Genuine F class experience, what is that for you?

[SkyDining]

Dear SQTalk members,

I have been reading the forum for a few weeks and I finally joined after reading many interesting threads.
Its a pleasure being on board here!

So...
Genuine F class travel, in your personal opinion, what would you think that makes it just that notch above?
Examples:
-connectivity (internet, phone, work)
-exclusivity (limited number of co-travellers in lounges, airplanes)
-Privacy (seat layouts)
-Arrangements (check-in, limousines...)
-Dining (The quick tray or a unique dining experience found in top restaurants)
-Amenities (from perfume to flip-flops...)
-professional anticipating crew (butlers or waiters)
-...
You name it.

My profession is...You name it, trying to deliver just that!
Any opinion/experiences, good or bad are most welcome to be discussed!

[Jamiegutz]

For me, consistency accross the entire product. For Example ... if i fly paid F from SIN-LHR, and then do the same trip on a KF redemption i still would expect access to The Private Room etc etc. And the whole suites/class beyond first is just nonsense ... it is still F just a more complicated seat (but i must admit the bed is very comfortable). SQ should F revenue on this.

I really dont see any benefit to categorising customers in this manner ... when you fly F you expect to be treated as such ... not feel below another passenger who has paid more. An F passenger is still an F passenger regardless of whether it has been paid by cash or miles.

[SQDoubter]

Here we go...Welcome Skydining. I think you have opened up a can of worms. Get ready for it! I myself have never flown F but there are quite a few who have some very strong feelings about this. Hope you can make a change!

[SkyDining]

Here we go...Welcome Skydining. I think you have opened up a can of worms. Get ready for it! I myself have never flown F but there are quite a few who have some very strong feelings about this. Hope you can make a change!

Indeed, I've seen the posts, thats exactly why I joined this forum and started this thread!

Consistency on every level is indeed a big issue, I have to admit as well that today, the F class experience goes way beyond the actual airplane itself.
Guests who continue to do business and get rewarded for this in a FF program, should get all aspects of the experience when they are checked in for a seat in my personal opinion.

While almost all airlines tend to reward a customer with an upgrade/free ticket, what they actually want to do is advertise the next product, it can come over very arrogant as well to the guest in how it's being done, I am well aware of that.

However, the exclusivity/credibility of a genuine F is at stake here, either you raise the bar very high for F rewards or risk becoming a Reward class.
Anything in the middle will give conflicts.
Any thoughts?

[SMK77]

The good old times when First was truely First are long gone - and unfortunately, I am too young to tell from experience...

Second, the times where First was highly profitable are long over as well. Airlines try to "optimize" the product while customers would love to have a more perfect product.

Important to note that all pax in F have usually totally different motivation why they are in First. Some busy executive will only care for a good and undisturbed sleep for the whole flight while a couple on honeymoon just wants to get spoiled.

"Smooth as silk" (while Thai's advertisment) is pretty much what all pax would expect - travel in First has to be hazzle-free and the processes designed around the pax and individualized as much as possible.

-connectivity (internet, phone, work)
That seems to be an overall plus to chose an airline - when internet was launched, there was no "First only" access. Same for entertainment: Having a big screen doesn't make you fly First.
-exclusivity (limited number of co-travellers in lounges, airplanes)
Definitely something that F-flyers appreciate. Look at SQ's Suites product and see how SQ fails to deliver on that one.
-Privacy (seat layouts)
The old story of how to cater single travelers and couples - needs will be totally different.
-Arrangements (check-in, limousines...)
Makes for a smooth experience. Being picked up by Emirates at home even on a business flight and dropped of at the hotel is truely looking at the end-to-end of a passenger's travel.
-Dining (The quick tray or a unique dining experience found in top restaurants)
Give choices. If you want to go to sleep all the way, dining on the ground is a) better and b) more convenient.
-Amenities (from perfume to flip-flops...)
Last touches but not important to me. PJ is a nice amenity though.
-professional anticipating crew (butlers or waiters)
Never thought about it - but like the idea :-)

[SQflyergirl]

I can't agree more with the statement that any particular cabin class should be further subdivided once you've checked in.

