New LGW Config

you have too much time mate

15 -all

So now we are comparing VS with a charter airline? I don't think I've seen such an over reaction like this before, and all because VS are moving 20 PE seats from upstairs to downstairs and putting some Y seats on the Upper Deck. Sure it would be better for PE pax if they didn't, but it really isn't that big a deal

Unfortunately that is the very comparison that VS are inviting with this. Here are people who have flown both making exactly that comparison - VS often does NOT come out on top!

The major difference is the lack of UC - but on the MAN/LGW fleet the promise of new cabins (even before LHR!) is retracted - they are just going to be cleaned.

Personally I do not think that TOM is better than VS - but when making the comparison can we honestly say that VS is worth paying almost twice as much? (£1,200 against £759 in PE)

PE & UC have always been the "signature" products for VS - where they show the difference, the Virgin advantage - but no longer. Not on the LGW/MAN fleet.

We are totally forgetting they are installing brand new Y and W seats, brand new IFE, and introducing a new PE meal service.

TOM have the new seats now and will have 787 Dreamliners on the MCO route from May next year (they start to arrive in January) - with current VS policy, where will VS Dreamliners go? - if they ever arrive?

I'm sure you will enjoy flying in to SFB, on a Tuesday or Saturday only, ending up in an economy seat because Thomson decided to send an a/c without premium seating installed (happened 3 out of 4 flights to my colleague). Oh and enjoy all the benefits and potential savings from their FF scheme, oh wait a minute, that's right, they don't have one.

Two days a week - just like VS with UC!

TOM use the A330 (where have we seen those?) on almost all MCO flights - only the 767 when a plane goes tech. - again see the reports on theDibb

FF scheme - what benefits to the MCO UC pax? - almost no chance to get UC reward flights now with only 2 or 3 days a week and small cabins.

SFB - yes, an extra 20 minutes to Disney - but you can save an hour of MCO immigration! You also get lounge access if flying PE!

I'm not happy to see VS reduced to comparison with Charters - at one time it was leading the scheduled airlines but no more - particularly on the MAN flights (remember no clubhouse for UC there - you only get a VS lounge if you are with VH)

The OP has been very accurate with new information in the past, and before it is announced on the internal site. I feel sorry for crew like VB747 who still would like to think VS is something special but I can understand that for some others the VS "advantage" is disappearing so can understand and sympathize when I hear of all the crew consistency reports. It can hardly be pleasant to be continually the second class to LHR routes and to see the comparisons with TOM flying alongside at MAN.

It is not just the PE cabin - it is the whole MAN/LGW package. Continual refurb. delays; the differential to LHR; the lack of Clubhouse; the comparison with Charter; reduced baggage; seat requests; the lack of UC in the A333. While others improve, VS stays the same or gets worse.

OK, VS FB say it is not yet confirmed - I just hope there is time for a last minute re-think by VS beancounters - but I'm not holding my breath any longer.

[Neil]

I understand what you are saying, Bill, but this is specifically about the removal of *some* PE seats from the bubble and replacing them with Y seats. Numerous people on here and on the VS FB page have implied with their comment that they would now fly with BA or whoever because of this change. I'm sorry, but to all but your casual traveller, comparing a schedule and charter carrier is just stupid, even on a B&S route like MCO. I have flown TOM just as I was started my serious long haul flying and while the core product is similar (a bigger seat, in a private cabin) everything else was significantly inferior to VS.

We all know that currently the downstairs PE cabin is rubbish, but a slightly larger one between UC and L2 could actually be nice. It's still fairly small, without the risk of Y pax entering/walking through like on the LHR 747 and A346, will suit many families of 4 that like to sit together. All the time offering what is probably one of the top two PE products on the market currently.

The whole UC, or lack of, from MAN is a different issue and one that is likely to be resolved when the A330 are refitting and relocated to LHR leaving the 747's ex MAN. It is still unfair however to suddenly suggest that by half the bubble being changed to Y (increasing the total number of pax up there by a massive 10 or 12), it will make such a huge difference to the in flight experience.

