Norwegian Air Discussion

bk

JCX BXC, I don't get your criticisms and the criticisms of others on here.

If you want a "full service" airline, then great, there are already like a dozen options for you. But for people who want a transatlantic low cost carrier and are happy to put up with some inconveniences in order to save hundreds of Euros, then until now we have had zero options, so it is great that an option now exists for people like us.

Competition is great and choice is great.

As a person who almost never brings luggage anyway and who thinks most airline food is crap anyway, I'm delighted to have a few hundred euros in my pocket to spend on much more fun things in Manhattan.

Thing is 7 hours really isn't a long time. It is medium haul at best. Given that I regularly travel to SFO and South America, 7 hours on even a 737 is piss easy. Hell try a coach for 24 hours across South America!

An iPad, sound cancelling headphones and some sandwiches and the time will fly by. Add wifi and super easy IMO.

But again, the point is nothing forcing you to take this. Dozens of options exist for you already. Let us folk who want to save a bit of money do so.

JCX BXC

There is no anger, but simply pointing out the flaws. I still cannot understand why there's such a reluctance to accept these flaws.

I'd agree getting from JFK and EWR to NYC can be nightmarish, but it's not like you're not going to hit traffic coming in from the north instead!

gizmo81

There are no flaws. Like a person who complains about Ryanair.

Ryanair/Norwegian advertise a service. Just because it's not what you want/expect doesn't mean it's flawed.

Believe I will be the first to complain if I have issues once I use the service.

JCX BXC wrote: »

There is no anger, but simply pointing out the flaws. I still cannot understand why there's such a reluctance to accept these flaws.

I'd agree getting from JFK and EWR to NYC can be nightmarish, but it's not like you're not going to hit traffic coming in from the north instead!

bk

gizmo81 wrote: »

I am traveling for 3 days to New York with Norwegian, something i wouldn't have considered with Aer Lingus with the price tag.

Yup same here. I've friends living in Manhattan I can stay with.

With flights around 200 to 250 I'll be able to take a few 3 to 4 day trips to stay with them and hangout for long weekends.

At about 500 with AerLingus, it wouldn't even be a starter.

This new service opens up the East coast of the US to a whole new type of traveller, the long weekend type traveller like you and me, who is very common on Ryanair around Europe and can now look to the US too.

JCX BXC

bk wrote: »

JCX BXC, I don't get your criticisms and the criticisms of others on here.

Nor do I understand bk why you use extreme sarcasm when referring to anyone who does not have the idea of perfection you have of the service, just mainly a condescending attitude. Also, I'd like you to point my criticism of others up to now, as you're the first person I've pointed out.

If you want a "full service" airline, then great, there are already like a dozen options for you. But for people who want a transatlantic low cost carrier and are happy to put up with some inconveniences in order to save hundreds of Euros, then until now we have had zero options, so it is great that an option now exists for people like us.

And by point is, many people will, and I think that there are too many holes in this service for many of the "we" you speak of. Also I dispute this hundreds of Euro savings, but in limited circumstances fair enough.

As a person who almost never brings luggage anyway and who thinks most airline food is crap anyway, I'm delighted to have a few hundred euros in my pocket to spend on much more fun things in Manhattan.

Great, the service is for you, you fit most of the criteria for the ideal customer, providing Norwegian don't want to get much money on fares. I don't think you're the general traveller though bk, and the question is rightly will enough you's fill the service.

Thing is 7 hours really isn't a long time. It is medium haul at best. Given that I regularly travel to SFO and South America, 7 hours on even a 737 is piss easy. Hell try a coach for 24 hours across South America!

Well that's great for you, I'd suggest on your next transatlantic Norwegian flight you try find anyone with similar travel experience as you. If this service is only grand for the people with significant travel experience, then it won't succeed.

An iPad, sound cancelling headphones and some sandwiches and the time will fly by. Add wifi and super easy IMO.

Extremely unreasonable to assume people have all these items, while a few will, as I said above, alot of people may just we'll sit there attempting to read a book, get some uncomfortable sleep or just sit there bored for 7 hours. This is the reality, whether you would like to force everyone to do the same as you or not doesn't come into it.

But again, the point is nothing forcing you to take this. Dozens of options exist for you already. Let us folk who want to save a bit of money do so.

So again, just dismiss any fault the service could have? Quite poor.

LXFlyer

JCX BXC wrote: »

There is no anger, but simply pointing out the flaws. I still cannot understand why there's such a reluctance to accept these flaws.

