Originally Posted by
avidflyer
It is as simple as this: I left and took 1/2 my spend to AA because I can sit in a reasonable J seat (NOT lie flat DL Biz) and do it for a reasonable price of about $1000. There are a ton of customers who think M fares are too high....it is the exact same argument just posed a little differently. I am taking my real life experience (and that of many) and looking to DL to solve the problem that drove part of my business away. What is wrong with that?
Did you ever stop to think that DL simply doesn't care if you take your business elsewhere? The cost of BE upgrades is a problem for you, and it is not clear DL views it as problematic for them.
I'm sure they know they are losing some business by not offering cheap upgrades, but to keep that business, they would have to offer cheap upgrades. They don't want to do that, and feel it is a bad model for them. For now, at least, they claim that their yields and loads support that decision. AA can continue offering them, but why would any business choose to emulate AA? Yeah, I know AA's problems run deeper and are more numerous than offering cheap upgrades, but I also don't see much evidence that this aspect of their business model is that successful, either.
And, frankly, I'm not sure your proposal would even solve your problem. Suppose DL did as you seem to suggest and scale back current BE to create a J product less than an upgraded BE. How would this product be competitive with what I think is the currently relatively comparable CO J product? It would seem to me that any reduction in seat or service quality would make BE less attractive. At that point, wouldn't you simply be choosing CO for the better product, if the cost to upgrade was the same?