The one thing that bothers me right now about EI is that we've had a major focus on cutting costs - and just that. The staff, who have made a lot of sacrifices in recent years, are being asked to make sacrifices, but without the knowledge of any change in the airline's strategy or direction. If I were an EI person, I think I'd be asking "ok, you want us to make sacrifices, but in the absence of ANY evidence of change in strategy or direction, how do I know that the sacrifices I and colleagues make won't be frittered away by poor management decisions, or just inaction?"
People have referred to collapsing pax numbers and yields, yet I've seen no evidence that EI is looking at anything smaller than the A320, a 174 seater. In the current environment, and indeed going forward, shouldn't EI be looking at something around the 100 seat mark (and there are plenty of acft in this class) if it has any hope of staving off FR?
On long haul, not the slightest evidence of change - still, despite the v. poor economy, 24 J class and no sign of any more to replace this with a Premium Economy section or to go down the long haul low cost route, a la Air Asia or Jetstar. Always the follower, never the risk taker ... perhaps that's why EI is where EI is and FR is where FR is?
Why does EI need an acft - the A350-900 - which is even bigger than the 333 and will prevent EI from expanding beyond its current core cities. Surely something around the 250-300 seats would have been a better idea?
Maybe Monday's announcement will give some indication of the airline's planned direction?