Neil

Regarding seats and charter vs scheduled, I tend to find it's more the seat width that is the deal breaker for me. After travelling to Las Vegas last year on Thomas Cook's cramped 3-3-3 A330's I find VS's product far superior, even adding into the equation the excellent customer service I've had from VS on all my flights with them.
As for the bubble refit, is this happening across the entire 744 fleet? And will this be the last refit for certain ones with some approaching 20 years old. Ie anything from XLG and before, including the 4 leased 744's.
Having only travelled on PE a couple of times, I do appreciate the feeling of being in your own section of the cabin without a multitude of people standing, passing, climbing all over and around you. I only think we'll have to sit and wait this one out from VS and see how the new plans materialise.

LP

[Neil]

All LGW 747's are being refitted apart from G-VTOP, as that is leaving the fleet this year.

The LHR 747's, which are the older ones in the fleet are not being refitted, but even at 20 year old, they aren't that old in aircraft terms.

[preiffer]

I'd love to know where exactly VS has marketed, promised or detailed the upper deck AS a "Premium Economy perk". Or Upper, for that matter...

Yes, it's nice to sit up there - but have a single deck aircraft, or a config change, and that *nicety* goes out the window. For that reason, I really struggle to understand the ferociousness of the backlash here - by halving the number of PE seats up there, according to what VS sell as a PE product - they're not taking anything away from passengers who book PE. They still receive the marketed PE experience.

And, in the process, 30+ economy passengers get to experience that "nicety" (depending on your perspective of upstairs!) themselves.

They still receive the marketed PE experience.

Interesting.

Where there is a choice, PE in the bubble has always struck me as a better product, more like UC minus. Not because of food or booze but entirely because of the exclusivity of the cabin, even with 40 odd people in it.

PE downstairs, in contrast, by its nature, strikes me more like Y plus.

And never the twain shall meet!

Whatever. Should the changes in layout ACTUALLY occur I guess that they are being made for financial reasons, otherwise why bother. And although a bean counter myself (or, alternatively a Fellow of an esteemed Institute!!!!) I am struggling to understand the figures. ?|

PS The only place I have seen the Upper Deck experience "sold" is in a Virgin Holidays brochure, never by VS.

[preiffer]

Referring to "config 2 of 747 here: the-toolbox/seat-maps

(and ALL my guesswork, nothing suggested/official/implied/anything!)


Lose rows 70-74 of PE in 2x2 upstairs (-20 PE seats)
Fit (guessing) 6 rows of Y in place of 5 rows of PE in 3x3, so (+36 Y seats)
Lose 4 rows 21-24 of Y in 3x4x3 downstairs (-40 Y seats)
Fit (guessing) 3 rows of PE in 2x4x2 downstairs in place, so (+24 PE seats)

So net effect = -4 Y seats, + 4 PE seats in total (so makes some profit) and Y passengers get to sit upstairs.

Now, that also assumes they replace 4 Y rows with 3 PE rows in the downstairs section. IF they could re-config it to accommodate an extra PE row between the total of rows 81-82 and 21-24, they COULD add another 8 PEs, making it -4Y, +12W.

That would make significant financial sense...

[Neil]

I imagine they should be able to get at least 4 rows of PE seats in, as surely they can remove the bullhead that currently exists between the PE/Y cabin downstairs to help create space.

What will be interesting is what happens with regards to the toilet. Will PW pax be 'allowed' to use the UC toilet or will they add another toilet at the rear of the PE cabin?

Don't forget also, that on some of the LGW a/c there are only 2 rows of Y seats in the mini downstairs cabin, so the gain will be more because they are moving the small office.

I think overall, this is most likely to bother the PE passengers on these routes. Y passengers, over all, will be getting a better deal after these refits, and J passengers will probably feel just a little let down, but will largely be getting the same deal they ever did.

As a frequent PE passenger, my chances of getting a PE seat in the bubble will be reduced if this goes ahead - that's it...

Yes, moving a few seats isn't that big a deal, but the consequence to me matters.

If this really does come to fruition, I assume VS have made the decision for sound reasons so good for them.

I don't believe this is an over-reaction due to the widely held belief that PE in the bubble on LGW/MAN fleet is a better product than PE on the main deck with the same fare structure.

Therefore, for those that fly PE out of LGW or MAN, the whole deal just got worse (if this config is actually how it turns out in the end).

