The New BA Advert: To Fly. To Serve [Archive]

VintageKrug

21st Sep 2011, 20:38

Really impressed by this:

British Airways - Our advert 2011: To Fly. To Serve. - YouTube

I think it’s beautifully shot, a respectful nod to the past while embracing the future, a clear focus on BA’s much maligned staff and a clear “line in the sand” from which to build the future.

It would be good to see more of the contemporary BA, and the actual services offered (such as the inside of the aircraft, lounges), and more on BA’s global footprint, which is a real selling point.

But it’s a good start, and compared to the p*sspoor “Sydney” ad and the OrangeTastic CloudyDolphin Low Cost campaign, I think BA have finally found a media partner which “gets” the brand.

Let's hope they build on this.

PAXboy

21st Sep 2011, 22:28

Mostly lovely pictures but a truly TERRIBLE script and OILY, unctous voice which, to me, is utterly meretricious. My first thought was that it was all a spoof. By half way through, I was still waiting for the punch line.

If the script had been plain speaking - not that awful heavy handed Public Relations tosh - then I might have liked it. But the voice would also have to have been plain speaking. Just honest 'British' and straight forward, that's what pax associate with BA. The kind of oil that was ladled onto this is the way the Americans make their airline TV adverts.

But the public relations people can't resist trying to make it 'dream like' and 'aspirational'. They had all the genuine components of their history there and threw them away. There was nothing innovative about this, just the usual self satisfied corporate splurge. It reeked of fat cats and board rooms, not the staff who actually deliver the service. If I worked for BA, or was a shareholder, I'd be well cheesed off at the waste of money.

It's also a terrible waste of an opportunity. When you think about the magnificent winking island advert? This will win no awards at all. it's just complacent dwang (as we say in South Africa!).

I would insist that it is a pi$$ take but it's too horrible for that. You know the big men sitting around the big table in their big chairs have smiled on this fictional image of their company and believe it to be so.

The single most amusing thing is the abscence of Airbus machines! They over play Concorde and the 744 is still shown centre stage. Now that is reasonable, given that they are one of the world's largest operators of the type, but having shown so many other types?

They show BEA (perhaps because the merger was govt forced) but none of the other airlines they bought up and the good names they used.

The computer work on the scenery is good, although heavy handed. For example, in the VC10 sequence, they over egg it by pasting too many of them into the shot, I would say. I'm glad that the Shuttleworth Collection appear to have made money out of this. No one comes out of this well, in my not humble opinion. :mad:

Fargoo

21st Sep 2011, 23:18

Looks like an advert for Pilot recruitment rather than BA as an airline.

The voiceover is grating and the computer work shoddy, apart from that not bad! 4/10

TightSlot

22nd Sep 2011, 08:53

I've always been impressed by how much you can achieve simply by having a near national monopoly and several billions of taxpayers money in days gone by...

Opps! Sorry... Did I say that out loud?

:E

Ancient Observer

22nd Sep 2011, 10:17

That will take one of the prizes for being one of the WORST adverts in advertising history.
As ever with Aviation, it is obsessed by the bl**dy planes and the pilots.

Not a mention of Customers, who pay for it all. Not a care about service, about quality, and not even a nod to listenning to what customers want.

Terrible. Awful. Complete waste of money.

deltahotel

22nd Sep 2011, 13:33

I think I'm going to be sick....

foxmoth

22nd Sep 2011, 13:39

As ever with Aviation, it is obsessed by the bl**dy planes and the pilots.

That is what aviation is REALLY about, passengers are just a necessary evil.:p

SeenItAll

22nd Sep 2011, 20:42

While the advert may be grating on British sensibilities, as an American, I think it does quite well. There is a limit on how much factual information the typical punter can absorb over a minute, so the goal is to leave him/her with a feeling that s/he will remember every time s/he thinks of the airline. Here, the intended feeling is that BA has been trusted and reliable for the last century -- and isn't that what you are looking for when you choose to fly?

I can see the punchline "to fly, to serve" as being the basis for a huge amount of follow-up advertising over the coming years. It could become as iconic as "Singapore Girl" or United's (Gershwin's, actually) Rhapsody in Blue as being the public's symbol for the airline. I guess we'll see ...

Montgolfier

22nd Sep 2011, 20:45

Guys, I gotta have more Delibes. You gotta want that Flower Duet on the track.

Matt101

22nd Sep 2011, 20:55

Ancient Observer

....Not a care about service......

Was the tag line of the advert not their coat of arms motto "To Fly. To Serve"? ;)

I thought it was a clear attempt to rekindle the history of the company, the one everybody used to consider their favourite.

As a piece of corporate media it seemed great. Not sure it did the clearest job of presenting some selling points but overall I really enjoyed it.

