Change in BA stategy?

[Final 3 Greens]

Interesting article from the Times Online.

British Airways jettisons high fares and goes for offers to put ‘bums on seats’ - Times Online (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article6735415.ece)

Even more interesting comments on the thread, in the context of the amount of ill will that they airline seems to have generated amongst its customers or ex customers.

The PR disaster of the removal of shorthaul food after 10am is probably typical of why people feel this way.

One poster quotes 'thank you Ryanair.' I wonder if he means thanks for changing the market and influencing an across the board drop in service levels or just thanks for reducing prices?

[Scumbag O'Riley]

It very much depends what is included when measuring 'service', and then putting them in order of importance.

BA cannot afford cheap fares, their cost base is too high. But they also cannot afford not to have bums on seats. They really need to get their industrial action out of the way and we can then see what emerges at the end of it. If they end up with the Ryanair cost model they may become relevant again. Otherwise they should be allowed to go to the wall and release Heathrow for other airlines to use.

[Guest 112233]

As a regular BA user L.Haul to the USA for the last 9 years or so (VFR), I think its important to differeniate between the medium/long haul and shorter services - no grub on a 1h or 2h secter for the SLF is not too bad BUT...... - Although the advantage to an early morning pax, of some kind of breakfast cannot be under estimated. (I speak from experence), however from a service point of view and I'm thinking outside the Anglo Saxon mind set - the absence of any kind of offering, or greeting in this sense, is culturely offensive and could deter nationals from other parts of the world from using BA when another carrier is avalable. Like the poster in another tread said; "removing the late evening rotations even though they are not well supported lessens loadings on other services.". BA are not Ryan air / Easy Jet - Its the experence more than the cost that matters for people prepared to pay to travel with airlines like BA. Another victory for the bean counters and another nail in the box for BA. I don't remember the days of Connies/VC10's and menus but the sprit of "If you don't like it! piss off or quit whinging and pay" seems to be the sprit of the age.

CAT III

[Stampe]

I,ve never found BA that expensive if flexible on travel times.Sometimes they can be cheaper on shorthaul than the lo-cos and a much better travel experience generally.They will remain my carrier of preference.VBR Stampe

[raffele]

Slight deviation from cost, but they're changing their baggage policy - the big one being that when travelling to the Americas, World Traveller pax will only be given one free bag in the hold:

British Airways - Baggage policy changes (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/flightops/public/en_gb?p_faqid=3823)

They're also changing their policy with regard to sport equipment:

British Airways - Sport equipment policy change (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/flightops/public/en_gb?p_faqid=3824)

[Scumbag O'Riley]

BA are not Ryan air / Easy Jet - Its the experence more than the cost that matters for people prepared to pay to travel with airlines like BA.Well yes, but the problem is there is now a shortage of people prepared to stump up the cost required to make it profitable for BA to operate. Which is the subject of the topic, not whether they are providing food anymore. And as the BA 'experience' rapidly descends to levels way below the service levels you experience when flying FR and EZ, they are going to find it even harder to find people to fill their seats at the generally higher prices BA charge.

[Capetonian]

BA's problems began when they arrogantly branded themselves 'The World's Favourite Airline' and adopted a haughty 'last outpost of the Empire' attitude to customers.

They then decided to 'lose' their Britishness, under Robert Ayling, to rebrand themselves as a 'global' airline, and spent millions of pounds painting aircraft in colour schemes that in many cases quite honestly made them look as if a cat had sicked up over them.

Professional, reliable, and safe they may be, but many of us have other criteria when choosing with whom we spend our money, or even our employer's money. I stopped flying with them years ago after a minor incident at check-in was mishandled and then compounded by spite, lies, arrogance, and libellous remarks being placed about me in their system.

It was at that point that I decided No Way BA .... and apart from a couple of regionals in Southern Africa and one flight to the Caribbean where I had no choice because we travelled as part of a group, I've kept off their aircraft.

[Guest 112233]

Dear S. Yes, having just seen what BA are doing the the Word Traveller Baggage allowance One 23 Kg bag instead of two.On the basis of my last post, I have to ungreatfully accept the honour of the self placement of my foot into my mouth. - I was trying to explain how poorer service kills demand - not just the food issue.

What are they trying to do ? (cut costs !) to their exsisting customer base. [its a rhetorical question ] - Activities like this, will detract from the passengers' propensity to use BA - full stop.

A vicious circle of fewer pax, poorer services begetting fewer pax could develope across their whole network (domestic and european pax feed the long haul system). I know this is a public site and I will not denigrate the Co further.

CAT III

[backseatjock]

Appears to be one very difficult fight for survival and one which sees BA adopt high risk tactics, that might work well for the airline, or compound the problem further.

As I understand it, BA has increasingly relied on the strong revenue flow from business pax in recent years. Yet a degrading of the service and standards has seen many, like myself, voting with their travel budgets and flying with others.

