Re: Europeans flying on holiday - hysterical !

[Jay Beckman]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> >Now my friend who told me this, knows nothing about aviation but flies
> a couple of times a year on holiday. Those who say that the average
> passenger knows or cares nothing about the plane/airline/service and
> just wants the cheapest havent met my friend and apparently a lot of
> other paople on the plane were grumbling.
>
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Right - But if those passengers went on holidays again next year and
> the option was a) a cheap charter with few services on an older but no
> doubt perfectly safe plane or b) paying more money to fly on a carrier
> with service they would no doubt pick the cheaper option "a" again and
> again. People ALWAYS complain about lack of movies or food or leg
> room, but have consistently shown that if push comes to shove they will
> always reject that in favour of a cheaper fare.
>
> Cheers,
> Geoff Glave
> Vancouver, Canada
>

I think it depends on why you're traveling.

In my case, I fly 40-45 weekends a year on business and I'd KILL to have the
perks, the legroom, etc. It seems these days, if you are a single business
traveler, you are a pariah and are so far outside the air travel "norm" that
you just don't matter.

The airlines (at least here in the USA) all realize that their bread is no
longer buttered by business travel because of videoconferencing, email,
fractional jet use (for the really high class business folks...who used to
guarentee that all of first class had paid for their seats and didn't get
them via frequent flyer miles...), etc, so they only need to cater to the
lowest form of travelling life which is the person who goes somewhere once
every couple of years who either forgets or doesn't care what the level of
service is.

Wasn't it Midwest Express that started flying DC9s that were all first class
level service in the NorthEast corridor (NYC, DC, Boston)? Didn't they have
to beat the business flying customers back with a stick?

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL (Road Warrior)
Chandler, AZ

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in message
news:sAlpe.3318$7s.1967@fed1read01...
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...

> Wasn't it Midwest Express that started flying DC9s that were all first
> class level service in the NorthEast corridor (NYC, DC, Boston)? Didn't
> they have to beat the business flying customers back with a stick?
>
> Jay Beckman
> PP-ASEL (Road Warrior)
> Chandler, AZ
>

Well I just did a reservation check NY to DC on Midwest's web site and they
only show Y rate fares which are coach. But the prices for a June 12th
flight and a 15th return were between $1010 & $1240 so it ought to be first
class but there was no mention of it.

My bet it was successful for a while and then it died after the new wore
off.

[EL]

> Wasn't it Midwest Express that started flying DC9s that were all first class level service in the NorthEast corridor (NYC,
> DC, Boston)? Didn't they have to beat the business flying customers back with a stick?
>
> Jay Beckman
> PP-ASEL (Road Warrior)
> Chandler, AZ

I believe that a number of the airlines are considering beating their customers with sticks, as part of their attempts to
improve customer service ;^)

Eric Law

[Jeff Hacker]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wr.giacona@coxDOTnet> wrote in message
news:9Xlpe.25856$DC2.18048@okepread01...
>
> "Jay Beckman" > wrote in message
> news:sAlpe.3318$7s.1967@fed1read01...
>> > wrote in message
>> ups.com...
>
>> Wasn't it Midwest Express that started flying DC9s that were all first
>> class level service in the NorthEast corridor (NYC, DC, Boston)? Didn't
>> they have to beat the business flying customers back with a stick?
>>
>> Jay Beckman
>> PP-ASEL (Road Warrior)
>> Chandler, AZ
>>
>
> Well I just did a reservation check NY to DC on Midwest's web site and
> they only show Y rate fares which are coach. But the prices for a June
> 12th flight and a 15th return were between $1010 & $1240 so it ought to be
> first class but there was no mention of it.

Midwest's Boeing 717's and MD80's are primarily configured 2-2 and offer a
first class seat with 34" pitch at a coach (i.e., full coach) fare. They
have some discounted fares, but typically may be a bit higher than their
competition. They have a few MD80's used for primarily vacation routes
configured 2-3, but, again, with better legroom than most other MD80
operators.
>
> My bet it was successful for a while and then it died after the new wore
> off.
>

[mrtravel]

Bob Fry wrote:
>>>>>>"gglave" == gglave > writes:
>
> gglave> again. People ALWAYS complain about lack of movies or
> gglave> food or leg room, but have consistently shown that if push
> gglave> comes to shove they will always reject that in favour of a
> gglave> cheaper fare.
>
> I wonder though, if at purchase time it was quite clear what extra
> service they could buy ($10 for an inflight meal, $30 for 2 inches
> more legroom, and so forth), maybe people would pay more.