New IFE? Great, I don't use the IFE, so couldn't care less.

New seats? A mixed blessing that one, I hapen to find the old cloth PE seats more comfortable than the new leather ones.

Better meal service - about time, they need to stay with the competition and keep the PE product at the very high standard it is/was.

Anyway, all speculation, and the reality may be different, but there's nothing wrong with a little speculation...

Where there is a choice, PE in the bubble has always struck me as a better product, more like UC minus. Not because of food or booze but entirely because of the exclusivity of the cabin, even with 40 odd people in it.

PE downstairs, in contrast, by its nature, strikes me more like Y plus.

Thats kind of how I feel, except I would say you get better service from the cabin staff on the upper deck. On the lower decks I had to go and try and find someone to pour me a drink after takeoff. Upper deck, I never have.

I suspect I will get the same sort of service with a mixed Y deck. I could be wrong, but I'd say theres a pretty good chance. The few times I flew Y, I got similar sort of attention as did with lower deck.

I'm not saying I'm flying with anyone different, I'm saying I don't see the point of the premium cost anymore and will more likely fly less longhaul... Part of longhaul was enjoying the flight itself...

[preiffer]

So... Reading all these posts about the differences...

Surely the message is that the REST of PE needs to be made to feel like the current upper deck experience? It's the "downstairs PE" that's a bit crap - making the upstairs PE feel like it's a necessity?

In which case, the more productive message, surely, to VS is not "we don't like that you've taken away half of upstairs' PE allocation", but "can you please sort out the downstairs PE service - it needs a lot of work!"


?

[Neil]

So... Reading all these posts about the differences...

Surely the message is that the REST of PE needs to be made to feel like the current upper deck experience? It's the "downstairs PE" that's a bit crap - making the upstairs PE feel like it's a necessity?

In which case, the more productive message, surely, to VS is not "we don't like that you've taken away half of upstairs' PE allocation", but "can you please sort out the downstairs PE service - it needs a lot of work!"


?

Without question that is the issue, you have 2 rows on PE stuck in a dark tiny cabin between the UC galley and the Y bulkhead.

By opening it up and expanding it in to the current Y mini cabin, as I have said above, it should *hopefully* make a much nice cabin environment.

You won't have any Y pax coming through it or crew constantly going through to the Y cabin like you do on the A346 and LHR 747's. It is still a small cabin so will have an exclusive feel to it.

Maybe it won't, but just maybe, it will actually make it just as nice a cabin and place to sit as the upper deck currently is, plus it will be more flexible for families of 4 and pax that can't make the stairs.

hadnt even considered Thompson...just checked £688 for premium V £1175 on VS..........................same dates etc

One thought about this proposed new config is that the mini-Y cabin will go. I know that this cabin is often used to seat passengers with special needs as it offers a bit of privacy when compared to the main Y cabin.

So whilst some PE pax may no longer be able to sit upstairs and will be unhappy. Some Y pax with special needs will no longer get the semi-private experience that have been used to. And these pax cannot go upstairs as they are more often than not in a wheelchair (people who have done MCO flights will know what I mean).

Hmm, Thomson to BGI easter 2013 - £968.98. Then £50 per bag to check in. Then £30 to choose a seat...

Although not a direct comparison, doesn't look particularly good versus the £750 ish I paid for VS to BGI this easter.

I hope that the person who thought up this configuration enjoys his new job, wherever it is, as he should be sacked!!!!

I hope that the person who thought up this configuration enjoys his new job, wherever it is, as he should be sacked!!!!

Well, one assumes that if it comes to fruition, it's been done for some sort of rational reason - at least, that's the hope!

Anyway, it might be a she....

Preifer and Neil make a good point though.....if VS can improve the W offering in the enlarged main deck cabin, the issue largely goes away, I think?

I agree with the point that downstairs W needs improvement, but if my own experience is at all representative of general loads, I generally see W/J sell out ahead of Y on school holiday flights. On that basis, you'd think there was an economic argument for extending out W downstairs without sticking any more Y in upstairs. I'm not an expert on the maths, but the conventional wisdom is that Y is subsidised by the 'higher classes' - so why wouldn't you reduce those seats if more people wanted to buy in W...