People always refer to the old Flower Duet adverts, particularly the 82 one; as great as they were they are a bit old hat to be honest.

Mach2-Speedbird

22nd Sep 2011, 23:13

Got to say that this has to be one of the best BA adverts there's been (except for one's that had Concorde in all to themselves!)

The irony though of promoting BA in the voice-overs, and using Concorde though, is slap bang in your face though!

PAXboy

22nd Sep 2011, 23:49

Matt101People always refer to the old Flower Duet adverts ...

As a piece of corporate media it seemed great. Not sure it did the clearest job of presenting some selling points but overall I really enjoyed it.
I disagree, to this day, some people refer to the Flower Duet as 'the British Airways music'. I have heard this at first hand more than once. Now, this might have been better for Delibes but he went out of business in 1891 and is also out of copyright. Thus fa, BA is still in business and some folks associate that music with them.

Not sure there is anything in this corporate belch that wll be remembered (however minimally) in 2040. (1992 ~ 2011 = 19. So + 19 = 2040)

Matt101

23rd Sep 2011, 09:36

Sorry I should have sorted out my paragraphing better, when I talked of a a decent bit of coporate media with no real message I was referring to the latest advert.

I still think the flower duet ads were good but are outdated these days. The last advert I saw with the flower duet was for a chocolate biscuit.

PAXboy

23rd Sep 2011, 13:11

Ah, I may have jumped the gun Matt101, as I soooo dislike the new trash, I was happy to pick up any cudgel that came to hand! Certainly the island and winking face were good then but, I would suggest, what they needed now was plain speaking. In the middle of the worst recession in decades, they needed to talk about value and service (funny old word that :rolleyes:).

Yes, the history is good but probably only for those that remember part of it. For the 20 somethings, the history will be irrelevant. They may very well see this advert as a bunch of old fogies only suitable for carrying their grandparents.

BA (and other legacy carriers) face the same problem that the Whiskey business found itself in some 20 years ago. Their brand was associated with parents, grandparents and old mens clubs - a clientele that was dying. So they had to remarket the brand. In the UK the newspapers The Daily Telegraph and The Times had the same problem and reinvented themselves. Thus far, BA has not. I agree that there IS a case to be made for promoting yourself as your history and solid approach - but you still have to sell something new - and this does not.

The advert might be nice for memory lane but what is new?

fernytickles

23rd Sep 2011, 13:34

Don't BA have any female pilots at all :rolleyes:

WHBM

23rd Sep 2011, 14:52

I've shown it to a range of non-aviation types (but regular travellers) in the office. They're all struck by it.

"Ah, there's Concorde .....".

"That was the old VC10 we met my grandfather from once, on .... BAOC".

To me the ad exemplifies a long history of development in what is the most technically challenging area the public are ever likely to personally experience. Makes you think as you contemplate your next trip what is the background and history (or lack of it) of Virgin or Emirates.

The single most amusing thing is the absence of Airbus machines!
Ah, but they show how the DH9 started it all off in 1919. And then move on to the Rapide. Both De Havilland. Now remind me just whose design team and factory at Broughton got turned over to producing the wings for every Airbus ever built. Yes, De Hav........

PAXboy

23rd Sep 2011, 15:15

Nice point WHBM!! I've just been amusing myself on a quiet day with reading up the subject on two other forums. One that is mainly from folks who work on board (but not up the front) love it and it makes them terribly proud to work for BA. So it's nice that they like it.

Skimming thorugh the other forum, based more around people like us but to which I am not signed up, has a similar range of views but more in favour than against.

Whilst it is certainly a corporate branding advert, as opposed to a particular route or cabin, I still think that it is TOO retrospective.

Mr Optimistic

23rd Sep 2011, 21:52

I only managed the first 40 seconds. Looked to me like one of the intrepid early shareholders was about to fly into Cb. There will be words about that higher up the board. Doesn't anybody think use of the words 'to serve' won't invariably be met with 'mine's a g&t' ?

mur007

24th Sep 2011, 10:57

I think it's great - easily the best BA advert I've seen.

gdiphil

24th Sep 2011, 17:38

Well I have to say it made me laugh. All those models flying around. Would it make me want to fly BA? No, definitely not for the very simple reason they don't serve. They are almost at the bottom of the heap along with the US carriers for service and comfort levels in economy. Interesting that they have two sentences in their new ad. One is not necessarily connected to the other. But, they do fly, and safely too.

korrol

24th Sep 2011, 20:57

Anything - absolutely anything - which will get BA paying dividends to its shareholders again is OK by me.

Will a display of BA's heritage aircraft and its garolous pilots do the trick? I doubt it .

