Originally Posted by
steve64
And there are people like me for whom the term "hub captive" is confusing.
Many years ago, I defected to CO while based at DFW. The operational reliability was worth much more to me than non-stops on AA (and always arriving back near a gate where my car was parked was an unexpected benefit
).
When I transferred to PHX, I was with America West only about a year before defecting back (85%) to CO. Ironically, it was the HP/US merger integration fiasco that was the final straw.
There is no rule that says someone living at a hub must fly any specific airline, the choice is still there. The majority of folks may place a higher value on non-stops than I do, but I'd bet I'm not the only one who rolls their eyes at the term "hub captive".
There is no rule, obviously, but if the objective is to enhance the travel experience, and by doing so you force yourself to go from flying mainly non-stops to connecting through hubs you will be not only increasing the flying time for each flight, but you are running the risk of additional delays, missing your connection, etc.
As you write, though, in cases where the airline in your hub is unreliable, perhaps this equation is modified.
But for most so-called hub captives, the notion that they will give up on an airline because, say, their upgrade percentage diminished, only to fly another airline (usually on an RJ without FC anyway) and tremendously increase their travel time in the process, does not represent much of an improvement in the travel experience.