Anecdotally, and based on my own experience, the W and J cabins usually fill up first - agreed.

But that might just be at the times I tend to travel (school hols). It would be really interesting to know the load stats......

However, if this really were the case, surely VS would capitalise?

Am I missing something here?

There is still going to be a premium cabin upstairs. It's going to be even smaller which will only add to the "exclusiveness" of being in the bubble. The Y passengers will have no need to walk through. And best of all the seats are going to have some nice new shiny purple leather on them! OK, there may be fewer seats to chose from, but as long as you book early/ are quick at OLCI, then you will be just fine.

So as a frequent LGW PE customer (I fly on average twice a month out of there), I am going to get a smaller cabin, brand new seats, brand new on demand IFE and a smaller queue for the loo, sounds good to me!

I for one have no problem with the move and am thankful that there is some investment on the fleet of which I am a frequent flyer. As for the UCS, hard to judge until we see the new one, but the current one is still superb, and with the tiny little cabin on the LGW fleet, it's my favorite cabin in the world when I get the chance to blow some airmiles.

Also to those still awaiting confirmation, I believe the OP has revealed several bits of information on here ahead of time, including the good night flight service (jeez, remember the commotion in that thread ? ): ), so I'm fairly certain this is all accurate.

To an extent you can judge the load stats by the fare watch tool
PE very rarely drops below £1200 a seat and goes up to around £1600.
Y varies from £500 up to £1000.
This is complicated with taxes etc. so deducting to get revenue:
PE is £850-£1250
Y is £240-£800
Off-season, the PE seat can bring in well over 3x as much cash.

That tends to confirm the general feeling that PE, like UC, fills up most of the time and can command high prices.

So comparing the 33 Y seats in the bubble with 22 Ws:
In "lo" times the revenue would be £8k from Y against £19k from W but in busy times the difference is much smaller - £26k v £28k.

Another complication is the extra revenue from VH sales. If the bubble is allocated to VH there is little chance for those who book via VS direct.

From a beancounters perspective they probably feel that they can sell W seats anyway, particularly to the grey market, so why bother giving them any perks? Give more perks to Y and they can charge higher prices. Unfortunately that ignores brand loyalty.

The "grey" market has more time to compare - and they can compare PE with Business Class on other airlines. Not easy to lose that brand loyalty from "grey" market but if lost, it is very hard to regain. VS are also squeezed from the other side with Charters offering better and better product with exclusive private PE but at MUCH lower prices.

Quite a large number of VS regulars place great store in the peace , quiet & comfort of the 2+2 bubble for holiday flights. They are willing to pay a large premium for it even during off-season. VS should upset these pax. at their peril.

The 14 J seats are similar - ticket costs are £2k to £4k, taxes etc. £440, so the cabin brings in £20-£50k if full of fare paying pax.
We have often seen Y with fewer than 100pax in quiet times - less than £24k coming in. At the same quiet times we have seen W & J full - over £40k coming in from them.

We have seen the lack of investment & delays in MAN/LGW J and been promised this would get the first new seats. I guess we now know how much we can rely upon VS.

So, Bill_S, are you backing my statement that the W and J cabins seem to fill up whilst the Y doesn't at non-peak times and if so, does that indicate a higher demand for those cabins overall?

If so, then why wouldn't VS increase the number of J and W seats and reduce the number of Y seats?

I'm assuming they've thought about this, but can't quite get the reasoning right now...

Seany I would say what you are missing is a) far less availaibilty to VS (not VH) customers, slower to deplane - I presume they will hold back the upstairs EC pax until all downstairs UC/PE have exited and also -ok here comes the snob factor ,kill me, the possibility of more families and more noise. sorry call me a stuck up whatever but I pay the extra for some peace and quiet and other 'perks' (the speed exiting etc) .maybe the downstairs will be super dooper and be worth the extra but right now it isnt for sure.....thats why regular PE 'bubblers'are airning their unhappiness.

Bill you need to extract the VS fuel surcharge from the 'taxes' and add that into the base fares as this is VS income.

"Taxes etc" on a UC fare MAN to MCO is £ 459.09 of which £ 279 is the fuel surcharge. in PE it is £193 out of £373 and £ 193 out of £ 308 in Y