SQ continues to upset customers in 2018

[flyguy]

SIA still needs its economy passengers in order to make a profit as altho its premium seats may have higher yield and contribute something like up to 40% of its revenue, but without support from its EY loads, SIA will still make a lossl. However as said, if SIA continues down this slippery slope of being a "me too" airline and continue to upset its economy passengers, then the customers will not find any dinstinction with flying with SIA and will go for any other airlines - which then will hurt SIA too - as SIA have then lost its edge on EY and just be like any ot the other hybrid style airlines with LCC products.

[259850]

SIA still needs its economy passengers in order to make a profit as altho its premium seats may have higher yield and contribute something like up to 40% of its revenue, but without support from its EY loads, SIA will still make a lossl.

What's the evidence for this? Cost allocation in a high fixed cost business like airlines is more art than science (e.g. should you allocate the pilot's salary on a flight equally to all passengers, or by the airfare they paid, or the floor area they occupy) so it is hard to make statements like this without a lot of data and scenario analysis.

SQ's financial disclosure is not very extensive, but I've seen detailed management accounts of a small number of other airlines. If anything, they suggest the opposite is true. The profits are disproportionately driven by business class (First class is a different story). Think about it: what's the footprint of a C-class seat vs Y-class and how does that ratio compare against the ratio of ticket prices? (As a corollary, what's driving the new A380 config vs the old?) But yeah, it would be risky to run an all premium airline, and SQ needs the Y-class given current fleet.

All in all, I'm glad I'm a customer rather than management. There is no easy win here. I don't see how loyalty can be sought from a generation of flyers whose main travel app is Skyscanner.

[SQ228]

Who has forgotten about UA and Dr Dao now?

Not me. Unlike an annoyance on a flight or a luggage delay, that incident had a wide audience and damaging effect. But then my memory is a bit photographic. What happened though showed up the true attitude of the airline when they thought nobody was looking.

Having said that, I still chose them to fly with domestic in the US very soon after as I had a lot of extra baggage with me and wanted elite miles and the other *A option in the US is _____?

[lingua101]

So maybe a much smaller fleet of B788s with premium configuration only.....and then stop nickle and diming the premium customers. Leave the commoditized Y class to TR.

remember that all C class config on A345?

I still think the Y pax still contribute to the overall profitability of the flight. The margin may be low, and this is why the volume is important.

I am the one that willing to pay premium on SQ (or any other premium carrier) for better service/aircraft and mostly I am still flying Y, as I cannot convince myself to pay J for regional flight, as some of the aircraft was so crapy like the infamous SLR that I was last Sunday from BKK-SIN

[lingua101]

commoditizing or sweating of Y seats is a trend and SQ shouldn't be faulted by moving with the trend.

So now SQ is the follower instead of the leader in the industry?

[SQ_326]

So now SQ is the follower instead of the leader in the industry?

Since when was SQ a leader in Y class?

[reddevil0728]

So now SQ is the follower instead of the leader in the industry?

Actually if SQ is the leader in the industry in this sense, then if the leading practice is to commoditise or sweating of Y seats, then like that SQ is late to the game?

[Trent1000]

Since when was SQ a leader in Y class?

1970s?

First to provide free headsets and choice of food and drinks in Y.

https://www.singaporeair.com/en_UK/s.../our-heritage/

[SQ228]

Since when was SQ a leader in Y class?

I guess it's a matter of opinion but they haven't become such a leader in the Kangaroo Route market with just their premium cabins. Their following among Y flyers in Australia is massive and they are always spoken of as a leader in the market by frequent travellers.

[259850]

I guess it's a matter of opinion but they haven't become such a leader in the Kangaroo Route market with just their premium cabins. Their following among Y flyers in Australia is massive and they are always spoken of as a leader in the market by frequent travellers.

I don't think you're wrong. But here's the deal - the Y market, maybe not so much the Kangaroo Route, I don't know enough, but definitely Asian regional and Asia <-> Europe, has changed. The market has grown tremendously but is extremely price sensitive. So it is a race to the bottom. "Now Everyone Can Fly"

SQ has 2 choices: stay in its niche but serve a smaller market, or grow along with the market by offering the product the market wants at a price that it's willing to pay. They've been oscillating between the two, wanting to have it both ways. But at some point, they have to go strongly one way or another. With the large aircraft orders, one can only guess which way it will be. It all starts with auto-included insurance, then 9 abreast 787 seats, then......