PAXboy

24th Sep 2011, 22:29

If they had divided the cost of this production (including mgmt time) and given that directly to the shareholders - at least someone would have been happy. The observations re-posted by Re-Heat (there must be some mishtake, surely?) are spot on. It tells you that no pilots were involved in the final approvals process of this load of old codswallop. (for the non Brit reader, that is an old fashioned word for Bull$hit)

wiggy

24th Sep 2011, 23:12

FWIW

Motto stitched into every captains uniform, and the commentary on the promise - ridiculous.

Ridiculous or not, it's there in the jacket lining.

PAXboy

24th Sep 2011, 23:53

If the motto IS stitched into the lining, I did not see that illustrated by the advert. It would be a smart publicity point to make.

high spirits

25th Sep 2011, 08:39

It captures the 'glamour' of aviation really well. Not as good as either of the 2 recent Virgin adverts which are slightly Tongue - in -cheek and appeal to a broader spectrum IMHO.

603DX

25th Sep 2011, 09:39

OILY, unctous voice which, to me, is utterly meretricious. My first thought was that it was all a spoof. By half way through, I was still waiting for the punch line.

Am I the only person who thinks he recognises the voice of Jeremy Clarkson in deliberately unctuous mode? ;)

PAXboy

25th Sep 2011, 14:08

If it was Mr Clarkson, at least you would KNOW that he was extracting the urine! I agree with Re-Heat's view that it does not hold together and (even without further viewing as I've had my lunch) realise that they have just tried to cram too much into the time. They tried to get 90 years of history and the present- in one go. Better to have broken it up into 15 second chunks dealing with different eras and then lead the customer through to the present and the (hoped for) future.

the management brief was clearly poor
:eek: Surely not ...

ssc1

25th Sep 2011, 15:22

well i think its great and does show what a great airline we once were as we had the Concorde and made great use of it ,as they still do in the advert even though BA dont want anything to do with Concorde (if you ask willy). And its far better than the virgin ad which is just an advert for another bunch of stuck up pilots and cabin crew ....i think its well done but not sure what the message is ...to fly to serve . i think it should be ..we fly to serve . No airbuses proberbly because we are a boeing airline at heart . As i say great Concorde bits especially the end where the rocket leaves the rest for dead .

WHBM

25th Sep 2011, 15:34

What we now need is an airshow of all the types in the ad, because apart from Concorde they are all still airworthy (RAF will surely lend a VC10 with a temporary paint job), and fly them all together like the end piece does.

Capot

25th Sep 2011, 17:21

It's a classic example of an ad that wins huge praise and awards from other advertisers, and even from people who like interesting film/video, but doesn't actually sell, in this case, one additional airline seat. Or car, shaving cream tube, box of chocolates; whatever the product might be.

I forget the word the advertisers use to "explain" apparently pointless promotion of a brand rather than a product. Within many large companies there lurks a manager who actually believes the bull****, and signs off these monstrous wastes of shareholders' money. And of course he or she rather likes the invites to all the corporate entertainment.

The BA ad appealed to me as an aviation fanatic, but it will influence neither my company's ticket buying, nor my personal ticket buying in the slightest. I/we ensure we get value for money, no more, no less, which means buying the cheapest service unless there's a good reason not to. This can happen with BA, when we need to go to somewhere that BA goes to, and when it does we buy BA.

If the ad persuaded me that BA really is value for money even when it is more expensive, we might look harder at the BA option. But the advertisers - and their client, BA - clearly did not think that this is important, which tells us all we need to know.

spannersatcx

25th Sep 2011, 17:29

BA uses VS a/c (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2041597/The-20m-new-BA-promotion-campaign--uses-rival-Virgin-plane.html):O

notlangley

25th Sep 2011, 18:53

We could have been given this http://www.h1932.com/Concorde/Fly the great one.jpg

PAXboy

25th Sep 2011, 19:19

VERY amusing info, thanks spannersatcx.

Once again, the advertsing agency and publicity kids think they know it all. What if theat engineer had been a somewhat disaffected employee and NOT told them? What if he had tipped an nannonymous nod to the media AFTER it had all been shown? As I said earlier, no pilots were involved in the final cut!

If the mgmt had really wanted to be inclusive, they could have representatives from all levels involved in this and giving feedback for, as we all know, it is the people at the rock face who know how the ground lies ...

VS must be highly amused and thrilled at:
A BA source told the paper: 'The mistake was highly embarrassing – especially as Virgin Atlantic are BA’s prime competitor.

