Programs: JAL Mileage Bank, oneworld Sapphire, SPG Gold
Posts: 9,221
I think the higher the booking class, the higher the % should be. Or they should charge the infant by the level of noise they produce and give you a surcharge bill at the end of the flight
__________________ Disclaimer: Not associated with any airlines or travel agencies
Vist my personal blog on JAL & follow me on Twitter.
I have no problem with babies crying in their own seat.
If I have to store my 5 lb laptop computer while taking off because of safety, what makes holding 15 lb baby any different from holding 5 lb laptop?
It's a safety issue, not crying baby issue.
I just hope all airlines charge 100% of applicable fare for lap child so that people will start to purchase a seat for their babies, but 25% charge is a good start.
__________________
I'm reading FT on Friday night because I have 6AM flight on Saturday morning...
I have no problem with babies crying in their own seat.
If I have to store my 5 lb laptop computer while taking off because of safety, what makes holding 15 lb baby any different from holding 5 lb laptop?
It's a safety issue, not crying baby issue.
I just hope all airlines charge 100% of applicable fare for lap child so that people will start to purchase a seat for their babies, but 25% charge is a good start.
We agree there.
I have no problem in airlines charging 100% fare for infants. What gripes me are the comments that infants should be banned from planes. They have as much a right to travel as any other fare paying pax. And not all babies cry in a plane.
If one start banning babies from flying just because they are babies and some people don't like to travel with them, who would be the next to be banned- obese, people of different skin colour from me, people who come from the same region as terrorists as they might be potential security risks, people on medication??? We are on a slippery slope here.
No more baby comments please... ! Its okay to lament about the fare, but once you go into "why should people take ..." then you're going to open up a huge can of worms...
So lets just stick with the topic about fares and keep it civil, shall we?
Thank you!
Guy Betsy
Cathay Pacific Asiamiles forum moderator
I think it would be great if they had a section like they do DB trains in Germany, where it a sealed off bubble area at the front and back of the train where you can take kids, its great
I have no problem with babies crying in their own seat.
If I have to store my 5 lb laptop computer while taking off because of safety, what makes holding 15 lb baby any different from holding 5 lb laptop?
It's a safety issue, not crying baby issue.
I just hope all airlines charge 100% of applicable fare for lap child so that people will start to purchase a seat for their babies, but 25% charge is a good start.
The ignorance of this post is amazing (not you, but your knowledge of parenting a baby/infant/toddler.)
1) The mother/father doesn't just "hold" the baby, the airline has to provide a seatbelt that attaches the baby/infant to the mother safely and securely. Unless you want to strap your laptop on your stomach than it's not the same.
2) The infant/baby is TOO SMALL, TOO LIGHT to be on a seat of their own. I'm amazed airlines start demanding them to have their own seats at the age of 2, which is still too small in my opinion. Should anything happens they will fly right off their seats and the seatbelt given. This is why in USA it is illegal for kids to sit in a car without a childseat until the age of 5-7 (demanding on which State you're in). Yet on the plane it's age of 2.
3) Yeah, 25% charge basically for an equivalent of extra carry-on bag. If there's no seat there should be no charge. 10% was already too much. CX will no doubt lose more customers because of this, and I don't see any lines of customers that's either to take over their abandon seats. I know my family travels 2 times a year to Asia with our toddlers and with this change we might abandon CX for someone else.
We agree there.
I have no problem in airlines charging 100% fare for infants. What gripes me are the comments that infants should be banned from planes. They have as much a right to travel as any other fare paying pax. And not all babies cry in a plane.
If one start banning babies from flying just because they are babies and some people don't like to travel with them, who would be the next to be banned- obese, people of different skin colour from me, people who come from the same region as terrorists as they might be potential security risks, people on medication??? We are on a slippery slope here.
There are noisy adults on the plane that sometimes I wish I'm sitting next to a baby. At least they sleep most of the way...
....
Personally I am also in favour of anything that reduces the number of screaming kids on planes.
...this is exactly the reason why i do not care if my child screams the entire flight from YYZ to HKG....why care about other pax when they do not care about you or your child...perhaps instead of being in the mini cabin on my next flight so i only have 5 other people to annoy, i should place my 3 year old right in the middle of the main cabin and try to keep her awake for the whole flight so she is nice and pleasent...i mean i will never see any of those other pax again and i can handle the screaming...
as to 25%, i guess the child does add extra weight...but 25%....what is next, a fat person tarriff? if you exceed a set BMI, you will pay more...i mean you are costing more in fuel?
