A budget carrier is set to launch longhaul flights from London, where your 7-hour journey will not even include a free cup of water.
Wizz Air Will Launch A321 XLR Longhaul Service From London Gatwick
European low-cost carrier Wizz Air is launching a new nonstop service between London (LGW) and Jeddah (JED). A brand new Airbus A321 XLR will operate the flight. But while other carriers are installing fancy lie-flat seats, seatback screens, and mood lighting on their incoming A321s, you will be in very different aircraft on Wizz Air.
Wizz Air CEO József Váradi warned Bloomberg:
“If you want to have more fun, you have to create the fun for yourself. It’s not going to be us who create it.”
Talk about understatement.
Not only will there be no seatback screen, but 240 seats crammed onboard will share three toilets. Seats will not recline. Legroom will be 28 inches. Food and snacks will be for purchase only–including water.
And Váradi makes no apologies.
“When you take a legacy carrier and you get a coffee for free, that is probably the most expensive cappuccino in your life.”
And for what? Why would anyone do this? To save money. Váradi explains:
“15, 20 years ago, I thought three hours would test passenger tolerance, and then we pushed it to six hours, and we are still fine. You kind of suffer the pain, if you wish, for the economic benefits that you are deriving from the transaction.”
Wizz Air expects to offer fares at about 1/3 the cost of flying British Airways or Saudia on the same route…
And that is an interesting question. Will passengers embrace absolute misery to save a few bucks? I appreciate that Váradi does not even try to hide the fact that it will be absolute misery…
I’m skeptical. I look at how Spirit Airlines and Frontier Airlines have fallen out of favor with customers and wonder why the European market is so different. There, so-called “ultra-low-cost carriers” seem to be thriving. EasyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air have developed a niche market that works very well.
Are you Europeans just more budget-conscious…or just smaller?
In any case, this kind of airline is not for me, but I love this business model. I think it’s a great thing to offer passengers an alternative to give up some amenities in order to save money. It’s how the airline industry innovates. As long as that aircraft can safely be evacuated quickly, I support such expansion. It’s free rawdogging…
> Read More: Wizz Air A321 Basel To Warsaw
More importantly why is Jeddah being chosen as a budget ultra low cost destination?
Probably aiming for Pakistani/Indian immigrants and their descendants doing VFR trips between two top migrant destinations.
Kind of a dumb answer.
Kind of like you answering that you can’t remember if you have taken more loads in your mouth or ass.
Oh look, you just one upped PM in the dumb answer department. It must take a special kind of stupid for that.
Why do you think that my answer is ‘dumb’? Wizzair wouldn’t randomly start a route for which there’s no demand, there certainly aren’t lots of British tourists wanting to visit Saudi Arabia, the affluent Saudis wanting to spend a few days in London would choose other airlines (even in Y), so it’s got to be mostly student and VFR traffic, and a lot of it will likely have links to the subcontinent. Do you have any alternative interpretation?
Do you have any data to supports your opinion? Just curious.
No hard numbers – it’s my guesstimate, but I am quite confident in it as I have been living in the UK for decades and unsurprisingly have lots of friends and acquaintances from the demographics in question.
Anecdotal evidence is useless and pointless. It’s just opinion, nothing more.
The fact that I had been speculating is exactly why I chose to begin my sentence with ‘probably’!
Of course, numerical data might help, but there’s absolutely no way that it could prove any causality in terms of wizzair’s route planning decisions – it would still be speculation unless and until someone from within the company confirmed it!
Yeah, but facts always help.
Also, Pakistanis in KSA aren’t migrants, they are expats.
Annual pilgrimages are a big deal for many muslims to Mecca. In fact, some of our former big charter airlines used to do flights in & out of there all the time (World, ATA, Omni). I think even HiFly, at one point, was doing A380 charters from Jeddah to Kuala Lumpur, Bali, & Singapore.
That’s very true, although I believe the demand is a bit seasonal.
The others sound right but Bali seems pretty unlikely since the population is very largely Hindu.
Norwegian did the same thing with the 737 Max, before the crashes and the suspension of flights.
Perhaps they were the most uncomfortable flights of my life, No recline, no water, no srceen, but paying $69 for New York (Stewart)-Edinburgh and $99 for Bergen-Stewart, I would do it again a thousand times.
It’s not about saving a few bucks, it’s about saving a lot of bucks! Not everyone can afford expensive, luxurious flights.
For me, the most important thing about a flight is that it transports me from one point to another.
What crashes?
Really?
The 737 MAX was grounded after two fatal crashes, Lion Air Flight 610 on October 29, 2018, and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 on March 10, 2019, in which a total of 346 people died.
A fact that impacted Norwegian’s long haul operations. Later, the pandemic put the final nail in the coffin.
3rd world pilots and airlines whose families should be sued for every dollar they have by Boeing shareholders for the damage they did to the company. Granted Boeing is partially responsible for selling this technology to people not capable of properly utilizing it.
The investigation showed that Boeing misled pilots, customers, and regulators on the MCAS system which malfunctioned due to a design flaw of relying only on one sensor before pushing an aircraft into the ground. The 737’s legacy manual (elevator?) also was difficult to adjust in an emergency during takeoff.