I'm not a traditional BA basher, but it's about time the bean counters and strategy people took note of the relatively simple touches that airlines such as Virgin provide to those travelling in business.

Priority luggage delivery, a welcoming lounge environment, decent standard of food, limo pick up service etc all add up to providing a much more pleasant experience and often for a significantly lower fare!

To give just one example, I was recently refused access to the T5 first/business class lounge because I had forgotten my Gold card. I did, however, make the booking using my card and the details were clearly printed on my boarding card.

No matter, a stand up row with the lounge receptionist saw me refused entry on the basis that she could not be sure that was me (even though I had my passport with me). Stubborn git that I am, I stood my ground and asked for the supervisor who did allow me entry.

A great welcome for someone who does around 100 sectors a year, 70% of which used to be on BA. It's a 'strategy' and approach that has me voting with my travel budget.

BA undoubtedly employs excellent flight crew, cabin crew, ground staff and engineers but, for what seems to be an increasing number, their frustrations and irritation at ever changing policy, conditions of employment and company 'strategy' do seem to be impacting on their approach and attitude to pax.

[Capetonian]

I was recently refused access to the T5 first/business class lounge because I had forgotten my Gold card. I did, however, make the booking using my card and the details were clearly printed on my boarding card.

No matter, a stand up row with the lounge receptionist saw me refused entry on the basis that she could not be sure that was me (even though I had my passport with me). Stubborn git that I am, I stood my ground and asked for the supervisor who did allow me entry.

This sums up the problem with BA (and many other organisations) which employ 'jobsworths' who, once inside that uniform, are determined to use their 'power' to make the lives of everyone else difficult, to build barriers rather than bridges.

Good for you for having the tenacity for following up and winning. My approach to this is very simple. When these people tell me : "I can't .....", I tell them to get me the person who can. It usually works when they realise you are not going to shuffle meekly off.

[ZFT]

..and to demonstrate the difference in approach/attitude, I doubt I've taken my Star Alliance (TG) card out of my wallet on more than a handful of occasions over probably 50 sectors across 5 or 6 Star Alliance carriers this year. As backseatjock stated, all the necessary details are available on either your (e)ticket or on your boarding pass.

[Malone]

Capetonian, I absolutely agree.
I used to work as groundstaff and some of my "colleagues" seemed to go out of their way to be unfriendly, rude and downright awkward.
This does appear to be endemic in this industry and staff attitude really can mean the difference between downfall and survival in this day and age.
A typical example is when I went to Dublin for the day on Aer Lingus. They are ok basically. The crew on the outward leg were friendly and efficient, very pleasant. The crew on the way back were led by a purser who obviously managed to bribe her way through the customer service skills part of her training course!! It was a nightmare, like a different airline.
I know that we can all have our "off days" but if you cannot do your job properly when you have one of these you are in the wrong job I feel.
Oh and before I get 100's of replies, I must also say that it is a minority of staff who are like this. However, bad news travels fast and good news hardly travels at all! (Something called the "Halo" principle I think but please correct me if I am wrong.)

[PAXboy]

Allow me to give my sympathy to all who work at BA - and that means right up to the CEO, I don't usually count Board members as working. After all, if they were - would they be allowing the airline to do this?

I am sincere in this statement because I think there is practically nothing that can be done. The company is in old age and the components of buildings, people and long term commitments are locked in. The only way to support them is higher revenues or bankruptcy, as no one wants to lose their job (unions or no), they need revenue. They cannot get revenue in a recession so they are doing the last ditch and so is almost everyone else!

The culture of providing a higher service is very strong and the greatest majority of staff are gutted to have to reduce service, many feel as if they personally are stabbing their customers in the back and it hurts them too.

During the recession of 1989/1992 (approx) the corporate world from tiny to BA decided that the accountants had all the answers. No one could see where it would land us and I count some accountants amongst family and friends and have seen them put money and great effort into companies.

Once the recession was over, the good times rolled because the greed of many men was allowed to be unfettered by other men (some of whom got benefits). Whilst it was obvious that we were heading for a crash no one wanted to cry STOP. So ... all the components for disaster were ready and for a company like BA, the combination more lethal. As I say, they have my deepest sympathy.

What's to do? Probably nothing because the investment in people and service is beyond the current Board. They (and others like them) are so wedded to the 'lean and mean' route that to change to a: "Let's invest in training our staff better, give them authority to love our customers and put in a few special touches." is unthinkable - they would have to admit they were wrong.

All they have to do is read: From Worst to First: Behind the Scenes of Continental's Remarkable Comeback by Gordon Bethune.

[Ancient Observer]

PB - at least BA staff received some good customer service training back in 89/92. All that "putting people first" stuff did work. I was a gold card holder with BA and SQ from about 89 thru to 2002, and the BA professionalism combined with a focus on customer service did work.