In the case of MRTC, AA clearly advertised that it was offering more
space. However, if you are booking though an online search engine, all
you would see is that carrier A is charging $30 more than carrier B for
Economy service on a 737. Someone posted that the legacy carriers charge
a lot more. This is not generally true in markets where they compete
with low fare carriers. Although some people aren't convinced the
airlines are taking good surveys, this logically makes no sense. Why
would an airline purposely put the seats back in if it was more
profitable to leave them out and charge more?

[Jeff Hacker]

"mrtravel" > wrote in message
om...
> Bob Fry wrote:
>>>>>>>"gglave" == gglave > writes:
>>
>> gglave> again. People ALWAYS complain about lack of movies or
>> gglave> food or leg room, but have consistently shown that if push
>> gglave> comes to shove they will always reject that in favour of a
>> gglave> cheaper fare.
>>
>> I wonder though, if at purchase time it was quite clear what extra
>> service they could buy ($10 for an inflight meal, $30 for 2 inches
>> more legroom, and so forth), maybe people would pay more.
>
> In the case of MRTC, AA clearly advertised that it was offering more
> space. However, if you are booking though an online search engine, all you
> would see is that carrier A is charging $30 more than carrier B for
> Economy service on a 737. Someone posted that the legacy carriers charge a
> lot more. This is not generally true in markets where they compete with
> low fare carriers. Although some people aren't convinced the airlines are
> taking good surveys, this logically makes no sense. Why would an airline
> purposely put the seats back in if it was more profitable to leave them
> out and charge more?

In the case of American, they really do seem to believe that they can get
away with it. They are about as arrogant as any airline ever was.

[TOliver]

"Jeff Hacker" > wrote in message
...
>
> "mrtravel" > wrote in message
> om...

>> In the case of MRTC, AA clearly advertised that it was offering more
>> space. However, if you are booking though an online search engine, all
>> you would see is that carrier A is charging $30 more than carrier B for
>> Economy service on a 737.

I fly often on American and find the rates to be competitive with other
carriers on the same routes, depending on the day and time of day varying by
up to 100%. The MRTC didn't change any fares, simply provided more legroom,
as AA kept it's Economy fares the level with competition (other than WN
advance purchase/internet specials)

>> Someone posted that the legacy carriers charge a lot more. This is not
>> generally true in markets where they compete with low fare carriers.
>> Although some people aren't convinced the airlines are taking good
>> surveys, this logically makes no sense. Why would an airline purposely
>> put the seats back in if it was more profitable to leave them out and
>> charge more?

AA put the seats back in on their Caribbean and SAmerican routes, bot US
domestic or TransAtlantic which remain "MRTC"
Legend is that a research company told AA that travelers to the Islands and
SAmerica were natives with short legs or tourists who had no alterantives
except Latin American Airlines, some of which remain a bit primitive

>
> In the case of American, they really do seem to believe that they can get
> away with it. They are about as arrogant as any airline ever was.

Only "Half Arrogant", not in the domestic service where MRTC has helped to
keep'em afloat, especially with DL deflation of service and capacity. The
innocuous MD80 series remain 34" I believe.

TMO

[Scott Skylane]

TOliver wrote:
/snip/
> AA put the seats back in on their Caribbean and SAmerican routes, bot US
> domestic or TransAtlantic which remain "MRTC"
> Legend is that a research company told AA that travelers to the Islands and
> SAmerica were natives with short legs or tourists who had no alterantives
> except Latin American Airlines, some of which remain a bit primitive

The
> innocuous MD80 series remain 34" I believe.
>
> TMO
>
>

According to seatguru.com, *all* of AA's planes will be converted back
to standard 31" coach pitch by the end of this month :(

[Cub Driver]

I flew to Washington (okay: Baltimore) the other week on Southwest,
the bare bones economy airline. What luxury! It's the first time in
two years that I didn't spend the flight in terror that the guy in
front of me was going to recline suddenly and smash my kneecaps.

The seats seemed *wider* too. I don't know if that's possible. Perhaps
it was only the result of not being crushed fore and aft.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com