LCCs' vs Legacy Is there really significant difference?

lufties

I am sure this has been debated ad nauseum, but in case it hasn't. I'm starting this. 
Having recently flown a lot to the UK and back, with EI and FR, It struck me that there is very little difference between the two nowadays. Mueller tried to create a so-called hybrid with EI, but bar seat recline and the myth of a better service (which seems to equate to more smiling). I've actually found EI hostesses to be generally a bit arrogant with an air of snobbishness, god knows why. In fact, if say for example there was a flight to LGW, I think I'd choose FR if the costs were the same.
Of course this isn't limited to Ireland, as you now have a race to the bottom in BA, where they charge for snacks and beverages. If BA didn't have the monopoly on LHR, they'd be pitted against Easjet as a valid competitor IMO. :angel:

JCX BXC

Short haul - not really
Long haul - yes massive

lufties

JCX BXC wrote: »

Short haul - not really
Long haul - yes massive

Long haul isnt really established yet apart from scoot and norweigan.

I mean short haul.

L1011

Legacies don't generally go out of their way to be hostile to customers; LCCs often do. Exceptions exist for both.

Tenger

I think you need to refine your question.
In the Irish shorthaul market I would say there is little difference. BA while recently introducing buy onboard are still retaining business class. (For now!)
The larger Euro carriers still retain at least some of their product difference from LCCs.
In the US market there is a difference but it is slowky eroded as both groups are moving their product towards each other.
In Asis/Pacific there is still a difference betwern LCC and Legacy.

The issue here is that EI were fighting survive against FR out of Dublin primarily. Going Hybrid/value carrier was the best strategy. Under Walsh it looked like they were going full LCC....( I remember as I was there under his tenure as CEO)

lufties

Tenger wrote: »

I think you need to refine your question.
In the Irish shorthaul market I would say their is little difference.
In the US market there is a difference but it is slowky eroded as both groups are moving their product towards each other.
In Asis/Pacific there is still a difference betwern LCC and Legacy.

fair point. Its prob just BA and EI flying the flag for the race to the bottom..Common denominator is Mr Walsh

MoeJay

Having flown with most of the major short haul operators in Europe in the last 12 months, there is precious little difference in service level amongst them.

Short haul business class in Europe I admit I have no experience of.

I guess it's down to the fact that people are have become so focused on price alone, service doesn't come into the equation anymore.

In the USA thankfully things are not so bland.

lufties

MoeJay wrote: »

Having flown with most of the major short haul operators in Europe in the last 12 months, there is precious little difference in service level amongst them.

Short haul business class in Europe I admit I have no experience of.

I guess it's down to the fact that people are have become so focused on price alone, service doesn't come into the equation anymore.

In the USA thankfully things are not so bland.

MoeJay wrote: »

Having flown with most of the major short haul operators in Europe in the last 12 months, there is precious little difference in service level amongst them.

Short haul business class in Europe I admit I have no experience of.

I guess it's down to the fact that people are have become so focused on price alone, service doesn't come into the equation anymore.

In the USA thankfully things are not so bland.

I reckon the likes EI could offer a better service with small cost. From what I've read, middle earners are seeing that ryanair offer the same service for less, and vote with their feet accordingly.

Surely the marketeers and bean counters can see a gap to capitalize on an enhanced business model.

Free snacks and tea mightnt seem a lot, but it makes a punter feel welcome.

Simon Gruber Says

If the Aer Lingus choice seats had a little more legroom, there would be more incentive to buy one.

This goes especially for long haul. Have often seen the entire "Choice" section empty. €45 so you can board earlier isn't a very good deal.

Donegal Storm

JCX BXC wrote: »

Short haul - not really
Long haul - yes massive

I flew Jetstar long haul in Asia last year, basically Ryanair level of comfort for an 8 hour overnight flight. Had IFE but at a cost, all food charged, cramped seats, constant announcements trying to sell stuff while people were trying to sleep etc, would never do it again.

Marcusm

Tenger wrote: »

I think you need to refine your question.
In the Irish shorthaul market I would say there is little difference. BA while recently introducing buy onboard are still retaining business class. (For now!)
The larger Euro carriers still retain at least some of their product difference from LCCs.
In the US market there is a difference but it is slowky eroded as both groups are moving their product towards each other.
In Asis/Pacific there is still a difference betwern LCC and Legacy.

The issue here is that EI were fighting survive against FR out of Dublin primarily. Going Hybrid/value carrier was the best strategy. Under Walsh it looked like they were going full LCC....( I remember as I was there under his tenure as CEO)

I think you can forget any thought of BA dropping business class on short haul; it's just reintroduced it girvtge donestic market. It's an important feature girvfeedervtraffic even if it only amounts to an empty middle seat and feee f&b which sometimes is less appetising than the bob variety.