I'd agree getting from JFK and EWR to NYC can be nightmarish, but it's not like you're not going to hit traffic coming in from the north instead!

With respect, it's not what you would like (and if I'm honest it's not what I would like either).

But I can quite imagine that there are plenty of people out there to whom it will appeal to - and I think your posts don't seem to recognise that. They come across as definitive statements about the service, when really they're your own perceptions and your own opinion about what you would like.

There are lots of people out there who aren't time sensitive, are price sensitive, and who are happy with a low to no frills service, even for mid haul services such as these.

This service will appeal to them, I have no doubt about that.

JCX BXC

gizmo81 wrote: »

There are no flaws

And this sums up what I've been saying. No point debating against rose tinted glasses anymore really.

Jamie2k9

mikel97 wrote: »

I hope that lots of airlines do the us routes, the more the cheaper for me. I checked all the airlines and Norwegian was cheaper by 500 euro for same dates and im happy. The rest of u can fly with ure prefer airline. i have a cheap trip and happy. Yes bring every airline to Dublin

500 is an extreme case, looking at various dates 40-60 quid between same fares type with legacy as DY. Remember a late announcement was always going to lead to some seat dumping to start with.

I do think they can make money but a 737 won't be particularly lucrative for them, cost will start to creep up.

bk

JCX BXC wrote: »

There is no anger, but simply pointing out the flaws. I still cannot understand why there's such a reluctance to accept these flaws.

I'd agree getting from JFK and EWR to NYC can be nightmarish, but it's not like you're not going to hit traffic coming in from the north instead!

It is perfectly right to point out the differences, so people can make up their own mind if they want to spend hundreds extra or not.

But I also have to say it is a little overdone and I have to say it very much reminds me of the same arguments I heard when Ryanair was first hitting it's stride and I do suspect that at least some of the "complaints" are coming from people connected with other airlines who are worried about the competition.

To be honest, I fly AL to the US quiet a bit and I really don't see why people seem to think it is so great. In terms of a "full service" airline I would place it at the bottom of the league. It really isn't anything special. It really is little more then a low cost carrier IMO.

Their new business class seats are very nice. But economy is very poor and outdated IMO.

- The IFE on AL is just terrible, very poor system with a very small and poor movie selection.
- Power at the seats rarely seems to work for me
- Wifi is expensive and poor performing.
- Food is poor

To be honest, I usually just end up using my own iPad anyway.

So I'm quiet happy to save a few hundred on Norwegian.

JCX BXC

bk wrote: »

It is perfectly right to point out the differences, so people can make up their own mind if they want to spend hundreds extra or not.

But I also have to say it is a little overdone and I have to say it very much reminds me of the same arguments I heard when Ryanair was first hitting it's stride and I do suspect that at least some of the "complaints" are coming from people connected with other airlines who are worried about the competition.

To be honest, I fly AL to the US quiet a bit and I really don't see why people seem to think it is so great. In terms of a "full service" airline I would place it at the bottom of the league. It really isn't anything special. It really is little more then a low cost carrier IMO.

Their new business class seats are very nice. But economy is very poor and outdated IMO.

- The IFE on AL is just terrible, very poor system with a very small and poor movie selection.
- Power at the seats rarely seems to work for me
- Wifi is expensive and poor performing.
- Food is poor

To be honest, I usually just end up using my own iPad anyway.

So I'm quiet happy to save a few hundred on Norwegian.

Which again bk, is you. Especially as who appears to be a seasoned traveller. Also like to point out I've no affliction with any airline if that's what you're trying to suggest.

And yes there is differences, however they've been repeatedly been dismissed, and the only thing flashed was this almost imaginary hundreds of euro that'll be saved.

Also, Delta has much better service than Aer Lingus by the looks of things, although I cannot personally compare.

gizmo81

You'v'e pointed out wifi as a flaw, they explicitly state some flights won't have wifi.
You say paying for snacks, they advertise you have to pay, all flights charge.
You say uncomfortable seats, you haven't flown, Norwegian explicitly state the seats size, leg room.
You say no in lnflight entertainment, they don't advertise it.
Baggage charges, advised at booking, free carry on.

None of these are flaws, it's just a different type of service all of which you are aware of before flying so I don't see what the problem is.

JCX BXC wrote: »

And this sums up what I've been saying. No point debating against rose tinted glasses anymore really.

JCX BXC

lxflyer wrote: »

With respect, it's not what you would like (and if I'm honest it's not what I would like either).

