Des Small <[email protected]> wrote:

    >[Cross-post snipped]
    >"Gene Seibel" <[email protected]> writes:
    >> An airplane isn't a restaurant. An airplane isn't a movie theater. An
    >> airplane is a way to get from point A to point B in a reasonable amount
    >> of time and at reasonable cost. Most people see it as such.
    >In fact everyone shares my opinion, if you ignore the people who
    >don't.
Except the lurkers.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED

"Padraig Breathnach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Des Small <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >[Cross-post snipped]
    > >
    > >"Gene Seibel" <[email protected]> writes:
    > >
    > >> An airplane isn't a restaurant. An airplane isn't a movie theater. An
    > >> airplane is a way to get from point A to point B in a reasonable amount
    > >> of time and at reasonable cost. Most people see it as such.
    > >
    > >In fact everyone shares my opinion, if you ignore the people who
    > >don't.
    > >
    > Except the lurkers.

and the French tennis player in the broom cupboard with Mixi.

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] oups.com...
    >> You are, I presume, joking, right????????
    > Not at all - Economics have shown again and again that people are not
    > willing to pay for perks on flights.

you can do a survey of this yourself by flying Maersk.

They have three "classes". Small, Medium and Large.
Large gets you extras like food and a fully flex ticket but
all Medium gives you is extra legroom for only an
additional 30 Euro .

There are 3 rows of Medium, 20 of small and on my
75% full plane, there were (relatively) more spare seats
in Medium class than Small

tim

"d_jay_double" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] oups.com...
    >I fly BA over ryanair anytime, as long as I can book early enough to
    > keep prices reasonable. Even if the difference is sometimes close to a
    > 100 pounds, I fly so often that I just can't stand the rush for seats
    > on ryanair, the cramped seating, the pay through your nose for a
    > sandwich syndrome....

I fly Ryanair because of the convenience of the airports that they
fly from. I just wish that BA (or others) would fly from nice quite
airports where you can park your car 2 minutes from the terminal
with another short walk to the gate. On return it's back in your
car, 5 minues after landing.

But they don't, they fly from monstrosities that you have to go
to by Public transport (because the parking is unaffordable),
arrive hours before the flight to fight through security etc.....

Their loss!

tim

d_jay_double <[email protected]> wrote:
    > I fly BA over ryanair anytime, as long as I can book early enough to
    > keep prices reasonable. Even if the difference is sometimes close to a
    > 100 pounds, I fly so often that I just can't stand the rush for seats
    > on ryanair, the cramped seating, the pay through your nose for a
    > sandwich syndrome....

They charge 100 pounds for a sandwich?

Because it would seem odd to pay 100 pound to avoid paying, say, 7 pounds
for a sandwich.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 36 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Queens Day in Amsterdam; the Grand Canyon; Amman, Jordan

"George Patterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:9Qspe.2072$5M2.1618@trndny06...
    > Mxsmanic wrote:
    > >
    > > They all fly the same planes in the same way on the same
    > > routes.
    > No, they don't. Try checking flights between Newark and Atlanta, or Newark
and
    > Birmingham, or Newark and Tampa. Some carriers have a direct flight when
you
    > want it, some hub out of one city, some out of another, etc.. One way you
might
    > get an MD-80, maybe a 737, perhaps a Fokker, and I forget what the twin is
that
    > Continental shuttles down to Birmingham. Fly into somewhere more out of
the way
    > (like Knoxville, TN), and you can choose between hubbing at Dulles,
Atlanta,
    > Raleigh, Cincinatti, or Nashville.
    > They're running different planes and different routes between the same two
cities.
    > George Patterson
    > Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
    > and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
    > Because she smells like a new truck.

Although each airline has multiple aircraft in their fleet, for the most
part they are pretty much the same. They all have 737s or A320's or MD80s
Unless the trip involves a CAT shot off of the USS Eisenhower in an F-18,
the flight is pretty much the same whether you are stopping in Dallas on an
MD-80 or Atlanta on a 737. I guess you may as well throw CRJs and ERJs in
the mix now as the "standard" airliner.

    > In other words, good service is nice but we'll put up with a lot if it
    > means a cheaper seat. Americans, as a rule, won't pay more for a
    > plusher seat or better food. And U.S. airlines know it."
    > Source:
    > http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/02/pf/g...lines/?cnn=yes
    > Cheers,
    > Geoff Glave
    > Vancouver, Canada

I say bring your own drink, your own sandwich, and your own portable DVD
player, that way you can have and watch whatever you want! That's my new
philosophy, and it works quite well. Nothing is better than a Cafe Latte and
my movie-of-choice with my own noise-cancelling headphones on. (I had to buy
a second pair and a splitter cuz my wife kept trying to talk to me and
getting mad because I wasn't listening/couldn't hear ;) Netflix just sent
Ocean's Twelve, which should go nicely on the 4.5 hour jaunt to Aruba next
week....

