Originally Posted by
MSPeconomist
I didn't find the article and its comments to be so terrible.
I could care less about the comments, but the article is bad. Really bad. Two portions that verge on the unethical are:
- The quote from Tim Kehoe. The reference to him as a professor is clearly meant to connote an air of authority, but it is unclear if he has any. I mean, he is a macroeconomist, not an ergonomic expert. I could find no link to the study he used to determine what the average person finds comfortable.
- Stating that "some" of the seats on the Airbuses have an inch more legroom, but ignoring that "some" of the seats on the Airbuses have an inch less legroom.
The author also ignored those areas where there are objective improvements to the quality of the long-haul planes, such as the cases of swapping the 747 for a 777 and the 764 for the A330. It is unclear that the net impact is nearly as negative as portrayed in the article.
Originally Posted by
MSPeconomist
Of course there are some responses by idiots, but the overall theme that DL has given us worse and smaller planes is generally true, not to mention higher prices, bad IT, less award availability, etc.
Except it isn't true that DL has given you smaller planes. The MD-88s and MD-90s are both larger by capacity than the A320 (and A319).
Originally Posted by
MSPeconomist
and sometimes nonstops to CDG, FRA, HKG, and IIRC OSL on the schedule.
Good God. Is revisionist history part of the core curriculum in Minnesota? NW had a flight to HKG for less than a year. In 1998! FRA and OSL were similarly short-lived (and operated 10+ years ago). IIRC, the OSL flight was an especially laughable route. And the flight to CDG was a seasonal flight launched AND cancelled only months prior to the merger!
But to hear the Minnesotans tell it, DL has somehow eviscerated a premier global gateway. Sorry, but the numbers and facts don't lie - MSP is a marginal international hub. That explains far more of any losses to international capacity than anything else.