Funnily enough, 20 years ago, club Europe had more keg room but only one dude had an empty middle seat or rather an eliminated spacesaver. In personal space terms the offering has improved. Apart from the Embraerscwhere the 2x2 config means no difference front and back.

trellheim

point-to-point vs connections is another important factor , one of the defining characteristics of LCCs is no connections are offered or expected.

lufties

trellheim wrote: »

point-to-point vs connections is another important factor ,  one of the defining characteristics of LCCs is no connections are offered or expected.

Very True..In fact that is probably the main difference.

JCX BXC

Really though? It was a factor, but we see airlines like Norwegian, Eurowings and Vueling offering connections, and now Ryanair are offering connections too.

Even if it was a definition, it certainly isn't anymore.

CelticRambler

MoeJay wrote: »

I guess it's down to the fact that people are have become so focused on price alone, service doesn't come into the equation anymore.

It does for me! For practical purposes, my "local" airport is a choice between four within 200km. Ryanair flies from all of them, direct to places I want to visit, or offering me the option of connecting in Stansted to just about anywhere else.

Hop! (Air France regional) operates from just one, and will ferry me to Orly, which is only about 300km up the road so quicker to get to if I keep my feet on the ground (especially if my ultimate destination is Paris).

Flybe also fly from just one and will take me to Southampton from where I may or may not be able to make a connection to somewhere else on their network, depending on how keen I am to visit the UK ...

So price doesn't come into it: Ryanair offers flights worth taking, the others don't. That makes them the leading service provider and the labels "LCC" and "Legacy" are irrelevant.

MoeJay

CelticRambler wrote: »

So price doesn't come into it: Ryanair offers flights worth taking, the others don't. That makes them the leading service provider and the labels "LCC" and "Legacy" are irrelevant.

I understand the point you make.

I took the word service to mean in this context the onboard experience and the difference between carriers.

In terms of route development in markets that had no previous flights then it's obvious who have been the most aggressive.

CelticRambler

MoeJay wrote: »

I took the word service to mean in this context the onboard experience and the difference between carriers.

In terms of route development in markets that had no previous flights then it's obvious who have been the most aggressive.

And I understood what you meant but if a "legacy" carrier can't be bothered to provide me with a flight, there is no onboard experience.

Now as it happens, in recent years I've twice been in a position where I had to fly the Dublin - Charles de Gaulle route, so Aer Lingus was my only option. Other than noting the arrogance referred to by the OP (and the stupidity of only using one door to board, and both flights being late :rolleyes: ) there was no significant difference for me as regards the onboard experience.

Locker10a

CelticRambler wrote: »

MoeJay wrote: »

I took the word service to mean in this context the onboard experience and the difference between carriers.

In terms of route development in markets that had no previous flights then it's obvious who have been the most aggressive.

And I understood what you meant but if a "legacy" carrier can't be bothered to provide me with a flight, there is no onboard experience.

Now as it happens, in recent years I've twice been in a position where I had to fly the Dublin - Charles de Gaulle route, so Aer Lingus was my only option. Other than noting the arrogance referred to by the OP (and the stupidity of only using one door to board, and both flights being late :rolleyes: ) there was no significant difference for me as regards the onboard experience.

I don't think I'd consider Aer Lingus to be in the legacy category anymore, certainly for short haul they follow the LCC model, although I find them much more relaxed to fly with. To be fair to them the vast majority of customers prefer using the airbridge. It may be slower but it's what customers want.(you should hear the amount of complaints from passengers when you're on an airbridge stand and they see there's an airbridge that's not being used!!) It's easier and more comfortable for them. It can't be blamed for delays either, Aer Lingus are Dublin's most punctual airline this year..:despite using airbridges!

Locker10a

CelticRambler wrote: »

MoeJay wrote: »

I took the word service to mean in this context the onboard experience and the difference between carriers.

In terms of route development in markets that had no previous flights then it's obvious who have been the most aggressive.

And I understood what you meant but if a "legacy" carrier can't be bothered to provide me with a flight, there is no onboard experience.

Now as it happens, in recent years I've twice been in a position where I had to fly the Dublin - Charles de Gaulle route, so Aer Lingus was my only option. Other than noting the arrogance referred to by the OP (and the stupidity of only using one door to board, and both flights being late :rolleyes: ) there was no significant difference for me as regards the onboard experience.

I don't think I'd consider Aer Lingus to be in the legacy category anymore, certainly for short haul they follow the LCC model, although I find them much more relaxed to fly with. To be fair to them the vast majority of customers prefer using the airbridge. It may be slower but it's what customers want.(you should hear the amount of complaints from passengers when you're on an airbridge stand and they see there's an airbridge that's not being used!!) It's easier and more comfortable for them. It can't be blamed for delays either, Aer Lingus are Dublin's most punctual airline this year..:despite using airbridges!

JCX BXC

Locker10a wrote: »

Aer Lingus are Dublin's most punctual airline this year..:despite using airbridges!

Why would an airbridge cause an airline not to be punctual? As long as they allow time for it in the turnover then I can't see why it would.