Ridiculous infant fares with CX also ex China and HKG
The fares CX charges for infants are ridiculous, but not only x USA, try to book PVG-HKG through the website and add an infant, they will charge you around 1500 RMB, actually more than some group fares. Surprisingly the fare charged in the airport is usually lower. 10% of the ticket price was reasonable considering you get a baby pack, and 10 kg luggage, but 25%? Compare that to LX, F class to Europe for the infant cost me less than CX PVG-HKG Y class infant ticket. Want to charge 25%? right then give us 25% more space and a proper family area in the plane where we will not annoy the rest of the pax.
Some people here seems to think traveling with babies is our first choice!! Just wait till your get your own ones :-))))))) and actually dread your next long haul with him. Actually I doubt people take their babies flying around willingly, and considering you seldom get more than 1 or 2 on a longhaul flight, the only problem I see is that they will push GO and DM out of their reserved seats. :-)
25% is indeed steep for a lap-child in Y. I travelled with our son in F from HKG-AMS last summer and paying 25% for the extra width and comfort wouldn't be an issue for me. Not sure if I would do the same for J though.
Programs: CX Gold (OW Sapphire), former SQ Krisflyer Gold
Posts: 1,731
I know Guy said to keep the topic off babies, but since at least 15 people have jumped in to say that kids should not be allowed on flights, I thought I'd chip in something for balance.
--Off topic--
I travel with my infants on flights (and when I was an infant I travelled on flights with my parents). I will say that most parents of infants do not enjoy annoying other passengers and we also try to keep our kids crying to a minimum (we don't enjoy it when they cry either). I'm guessing most of the posters who don't want kids on their flights, probably don't have any of their own.
While acknowledging that kids can annoy other pax, all I'll say is that adults can (and do) annoy passengers just as much as kids. Ever had an idiot who keeps on kicking your seat because they don't like your recline? Or some loud mouth who can't stop yapping? Well those guys are consciously choosing to be a PITA. Infants well, are just infants and don't choose to cry.
--Back on topic--
Infant fares are already expensive given that they don't occupy a seat. Remember infants are charged 10% of Y fare (and now 25%), not 10% of whatever cheap V class ticket I usually buy for myself.
Now, it might actually be cheaper to pay for a 75% child V fare ticket instead of 25% of a full Y ticket. I think CX might be shooting themselves in the foot, because people might take up V seats for infants less than 2y old, CX will get similar revenue from that pax, but they will lose the seat which they cannot then sell to someone else and will end up carrying at least 10kg more luggage for that infant as well.
I can't imagine what the bean counters were thinking when they approved this one.
I know Guy said to keep the topic off babies, but since at least 15 people have jumped in to say that kids should not be allowed on flights, I thought I'd chip in something for balance.
--Off topic--
I travel with my infants on flights (and when I was an infant I travelled on flights with my parents). I will say that most parents of infants do not enjoy annoying other passengers and we also try to keep our kids crying to a minimum (we don't enjoy it when they cry either). I'm guessing most of the posters who don't want kids on their flights, probably don't have any of their own.
While acknowledging that kids can annoy other pax, all I'll say is that adults can (and do) annoy passengers just as much as kids. Ever had an idiot who keeps on kicking your seat because they don't like your recline? Or some loud mouth who can't stop yapping? Well those guys are consciously choosing to be a PITA. Infants well, are just infants and don't choose to cry.
--Back on topic--
Infant fares are already expensive given that they don't occupy a seat. Remember infants are charged 10% of Y fare (and now 25%), not 10% of whatever cheap V class ticket I usually buy for myself.
Now, it might actually be cheaper to pay for a 75% child V fare ticket instead of 25% of a full Y ticket. I think CX might be shooting themselves in the foot, because people might take up V seats for infants less than 2y old, CX will get similar revenue from that pax, but they will lose the seat which they cannot then sell to someone else and will end up carrying at least 10kg more luggage for that infant as well.
I can't imagine what the bean counters were thinking when they approved this one.
Very good points. Another seeing the tree and miss the forest move by a major corporation. I'm really worrying about CX.