But I can quite imagine that there are plenty of people out there to whom it will appeal to - and I think your posts don't seem to recognise that. They come across as definitive statements about the service, when really they're your own perceptions and your own opinion about what you would like.

There are lots of people out there who aren't time sensitive, are price sensitive, and who are happy with a low to no frills service, even for mid haul services such as these.

This service will appeal to them, I have no doubt about that.

Can I ask you to give me a few examples of my definitive statements?

I'd agree, but as I've said the question is there enough? I'd wager the pool of people who still wish for a no frills service across the Atlantic are smaller, generally once the promo fares are gone I don't see it overly appealing, especially if one requires suitcases.

Also, I'm not sure people enjoy flying to external airports, another thing which has been put down to not mattering. We even see Ryanair in Europe moving to larger airports in recent times, yet somehow its great to fly to an outback in the US?

JCX BXC

gizmo81 wrote: »

You'v'e pointed out wifi as a flaw, they explicitly state some flights won't have wifi.
You say paying for snacks, they advertise you have to pay, all flights charge.
You say uncomfortable seats, you haven't flown, Norwegian explicitly state the seats size, leg room.
You say no in lnflight entertainment, they don't advertise it.
Baggage charges, advised at booking, free carry on.

None of these are flaws, it's just a different type of service all of which you are aware of before flying so I don't see what the problem is.

I don't get this attitude here also, If it's all stated, it's okay? A poor service isn't excused by them telling you it's a poor service beforehand. This is only an example and I'm not calling the Norwegian service a poor service.

Granted, it removed any right to have an issue with it once booking, however again my point is will enough people want to travel.

Still flaws, even if they're pointed out, it's a strange assertion to assume flaws aren't flaws once they're well known.

Also, I don't think not having WiFi is a flaw, it just can't be used as a pro until it's available on the Max imo.

bk

JCX BXC wrote: »

Great, the service is for you, you fit most of the criteria for the ideal customer, providing Norwegian don't want to get much money on fares. I don't think you're the general traveller though bk, and the question is rightly will enough you's fill the service.

Well Ryanair, Easyjet, Wizzair, etc. would seem to suggest otherwise!

I think there are large numbers of price sensitive customers who have been dying for a service like this.

I really don't see how this new service is any different from the literally hundreds of millions of people who fly on LCC's every year.

JCX BXC wrote: »

Extremely unreasonable to assume people have all these items, while a few will, as I said above, alot of people may just we'll sit there attempting to read a book, get some uncomfortable sleep or just sit there bored for 7 hours. This is the reality, whether you would like to force everyone to do the same as you or not doesn't come into it.

Give over. Everyone has a smartphone these days that you can fill with games, movies, music and books. And once wifi is there even surf boards etc.

Sure agree a smartphone isn't ideal, a tablet is better. But lots of people have those too. And they aren't expensive. Fire Tablet cost just €80.

Or just bring a book or magazine.

Honestly how do you think people entertained themselves prior to IFE's? Somehow we all managed to entertain ourselves. Today we all have devices sitting in our pocket with almost limitless amounts of entertainment.

JCX BXC wrote: »

So again, just dismiss any fault the service could have? Quite poor.

Of course not. I use logic.

If there was only a €50 difference, then of course I'd take AL. But if there is €300 difference then I'll happily pocket that to spend on much more fun things on my trip.

Captain_Crash

So without taking any sides in this DY vs Legacy cost debate I have taken the time this morning to do a few dummy bookings with EI and DY (or whatever subsidiary it is who fly the routes) to look at actual cost.

3 trips to BOS on random dates and 3 trips to NY on random dates.... these dates were in the middle Sept, end of Oct and beginning on Jan and were the same for both airlines. For DY I selected the option that gave 20kg checked bag plus a meal... This was just to even it up with what you get with EI.

Despite all the hoopla about cheaper fares, for every trip, EI were cheaper... one of them was wait for it €500 cheaper! All bookings were for 2 return. This isn't to say great deals cant be got, but it does say that you have to go looking for them and the dates you find them may not be suitable/convenient!

LXFlyer

JCX BXC wrote: »

Can I ask you to give me a few examples of my definitive statements?

I'd agree, but as I've said the question is there enough? I'd wager the pool of people who still wish for a no frills service across the Atlantic are smaller, generally once the promo fares are gone I don't see it overly appealing, especially if one requires suitcases.

Also, I'm not sure people enjoy flying to external airports, another thing which has been put down to not mattering. We even see Ryanair in Europe moving to larger airports in recent times, yet somehow its great to fly to an outback in the US?

