767 Envoy Class Reconfigured?

[phlus2]

I was just looking at Envoy award tickets to London in late November and early December, and noticed that the seat maps are only showing 18 Envoy seats on the 767, rather than 24. Are they removing Envoy seats from the 767's in another brilliant "re-configuration"?

As a side note - I flew on a re-configured 757 the other day - in seat 4f - what a joke! I can't even imagine that the brilliant folks in Tempe expect people to fly on these planes after they are done "improving" them.

 

[Art at ISP]

You are correct. A side effect of putting the "new" Envoy seats in the 767 is that they take up more space, therefore you lose 6 Envoy seats. They kept this really quiet, to the point that it came up in one of my conversations with someone in Tempe, and even he didn't know about it.

God forbid they sacrifice 2 rows of coach to put in the same number of premium seats.

 

[PHL]

The 767 reconfig begins this Fall, but is supposed to be keeping 24 seats. You make an interesting observation though...Did the geniuses in Tempe decide to go with 18 seats and move the bulkhead up a few inches to accomidate another row of coach? Wouldn't surprise anyone here.

The 757 Envoy reconfig is the laughing stock of the "business".

 

[Art at ISP]

PHL,

Unless they changed their minds again, the new 767 configuration is only 18 seats in Envoy. They claim it is due to the fact that the new seats offer more legroom than the previous configuration.

I am not buying it, but like you said, they are quickly becoming the laughing stock of the business.

Why not just make the whole airplane 36 inch pitch and ditch Envoy altogether? It's coach plus service at best now, why continue to fool people?

Add things like this to the overwhelming reliability of the operation today, and I think you can understand why I am taking Mrs. Art to Italy this fall on CO.

 

[etops1]

it will be 18 seats in envoy. i saw the pics of the new seats. they are too big to have 24.

 

[Art at ISP]

ETOPS,

They could have 24 if they sacrificed a few coach seats, but then again, premium customers be damned......must have seats for the Kettles.

 

[SS255]

I would much prefer to see a premium economy section (even at the expense of what they are calling "Envoy"). Operational issues notwithstanding, I would not consider flying US transatlantic right now because the pitch in Y is unacceptable, and Envoy is virtually unattainable unless I want to drop $6,000+. I have numerous other, much better options out of LAX on *A partners. On the other hand, if US had a premium economy section I would pay a premium to sit in it. I would also pay $500 each way to GoEnvoy, but not at the risk of Envoy being sold out and having to sit in Y--.

Alot of companies will allow their employees to fly premium economy, but not business class. US is driving away these customers because they have much better options for flying transatlantic in relative comfort on other carriers. I think US would actually do quite well with a premium economy cabin. It's too bad this type of customer doesn't fit the profile that Tempe is targeting.

 

[TechBoy]

ETOPS,

They could have 24 if they sacrificed a few coach seats, but then again, premium customers be damned......must have seats for the Kettles.

Clearly, they are not selling enough actual premium fares to justify 24 premium seats. So (like United) they will shrink the premium cabin to meet demand. I don't see anything wrong with that. Sounds like good business practice.

It's one thing to have excess domestic first class seats constantly available for upgrading loyal passengers, particularly those paying Y and B fares. It's another thing to have excess international biz seats -- very expensive. I suspect that they saw that they rarely sold more than 18 biz fares on the 767 flights and handled capacity accordingly.

 

[SKY HIGH]

I suspect that they saw that they rarely sold more than 18 biz fares on the 767 flights and handled capacity accordingly.

sky high states: They also offer a product, called an upgrade.

Or is that like Monopoly money, in this case?


only stating opinions

 

[PHL]

Both the A330 and 767 should have that mini-coach cabin behind the existing Envoy cabin turned into E+. But that'll never happen because it would mean losing revenue. Something this airline badly needs with nearly $4B in unrestricted cash I guess.

 

[Travelpro72]

The one thing about the 767 that I thought seriously should have been visited is the mid "dry" galley. That area is useless besides housing some water/wine and trash carts or duty free. If they reworked the cabins a bit (which we know will NEVER happen) that area could house some seats that would allow us to maintain 24 seats. What the hell would I know as a flight attendant though. I guess it's the same as my never being able to understand why we don't get row 12 on the 767 as crew rest either as we do on the A330 exit rows. This company is wacked. Now as for the new seats it seems that the foot rest when extended will somewhat slide under the seat in front of it. They will be almost the same distance apart but allow for the same amount of seasts If i remember correctly. I don't wanna sound like Debbie Downer BUT we ALL KNOW they will fudge this up. TRUST ME.

 

[phlus2]

Clearly, they are not selling enough actual premium fares to justify 24 premium seats. So (like United) they will shrink the premium cabin to meet demand. I don't see anything wrong with that. Sounds like good business practice.

Or they are just to cheap to take out a few coach seats and put in another row of envoy! And what are you referring to with United? I travel them all the time and havn't seen any reduction in premium cabin seating?

 

[phlus2]

Add things like this to the overwhelming reliability of the operation today, and I think you can understand why I am taking Mrs. Art to Italy this fall on CO.

Gee - me too - cashed in American Express Miles for two Business First tickets on Continental this fall to Europe. At least I know I'll get true premium service, unlike the joke Envoy has become!

 

[TechBoy]

sky high states: They also offer a product, called an upgrade.

Or is that like Monopoly money, in this case?
only stating opinions

I thought that upgrades were offered when available, not as a right.

It would be interesting to know the ratio of paid C vs. upgrade/mileage/nonrev on transatlantic routes. I have no idea, but I'm guessing that it's 50:50 at best if they are removing 25% of the seats.

 

[TechBoy]

Or they are just to cheap to take out a few coach seats and put in another row of envoy! And what are you referring to with United? I travel them all the time and havn't seen any reduction in premium cabin seating?

United just announced its new flat business seats to be installed across its fleet between 2007-2009. As part of that retrofit, they will significantly reduce the number of business class seats on each aircraft.

Why is this a question of being "cheap?" Aren't the passengers who expect to get lots of upgrade the ones who are being "cheap?" US is in business to make money. They do that by selling paid business fares, with upgrades available when they have not sold all the seats. If they can get more revenue by having more coach seats than by having more business seats, then it makes perfect sense to me.

If you want to talk about "cheap," I would suggest you refer to the poor service and bad catering in the US premium cabins. I wouldn't pay a C fare to get that service. But since you want to upgrade, neither would you.