tim.... writes:

Do they?

Do they really?

Do passengers really pay more to fly with Qantas (who have never lost an
airliner) than with e.g United, who have?

Qantas is not demonstrably safer than United. Regional airlines are
demonstrably worse than the majors.

Does the safety record really make a difference?

For a substantial minority of passengers (a 30-50%, I'd guess), it does make a
difference, if they are made aware of the safety record. Many people have had
it drilled into them that airline travel is completely, totally safe, however,
and probably don't ask themselves any questions today. The problem is that,
while air travel is very safe, it isn't completely safe, and the differences
in safety between a major airline and a regional are real and significant.

I know that people don't
like to fly with airlines from developing countries, who just happen to have
poor safety records, but that is as much because of the service on offer.

Many people don't realize how poor the record is in the Third World, again
because they are constantly told that all airlines are safe.

Is the safety record of different (in this case US) airlines so different?

Airlines and the airline industry deliberately avoid all discussion of safety,
and won't even talk about relative safety. They tell everyone that it's always
110% safe everywhere, with no difference between carriers. But there are
differences.