Part of the difference is that the EU is a very different kind of negotiating partner than the East Asian countries involved. While in TPP the concern was about

Part of the difference is that the EU is a very different kind of negotiating partner than the East Asian countries involved. While in TPP the concern was about US standards being diluted by the transfer of economic activity to other countries, in TTIP the concern goes the other way around. EU consumer protections regarding things like privacy and agricultural products are stricter (though the latter include some IMO ridiculous things like a blanket GMO been). It's also a bilateral treaty; there's none of the wrangling of dozens of different negotiating parties, there's just the US and EU trade negotiators. Also, there's the practical reason - the Asian partners don't know the contents of TTIP because they're not parties to it. TTIP covers EU-US trade, and TPP covers Asia-US trade. I think these flows are larger than direct EU-Asia trade, but if not, it's up to the EU and the TPP partners to negotiate between themselves. Which is part of the untidiness of these trade deals happening outside of the WTO, but those global deals seem to be pretty dead; there are just too many parties involved with too many competing interests to come to a single deal that everyone's happy with.