You already have a 3 (sometimes 4) classes already. Further subdividing classes into First Class, Firster Class and Firstest Class like the TPR example above only increases administrative work, dilutes the product, makes it harder to advertise properly.

"Oh Look honey - that chap over there, he's only in First. Ours is Firster than his"

[SMK77]

I can't agree more with the statement that any particular cabin class should be further subdivided once you've checked in.

You already have a 3 (sometimes 4) classes already. Further subdividing classes into First Class, Firster Class and Firstest Class like the TPR example above only increases administrative work, dilutes the product, makes it harder to advertise properly.

"Oh Look honey - that chap over there, he's only in First. Ours is Firster than his"

SQflyergirl, SQ's CEO has already put your vision into place.

"First Class passengers are welcome to The Private Room".

"Oh, you travel on a 540.000 miles Full Award First ticket. Sorry, Sir. That's not First enough".

[SQflyergirl]

oops that statement of mine is wrong. should be NOT further subdivided.

[SQJunkie]

oops that statement of mine is wrong. should be NOT further subdivided.

Glad you clarified, I re-read several times to make sure I was not missing something!
An end to sub-divisions!

[SQJunkie]

Dear SQTalk members,

I have been reading the forum for a few weeks and I finally joined after reading many interesting threads.
Its a pleasure being on board here!

So...
Genuine F class travel, in your personal opinion, what would you think that makes it just that notch above?
Examples:
-connectivity (internet, phone, work)
-exclusivity (limited number of co-travellers in lounges, airplanes)
-Privacy (seat layouts)
-Arrangements (check-in, limousines...)
-Dining (The quick tray or a unique dining experience found in top restaurants)
-Amenities (from perfume to flip-flops...)
-professional anticipating crew (butlers or waiters)
-...
You name it.

My profession is...You name it, trying to deliver just that!
Any opinion/experiences, good or bad are most welcome to be discussed!

Welcome to SQTalk, skydining.

May I ask whom you are trying to deliver a better First Class experience for?
What I mean is, which company?
Is it our beloved SQ?

[Danny Bhoy]

I make the following comments as an increasingly infrequent SQ J pax and an SQ shareholder. BTW, all the suggested logistical details that I'm throwing out below are just seat-of-the-pants out-of-my-arse figures and not even back of the envelope calculations.

Nobody wants SQ to go the way of the stateside airlines dishing out upgrades to F like candy. I think as long as the F pax has paid for his seat either with cold cash or hard-earned points (let's face it the relative poor earn/burn ratio of KF points means that using KF points isn't cheap), that is enough - they are all equal; after all, SQ does not (yet ) distinguish between pax in J and Y between those who paid cash and who paid points - what next distinguish between fare classes in Y? If SQ wants to limit those flying in SQ F on points to KF/PPS customers that's fine; you're simply prioritising to your own elite frequent fliers. But to reiterate, once the pax is in that class, there should be no differentiation - save perhaps between SQ KF elite pax and other non-SQ FFP.

Personally, I reckon trying to recreate the sort of unique dining experience one gets at a high-end on-the-ground restaurant is a fruitless endeavour. As somebody probably said before, even the average pax in Y will have better meals at home in a more enjoyable environment than they would ever in inflight F - no meal I ever had in SQ J could compare with a decent zi char take away in S'pore. Once a certain quality of the meal is there, the rest IMO is just the finer touches of presentation which shouldn't necessarily cost more or that much more. I agree with SMK77, that options such as on-the-ground dining in lieu of inflight dining should be considered for F pax. Such an option should obviously also be flexible to allow a pax on a long-distance flight to have a meal on the ground in order to skip the first meal to sleep but then he would still receive the subsequent meals in the flight.

