Originally Posted by
pinniped
I would be with you if it were someone flying a ULCC and then going on an online rant about how the seat was small, there was no first class, there was no lounge, there was no food, and they had to pay for baggage. Those are the legitimate, advertised strings attached to the $59 fare.
We still expect the core product - the flight - to be delivered with the $59 fare.
and the issues are: (1) the airlines that offer/provide said $59 flights have a
minimalist business model that doesn't make allowance for
any instance in which
anything is other than normal, and (2) many if not most people who eagerly snap up said $59 flights have not -- and likely will not -- ever consider that things just might not go normally during their travels or the fact that the airline's business model will likely leave them to fend for themselves for awhile
in real time, whether they consider themselves "stranded" or "delayed" is only peripherally relevant to how anyone else perceives both the situation and the reactions
Originally Posted by
james318
This reminds me of one of the rappers recently in the news. She claimed AA stranded her and her baby, as well as others (the rest?) of the plane at MIA, with no luggage. My first thought was that out of EVERYONE she was probably the least "stranded" as she had the resources to purchase a ticket, or anything she should need, plus likely had at least a person or handlers/assistants. And a label that probably would have gotten her on a private jet if she complained enough.
For me, stranded makes me think of accidentally being left totally alone on a cruise ship's private island or something with no other boats coming into port for a while.
again, anyone with a public persona is even better positioned than the average traveler to make a digital ruckus about how "the big bad airline treated me and my family/traveling party like dirt and I'm gonna make sure everyone knows about it! "