SANspotter

A few months ago I would have laughed at such a statement, but after giving them a try up front I agree. Spirit is the only airline in the US that prices their premium product fairly - heck, you can get one of those seats for just $20 if one is available at check in. A small price to pay for what is essentially the same first class seat as found on the other airlines.

JDiver

We're talking about the US, (and can easily include all the Americas for comparable service). Europe because it's the nearest comparison in terms of mid-con sectors. Not so many visit the Middle East and their deep pockets airlines.

And in the US, the average mid-con is 3-4 hours, much like the Euro sector trip. Quite comparable IMO.

U.S. airlines should rebrand their cabins as "Business". If JetBlue and Virgin America succeed with their plans, they will grow and the three members of the airline cartel will take notice and improve their product. But in the Americas mostly airlines must pay their own way and make profits for their shareholders.

Not exactly how it works with some MiddlevEast airlines at all, given who or what their shareholders are.

pinniped

Except that it really isn't. Yes, you get access to the business lounge, but for these short-hauls I hope you aren't spending hours in an airport anyway. (Besides, picking up free or very cheap U.S. lounge access isn't exactly hard.) Once you're in the air, you're drinking macrobrew and bad wine on both...and at least the U.S. carriers give you a much more comfortable seat.

At the end of the day, a 31" seat sucks even if they're pouring Dom (which they aren't).

True, but on those 4-6 hour flights where they're using a widebody or some sort of enhanced narrowbody, are they giving the F seats away to elites for free? Or as $100-150 OLCI upgrades? Probably not. The U.S. carriers have a different economic model in place.

I believe you, but the *one* time I noticed a semi-reasonably-priced Middle Eastern J itin, it was on Gulf Air. I came to FT and read stacks of posts about how Gulf Air J sucks. There's a reason it's cheap. QR, EY, etc. with no status and no corp discount...I'd be in Y. Back to the 31" seat.

Perhaps we just accept that they're all different sets of products for different markets. You're right in that U.S. F isn't apples-to-apples with Euro J, and the way they are marketed and sold isn't the same either.

cmd320

They're turning billions in profits at this point. They have more than enough money to invest in the customer experience. It's one thing to make money for your shareholders, its another to be a slave to your shareholders.

I've always found that it is. In fact, I've found the the soft product in Euro Y is often better than US F on comparable flight lengths. J lounge access is a decent perk, and something that would be nice to have in the US, if we even had J lounges that were slightly comparable here. Closest things are Flagship Lounges or Global First Lounges and even those IMO don't really stand up to some of the Euro J lounges out there.

As for giving seats away for free, no, of course not. People who want to sit up front pay for it, as it should be. I would gladly see US airlines remove complimentary upgrades if it meant an improvement to the product. Use Y+ and block the middle for complimentary upgrades and reduce the size of the F cabin reserving it for paid customers.

Yeah, I haven't messed around with GF, nor do I plan to. Can't really comment on that one.

84fiero

A for-profit business' goal is to maximize shareholder value. Customers are a just means to an end in a sense, and improving their experience is important only so far as the corporation believes it will contribute towards the bottom line.

Which isn't to say the airlines are always correct in what they believe they can, must, or shouldn't do in terms of the product and the customer experience. But if an airline thought it could shrink-wrap passengers, stack them on wooden pallets and still sell enough tickets to make whatever profit goals they have, I'm sure they would do so in a heartbeat!

cmd320

I don't doubt that, but there needs to be some sort of check and balance to their tyranny. That should be the US Government, but that body seems to be so inept or paid off at this point that I don't know who that body becomes...

deniah

The average Euro sector trip is much shorter

ORD-SFO/LAX is somewhere around 1800mi

starting quite west in MAD...
CDG 600mi
MXP 700mi
FCO/LHR 800mi
AMS 900mi
VIE 1100mi
CPH 1300mi
WAW 1400mi

you gotta be shuttling b/t spain and moscow to breech 2000mi


for the AF/KLM/LH/LX fliers...typical trip much much shorter

tmiw

A ton of companies these days will not even pay for anything other than Y unless you're high enough in the organization or the flight's long enough. This even applies to international flights. And there are also at least a few who won't pay for anything higher than Y period.

Tchiowa

The check and balance is the market. If they don't provide a product people are willing to pay for, people don't buy it. If an airline thinks it can provide a better product, it tries. If the public thinks the value for money factor is there, it succeeds.

No way do you want the US government being a check or a balance.

tmiw

Eh, the government already controls a ton of aviation-related stuff. For instance, there is an effective minimum for legroom for safety/evacuation purposes by virtue of the maximum number of allowed seats on board specific aircraft types (determined when Boeing/Airbus/etc. submits their new models to be type certified).

cmd320

Maybe not today's useless government. However things seemed to work alright in the days before deregulation.

Tchiowa

None of which has anything to do with marketing or costs. Safety regulation is one thing. Market regulation is entirely different. And dangerous.

Adjusted for inflation, costs for airline travel have dropped fairly significantly since deregulation.

cmd320

That's a big part of the problem.

84fiero

I guess it depends on what you mean in terms of having worked alright. Since pricing was controlled, the airlines generally had to use hard/soft product to compete. It wasn't that the government was regulating their products, this was just a consequence of price control.

WillCAD

Since I don't fly F, I can't contribute to the main topic, but I am curious - would you be willing to share the make and model of this laptop?

I'm also curious as to the nature of the work you do that requires so much horsepower while on the go. Of course that's a much more personal issue and I understand if you're not willing to share that information publicly.

One thought popped into my mind when you mentioned 30 minutes per charge - in my experience, even the most power-hungry laptops produced in the last 5 years get at least 60-90 minutes per charge, unless their batteries are bad. You might want to check your battery; you might have gotten a bad one from the factory (it happens sometimes) and a replacement could extend your work time up to several hours. If the laptop is fairly new, the battery would be covered under warranty and the replacement would cost you nothing but a phone call to tech support. Every little bit helps!

My last two work laptops have been workstation types, one a Lenovo eight-core with 32gb (can't remember the model) and my current HP zBook quad-core with 16gb. Both drew 200w or greater and had heavy power bricks up to 8"x4"x1". Yet both were able to last up to six hours on a single charge. So even your 12-core powerhouse should be able to get more than 30 minutes.