Personally (I know, noone asked) when I'm shopping Expedia I start at the
top (cheapest) and work my way down until I find agreeable times. I'd be
willing to bet that most of us do the same thing for personal travel. I've
never flown Southwest, but if they had a fare to XYZ for $300 and Delta had
one for $500, unless Delta is going to let me log the time, I'll save the
$$. Is the service that different? What exactly is considered service these
days anyway? Coke and peanuts? Even in first class, what, I get a drink
before we push back so now I have to go to the bathroom on takeoff? The big
seat is nice, but on a short flight it's a non-issue for me.

We just flew to Albuquerque from Richmond recently for a mini-vacation, and
it was the first time I had ever flown American Airlines. It was pretty much
identical to any other flight I've ever taken from Richmond on any airline
on any aircraft - we took off, we leveled off, I got a cup of Pepsi and some
pretzels, land at Big Hub Airport, rinse, repeat, to Albuquerque.

In fact, the only flight I've ever had anywhere that stands out from the
rest was a British Airways flight from IAD - LHR, and that's because they
gave us socks, a warm washcloth, and some toiletries.

Oh wait, that was because US Airways had mechanical problems, then put us on
some other flight that had already left the gate, and ended up putting us on
BA, which dropped us upstairs in 1st class. Kudos to the Brits (and Rudy at
the counter) for picking up US Air's slack.

John K.
PP-ASEL

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:57:38 +0100,
[email protected] (chancellor of the duchy of
besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco) mangled uncounted
electrons thus:

    >Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
    >[]
    >> There is relatively little difference in service across airlines,
    >> anyway. They all fly the same planes in the same way on the same
    >> routes. No amount of service reduces flight time, and there's almost
    >> nothing that can be done to reduce discomfort. And food and drink don't
    >> significantly compensate for this.
    >The meals and drinks help pass a bit of time, usually, and IMO the
    >aircraft with seat-back video and lots of movies and TV shows on demand
    >help pass the time even more.

Speaking personally, and therefore as a sample of one, I'd
(almost!) pay not to have a TV screen in the back of the seat in
front of me. They're too damned small to be any use, and too
close to my eyes - all I get is a blinding headache and nausea
after a hour of exposure to one.

My cry is for legroom - any other 'frill' is entirely irrelevant
to me. I made the mistake of flying on a Virgin 747 from LGW to
MCO, following someone else's glowing recommendation. But never
again - I spent a good chunk of the (overnight) return flight
standing in the cross-aisle at the back, reading my book, rather
than try to sit... :(

Martin D. Pay
As a leisure flyer, I don't have the luxury of affording top-end
seats...

So, leaving aside her irrational fears, the complaint is that the FAs
were blonde and no meal was served? Where is Amnesty International?

Martin D. Pay <[email protected]> wrote:

[]
    > Speaking personally, and therefore as a sample of one, I'd
    > (almost!) pay not to have a TV screen in the back of the seat in
    > front of me. They're too damned small to be any use, and too
    > close to my eyes - all I get is a blinding headache and nausea
    > after a hour of exposure to one.

Have you been on equipment with the bigger screens? I find them much
better- no problem really.

    > My cry is for legroom - any other 'frill' is entirely irrelevant
    > to me.

One of those occasions when being short is an advantage, I admit! I'm
sometimes bothered by wide people to the side of me though.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

d_jay_double wrote:

    > I fly BA over ryanair anytime, as long as I can book early enough to
    > keep prices reasonable. Even if the difference is sometimes close to a
    > 100 pounds, I fly so often that I just can't stand the rush for seats
    > on ryanair, the cramped seating, the pay through your nose for a
    > sandwich syndrome....
    >

I flew BA for the first time this year from Gatwick to Porto. I paid £69
for the flight, and it was my first non low-cost flight. To be perfectly
honest, given a low-cost alternative flying the same route, I'd use the
low-cost every time given a cheaper price of _any_ amount. On a 1-2 hour
flight, I don't feel I get good value from paying £40 extra for a small
snack box and a complimentary newspaper. Of course, my first long-haul
flight will probably change my views!