Get a grip

25th Sep 2011, 21:47

Hello...lurked for a while but first post on here....Have been Longhaul LHR for many many years and I am now going to the closet where I chuck my uniform after duty or dry cleaning to inspect the lining!! seriously you are all saying that BA are playing on their image of a fantastic safety record...and while that has been true for a very long time, it doesnt seem that way now. during our dispute engineers volunteered to our "jobs" and are still doing recency flights to keep their liscence...We as a cabin crew community have 100% noticed that our aircraft are not maintained the way they used to be. In the tech log (where all defects are logged) there used to be a couple of items listed....recently we had soooo many it prompted the engineer on landing to ask if we had just run out of ink in our pens. If all the passengers and shareholders who post on here actually took the time to write to BA and say they didnt appreciate our engineers flying round the world on a "jolly" and did the jobs that are payed for...then...we could have adverts on our safety records.

Hand Solo

26th Sep 2011, 08:59

And to add some balance, as a BA pilot and one who gets to inspect the real aircraft Tech Log (not the cabin log where the complaints of 'uneven coin dot flooring' get written up) I'm quite satisfied by the standards of engineering and maintenance on our aircraft, nor have I seen any drop off in those standards due to perhaps one percent of engineering manpower time being redirected. It would indeed seem to be the case that someone should Get a Grip, and perhaps ask who it is who is breaking all these dogboxes, latches, bunk curtains etc. They don't break themselves you know!

Now back to the advert.....

L337

26th Sep 2011, 09:18

A BASSA fundamentalist has wandered into the thread. Wrong forum dear.

4PON4PIN

26th Sep 2011, 10:01

20 secs in: "boring into the clouds to do battle with the wind and stars"

How does one do battle with the stars? :hmm:

boardingpass

26th Sep 2011, 10:12

I think the message is quite clear: if you want to be an aviator, you need to grow a moustache...

I can see a new drinking game that can be played down route

Contacttower

26th Sep 2011, 11:35

Loved the pictures, although the VC10 could have lingered for a bit longer I think...:ok:

Commentary did make me cringe a bit; would have been better off with just some music and dates to give people a sense of progression along with footage of important milestones like first Trident autoland, first jet service etc and maybe some more radio chatter to liven it up a bit. BA's long illustrious history can tell itself; it doesn't need a some awkward sounding voice over.

TightSlot

26th Sep 2011, 12:32

triple x

26th Sep 2011, 14:07

The ad is very forgettable
Which one will you remember BA or Virgin ad ?

Official Virgin Atlantic Advert 2011 - HD 'Your airline's either got it or it hasn't' - YouTube

Get a grip

26th Sep 2011, 14:53

I was referring to the advert as it was mentioned earlier on here that the advert was playing on our image over the years including our safety record. Apparently the advert is the first in a series of 6...obviously all the pilots are salivating on here over this one as its a pilot/plane spotters wet dream! lets see you all gush when it s the about crew or catering (although that would be far too embarrassing to show our product)

Hand Solo

26th Sep 2011, 14:58

Move on. Safety isn't just about what goes on in the cabin, although given that BASSA tells you that you are the only reason people fly BA I can see why you'd think that. Back to CrewForum for you, leave this place for the grown-ups.

Get a grip

26th Sep 2011, 19:30

Oh yeah...sorry...as appose to Balpa telling your lot that we are in a fight for survival and your pensions were at risk!! Anyway back to advert...aswell as using Virgin planes in the advert, BA should have also used Virgins advertising agency...as they always win hands down.

notlangley

26th Sep 2011, 20:16

What very interesting posts are those of Get a grip._ They are full of panic._ A familiar panic._ Earlier this year there were many of these panic postings from Trolls._ That was when the realisation came that they, the Trolls, had become irrelevant.

So evidently there is something subtle in the BA advertisement, there is something which threatens the last Trolls, and this presumably is a successful future for BA that is determined by intelligent management.
A successfully managed business causes trouble-making Trolls to wither like chestnut trees in the Sahara.

TightSlot

26th Sep 2011, 20:48

...causes trouble-making Trolls to wither like chestnut trees in the Sahara.

The other thing that is very effective is simply ignoring them - You can do it, really you can - Let's try?

PAXboy

26th Sep 2011, 21:16

I presume that the VC10 used was the one at Duxford? With the background computerised out more accurately than the VS registration at EGLL!

As to VS advertising (thread drift) I am not a complete fan of the one that was linked by triple x. The portrayal of cabin crew as doe-eyed models parading through the terminal is neither good nore helpful. Whereas, the ending of the item with the crew in the wing witha FABULOUS punch line? That is brilliant. It has the feel and delivery of the legendary 'No - Luton Airport' about it.

bottle

27th Sep 2011, 08:33

might be better with "i dont like mondays" overplay

YorkshireTyke

27th Sep 2011, 09:11

Post # 12

Must be a Captain.

(1992 ~ 2011 = 19. So + 19 = 2040)

Not exactly top of the arithmetic class, are you ?

Was once told that Flt. Eng. had to do sums, co-pilots had to be able to write, and Captains had to know someone who could read.

Seems they were right.