[scooby5]

Made a work trip booking online a couple of weeks back as our corporate TA couldn't (or couldn't be bothered to) get the lowest fare bucket. Saw the insurance added and unticked the box before proceeding to pay. Wasn't upset at all!!

Actually I was a bit ticked with that.

Booking online for years and suddenly, without warning or highlight, the box was ticked as default. Fine, I noticed it but at the time I was thinking; "Hell, no, that's not on." That's how many fell into the trap of buying, because we've never done it before and now SQ has the hassle and logistics of making the refunds on top of ticking off more than myself.

Long run, it's a few people and some extra cost but will it generate enough income to SQ who will be working on a commission/limited margin call on this service anyway.

[lingua101]

Actually if SQ is the leader in the industry in this sense, then if the leading practice is to commoditise or sweating of Y seats, then like that SQ is late to the game?

well put it this way. Many airlines, at least in this region, always looking at SQ as benchmark.

Arguably, we can say SQ is one of the leader (if you do not like the leader) in the industries.

If now SQ has to follow the trend (cheapo trend), isn't lower its reputation?


I think what SQ needs to do is to increase the revenue from in flight sales. If I compare SQ and CX, I notice CX crew is more "agressive" to do in fligth sales on all my flights.

I was in SQ flight when I wanted to buy something, but the crew was like half heart to do it.

[lingua101]

I don't think you're wrong. But here's the deal - the Y market, maybe not so much the Kangaroo Route, I don't know enough, but definitely Asian regional and Asia <-> Europe, has changed. The market has grown tremendously but is extremely price sensitive. So it is a race to the bottom. "Now Everyone Can Fly"

SQ has 2 choices: stay in its niche but serve a smaller market, or grow along with the market by offering the product the market wants at a price that it's willing to pay. They've been oscillating between the two, wanting to have it both ways. But at some point, they have to go strongly one way or another. With the large aircraft orders, one can only guess which way it will be. It all starts with auto-included insurance, then 9 abreast 787 seats, then......

Again it is a matter of opinion.

In certain market (such as Indonesia), SQ is still regarded as atas (literally mean above/high). If you fly SQ, they perceive you as atas.

They will choose SQ as it is the "great way to fly"

[SQ_326]

well put it this way. Many airlines, at least in this region, always looking at SQ as benchmark.

Arguably, we can say SQ is one of the leader (if you do not like the leader) in the industries.

If now SQ has to follow the trend (cheapo trend), isn't lower its reputation?


I think what SQ needs to do is to increase the revenue from in flight sales. If I compare SQ and CX, I notice CX crew is more "agressive" to do in fligth sales on all my flights.

I was in SQ flight when I wanted to buy something, but the crew was like half heart to do it.

"leader" or whichever, it is just a name, something intangible. If it is an asset then capitalize on it. But if it is turning into a liability then don't sink together with it. SQ has to transform and it isn't easy. Y class is slowly but certainly commoditizing and compressing. Failure to recognize this and respond accordingly because of the heavy burden of a meaningless name wouldn't help too.

[SMK77]

I am still waiting for a premium carrier to discontinue Economy Class and just start with Premium Economy Class.

Unfortunately, to make this work that airline would need to change planes overnight and replace an A380 with a 777 in a premium configuration.

As long as SQ has so many A380 to fill, we will see Economy Class...

On the other hand, the business model of SQ was to be the absolute superior airline. They invested 10$ more in the food and 10$ more in the drinks, topped that up with the most charming cabin crew and were then able to sell the same seat for 100$ more than any other airline.

In a world where passengers prefer to fly British Airways Economy Class because it's 10$ cheaper than SQ, force SQ to join the race to the bottom.

It's good to know that they stopped there and First Class is still the same outstanding product that other airlines look up to. Note some of the fare increases for First Class is showing that SQ is confident to be able to ask for a premium and actually get it.