Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

There probably are lower fares, how many seats they allocate, difficult to determine. On the other end, the same anecdotal evidence suggests, the last minute fares on Easyjet and their ilk are often higher than the likes of BA etc.

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

I have posted this before, I know, but oh soooo appropriate :nod:

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

We've established that certain (just a few) airlines in the EU have a marketing tactic of selling the first X number of seats as loss leaders, a practice that isn't adopted in the US. In Europe, if you are prepared to book in advance then you have a shot at getting these fares (sometimes even moreso if you are prepared to change your dates, leave very early or very late in the day, accept an airport that is further away from the city served etc.) People who do not get these fares pay higher fares, and those who purchase the last few seats on any given flight pay the highest fares of all.

US carriers, while also using fare buckets (where groups of seats are sold at increasing prices as the flight fills up), charge a more realistic price for the first and last seat on each flight, thereby avoiding the extremes seen at both ends in Europe.

In (overly) simple terms you could say that each flight has to be profitable, so the sum of the cost of the first and the last seat on an "equivalent" flight marketed under each model should come to the same. I said this just to try to convey a rough gist of my point, although one of the reasons why I'm sure this isn't true is that each flight doesn't have to be profitable - it's the operation as a whole that does. Therefore the airline adjusts its fare buckets again so that flights where there is a lot of competition are cheaper (to try to attract market share) and it 'pays' for this by increasing fares on routes where it has a greater monopoly. (This becomes very apparent when you start to notice fares from A to B being - sometimes much - higher than fares from A to B to C via B). This is why you can't argue that a flight of X miles or Y hours costs more/less as proof that one airline (or group of airlines) costs more or less than the other as a whole.

None of this means that US carriers are worse than EU carriers (US carriers are shit for all kinds of different reasons) - it just means that the EU model is more cost effective for those with the greatest flexibility and the US model is better for those who just need to get somewhere without thinking about it an age beforehand. Which is kind of good considering how easy it is to jump on a train in Europe whereby that alternative doesn't really exist in the US (with few exceptions).

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

+1

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

The way that the UK rail industry has morphed into a profit-making market rather than a national transport service is simply awful. Luckily, the rest of Europe isn't allowing that to happen - that is why the UK has the highest rail fares in the EU, and some of the highest in the world (I think Japan is more expensive per mile).

Most of my European travel by train is in states outside the UK - France, Spain, Germany, Belgium. What is most amazing is that the London/Brussels section costs nearly 10 times as much as Brussels/Cologne or Paris/Madrid !

I was talking to someone in the office about this today, and I think that there is an "expectation" things at play here. I have always thought of flying as that thing you do once a year to go on holiday somewhere nice, and that normally you'd drive or take the train. Her view (LA born-and-bred) was different - she is "popping" down to San Diego this weekend for 2 days at $250 return, and thought she had a bargain. But she hasn't had a week or two week holiday in the 25 years she's been at work....

So it looks like the travel market and it's uses are very different here, and definitions of "cheap" that would apply in Europe are just different as money is spent on different things.

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

That "profit-making market" enabled me to get from Swindon to London for 9 quid return on more than one occasion (about 80 miles / 1 hour each way). That would never have happened in those wasteful BR days where there was no incentive to improve. I doubt it happens much on the continent either. Granted, a walk up rush hour fare will cost you something like 120 quid for the same route, but that's the pricing structure for you - winners and losers.

Sleepers are a bargain too, only about 25 quid for the berth on FGW/ScR. Over here on Amtrak you're talking $250 minimum per night for a room, though that includes meals.

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

I booked 2 flights once last minute. My seat was under $130 including taxes. My child's was over $400. Same flight with seats in the same class.

I tried to book seats for two and the system would not allow it. I called the airline and they said there were not 2 seats left at the lower price.

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

I have a strong feeling that Amtrak's lowest fare bucket for sleepers is lower than $250, and that is for up to two people traveling together (as well as the 3 meals a day).

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

I don't agree with pay and being treated well equals better customer service. Go to any government office city, state, or federal level and it's completely hit or miss on how you will be treated. They usually have great pay, enough staffing, banker's hours, and benefit packages. Apply for public assistance, go to the DMV, pay your local business tax, meet with the IRS rep and it basically depends on who you get.

Of course management and how much they much they put into the customer experience make a huge difference. Still there is no excuse for the lack of empathy and dismissive attitudes I've seen. Pressures from management for efficiency can make it impossible to do a job correctly for every customer. Adequate staffing, long lines, reps not having the authority to solve a problem are different issues than the person you are dealing with having a major attitude or not validating your concerns.

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

I'm assuming you're referring to something previously said up-thread. Using the quote function helps you to further discussion on the points you have as it help us to see what you are responding to, and that context makes it more likely that you'll get a reply. Making a massive assumption here that these are things that you'd like to see, otherwise feel free to disregard this post! :)

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

Thank you! :)

It was this one I was replying to:

Re: Why are United SO Crap ?
 

Per room, yes, but even allowing for 3 meals a day it still costs maybe double the UK. Being pedantic I guess you do get one meal on ScR/FGW if you count fruit, tea/coffee, danish/croissant etc as breakfast.

Reason I said $250 is because I've recently been looking to get to Chicago and the Amtrak prices are something like $1200 round trip, compared to <$300 by plane (hence my layover thread yesterday). I was surprised at the prices as previously I've travelled in sleeper quite a lot and not paid anywhere near that price, even in August. So I was plugging away at different trains on different dates, near and far into the future, and kept coming up with $250+ per room per night (ie $500+ for 2 night journeys like the Empire Builder).

A quirk of the Amtrak reservations system is that trains with two parts, eg Lake Shore Ltd to New York and Boston, Sunset Ltd / Texas Eagle from LA to New Orleans / Chicago, and Empire Builder, have two independent reservation buckets. So for a random date I just picked found $586 on the Texas Eagle (LA to San Antonio) but $362 on the Sunset Ltd - which is exactly the same train, same lounge, same dining car (but different sleeping car) between LA and San Antonio!

I'll grant you that the SL sleeper supplement is $224 for that trip for nearly 2 nights.