Reading some of your posts, they do come across to me as definitive statements. That's all. Perhaps it's your phraseology. Describing aspects of the service as "flaws" when they are actually things that don't appeal to you, fails to recognise that many people just won't care about them.

They don't seem to leave no room for accepting that there are actually plenty of people out there who are happy to use a no/low frills mid-haul service like this.

Personally I think there will be plenty of people who will be happy to use it. I wouldn't use it myself, but as I've learnt over the years there is a very large number of people out there who don't care about having to use coach transfers and are happy to have a minimal service on board, and who can happily travel very light.

The proof of the pudding will be in the eating and I suspect they will do reasonably well.

But again, horses for courses - they're not my cup of tea, nor are they yours.

Its all about individual preferences - and when it comes to travelling they can differ wildly.

We will have to wait and see - I wouldn't dismiss it straight away - give it six months and let's see how they're doing and what people's opinion of the service is.

gizmo81

I just don't consider it a poor service. And i have flown transatlantic with Aer Lingus. Their in-flight entertainment to JFK was sh1te, food was miserable unless I upgraded, and wifi was an expensive novelty.

It's like people who won't fly Ryanair, I recently flew into Gatwick with Aer Lingus, I usually fly Ryanair. The only difference was we had a skybridge in Dublin.

JCX BXC wrote: »

I don't get this attitude here also, If it's all stated, it's okay? A poor service isn't excused by them telling you it's a poor service beforehand. This is only an example and I'm not calling the Norwegian service a poor service.

Granted, it removed any right to have an issue with it once booking, however again my point is will enough people want to travel.

Still flaws, even if they're pointed out, it's a strange assertion to assume flaws aren't flaws once they're well known.

Also, I don't think not having WiFi is a flaw, it just can't be used as a pro until it's available on the Max imo.

bk

JCX BXC wrote: »

Still flaws, even if they're pointed out, it's a strange assertion to assume flaws aren't flaws once they're well known.

I'm sorry, but they really aren't flaws. It is a different type of service, with different features and thus a different price point.

I'm really not sure what is so hard to understand about that!

Just like business class is different from economy class.

Would you say AL economy is flawed because it doesn't have full lie flat seats and free nose cnacelling heaphones and big IFE, etc.?

Of course not, doing so would be stupid. Different products, different features, different price points.

Likewise, this new Norwegian service is a different type of product, with different features and different price point.

Each of us decides if we care about those features or not and if they are worth paying extra for or not.

Extra choices is always good in the end of the consumer.

JCX BXC

bk wrote: »

Of course not. I use logic.

Again, condescending.

I've made my points, you've made yours, we're beginning to repeat ourselves now.

bk

JCX BXC wrote: »

Again, condescending.

I've made my points, you've made yours, we're beginning to repeat ourselves now.

Please, how is using logic condescending!

I'm not saying NAS is perfect, far from it. But it is a new product, aimed at a new and different market.

My basic point is new options is always good for the consumer.

JCX BXC

It's quite clear what I meant, misinterpreting my point deliberately does what exactly?

NAI are far from perfect, I believe serious questions still do need to be answered about the company itself, however on service level, there are many disadvantages over the traditional airline, although a few redeeming features are there (cost can be a big one). Will the deals be good enough into the future to allow many people to travel, and will the fares be high enough to be profitable?

Should I find a deal of €200 or less return in the future at a convient time, I may indulge myself for a short trip. However personally, any higher and I don't think it's worth jt

ED E

bk wrote: »

I'm sorry, but they really aren't flaws. It is a different type of service, with different features and thus a different price point.

Preface: LCC fan, FR regular, even prefer them to EI on UK routes. Have flown Norwegian before and had a fine time.

Is it though? Captain_Crash's sample was small but it seems to be representative. DY from a cursory glance seem to be selling a handful of tickets at cut rate prices to get headlines and then generally being on par or above for pricing thereafter.

I know without looking if I look up flights to Paris in September with any airline FR will probably be the cheapest. If I do the same for these new routes who's to say. If they want to be an LCC they need to be significantly cheaper on a semi-consistent basis. Right now they just seem like a silicon valley startup thats biting off a lot more than they can chew.

gizmo81

Ryanair wanted €200 from me to Berlin at the end of this month. Is this not part and parcel of a LCC?

ED E wrote: »

Preface: LCC fan, FR regular, even prefer them to EI on UK routes. Have flown Norwegian before and had a fine time.

Is it though? Captain_Crash's sample was small but it seems to be representative. DY from a cursory glance seem to be selling a handful of tickets at cut rate prices to get headlines and then generally being on par or above for pricing thereafter.

