The distance between the back and front of the plane will keep widening
#18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
#19
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Programs: AA, Delta, Singapore Airlines
Posts: 701
I quake at this ad from the future:
News Flash from 2043: UnitedDeltaVirgin announces the introduction of Economy Wing class. Passengers will enjoy the luxury of their own sleeping bag and oxygen mask while experiencing panoramic views during flight, courtesy of being bungee-corded to the wing by trained flight attendants just prior to take-off. Occasional bird strikes will provide in-flight meals during take-off and landing, and passengers are assured there will be no queues for the toilet facilities (as there are none, except of course the inside of the aforementioned sleeping bag). Fares are wonderfully cheap(ish...) of course.
News Flash from 2043: UnitedDeltaVirgin announces the introduction of Economy Wing class. Passengers will enjoy the luxury of their own sleeping bag and oxygen mask while experiencing panoramic views during flight, courtesy of being bungee-corded to the wing by trained flight attendants just prior to take-off. Occasional bird strikes will provide in-flight meals during take-off and landing, and passengers are assured there will be no queues for the toilet facilities (as there are none, except of course the inside of the aforementioned sleeping bag). Fares are wonderfully cheap(ish...) of course.
#20
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Current political environment, my foot.
The gap, between the front of the flying bus and the back of the flying bus, in service and service levels has been widening. Current political environment hasn't changed anything with regard to this.
For the vast majority of US passengers, it's now a case of pay more than before and get less than before -- excepting perhaps when in the front of the flying bus.
That doesn't -- it can't -- show what has happened to the average American household's portion of discretionary income available for leisure travel in the past twenty years and how such income's purchasing power applicable to air travel has dropped in the past 5, 10, 15, or 20 years.
It's amusing how some data misleads people into thinking something is more affordable in the US now than before, when the data is clear that it has become less affordable. But this is not surprising, as relying upon simplified silos of data doesn't educate anyone in the way more complex econometric analysis does.
The portion of air travel costs captured in fare pricing data has also been changing. Think about what that means for affordability too.
The gap, between the front of the flying bus and the back of the flying bus, in service and service levels has been widening. Current political environment hasn't changed anything with regard to this.
For the vast majority of US passengers, it's now a case of pay more than before and get less than before -- excepting perhaps when in the front of the flying bus.
Here's an Atlantic article showing how airfares have dropped 50% in inflation adjusted terms in 30 years. Good graph.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...oticed/273506/
And here are some charts showing that US mean and average incomes rose pretty steadily until 2008 and have been flat since then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona..._United_States
But since income is flat and airfares are down, I'd say it's the opposite of the original claim. Even including baggage and fess, costs are down compared to income.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...oticed/273506/
And here are some charts showing that US mean and average incomes rose pretty steadily until 2008 and have been flat since then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona..._United_States
But since income is flat and airfares are down, I'd say it's the opposite of the original claim. Even including baggage and fess, costs are down compared to income.
It's amusing how some data misleads people into thinking something is more affordable in the US now than before, when the data is clear that it has become less affordable. But this is not surprising, as relying upon simplified silos of data doesn't educate anyone in the way more complex econometric analysis does.
The portion of air travel costs captured in fare pricing data has also been changing. Think about what that means for affordability too.
Last edited by GUWonder; Sep 23, 2014 at 4:06 am
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,225
Of course, the point more generally is that the disparity between rich and poor is increasing. The point with the airlines is that disparity between rich and middle class is increasing. It's not the poor who fly, it's the middle class and it's their relative income which is declining at a fast rate. The economy section of the plane is where they sit, and so the offering will decline in line with their income.
But, yes, it's clear that Premium Economy will become more and more relevant for the top end of the middle class scale.
Quite. Not everything is about America.
But, yes, it's clear that Premium Economy will become more and more relevant for the top end of the middle class scale.
Quite. Not everything is about America.
#22
Join Date: May 2007
Location: IAD
Posts: 2,060
I'm sure the average customer doesn't think about or understand this dynamic. Regardless, the airlines will sell what the customers buy (whether the purchase consciously or subconsciously doesn't really matter).
We all have our preferences and these can be lumped into many different groups. Some will pay for J/F and some will pay for EC. The fact of the matter is simple. Most people will chose the lowest price. Airlines might be able to fill an entire plane with people that are willing to stand for the whole flight.
IMO, the airlines are trying to take care of (i.e., get the most money from) from what I guess are the 10% that are willing to pay for niceties (J/F) or a little extra space (EC). If the demand for (or profitability of) J/F/EC becomes greater than cattle class, airlines will up the price for those services and/or offer more of them. The demand is not there, so they don't.