The 737 Max crash, like the Challenger incident, was largely due to organization and leadership issues, not technical ones. Cost cutting-profit driven measures at Boeing led to an inability to design aircraft from the ground-up resulting in a re-use of the ancient 737 airframe and throwing a larger engine on it causing an unbalanced aircraft. Software “corrections” is largely about making an aircraft that is less safe than a redesigned one less unsafe. Would you be happy if your 50 year old design car breaks tended to fail but had software to try to hit the brakes early for you whether you needed them or not?
Boeing management’s practices led to these deaths and, if we had a better system of justice in this country, the Boeing executives should have been charged with manslaughter and shareholders fined for associating with them (to send a message about these practices.).
I’m going to dispute the poster above me on one point: Boeing could, and should, have said “no can do” on pushing the airframe design so far and in stripping out key functional features. It’s not like WN had a bunch of other places to go, and it’s not like Boeing didn’t have the 757 platform they could have worked off of. WN and others wanted to “go cheap” and carry over pilot training/certification, but at some point the seller needs to take some responsibility for their product.
WN, in particular, is almost captive to Boeing. AS has teetered on being captive as well. And basically everybody else either has Boeing or Airbus to choose from for mainline jets.
I appreciate the observation. If a con-air costs 1/3d the price of a normal ticket, that’s a valid justification to bring a water bottle you fill at the airport, bring some cold snacks with you (about as good as Jetblue’s long haul economy meals now), and a few books to read. I love reading books on the plane. One can always also bring pre-downloaded movies on an ipad.
One concern I have about this model is “the walmart factor” but we see bad behavior even on legacy airlines and even in business class. People sometimes don’t fully emotionally process that they SAY they don’t mind literally no frills until they’re in a confined tube at 30,000 feet and they really get no frills.
I know I wouldn’t want to ride on that plane not only for the personal discomfort, but the shared experience.
Well, and a lot of carriers have no frills /included/ but they’ve learned that they can sell some of the un-bundled amenities for a markup vs the basic ticket price.
I think Virgin America was notionally a LCC/ULCC, but their First product was one of the nicest ones out there, especially on shorter-haul flights like DCA-DAL. If AS had committed to that product (hard at least, soft more negotiable) instead of their own F product, I’d quite possibly have stuck with them instead of bailing to DL. I don’t generally mind if I have to pay for a nice seat (I rarely rely on comp-ups), but most such carriers didn’t even offer that as an option.
Ricardo- Those $69 and $99 fares were not all in. After you added the cost of checking baggage, seat assignment and anything to eat (even if yo bought a sandwich at the airport), the difference between your Norwegian flights and standard flights was not as great as it looks. Some of the basic fares by other carriers are not much more than what you paid. But the proof is in the pudding. Norwegian was losing money on those “cheap” flights so they stopped doing flying those routes.
When I was young, I was fine with TATL economy to save money, but not now. Your body ages. Also, even when young, it wasn’t the seat or food that made economy unpleasant – it was the other passengers: persons of size, belligerent drunks, persons who smell, etc. I have a hunch that is worse now, not better. But I suspect they might be able to fill such a plane with students and the like. I just don’t know if they can make much money that way.
BTW, if they would fly a daytime US to London, I might actually consider it.
My couch in my own home suddenly feels very luxurious, at least the mortgage I put into the home has appreciating economical value unlike a seat on a plane, budget or not.
For me you’re losing money regardless you are travelling budget or legacy, might as well go big or go home.
I see nothing wrong with this model. If they find enough demand for it, good for them. I just hope that whomever buys their tickets are well informed about how they work before whining in social media about how horrible they are. People have choices so choose wisely.
The difference is small. I don’t value a little bit of recline. Food and water can be brought with me, if I prepare in advance. Seat pitch is a bit tight.
Leisure air travel in Europe isn’t something restricted to certain demographics like it is in the USA. Besides, salaries in many countries are quite low, a lot lower than the US – it’s not so bad in the UK in absolute terms, but those living in London and working outside of finance/tech won’t have anything left over after they have paid an extortionate amount of money on their rent or mortgage.
I’m definitely not going to be on those flights anytime soon, but I welcome their introduction as they’re bound to put pressure on fares, particularly when it comes to airlines such as TK which try to maximise yields by taking advantage of the somewhat limited competition in certain markets.
The US economy is much stronger than that of Europe. Americans have a lot more disposable income in general than Europeans do. Combine that with the fact that European flights tend to be much shorter than the average US flight (the one highlighted here being an exception) and I’m not surprised that European ULCC are still doing reasonably well compared to their American counterparts.
Three toilets for 240 seats on a 7 hour flight. Yeah, that sounds like a good idea..
How many times do you piss or sh#t in 7 hours? Anyone not sick taking a dump on a plane is a disgusting individual. So you should be in/out in under a minute. That is 180 people an hour. Again, how often are you going if you aren’t drinking alcohol?
Oh goody, we found a #2 etiquette expert.
And we found the public sh#ttsr. Assuming you have a loose ass like Aaron. Hopefully not for the same reasons.