Limo service for F pax to pick-up/drop-off (within reasonable limits obviously) could be offered as an option. I would personally would almost never consider using such a service save perhaps in a one-off special event like honeymoon, but it seems many people like that sort of thing. Homebase SIN to start off, but I'm not sure if it needs to be extended to other SQ destinations. Even if extended to other SQ destinations, IMO this need not be a standard option for all destinations served by SQ F. IMO, where such a service is especially attractive is in difficult destinations (e.g. JED, RUH), so even if such destinations might only be served by a 2-class JY flight, that service could be an option to the J class pax on those flights. A much easier destination could either not have one or depending on F traffic have such a service but paid possibly discounted but also booked in advance (what defines such a destination is debatable and depends on the person, but in my mind an NZ destination could be such but places like LHR, HKG, NRT, EWR/JFK would have the heavier kind of such traffic where such a service might be more useful).

I also agree with SMK77 that hardware like internet and phone and power should plane wide and not just in F. Personally, I don't think F pax (even J pax) should give a toss about amenities (apart from the basic sockettes and blinkers, plus the pyjamas in F).

I don't know if SQ has buggy service for F but I think this could be provided at least at SIN (arrival, departure, connecting - to be extended to cases at SIN where the pax might be coming in on SQ F but connecting as J pax on a 2-class SQ/MI JY flight and vice-versa.)

The butler/porter thing is definitely worth looking at for that extra touch at least for homebase SIN, but it doesn't have to be 1-to-1; I think having 1 per travelling unit (i.e. single traveller or travelling couple or even travelling couple + 1 child) is reasonable. The butler/porter could handle the more menial affairs while the pax is in the airport with maybe an F rep (maybe only in SIN) handling the coordination and other more complicated matters (change of flights/connections, IROPS etc.) for all the F pax on that flight -say 1 (or 2 if really full/complicated) such rep(s) to a F flight.

[stargold]

-connectivity (internet, phone, work)

I don't think that voice calls should ever be allowed in-flight. That said, data connections (for Blackberries) and wi-fi would be most welcome - in many ways, I wonder whether Boeing Connexion would actually be a roaring success if they had kept it till now, given the vast popularity of netbooks these days.

-exclusivity (limited number of co-travellers in lounges, airplanes)

Clearly, LH's 16 seats are just too many. I think 8-9 is a nice number right now, for example 2 rows of 1-2-1 or 3 rows of 1-1-1 like CX. As long as it's possible to dine together on one table, I don't think it's strictly necessary to have pairs of seats.

-Privacy (seat layouts)

Clearly important - though different passengers have very different opinions about what is the perfect balance. I know that myself and some others really like the open design of the SQ 744, whilst others much prefer the other extreme of the Suites. I don't think there's really a correct answer.

-Arrangements (check-in, limousines...)

I doubt most paying F pax will be too fussed about limos, given that they will most likely have their own transport at the home city and hotel-arranged transfers when away. I can't see many airlines offering limos on upgrades or reward tickets.

The ground services experience is key to arriving into the cabin in a calm state of mind, and to that end I think LH gets it right at FRA with the FCT. I would say that even SQ's private F check-in at SIN is excellent given that it allows total exclusivity without having to queue at passport control etc.

Basically, anything that helps achieve the goal of privacy and no waiting is a good thing - clearly the LH FCT is impossible at every airport, but private lanes in as many places as possible would be the next best alternative.

And as already said time and time again - SQ's SKL F at T3: a big meh.

-Dining (The quick tray or a unique dining experience found in top restaurants)

I disagree slightly with Danny Bhoy in his opinion that a "first class" dining experience is impossible in the air.

My recent NH F dining experience for the western meal was simply breathtaking and definitely a match for a decent restaurant on the ground. Of course, you're not going to get Michelin-starred quality in the air, but a decent dining experience worthy of a good brasserie is definitely possible. But then again, NH are really class-leaders with the high quality of the main meal and the numerous "small portions of full dishes" snack options.