The most intriguing thing is how far the airlines can go before the overwhelming majority of "lowest cost no matter what" crowd changes their behavior. My guess is the majority will never pay a lot more, they will simply fly less.
We all have our preferences and these can be lumped into many different groups. Some will pay for J/F and some will pay for EC. The fact of the matter is simple. Most people will chose the lowest price. Airlines might be able to fill an entire plane with people that are willing to stand for the whole flight.
IMO, the airlines are trying to take care of (i.e., get the most money from) from what I guess are the 10% that are willing to pay for niceties (J/F) or a little extra space (EC). If the demand for (or profitability of) J/F/EC becomes greater than cattle class, airlines will up the price for those services and/or offer more of them. The demand is not there, so they don't.
The most intriguing thing is how far the airlines can go before the overwhelming majority of "lowest cost no matter what" crowd changes their behavior. My guess is the majority will never pay a lot more, they will simply fly less.
#23
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: MSY; 2-time FT Fantasy Football Champ, now in recovery.
Programs: AA lifetime GLD; UA Silver; Marriott LTTE; IHG Plat,
Posts: 14,518
"Meanwhile, business class keeps on getting comfier." This is certainly true for the long haul flights mentioned at the end of the article, but for domestic (non-transcon) first class, things are declining there as well.
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
The statement that travel is less affordable seems to defy the fact that more and more people are flying. If it was less affordable, fewer people could afford to fly.
#25
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by Tchiowa
So rather than making up stats, show some.
I'm not here to spoon-feed adults on demand or to be a tutor for those incapable and/or unwilling to try to work on analysis of this too. Numerical literacy matters, and I encourage it by not babying adults.
I find it cute when people rely upon "Airlines for America", as that is an industry lobby group which would be more accurately described as "Airlines Against America" since it is so very customer-unfriedly and wants to keep peddling a story about airline affordability to try to justify their customer-unfriendly positions. They are the purveyors of that chart in your link.
Originally Posted by Tchiowa
The statement that travel is less affordable seems to defy the fact that more and more people are flying. If it was less affordable, fewer people could afford to fly.
When the world's population has grown by a few billion in our lifetime and when relative wealth has increased in much of the non-OECD world where low cost carriers have increasingly become the norm, THEN divergence in affordability between different markets and a large growth in the absolute number of people flying shouldn't be a surprise. But that doesn't say anything about what has happened in the US to affordability of air travel for the average American household.
Last edited by GUWonder; Sep 23, 2014 at 1:13 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
What prices, published ticketed fares? They have been cut in half in constant dollar terms between which periods of time? They certainly haven't done that in the most recent one-year, three-year, or five-year period.s Has that taken place in the most recent ten-year period? No. In the most recent fifteen-year period?
It has nothing to do with making up stats; it has to do with letting people go fish for themselves if they so wish to challenge their own political prejudices in support of the industry.
I'm not here to spoon-feed adults on demand or to be a tutor for those incapable and/or unwilling to try to work on analysis of this too. Numerical literacy matters, and I encourage it by not babying adults.
I'm not here to spoon-feed adults on demand or to be a tutor for those incapable and/or unwilling to try to work on analysis of this too. Numerical literacy matters, and I encourage it by not babying adults.
#27
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 960
The air traffic is USA is increasing over the last years:
Year. United States
2009 679,423,408
2010 720,497,000
2011 730,796,000
2012 736,699,000
2013 743,096,000
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.AIR.PSGR
Year. United States
2009 679,423,408
2010 720,497,000
2011 730,796,000
2012 736,699,000
2013 743,096,000
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.AIR.PSGR
#28
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,371
even though the total numbers are still increasing, both the year-to-year increases and percentage of increase are slowing
get 25 economists or statisticians or analysts in a room (or on a FT thread) and you will get at least 50 reasons as to what story the raw data actually tell
get 25 economists or statisticians or analysts in a room (or on a FT thread) and you will get at least 50 reasons as to what story the raw data actually tell
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
The air traffic is USA is increasing over the last years:
Year. United States
2009 679,423,408
2010 720,497,000
2011 730,796,000
2012 736,699,000
2013 743,096,000
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.AIR.PSGR
Year. United States
2009 679,423,408
2010 720,497,000
2011 730,796,000
2012 736,699,000
2013 743,096,000
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.AIR.PSGR
The fact is that silo data doesn't paint a meaningful picture in the way that more complex analysis of silo-crossing data does.
The difference in ability to understand comes down to who wants to be and needs to be spoon-fed and who doesn't need to be spoon-fed data to figure this out on their own instead of relying upon a silo metric or two that masks what it doesn't track.