You really need to stop being so obsessed with me. It’s a sign of how deranged you are.
Definitely has me appreciating Alaska Airlines even more…. 4 lavs on a 737-800/900 Max 9 compared to 3 on everyone else.
I wonder how much the CEO is paid and whether he flies his own airline.
And how does it matter? If prefers comfort he pays more for normal airline.
Well, Avianca from Central America to some US destinations are 5:30+ flights with the same exact conditions. Worse of all if you look for prices there are no menaingful differences from say Alaska or United.
I’m not a Sam Chui who has to “survive” in an Emirates A380 economy flight, but this one sounds brutal. And the worst part is you’re probably flying with the lowest-class, ill-mannered demographic
In Europe this is highly dependent on the route. Low cost flight from MAN to provincial Poland? Absolutely fine. Low cost flight from MAN to Málaga? Good luck with that!
The perfect flight for those who were bragging about rawdogging.
Isn’t that you at the bar around 7 after a few sissy drinks trying to pickup another fan of your Hershey Highway?
Only on your nights off, dear.
Limited toilets coupled with water at a cost. Maybe, NoWizz airlines?
Theoretically if price is 1/3 I could consider long flight on Wizzair. But often low cost airlines are more expensive than normal one. And when you add luggage, free snacks/drinks, usually more legroom, more connections in case of delay, much better handling of claims for delayed/cancelled flights, low cost airlines often are not really that attractive.
Matthew, you are wise enough to acknowledge that LCC does not mean low cost carrier but low comfort carrier. There were some seats with very low prices, nowadays it is mainly promos with limited amount of seats availbale for low price. So, could you please name the things as they are? Jeddah is not a destination for Christians nor white European tourists, it is for UK muslims.
No thank you! Wizz Air is just so awful that my concern is “will the flight cancel with no reason and little notice?” and how long will the delay be? Wizz Air has been repeatedly penalized for breaking the EU and UK passenger bill of rights! My concern is not Wizz Air being a ULCC but its reputation as a poorly run airline and its reliability.
Honestly when you book a ticket on this airline, you know what to expect!
I will strong discourage anyone from flying Wizz Air but there will be plenty of labourers to the MIddle East taking this flight though!
Matthew, to your final question:
In Europe, the market is rather fragmented, so you don’t get the same competitive options. Your closest major airport is likely to be a hub for a single legacy carrier, and if you want to fly with someone else, you’ll be connecting.
These LCCs have made a real change in the market, and often they’re the only direct option on a particular route, which makes them attractive—especially if the price is right.
That being said, low cost long haul is a different beast. Others have tried and failed (Norwegian, Primera, Level), and even Ryanair has backed away from transatlantic plans. Wizz Air is really pushing it here, so it’s yet to be seen how this will pan out.
That’s if you happen to live near a hub! There are lots of major cities which have relatively limited direct service, from Berlin to Naples and from Marseille to Birmingham. Personally I avoid LCCs because of their limited flight schedules and because of my preference to travel with a fair amount of stuff for all but the shortest trips, but direct flights are really important to certain people (e.g. those travelling with young children and/or elderly parents) and it’s not unusual for LH connections to be cheaper than flying direct with the likes of Jet2 or easyJet on certain routes.
“Are you Europeans just more budget-conscious…or just smaller?” Bear in mind that, in Europe, 3 hours on a Ryanair flight (seat pitch 30″) is long haul by FR’s standards. My own personal pain threshold on LCC flights is around the 4 hour mark.
Oh, and we are smaller as well, apart from the Dutch!
The line “will not even include a free cup of water” is a bit wrong. Every airline is giving free cups of water on longer flights including Wizz air and Ryanair. Wizz air will ALWAYS provide you with a free cup of tap water even on flights from London to TLV.
Flights within Europe it will depend on the FAs, on Wizz air I always got but on Ryanair I was once denied a free cup of water on a flight from PRG to London.
European airlines compete with high speed trains. Their consumer purchasing power is also lower. I can see why discount airlines thrive in the region.
The fares Wizz are offering aren’t that cheap and you can certainly pick up a connection on a legacy carrier from London to Jeddah for the same money. Some though, will be daft enough to do this.
My friends and relatives who have young children are prepared to pay huge premiums, travel at inconvenient times, and/or use airports that are nowhere near their actual origin/destination in order to fly direct. I still think they’re irrational (e.g. if you live a short taxi ride away from BHX, flying at 11am out of there and having to spend a couple of hours at CDG seems a lot easier than having to drive for 4.5 hours in the middle of the night to catch a direct flight from STN) but they are convinced that it makes sense.
As the only airline with a nonstop flight from Georgia (Kutaisi) to Vilnius,I flew Wizz,and had a positive experience.Clean,new aircraft,friendly Lithuanian crew,paid for an aisle seat,sandwich,but it was all inexpensive and no worse than a legacy carrier.
What is the problem? I fly Wizzair a lot, just pay extra for exit row seat, bring sandwich and water bottle from home and download few episodes to the Netflix app on the phone. Isn’t it worth saving $300 making more trips possible? As if seats we get on Lufthansa in Europe nowdays are better.