And where were the Strat. and the Brit. and the 707 ? or are they coming in the series of 6 that have been threatened. ( weren't there Connies once, too ? )

PAXboy

27th Sep 2011, 11:38

YorkshireTykePost # 12 Must be a Captain.

Quote:
(1992 ~ 2011 = 19. So + 19 = 2040)
Not exactly top of the arithmetic class, are you ?You are correct, it was a typographical errir. But, if I was a captain, I would no sum1 who culd count and spel. But the clue as to my role in the great airline world is in my PPRuNe name ... :p

ssc1

27th Sep 2011, 15:29

Anyway the BA ad is far better than the virgin one ,which was just an advert for the flight and cabin crew ,and we all know they dont look like that in real life .
The cabin crew person is correct in some way in that we dont have enough manpower to do the job correctly so the ADDs have increased and we still do have a number of engineers doing cabin crew jobs and all of us dont support them ,as far as i'm concerned they are traitors especially the union guys .
standards have dropped and thats a fact .and thats from an engineer on the line .

PAXboy

27th Sep 2011, 19:41

I doubt there's a regular of this forum (and even the irregulars:p) who would say other than that standards across BA have dropped. For myself, I guess that they have also dropped in engineering because I guess the mgmt won't allow the time (aka money) to do jobs in anything other than the minimum. I know that BA deny that and always have done and always will.

Even if there is a smoking hole [excluding the special case of BA 0038], they will deny it because they believe that they are all operating within the law and the regulations and the spirit of the regulations. But human nature says otherwise.

Once again for the record, I have never worked in the airline biz and am always happy to fly BA but I would not share a park bench with their mgmt or mgmt of BASSA.

YorkshireTyke

27th Sep 2011, 21:02

But the clue as to my role in the great airline world is in my PPRuNe name ...

Ahhh ?? but that might just be a soodinnim, to fool us into a sense of false security ?

PAXboy

28th Sep 2011, 00:40

Youz is rite YorkshireTyke. Uz keptins iz sich durn clevver peeps, we fro u off d cent. :p

Talking to a friend today, she asked me if I'd seen the 'wonderful new BA advert' I was slack jawed as she said how great it was. She agreed that using Conc was a bit cheeky but wasn't it great? I forgive her because she works in marketing ...! Unfortuntaely, for BA she doesn't travel long haul very much these days.

L337

2nd Oct 2011, 20:35

A very talented lady pilot. Another advert in the Fly to Serve series

British Airways - Kitesurfer - YouTube

sea oxen

2nd Oct 2011, 21:05

How does one do battle with the stars?

Photograph Russell Crowe.

The advertising is eye-catching. I'm a BA banner waver - whether it would sway someone else, I cannot answer.

PAXboy

2nd Oct 2011, 22:44

Thanks for posting the next advert L337 Am I nit picking to say that I wanted folks to be able to see her at work? I know what the flight deck of a 744 looks like and I have an inkling as to what they have to do but - it is important for others, particularly younger women and children to SEE this?

Is it enough to see her in a wet suit then walking through the terminal? I expect that we would see a really smart computer edit - so that she would fly from the kite to her aircraft? When she was saying how she is constantly aware of the changing environment around her - why did we not see her flying in difficult weather, or landing in snow or SOMETHING about flying?

Maybe it's just me.

Chuchinchow

3rd Oct 2011, 00:38

notlangley told us: What very interesting posts are those of Get a grip._ They are full of panic._ A familiar panic._ Earlier this year there were many of these panic postings from Trolls._ That was when the realisation came that they, the Trolls, had become irrelevant.

So evidently there is something subtle in the BA advertisement, there is something which threatens the last Trolls, and this presumably is a successful future for BA that is determined by intelligent management.
A successfully managed business causes trouble-making Trolls to wither like chestnut trees in the Sahara.

I say! Steady on, old boy; that's strong language - especially from you.

TurboTomato

3rd Oct 2011, 09:11

Am I the only person who thinks he recognises the voice of Jeremy Clarkson in deliberately unctuous mode?

Pretty sure it's Jack Davenport of This Life/Coupling/Pirates of the Caribbean fame.

WHBM

3rd Oct 2011, 14:06

Can I ask someone more into CGI than me ......

OK, so the agency (presumably someone from there who is now admiring their P45) took a Virgin 747 and adapted the livery to BA. But why on earth go to all that trouble ? When BA have such a range of 747s already painted in their colours available at Heathrow to base the image on, why ever take a different one and then take all the time and effort to re-colour it ?

TurboTomato

4th Oct 2011, 08:56

Massively cheaper to just photoshop a Virgin plane when everything else is correct in the photo (exposure of sky, positioning of other a/c) rather than attempt to actually create that photo. That photoshop would probably take a pro 20 mins maybe?

easyflyer83

4th Oct 2011, 14:10

...and i doubt anybody got their P45 either. And remember, the ad will have been given the once over by BA anyway.