J.pilkington

JCX BXC wrote: »

Why would an airbridge cause an airline not to be punctual? As long as they allow time for it in the turnover then I can't see why it would.

I've been delayed plenty of times because there is no operative to work the airbridge, thus making turnaround time longer. Nothing worse than getting ready to deplane when the announcement comes that we have to wait

JCX BXC

J.pilkington wrote: »

I've been delayed plenty of times because there is no operative to work the airbridge, thus making turnaround time longer. Nothing worse than getting ready to deplane when the announcement comes that we have to wait

Fair enough, never happened me!

Would that be a fault of the airline or airport?

Locker10a

J.pilkington wrote: »

JCX BXC wrote: »

Why would an airbridge cause an airline not to be punctual? As long as they allow time for it in the turnover then I can't see why it would.

I've been delayed plenty of times because there is no operative to work the airbridge, thus making turnaround time longer. Nothing worse than getting ready to deplane when the announcement comes that we have to wait

Trust me, the same can happen with steps /lack of ground staff to meet a flight and has happened me many times.

Locker10a

JCX BXC wrote: »

Locker10a wrote: »

Aer Lingus are Dublin's most punctual airline this year..:despite using airbridges!

Why would an airbridge cause an airline not to be punctual? As long as they allow time for it in the turnover then I can't see why it would.

That's my point exactly!

Irish Steve

Don't know about other airports, the situation at Dublin is that there are only certain people "signed off" to operate airbridges, and that doesn't include any of the ramp agents, so you can get the crazy scenario of the aircraft being on stand, shut down, chocked, and bags being offloaded, but none of the passengers can move because the person responsible for connecting the airbridge is missing for some reason, most likely dispatching another flight at a different gate. If the aircraft has it's own steps (like the Ryanair 737-800's), that's crew operated, so there's no delay other than making sure there's enough people to supervise the transit of the passengers from the aircraft to the terminal, and don't let anyone tell you that it's a safe exercise, getting passengers off an aircraft using the aircraft steps is a bit like herding cats, and if there's ramp traffic to contend with, it can be dangerous as well.

J.pilkington

Locker10a wrote: »

Trust me, the same can happen with steps /lack of ground staff to meet a flight and has happened me many times.

Please see Tengers post

LXFlyer

CelticRambler wrote: »

And I understood what you meant but if a "legacy" carrier can't be bothered to provide me with a flight, there is no onboard experience.

Now as it happens, in recent years I've twice been in a position where I had to fly the Dublin - Charles de Gaulle route, so Aer Lingus was my only option. Other than noting the arrogance referred to by the OP (and the stupidity of only using one door to board, and both flights being late :rolleyes: ) there was no significant difference for me as regards the onboard experience.

Was Cityjet/Air France not an option too surely?

Locker10a

Irish Steve wrote: »

Don't know about other airports, the situation at Dublin is that there are only certain people "signed off" to operate airbridges, and that doesn't include any of the ramp agents, so you can get the crazy scenario of the aircraft being on stand, shut down, chocked, and bags being offloaded, but none of the passengers can move because the person responsible for connecting the airbridge is missing for some reason, most likely dispatching another flight at a different gate. If the aircraft has it's own steps (like the Ryanair 737-800's), that's crew operated, so there's no delay other than making sure there's enough people to supervise the transit of the passengers from the aircraft to the terminal, and don't let anyone tell you that it's a safe exercise, getting passengers off an aircraft using the aircraft steps is a bit like herding cats, and if there's ramp traffic to contend with, it can be dangerous as well.

In the U.K. A TCO/dispatcher must meet an incoming flight. So you can arrive on stand, extend the air-stairs/have steps attached, have a plethora of ground staff and baggage handlers go to work on the plane, but if the dispatcher is no present you can't disembark! So you sit there with the doors open, pax all ready to go etc but as the dispatcher has the pass card to open the arrivals channel, and they are delayed, you can't disembark, this very very frustrating scanario had happened to me more times than I'd care to remember. At one stage it happened once a week at certain UK airports

CelticRambler

lxflyer wrote: »

Was Cityjet/Air France not an option too surely?

For one flight, no (it was paid for by someone who had a deal with Aer Lingus); the other highlighted how bad the legacy airlines are at providing useful services.

After taking a Ryanair flight to Dublin on the Saturday, I had to be back at work on a Tuesday morning, and next Ryanair flight was on the Tuesday, so no good for me. Instead, I had to fly to CdG, then finish my trip with a 3 hours (500km) train journey. IIRC the AF two-flight option was around about 500€ with a long wait in CdG + cost of getting back from the local airport; Aer Lingus + SNCF was about 150€ (100 for the flight, 50 for the train); Ryanair would have been 50€-ish + same local transport as AF.

All-in-all, if I'd been able to take an extra day's leave, Ryanair's offer would have been way more convenient.

Of course the overall "inflight experience" on the TGV makes flying feel like you're being transported in an ass-and-cart! :pac:

trellheim

a slightly faster flying ass and cart though