those damn K-id packs that ultimately end up on Ebay; Sweeping statement but isn't the primary driving factor for Economy, the price? Has anyone gone and booked an airline because they offered a kids pack? Please.
What really is grating now is the absolute morons within VS that take me for a fool by trying to spin why they have made a cutback. I'm Gold, so too are many others here (and there are a few of the real top travellers too) - and not once have I heard of them being asked about
- would you miss the IFBT?
- would you like more treatments in the LGW CH, if it meant you had to pay for them and possibly lose the chance of getting a free treatment?
- how would you comment if we removed the pre-booking facility in its entirety even though 80% of passengers turned up on time? (this is utter spin, as there are fare easier solutions to fix this problem of people not turning up).
For a long time, it has been discussed here how little value VS Au is if you already fly in Upper Class. Where has the investment gone to correct this? Gold (or Silver for that case) on BA is of a lot more value to many given their far reaching network and membership of the OneWorld alliance. Profit does not lie in the Y cabin, that's just your fuel mone; profit is in W and J, and if you piss those customers off by continually removing the loyalty factors then you are really up the creek. But again, treat me (or your regular/premium customers) like a fool and god help you.
EDIT: I see this has just been posted up on the VS Facebook site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N71l3WK-bYQ - maybe its time to send an open e-mail to Mr Ridgway and the other members of the Exec Director team.
VS continue to waste money on utter rubbish, yet cut back on other areas that made the brand/experience different. Dare I mention VTravelled? How much is spent each year on those damn K-id packs that ultimately end up on Ebay; Sweeping statement but isn't the primary driving factor for Economy, the price? Has anyone gone and booked an airline because they offered a kids pack? Please.
What really is grating now is the absolute morons within VS that take me for a fool by trying to spin why they have made a cutback. I'm Gold, so too are many others here (and there are a few of the real top travellers too) - and not once have I heard of them being asked about
- would you miss the IFBT?
- would you like more treatments in the LGW CH, if it meant you had to pay for them and possibly lose the chance of getting a free treatment?
- how would you comment if we removed the pre-booking facility in its entirety even though 80% of passengers turned up on time? (this is utter spin, as there are fare easier solutions to fix this problem of people not turning up).
For a long time, it has been discussed here how little value VS Au is if you already fly in Upper Class. Where has the investment gone to correct this? Gold (or Silver for that case) on BA is of a lot more value to many given their far reaching network and membership of the OneWorld alliance. Profit does not lie in the Y cabin, that's just your fuel mone; profit is in W and J, and if you piss those customers off by continually removing the loyalty factors then you are really up the creek. But again, treat me (or your regular/premium customers) like a fool and god help you.
EDIT: I see this has just been posted up on the VS Facebook site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N71l3WK-bYQ - maybe its time to send an open e-mail to Mr Ridgway and the other members of the Exec Director team.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 163 guests