Hotel Tango

4th Oct 2011, 14:21

...and i doubt anybody got their P45 either. And remember, the ad will have been given the once over by BA anyway.

...and do you honestly believe that a BA manager would be savvy enough to tell the difference? I doubt it. :E

STANDTO

7th Oct 2011, 21:50

bit of a :mad: to see that BA are still attempting to dine out on the iconic image of the Concorde.

The new ad is really good, but I think you could actually find a flying example of every a/c featured bar Concorde. Perhaps they are realising that it was a whole lot more than what it cost them to run......?

Sunnyjohn

7th Oct 2011, 21:55

I think it depends who they're aiming it at. To the ordinary traveller it will, I'm afraid, be meaningless, but it will certainly appeal to the more discerning, i.e. wealthier, traveller and maybe that is the intention. My personal view is that as an advertisement it's a disaster and will follow in the wake of well-known failures such as the Strand and Ford adverts.

easyflyer83

7th Oct 2011, 23:55

But who says that the discerning traveller is interested in the history of BA? You could argue that those who fly once a year would be more interested in the ad. Just playing devils advocate really but I think that is a huge generalisation. That said, I agree that it's not a great ad in the sense that it is pretty much meaningless.

Ancient Observer

8th Oct 2011, 11:25

it is a terrible advert that relies on BAs days as a public monopoly when it charged whatever it wanted to charge, and cost the taxpayer a fortune.

Service? Customers? I wish.

It's not fair on the staff who do try to do their best.

shogan1977

8th Oct 2011, 11:43

Nearly everyone on here seems to think the ad is not only bad, but will have zero impact for BA?

I discontinued my patronage of BA around 2 years ago, after too many bad experiences (delays, strikes, teething problems with T5, etc)... As a non-British Brussels based flyer I had previously believed in the BA heritage/promise (safety and service). The service side let me down.

Now after two years of flying UA/CO I decided to switch back to BA for my next two transatlantic work trips - first one next Monday. This coincided with seeing this ad last week for the first time. Was I subconsciously influenced? Who's to say, but the real test for me will be my experience as a passenger. I am confident CW will be more enjoyable that UA/CO biz...

My conscious view re the ad is that I like the idea - a return to BA's greatest asset: their service and staff; drawing a line under all that has happened and looking to the future. I did not however care for the cheesy over the top music/voice over. Way too much.

ExXB

8th Oct 2011, 14:45

a return to BA's greatest asset: their service and staff; drawing a line under all that has happened and looking to the future.I remain sceptical. Saying you are going to do it is not enough, you've got to do it. For the most part I've rarely had a bad flight with BA, but when things go pear shaped (delays, strikes, teething problems with T5, etc) they let me down badly.

I hope you have a good flight with them, and that nothing goes pear shaped. I don't believe they have that side of the service equation sorted.

Armybloke

9th Oct 2011, 09:49

I think it is the worst advert I have ever seen. Patronising, cheesey, smug.

I feel so strongly I had to vent and even registered on here to do so.

It is so bad I will even avoid flying with BA again. Who is the advertising monkey who convinced BA to run with it? Or perhaps we are now a dumbed down nation who will love it.

Fly to Serve? Give me a break.

Yours, angry British Army Officer.

scotbill

9th Oct 2011, 12:05

As someone who delights in PVRs that allow one to skip through adverts on recordings, I cannot believe anyone would decide never to use a company again on the basis of one advert!
Or are you a troll hoping to provoke another bout of inter-service name calling?

DeepDene

18th Oct 2011, 16:53

Just seen the new ad for the first time and must say Mrs D and I rolled around the floor laughing when we saw it. Never seen such a load of self-aggrandising, patronising nonsense in all my life! For me, completely the WRONG message at a time when BA should if anything be putting on a show of humility and contrition in front of its customers. Who DO these people think they are?

PAXboy

18th Oct 2011, 19:24

DeepDene As you are the newbie here, from an old lag, may I say - Jolly good post!!!

Whilst I'm not out to batter BA at every opportunity (as some are) I do like your direct approach so may I be the first to welcome you aboard our happy cabin of the air(waves), I'm sure that you'll fit right in. :E

cockney steve

19th Oct 2011, 17:09

Yup, I,too . cringed at the syrupy,smug, self-congratulatory tone of this advert.

Perhaps the "to serve" element was to invoke memories of Tim Henman ?,,,, Lots of tantalising promise but always failed to live up to the expectations we'd been. promised :}

I'm sure many younger viewers will wrongly confuse the grounding of Concorde with the disastrous French crash.....I must agree with Sunnyjohn.....this is another "Strand " advert in the making.

the cash could have been better used in improving morale/service.