I know without looking if I look up flights to Paris in September with any airline FR will probably be the cheapest. If I do the same for these new routes who's to say. If they want to be an LCC they need to be significantly cheaper on a semi-consistent basis. Right now they just seem like a silicon valley startup thats biting off a lot more than they can chew.

Irishweather

bk wrote: »

It is perfectly right to point out the differences, so people can make up their own mind if they want to spend hundreds extra or not.

But I also have to say it is a little overdone and I have to say it very much reminds me of the same arguments I heard when Ryanair was first hitting it's stride and I do suspect that at least some of the "complaints" are coming from people connected with other airlines who are worried about the competition.

To be honest, I fly AL to the US quiet a bit and I really don't see why people seem to think it is so great. In terms of a "full service" airline I would place it at the bottom of the league. It really isn't anything special. It really is little more then a low cost carrier IMO.

Their new business class seats are very nice. But economy is very poor and outdated IMO.

- The IFE on AL is just terrible, very poor system with a very small and poor movie selection.
- Power at the seats rarely seems to work for me
- Wifi is expensive and poor performing.
- Food is poor

To be honest, I usually just end up using my own iPad anyway.

So I'm quiet happy to save a few hundred on Norwegian.

I don't know. I flew Aer Lingus Business Class and I thought the selection for entertainment was apalling.

bk

ED E wrote: »

Preface: LCC fan, FR regular, even prefer them to EI on UK routes. Have flown Norwegian before and had a fine time.

Is it though? Captain_Crash's sample was small but it seems to be representative. DY from a cursory glance seem to be selling a handful of tickets at cut rate prices to get headlines and then generally being on par or above for pricing thereafter.

Well after Captain_Crash's comment, I took a look at just one date in September and Norwegian was €200 cheaper.

Yes that was without luggage and food, if you add those the difference is less. I'll happily admit that if you want luggage and food then AL is probably a better choice, but always worth checking.

However if you don't mind forgoing those the savings are there. And yes, there are many of us happy to forgo those.

Irishweather

JCX BXC wrote: »

Which again bk, is you. Especially as who appears to be a seasoned traveller. Also like to point out I've no affliction with any airline if that's what you're trying to suggest.

And yes there is differences, however they've been repeatedly been dismissed, and the only thing flashed was this almost imaginary hundreds of euro that'll be saved.

Also, Delta has much better service than Aer Lingus by the looks of things, although I cannot personally compare.

Um, who's not wrong, at all. The American airlines offer a superior product to Aer Lingus.

ED E

bk wrote: »

Well after Captain_Crash's comment, I took a look at just one date in September and Norwegian was €200 cheaper.

Yes that was without luggage and food, if you add those the difference is less. I'll happily admit that if you want luggage and food then AL is probably a better choice, but always worth checking.

However if you don't mind forgoing those the savings are there. And yes, there are many of us happy to forgo those.

How many pax go to the states without luggage and with only a packed lunch? Dont think thats a realistic comparison. You need to go like for like when it comes to the essentials.

bk

JCX BXC wrote: »

It's quite clear what I meant, misinterpreting my point deliberately does what exactly?

I'm genuinely confused as to what point of yours I'm misinterpreting or even how I'm being condescending!

What you see as flaws, I simply see as different features for a different product. No different to the differences between business class and economy.

My core point is choice is good for consumers and a new low cost option is something new to the market.

Again there are already dozens of options for people like you who want a "full service" carrier. So you can happily continue to choose them.

It is great for people like me who want the cheapest option possible and are willing to "compromise" for it that there is now a new cheaper option available.

Choice is good, competition is good.

bk

ED E wrote: »

How many pax go to the states without luggage and with only a packed lunch? Dont think thats a realistic comparison. You need to go like for like when it comes to the essentials.

The same people who travel in their hundreds of millions with LCC's like Ryanair, etc.

The point is these cheaper fares open up the East Coast of the US to the same type of 3 to 4 day trips that are so common around Europe. You really don't need much luggage for that. A cabin max bag easily fits two weeks worth of luggage.

gizmo81

I think that's the point though that these €200 flights will change the way that people view trips to USA, as BK said for long weekends.

If paying €500 you'll want to stay 5+ nights

Because i'm only paying €200 I can go for 3 nights and feel it's worth it.

ED E wrote: »

How many pax go to the states without luggage and with only a packed lunch? Dont think thats a realistic comparison. You need to go like for like when it comes to the essentials.