A pre-flight dining option at the lounge will always be welcome, provided that the quality of the food is up to scratch. The Virgin Clubhouse, whilst being a pretty amazing lounge overall, had a pretty poor food quality to the extent that I would consider it unacceptable. I have heard that the food at TPR is pretty decent, however.

-Amenities (from perfume to flip-flops...)

All I want from a flight is a pair of slippers and a decent pair of PJs, so that I don't have to carry them around with me. Most F pax probably have products they already use and will carry with them onboard, but an amenity kit with decent products would be useful for those that forget/didn't bring their own.

From past experience, although being far from a "regular" F traveller, most amenity kits I have received have gone to others as souvenirs.

-professional anticipating crew (butlers or waiters)

Many airlines already have crew whose service levels cannot be faulted in any meaningful way whatsoever. Consistency is key, however, so that you can avoid the situation on some other airlines where you can end up with the best crew ever, or a catastrophically bad crew.

[SkyDining]

Welcome to SQTalk, skydining.

May I ask whom you are trying to deliver a better First Class experience for?
What I mean is, which company?
Is it our beloved SQ?

Let's say nothing and everything; I am currently employed with a middle-eastern company about to make a move, the reason for me reading this particular forum says enough where. ;-)

Thanks very much to all posters for your views and opinions so far, opinions count, especially in this type of business.

Indeed, the key to a succesfull First class experience is getting more personal, this is in essence the opinion by the posters and this is where most F class fail, getting your own opinions in my profession into a service product will count for some, but not for all, so whats the difference over J or C?

Let's compare some (personal) opinions and views with examples and any comments/critics on this are highly appreciated!

I am here basically as well as a hobby, nothing here means actual business,
the butler is a methophore, meaning a well anticipated staff following up your individual needs compared to a waiter who delivers you a basic product, but nothing more.

Comparing a Business class product with a First class product.

Why you buy Business class over Y class?
Because you want something more comfortable, so the airline delivers with a lounge, better seat, better dining options(not always ;-) ), comfort, more exclusivity.
Ok, you get all that, in a package, but not tailor made, so happy for all your needs, maybe not, but you get a much more complete product over Y though.

Why buy First over a good Business class?
This is indeed a pickle.
I see many airlines delivering a good Business class and more, but it is still not worthy to be called a First class experience besides less companions and a slightly bigger seat.
You buy (or get rewarded) in F, because you want more then the J/C class experience and what you get is still a J class experience in a nicer package.

Why not make it tailor made,
How do you buy a top end make car, go to any German car manufacterer and get yourself the topline model, the list goes on and on.
Why are these type of cars succesfull year after year and people buy them? Not because they are super good looking, they are very personal.

you have the basic options and a basic price: the seat, open or private?
Do you want the private room, limo, several menus to choose from varying in quality and price that may include a personal chef, maybe dinner on the ground and ready for bed upon boarding, caviar, ... ?
The list can be anything for what you personally care more then something else.
In my opinion, the consistency and anticipation can be of a high standard here, if you get your product tailor made for every guests needs.

I see you thinking, what about the cost, organisation for this? Those german limos are not cheap and take months to wait for!

This is where a car and this kind of product differ, imagine the cost the company would safe if it already knows what the guest wants, and at the same time, consider your face when you have exactly what you wanted, nothing less and maybe a bit more. Most products are already available.

You can even fly basic F class, not because the airline forced you too, YOU choose to.

[SQJunkie]

I am currently employed with a middle-eastern company about to make a move, the reason for me reading this particular forum says enough where. ;-)

Intriguing !

Indeed, the key to a succesfull First class experience is getting more personal, this is in essence the opinion by the posters and this is where most F class fail, getting your own opinions in my profession into a service product will count for some, but not for all, so whats the difference over J or C?

IMO, there is a difference between personalised service (eg FA anticipating one's needs) and personalising the product offered (eg tick your list of options). The former is a pre-requisite of F I'd say. I'm not keen on the idea of the latter.