Cheers,

Steve M

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 17:12:48 +0100, "Miss L. Toe"
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >"Padraig Breathnach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected].. .
    >> Des Small <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> >[Cross-post snipped]
    >> >
    >> >"Gene Seibel" <[email protected]> writes:
    >> >
    >> >> An airplane isn't a restaurant. An airplane isn't a movie theater. An
    >> >> airplane is a way to get from point A to point B in a reasonable amount
    >> >> of time and at reasonable cost. Most people see it as such.
    >> >
    >> >In fact everyone shares my opinion, if you ignore the people who
    >> >don't.
    >> >
    >> Except the lurkers.
    >and the French tennis player in the broom cupboard with Mixi.

Russian?
--
Martin

On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 02:43:41 -0400, nobody <[email protected]> wrote:

    >ShawnD2112 wrote:
    >>
    >> Sorry, nobody, but you're not quite right. People flying in Economy class
    >> buy tickets on price and price alone, once the hygience factors like safety
    >> and destination are there. In fact, routing and aircraft type are
    >> non-issues. People will fly from London to Amsterdam to New York if it's
    >> cheaper than a London-NY direct service.
    >I disagree. Here, Air Transat offers lowest prices for trans atlantic,
    >but many people insist on paying more because they've flown Transat once
    >and swore never to do it again with only 28" seat pitch for so long.
    >Price is not the only variable.
    >And in terms of domestic USA market, the problem is that the low cost
    >carriers actually offers service in flight, just not meals. JetBlue for
    >instance offers in seat video for passengers.

Continental hasn't cut out meal service in coach. It's the only
airline in America that still offers free food in coach and uses that
as one of its differentiating factors. Those who want food will
probably choose Continental sometimes because of it. That's the beauty
of a free market. One of the reasons we got in this situation is
because airlines were largely scared to death to differentiate from
their core competitor group. When someone else lowered fares, everyone
else did; when someone else cut out meals, everyone else did. This is
exactly the opposite of how most businesses work. There are lots of
examples where you can see people willing to pay a higher price if
they're happy with what they get in return.

In surveys, you can easily see why airline execs are in such a tough
position. There's never any clear consensus on what to offer. When
asked whether they would rather pay for food, entertainment or
Internet access, Internet access actually leads the pack with food a
distant second.
    >Another aspect of the LCCs in the USA is that starting in the year 2000,
    >they rapidly gained the image of being more reliable and on time than
    >the legacy carriers. So if you are travelling on business, Southwest
    >became a viable option to get you to your destination on time at a time
    >where legacy carriers had systemwide delays due to some thunderstors in
    >some big hub city.

In depends on the market. In NYC, you're not going to take Southwest
into town if time matters because you'll have a 45-mile schlep into
Manhattan. People who value their time don't do that.

    >The problem is that legacy carriers had overestimated how much business
    >travellers were really willing to pay for the extras that legacy
    >carriers provide.

I wouldn't say it's that as much as they underestimated how quickly
the low-cost carriers could expand their coverage to make themselves a
suitable alternative. Southwest was operating for years before they
became a viable alternative for someone wanting nationwide travel. One
of the reasons so many are cheering the America West US Airways deal
is because it will turn essentially two regional carriers into a
single entity that's more competitive.

    >But management attacked the meals first, before tackling the real
    >issues. US Air only now has begun to rationalise its fleet and increase
    >schedule efficiency, and this is how many years since its first
    >bankrupcy ???????

Like many other industries, the first expenses that go are the ones
that are easiest to accomplish. All industries do that. I was at a
company during the 2001 downturn that eventually shed 20 percent of
its workers, but they cut out the small things first.

Jesper Lauridsen wrote:
    > So, leaving aside her irrational fears, the complaint is
    >that the FAs were blonde and no meal was served? Where is
    >Amnesty International?

Leaving aside her unfamiliarity with the DC-9 rear stairs,
(quite a good description - it IS like a secret passage)
and the appearance of some of the cabin crew, her complaint
is lack of uniform standards. She booked a package tour
and had every right to expect that standards of service
on outward and return legs of her journey would be similar.
As for Amnesty International, they take up the cases of
PRISONERS all over the world. I hope you never have cause
to call for their help...

    > Flew back from Corfu on a Viking MD83. This is as she told me,
    > completley unpromted:

The rear seating in a MD-80 series aircraft has to be the loudest of
any aircraft on which I have ever flown. Ear plugs are the only way to
keep your sanity if you find yourself located in such a seat. Your
friend should have take a short walk to stretch her legs - one which
ended at the loo in the front of the aircraft.