Originally Posted by
mozilla
I don't care about lower fares but would love to see lower load factors and less overcrowding in the clubs and the terminals in general, but for the time being, I haven't seen that really materialize. Maybe domestic load factors are lower, but not significantly enough to be noticeable for folks traveling exclusively upfront. I have heard that it is visible in the Polaris lounges, but I haven't had INTL in the past few weeks nor in the upcoming weeks.
Consider this an exercise for when the next recession strikes. As jsloan already mentioned, they simply don't need to cut prices. With their tight grip on a market that has been deprived of competition, the legacies can get by with just cutting capacity and increasing award availability, and they will still fill the remaining planes to the brim. In competitive markets like EMEA and Asia it's a whole different story and that's why you see LH slashing fares and crying for government assistance.
It's only March and this crisis have no end in sight except maybe in China. I think it was mentioned earlier today that UA's domestic booking is down 70%. So you'll definitely see people at the airport sooner or later. I have definitely seen fewer tourists in Hong Kong.
A lot of people wants a recession to see where this will push the big 3 airlines. I got a sense it's coming and we'll see if this will put consumers back in the driver's seat.
Originally Posted by
FlyingBeanCounter
Think they are sorry they screwed us 1k's last year? A lot of us switched our flying to other airlines or partners. I guess assuming that we would all continue to pay exorbitant rates and not notice that 1k had effectively doubled its requirements was not the smartest thing to do.
BTW, the world is on sale as a result of this. I have been booking trips like a mad man at killer rates. 
I haven't seen killer rates in the US, but I've benefited from lower rates in the Asia-Pacific region. I also noticed hotel rates in London are lower and I'll be there this summer. It's a good time to travel.
Originally Posted by
TEBraniff
Yes. A lot of the routes to southern points are running close to full. Isn't United the largest US International carrier? That is the routes they appear to be really short of passengers.
I think that is true.
Originally Posted by
jsloan
Eh, what I really said was that they'll try cutting capacity first. There's a limit to how much capacity can be cut, though. There are already some reports of fare sales, and there will be more if demand is as low as it appears to be. The airlines won't be able to avoid cutting fares to find a point where they can fill the planes. Also, opening up frequent flyer seats improves the bottom line but not the top line, and indications are that UA is hurting not just for profit but for cash. It may be better to take $200 in cash than to remove a $300 non-cash liability from the books.
For the record, I'm of the opinion that the US market is actually extremely competitive: you've got the US3 as international carriers, WN as a national carrier, AS and B6 as regional carriers, and F9, NK, G4, and SY as ULCCs. Yes, there may not be head-to-head nonstop competition on the majority of routes, but there are a lot more routes in the US than there are in most other countries too.
Don't forget, the US economy is also much bigger. Just a thought here and I'm no expert here, but in the interest of competition, why don't we encourage a merger between the smaller carriers (maybe WN and AS?) to create a big 4 so that there's an opportunity for more competition for international flights into and out of the US? I'm really worried that in the long run AA will absorb AS.