To fly but NOT to serve. Is British Airways' new M&S paid-for food service always...

MSE_Luke

'I want to like the UK institution that is British Airways but I fear its service is hitting turbulence, begging the question whether it's worth paying its often higher prices over rivals such as Easyjet...'

Read MSE Guy's full blog: 'To fly but NOT to serve. Is British Airways' new M&S paid-for food service always this shambolic?'[URL="http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/team-blog/2017/07/24/fly-not-serve-british-airways-new-ms-paid-food-service-always-shambolic/][/URL]

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

powerful_Rogue

British Airways isn't British.

Alan_Bowen

BA admitted today that they are effectively running two airlines, a premium airline at the front ( and many would suggest that is far from the truth) and nothing more than a low cost carrier behind the curtain. The benefit for some people is that they fly from Heathrow, which for me is a lot nearer than Luton or Stansted but price wise there is very little difference, sometimes they are actually cheaper than easyjet or Ryanair and they tend to fly where I want to go at the time I want to fly. The problem is the cost cutting introduced by Alex Cruz the MD is putting infrequent travellers who may not expect much at the forefront of their business and the regulars at a disadvantage when the M & S menu hasn't changed for 6 months and as you point out, on longer routes the food runs out on the return journey

richardw

There are some very cheap BA fares from Gatwick Sept-October, if you like blue seats.

pollypenny

We had a similar experience to Guy on our one and only Thomson holiday/ flight. No food, apart from a packet of crisps, to buy on the way back.

. Surely BA executives must realise that this is bad business practice which will only push customers towards the real low cost airlines.m

leylandsunaddict

pollypenny wrote: »

We had a similar experience to Guy on our one and only Thomson holiday/ flight. No food, apart from a packet of crisps, to buy on the way back.

. Surely BA executives must realise that this is bad business practice which will only push customers towards the real low cost airlines.m

Thomson do a buy on board service, but granted it's not M & S standard. They've not provided inflight meals on shorthaul flights for years, but often airlines do run out of both food and drink on the inbound due to the outbound passengers consuming more than their fair share!

Personally I'd much prefer to buy M&S food and choose what I want to eat than have naff airline meal, but we normally eat before we board and then as long as the flight is less than about 6 hours we don't need anything else.

If you don't want to do that, when an airline doesn't provide food complimentary food (it was never free as stated in the article) it makes sense to take something on board with you, especially for the inbound.

pollypenny

It was our first experience with Thomson, as I said. The hotel was awful, the pick up was early, even though the flight was late evening and we'd paid for late check-out, so I should have realised.

Never using them again.

bagand96

British Airways a premium airline? You do make me laugh 😂

Voyager2002

bagand96 wrote: »

British Airways a premium airline? You do make me laugh 😂

Now now... last time I used them there were three different kinds of champagne, and when I spilled some wine the steward apologised profusely and offered to find another seat for me. The only problem was that the woman in the next seat was too far away to chat up!

philatio

They can't win though.

The UK is awash with low cost airlines. BA used to rely on business travellers to stay in business but now many firms send their employees low-cost too.
Adapt & survive means go low-cost.

dickydonkin

philatio wrote: »

They can't win though.

The UK is awash with low cost airlines. BA used to rely on business travellers to stay in business but now many firms send their employees low-cost too.
Adapt & survive means go low-cost.

Maybe the question should be asked as to why many firms now send their employees on a low cost carrier.

I accept that BA need to adapt, but their persistent cost cutting has gone way too far and their fares are not falling accordingly.

The shareholders will be delighted at their recent profits, but many believe austerity will only bear fruit in the short to medium term, however, it is their customers that are bearing the brunt to ensure dividends to investors are maintained.

I now avoid where possible to fly revenue flights on BA and their saving grace is their Executive Club which has (so far) been relatively unscathed, but gold status can still be achieved without flying on a BA aircraft, and long may that continue.

It is a shame to see the negative media attention BA is attracting, but a lot of it is self inflicted and certainly justified.