![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 & $1240 so it ought to be first class but there was no mention of it. My bet it was successful for a while and then it died after the new wore off. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message news:9Xlpe.25856$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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 ![]() |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Passing of Richard Miller | [email protected] | Soaring | 5 | April 5th 05 01:54 AM |
Mountain Flying Course: Colorado, Apr, Jun, Aug 2005 | [email protected] | Piloting | 0 | April 3rd 05 08:48 PM |
Flying Holiday in Europe | Udo Rumpf | Soaring | 17 | March 23rd 05 03:08 PM |
Ten Years of Flying | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 20 | February 19th 05 02:05 PM |
Routine Aviation Career | Guy Alcala | Military Aviation | 0 | September 26th 04 12:33 AM |