However, too many of the staff now seem to be in the "entitlements" brigade, rather than the service brigade.

[Malone]

Paxboy,
Customer service abilities cannot be "trained", you are that sort of person, or you are not.
My experience at "the world's favourite airline" has only served to make that even more obvious in my mind.
The entire company is full of people who seem to think that an 8 hour shift actually means 3 hours.
I cannot name names but there is one department at LGW who got "the hump" when management decided that they could cut manpower levels by 1 because 1 went home every night at the start of the shift.
Arms went up in the air, "how do you expect us to do the job" etc, etc. The answer is, well you seem to do it every night anyway!!
And they all expect a profit to share in!!!
:ugh:
Having said that, I will always choose BA because, generally, they are very good. Except for the idiots mentioned above!!!
:sad:

[PAXboy]

Yes, customer service is or is not built in and I also agree that the 'Putting People First' programme was excellent. I suspect that the turn-over of staff since then (17 years) means that the core is lost. I expect that the HR folks doing the recruitment have been told to keep costs down too of course, additionally, they may not know what they are doing!

Above all, I trust the flight and cabin crews of BA and am always pleased to be on their a/c. My argument has only ever been with their mgmt which is why they have been my second LH choice for the past 20 years. However, I travelling with them in three weeks (JNB) and will sample their WT+ for the first time and I shall let you know.

[manintheback]

BAs problems right now are so serious that the strategy is clear. Cut costs at any cost and bring the cash in any way you can. If you are still around in a couple of years to worry about the problems this may cause - thats a good thing.

This moves BAs position in the market to a sometimes full service airline that might be competitive on price. Thats a heck of a confused message and a difficult sell.

Whats also clear is that WW got it wrong big time, maybe no-one could have got it right in this market but I'm surprised he's survived until now. As to BAs industrial relations problems and cost base, absurd in this day and age. These should have been tackled under Ayling instead of the half hearted attempt at GO

[PAXboy]

I'm not at all surprised that WW has lasted till now. If the Board asked him to leave, they would be admitting that either/or/all:
They hired the wrong person
They gave the wrong guidance/instructions
They mis-read the market and global economyAs you know, Main Board Directors (always in caps) are never wrong and they want their perks. Like all the rest in the past bull market - they have stashed up their money before it all collapsed. They will be saying, "No one could have predicted" and all that rubbish, when lots of us did predict.

WW will eventually resign of his own volition - but not until he has enough cash to never work again, if needs be. But of course he will ... :rolleyes:

[custardpsc]

Ancient Observer is right. BA had some great training and great customer programs in the 90s. I know, I worked on them. A lot of what learnt then has stood me in great stead since. In fact it has helped me build a career. Partly out of gratitude i have flown with them ever since. Sometimes I work with customers who want me to fly with them or are airlines that expect us to use staff travel or favour alliances. I can thus say that BA has faded and i am sad to see it. I remember whole events that waxed lyrical about the food, the cabin service and a general attitude of pride in the product, both long and short haul. I now see other carriers with better service, better products and a kinder attitude to premium passengers. They don't always have the routes or the connections but thats one of the few things stopping them overtaking BA. I see BA going from being a full service carrier to things like 'all day deli' to 'heres your sandwich' to 'what sandwich?' The writing is on the wall. Not everyone buys on price. Let the LCCs have the cheap punters...

[Capetonian]

Two examples of why BA are losing the plot, and customers.

For many economy longhaul flights it is now not possible to prebook seats. I have three situations with friends who've booked flights out of London, one is to Seattle, one to Johannesburg, one to Lagos. They cannot book seats on the longhaul sectors, even though the GDS seat plan shows that seats are available.

Even on the 'cheapest' low yield fares seat selection should be, and used to be, possible on longhaul sectors, and in fact none of these tickets is in the lowest yield management groups.

They also have a policy that if a ticket is booked through a travel agency, as opposed to direct with BA, it is not possible to use FF Miles to upgrade. I have yet to find an explanation which, to a customer, is acceptable.

Some of the more printable words that come to mind are 'appalling' and 'shoddy'.

I think they are digging their own grave here, it is certainly not a policy which in the current economy is going to encourage people to either book higher fare classes, nor to stay loyal to BA. They lost my loyalty and respect a long time ago.

[manintheback]

For many economy longhaul flights it is now not possible to prebook seats. I have three situations with friends who've booked flights out of London, one is to Seattle, one to Johannesburg, one to Lagos. They cannot book seats on the longhaul sectors, even though the GDS seat plan shows that seats are available

Another bizarre offering in the exec club. Now touted as a benefit of being a frequent flier even though everyone used to have it anyway.

Result - people are less inclined to fly the airline, therefore dont become frequent fliers, BA lose revenue. Savings by revoking the seat selection policy - I suspect about zero.