Talk:Premium economy class

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the airline project.

Trademarks?

Aren't these premium economy seating areas, at least in the USA, registered trademarks owned by their respective airlines? And if so, how should they be written in this article? 74.106.50.218 (talk) 21:41, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Atlantic

The previous edit contained this section on Virgin Atlantic:

'Virgin Atlantic provide arguably the most pleasant Premium Economy, with purple leather seats, a separate cabin, dedicated cabin crew, pre-flight champagne and after dinner liqueurs. Also, Virgin offer amenities kits premium to those of the Economy Class.'

I'm not sure this looks very encyclopaedic / demonstrates WP:NPOV, so I've parked it here for now. For instance, on a purely personal note, I fly Premium Economy for business purposes, so I tend to choose BA, as VS have until recently not provided laptop power in their Premium Economy cabins, which matters to me somewhat more than seat colour ... but to say BA are the best would probably not be Neutral Point of View;-).Bill Martin 21:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Table

Considering adding value to airline data by tabulating information, draft below with 1 proof-of-concept entry:

Name	ICAO	IATA	Class Name	Type	Legroom	Rows	Power
British Airways	BAW	BA	World Traveller Plus	Comprehensive	37"	-1	Yes

Bill Martin 22:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice idea. I suggest the ICAO/IATA codes are redundant. "Legroom" should be "pitch". How about adding the Class of Service Codes used, too?

Name	Class Name	CoSC	Type	Seat Pitch	Rows	Power
Virgin Atlantic	Premium Economy	W,K	Comprehensive	37"	varies	varies

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Richi (talk • contribs) 22:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no need for CoSC and "type" is subjective. What is needed would be things like seat width, availability of foot/head rest, lounge access, priority handling, seat type (same as economy or leather or whatever), applicability, note, etc. C933103 (talk) 21:53, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Split article for "premium economy" and "economy plus"

It seems like there are more an more airlines that are branding their services between the business class and the economy class according to two different principles, one can be described as premium economy that is basically a premium cabin that have more advanced service in every aspects of a flights, and another one can be described as economy plus that is mostly ordinary economy class with maybe a bit more seat pitch and maybe also a bit more other services. Recently the line between these two type of services are becoming more clear and that some airlines are offering both services at the same time across its fleet. Thus I think it might be a good idea to split them apart. C933103 (talk) 17:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes... I agree with this. Rng0286 (talk) 04:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Economy plus is, if you think about it, another version of pre-economy. I think what's best is for ecoplus to have a section, and redirect users who wants to read ecoplus to said section. And anyways, even if ecoplus has its standalone article, it won't talk a lot other than repeating the pre-economy article. Gerald WL 10:55, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While having a separate section for Economy Plus may well be the best solution, Economy Plus being "another version of premium economy" is a rather inaccurate statement. Economy Plus is part of the Economy cabin, just with extra legroom; whereas Premium Economy is a separate class of service, equivalent to First Class and Business Class on many airlines. For example, this article lists Westjet Premium Class as an "Economy Plus" product when in reality it's the direct competitor to Air Canada Business Class, or domestic First Class on US airlines. Also, to get a little more specific and bring up airline fare codes, an Economy Plus seat exists on an Economy (Y-coded) ticket, just with a special seat selection; but a Premium Economy seat can only exist on a Premium Economy (usually W-coded) ticket. To summarize, and offer my own suggestion:

- Premium Economy is a different class of service, from both a hard product (seat model and design) and soft product (amenities, meals, etc) perspective, and the actual ticket codes sold by the airline.

- Economy Plus is the same as Economy Class, from a hard and soft product perspective, and the ticket code sold by the airline, with the only difference being extra leg-room.

Given these points, perhaps the best option would be for Economy Plus to be a section under the Economy Class article, and for this article to stand alone. Worldsbestskier (talk) 16:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Premium economy is the business class of old?

The lede of this article includes the line "It was widely acknowledged that the premium economy class has become a standard reflection of what the Business Class was like several decades ago." which is referenced by two articles on a website called "Frequently Flying". I'm not the person to say whether that's a credible site or not, but I do have issues with the line as it stands. First of all, two articles on a single website is not the same as "widely acknowledged", if it was truly widely acknowledged there should be more than just the one source for it. Secondly, neither of the linked articles makes any kind of claim of equivalence between premium economy and older style business class. Premium economy isn't even mentioned at all in either article. Either the references for this line need to be improved, or the line needs to be removed. DragonFury (talk) 11:24, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as it's been ten days since this comment, and there's been no reply, I am removing that line from the article. DragonFury (talk) 06:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]