Comparing a Business class product with a First class product.
............................
Why buy First over a good Business class?
This is indeed a pickle.
I see many airlines delivering a good Business class and more, but it is still not worthy to be called a First class experience besides less companions and a slightly bigger seat.
You buy (or get rewarded) in F, because you want more then the J/C class experience and what you get is still a J class experience in a nicer package.

Do you mean First?

Why not make it tailor made,
How do you buy a top end make car, go to any German car manufacterer and get yourself the topline model, the list goes on and on.
Why are these type of cars succesfull year after year and people buy them? Not because they are super good looking, they are very personal.

you have the basic options and a basic price: the seat, open or private?
Do you want the private room, limo, several menus to choose from varying in quality and price that may include a personal chef, maybe dinner on the ground and ready for bed upon boarding, caviar, ... ?
The list can be anything for what you personally care more then something else.
In my opinion, the consistency and anticipation can be of a high standard here, if you get your product tailor made for every guests needs.

There is another difference in your analogy of the German car:
The luxury car is customisable to the n-th degree because it is also an expression of the customer's personality.
Like a tailor made suit.
And: the luxury German car is also a status symbol.

whereas:

First Class is not necessarily an expression of personality.
In fact, usually in F, privacy is one of the main requirements / attractions.

First Class, in my opinion, should just ooze luxury. Period.

You can even fly basic F class, not because the airline forced you too, YOU choose to

That's an oxymoron! It just sounds so wrong.
It seems to be we are now coming back to the cost of F to the passenger.
If they want basic F, they get less and pay less?
Is that not tantamount to further subdividing First?

In fact, it sounds distinctly low-cost, a la Jetstar and AirAsia where many things are an additional cost.

There HAS to be some homogeneity of product so that an airline has a distinct identity.
For a top tier airline, I do not think having a First Class which varies from
Basic First to Firstest First is a good point of difference or attraction.

[SkyDining]

There is another difference in your analogy of the German car:
The luxury car is customisable to the n-th degree because it is also an expression of the customer's personality.
Like a tailor made suit.
And: the luxury German car is also a status symbol.

whereas:

First Class is not necessarily an expression of personality.
In fact, usually in F, privacy is one of the main requirements / attractions.

First Class, in my opinion, should just ooze luxury. Period.

No, First is not a status symbol or personality reflection IMO, I was reflecting merely to the personalised idea behind the option list of a luxury car.
However guests flying in First tend to want things exactly the way they like it.

That's an oxymoron! It just sounds so wrong.
It seems to be we are now coming back to the cost of F to the passenger.
If they want basic F, they get less and pay less?
Is that not tantamount to further subdividing First?

In fact, it sounds distinctly low-cost, a la Jetstar and AirAsia where many things are an additional cost.

There HAS to be some homogeneity of product so that an airline has a distinct identity.
For a top tier airline, I do not think having a First Class which varies from
Basic First to Firstest First is a good point of difference or attraction.

Where a low cost company simply does not offer anything, the difference here is that you have a tailor made service catering your exact needs over an already excellent standard First including all things we have today.

Maybe the tailor made option will come out cheaper then a basic First, maybe I should rephrase it to standard First.
Ditch the lounge option if you just checked in and ready for boarding for a night flight for example.

It's totally up to the guest what he/she wants for that specific flight, not the airline subdividing anything. Or is the status important afterall?
The savings for both parties will just be a nice bonus, the extra services/profit for personalised services as well.

Doing a concept like today where everything is available upon request, the cost is so high the customer is not prepared paying for it anymore.
I have observed guest behaviour over the years, and some of them want the privacy, a PJ, glass of water and rest for the remainder of the flight, yet they have to pay the full amount for services they do not utilise, even get disturbed by them. Yet today we have the technolgy and capability of easely personalising them.

I am sure something like this will never happen, but brainstorming the advantages and disadvantages of it is worth doing I think.
Thanks for the opinion SQJunkie! You have a valid point and its highly appreciated!