(for the youngsters," You're never alone with a Strand" was the strapline of a cigarette advert that showed a quiet, meditative gentleman strolling through a deserted London, smoking his favourite gasper.
Leastwise, that was the adman's view :hmm: The punters saw a sad lonely old git who was given a wide berth by all ,and only had these fags for company. moral.....smoke this brand and you'll be on your tod!

the brand collapsed and was a textbook case on how NOT to market a product.

Yellow Pen

19th Oct 2011, 17:40

For me, completely the WRONG message at a time when BA should if anything be putting on a show of humility and contrition in front of its customers. Who DO these people think they are?

Why precisely should BA be putting on a show of humility and contrition? They experienced a strike by militant cabin crew and still managed to fly the majority of their flights. They got the vast majority of their passengers to where they needed to go for the short periods of strike disruption. They, and they alone, forced the UK government to reopen UK airspace after the farcical shutdown for non-existent volcanic ash. They were not responsible for BAAs farcical response to snow. They are not responsible for APD. They are not responsible for delays due to the UK governments lack of an aviation policy. They are not responsible for the fact that the UK regions cannot sustain a standalone point to point network and rely on hub and spoke carriers. What are BA supposed to be apologising for?

yotty

19th Oct 2011, 18:10

I think this BA advert takes some beating! 1989 British Airways Commercial - YouTube :cool: Hand Solo. I humbly suggest if you are accepting a BA aircraft for service, a review of the Tech Log Pt 2 (Cabin Log) is required. Whilst containing many non-airworthiness items the defect you mention (uneven coindot) does have a 'elf and safety "trip" issue, and in the fwd galley has a "Spill Hazard Zone" dimension as well. (danger of leaking fluids contaminating vital computers in equipment bays beneath the floor). With regard to Engineering performance at BA, the Workload always will wax and wane. I had to ground a 777 2 weeks ago (Fully fueled, crewed and loaded) for some cracks which took 3 hours to to obtain the necessary paperwork. I was under no pressure from management to "pen it off". So it's business as usual... :ok:

L337

19th Oct 2011, 20:14

Well done to Yellow Pen. I absolutely agree, no need for contrition or humility. But much to be proud of.

Trolls. :yuk:

easyflyer83

19th Oct 2011, 20:28

I agree nothing to apologise for as such (certainly nothing that other European carriers haven't experienced) but the BA brand has been damaged or tainted in one way or another to the extent that it is not the brand it once was. Perhaps that is why BA are trying to evoke memories of bygone era's. However, I personally think that that is the wrong way forward and a self pat on the back sentiment won't help.

PAXboy

20th Oct 2011, 02:09

Yellow Pen, I agree with you that BA have nothing to apologise for and you list many achievements. But ...

Why did they not trumpet their recent achievements and overcoming of problems in the ad - rather than say that the good ol' chaps did a dashed fine job in the 20th century? The ad is full of bombast and history as they wish it to be told.

Some of us remember previous strikes that were not well handled - the catering workers strike anyone?

Just in case you think I'm being mean and looking at events too far in the past, consider that I stopped using BA as my main long haul carrier following Dirty Tricks, which started in 1993. My action will have cost BA (probably) less than 1 seconds worth of fuel on their global fleet on any day - if that. But how many people changed away from BA? Look up Wikipedia and then VS, then see that it cost BA more than £3.5 million in compensation.

for the record (again). I have never worked for ANY airline or airport and have no expectation of doing so.

Kengineer-130

20th Oct 2011, 02:58

I'm going to go against the grain here, but I think this is one of the best adverts for a long time, in any field. It shows a great time line of aircraft & aviation through the ages, all slotted into 1.30 of video, whist managing to create a very stirring "glamour/thrill of flying feel" through clever use of music & snapshots of the best bits of flying.

I might be a bit of a romantic, but the gleaming engine cowls of the DC3, a grumpy piston engine firing into life, Concords afterburners lighting up, the throttles being opened at the end of the runway & easing back the stick as 747 gracefully lifting into the air are all images most of us imagined as small boys/girls through the ages, dreaming of careers in aviation or simply just the amazing sensation of flying.

I think it's a very clever ad, focusing on the thrill of flight & the journey being a big part of the adventure to your destination :ok:

Oh, I flew BA (777) to Florida last year, have to say the service was fantastic each way!

13Alpha

20th Oct 2011, 21:56

As a reminder of what a great airline BA used to be, and with the sound turned down, it's a great ad.

However I know BA has great pilots and a long history and traditions - but I stopped flying with them because (a sizeable minority of) their long haul cabin crew were happy to fly, but not serve.

So if the aim was to win back people like me to fly with them, I'm afraid it failed.

13Alpha (former gold, now blue, card member)

lynx-effect

5th Nov 2011, 14:47

It always makes me stop what I'm doing and watch it. I think it is a great advert.

Ancient Observer

6th Nov 2011, 11:51

As someone who spends their own after-tax money with BA, (not some Company's money) I object to them using a penny of it on this awful history lesson. In the past, the taxpayer paid for their planes. Now it is customers.
If they served more, maybe the logo might make a tiny amount od sense.

(yes, I know, gross generalisation)

PAXboy

6th Nov 2011, 15:13

Saw this in the cinema a week ago - and it was just a poor as on TV. The same GHASTLY voice over and the same over production of image. I do realise that most of the angles have been used for advertising airlines but one of my greatest objections is the over use of digital effects. For the simple reason that I don't know what is real and what is fake. Most people could guess that the line up of VC10s is fake and just multiple copies of the (probably) one at Duxford. Whilst the quality of the image might just appeal to younger generations who are use to computer games and graphics - I want to see REALITY.

No, RyanAir would not waste their money on this kind of tripe and my experience is that their crews have just the same mix of those trying their very best and those who couldn't care less - as BA does. Or any other commercial company has.

PAXboy

6th Nov 2011, 18:59

Marketing departments usually promise more than can be devlivered. When senior management are too far removed from the point of service - then you get this kind of corporate bull$hit. Nothing unusual, happens all the time.

VintageKrug

8th Nov 2011, 12:18

The Ad works for me; I've seen it at home, in the office, at the gym, in the cinema and in a TV shop!

A few people did noticeably stop and paid attention to it; so it must be doing something right.

The linked press campaign is similarly engaging.

The focus on putting the customer at the heart of the operation is noble; as with any large organisation, there's a way to go to ensure everyone's expectation is met or exceeded - that would be a tall order especially at a time when costs are rising inexorably and people's expectations about service are inverse to their willingness to pay to experience such service.

But BA has backed this up with £5billion - yes you read correctly - £5billion of investment and that, coupled with Frank van der Post as the new customer experience champion means that positive changes, unencumbered by the dinosaurs of the past, will make their way to customers faster than has been the case in the past, and that continual improvement is the order of the day.

The ad still makes the hairs on the back of the neck tingle, and I think it plays to BA's strengths as well as aspirations in a way other airlines simply could not, and therefore it is the right ad for BA.

alcockell

8th Nov 2011, 14:15

As long as this doesn't end up as another truer ad... as long as ground ops work well... (Hugh Dennis) - "Weee-'ve lost your bags/ Weee-'ve lost your bags...."

PAXboy

8th Nov 2011, 22:43

Sorry, VintageKrug but BA have lost it. It is clear that they have lost the plot to deliver their passengers a good service because they have appointed someone with the title:

customer experience champion

The board ask the CEO to devise the level of service
The CEO co-odinates the given managers in each area that handle customers (from first to last AND those the passenger never meets)
The board approve the service and the costs.
The CEO implements it and each department knows their bit of it.

When you appoint a C.E.C. it means that you cannot manage all of those people in the line and so an overall person is being appointed. NOT another line manager but someone with a nebulous title that embraces waay too much and so cannot hope to actually deal with. Whilst the intention is to unify services, actually, this person lands up telling lots of departments what to do without having their own department. That NEVER produces good results. It's the same problem the United States has - they are too big to be one country in the modern world but they are clinging to the idea of Mr President. So more and more interim Commissioners and Tzars get appointed and? Nothing changes.

Further, you say that this person is the 'new' C.E.C. which means they have already tried this route and it hasn't worked.

I might well be wrong about all of the above but I would bet that I'm right overall - and I'm not a betting man.

VKThe focus on putting the customer at the heart of the operation is noble; as with any large organisation, there's a way to go to ensure everyone's expectation is met or exceeded - that would be a tall order especially at a time when costs are rising inexorably and people's expectations about service are inverse to their willingness to pay to experience such service.Indeed but BA had got it all correct following the privatisation. This fall from good service is very new.

Sorry, but BA are now too big and too old and too to heavy. Which is a pity as they are dashed fine airline - most of the time.

crewmeal

9th Nov 2011, 05:58

Regardless of BA champions or any other title bestowed on various personal, service levels onboard will not improve until the cabin crew sort out their differences with each other. This includes mixed fleet who seem to fly the 'better' routes, main crew who show their teeth every time there is a change, which ultimately results in some sort of salary loss. Until the crew work as one, then I don't see any improvement onboard.

It was the same when BOAC and BEA joined together back in the 70's. the crews didn't want it and service levels began to slide on both sides. Again back in the 90's BA introduced Mid fleet and that didn't work for long because of route structure and allowances.

When the crew are all on the same structured salary and allowances together, then I believe service standards onboard will start to rise again. BA can safely use the slogan 'To fly to serve'