Dollars2Donuts

Wow. And you realistically think this is the same thing?

In my email to Rosa I actually told her that all of the people that are positively responding to her article, will be the exact people that write to her to complain about fares going up 25% after the legislation comes into effect. Crying that 'they have no choice but to pay it' and 'airlines are robbing us once again'.

I told Rosa that her article was trash....I won't tell you what I think of your statement.

yulred

I don't think you get the economics behind.

Will prices go up? No. If the prices are - as you've claimed elsewhere - at what the market can bear, they won't go up. That would be self-defeating.

Will the Government regulate pricing? Unlikely. However, it could:

- make it easier for new entrants to enter the market (foreign investors, cabotage, open skies etc). Combine that with tax cuts (only likely if the government knows airlines are desperate enough to pass most of the savings through to pax).
- Go the BA route and charge for seat selection in J ($200-$500on a $5k ticket, perhaps? I mean it's only 4-10%, right?). That would generate lot more money than the current setup given how 'not cheap' the pax travelling in J claim to be. That would offset a big chunk of the cost, I suspect.
- Reduce catering in J, PY and Y. Maybe stop serving alcohol?
- do away with DOM MLLs outside hubs?

And so on. Suffice it to say there are market based solutions that don't necessitate regulation.

The flip side: The US or EU would have to do it first. That would force the majority of airlines operating to Canada to do it on their own. Otherwise we would probably lose WOW etc.

superangrypenguin

Your post contains a LOT of content that is negative to the flying experience.

So what you're basically saying is give me more pitch but reduce other things?

No thanks. I'll suffer in other ways as a result. So at the end of the day, one still has to pick their poison. It's not win win.

yulred

No, I'm offering a lot of options that would impact the FF/J experience, while improving the experience of the majority of fliers.

Subtle but crucial difference. The only ones affected are the people who chastise others for not spending more. But wait, now they can do something about it. Charge 'not cheap' J pax more. If you can afford $5k, what's another 5-10% for seat selection and/or alcohol service?

And if you can't, to paraphrase another poster, you shouldn't be flying.

Wpgjetse

WOW. You know AC is a business and not owned by the government? I think SAP knows the economic and you don't. Airlines margins are very thin and you think they will still make money if you increase their costs and greatly cut there rev. roll eyes

Wpgjetse

No, you are just pushing entitlement for low rev pax. People to cheap to spend a few dollars for preferred seats.

yulred

What?

The entire point is that increased costs can be offset by:

- reducing spending on frills like free drinks (built in health benefit!)

- opening new revenue channels - albeit from pax who claim they aren't cheap, and will therefore be more willing to throw money away than the cheap pax who aren't buying preferred seats in Y in any case.

yulred

Sure, but since it's clear that the low rev pax aren't going to spend those dollars anyway, while people like you are (or so you claim), AC can just turn to you to offset the cost, while simultaneously avoiding punitive government regulations.

Of course, this assumes you aren't too cheap to pay for seat selection or a handful of drinks.

Wpgjetse

So, you think people drink enough to cover the costs of 75 to 100 seat on a flight to Asia? Dble rolleyes So, If J seat selection is $500 per seat, shouldn't it be the same for your Tango fares?(all things being equal) I want to see what you write about parents writing into FA complaining AC want $1K for their kids to sit beside them. No company/country has ever been successful that give entitled people everything they want.

superangrypenguin

Ok I'm out. Holy jeez. Robin hood crap?

My final take? Want more leg room? Pay for it. Thank god airlines aren't doing what some suggest on here.

yulred

Haha. It's based on the same principle as progressive taxation.

Which is why airlines (all of them) need to pray this overreach on their part doesn't push governments into regulating them.

yulred

That's up to AC to work out. It was but one suggestion for savings or revenue generation. They could probably cut J catering to PY levels too. And so on.

Point being: prices won't automatically go up.

The seat selection fare is a good point. Feel free to charge everyone - Tango, Flex, Lat. Just be aware that separating children from parents becomes a public policy issue and trying to profit from it virtually guarantees regulation. A point not lost on AC. Charging at cost for it would, of course, be acceptable, but it's not clear what seat selection actually costs.

Should point out that, according to AC seat maps, 12 J seats on a 77W= 62 Y seats. Ergo, under fairness principles, the Y seat selection should cost less than1/5th of the J seat, which would put it under $100. How much does AC charge for TPAC?

Dollars2Donuts

Your reasoning is a little off. You don't really seem to understand the base economics of the real world. The public cannot have something, for nothing. It cannot happen. And frankly, the people that are screaming for more room will be the first to scream when prices HAVE TO increase.

montezume

Real question to everyone here - how far is too far? Should airlines be allowed to stuff 12 abreast on these planes? If people are willing to purchase fares on those planes, should industry be allowed to make the seats smaller and smaller? Should the market determine it, or should there be some sort of safety regulations in place? Not trying to make a slippery slope argument here - just curious as to the responses!

yulred

No, it isn't. Here's why:

- no one is getting something for nothing. They are all paying fares to get a seat. Some are getting a little more space, but by most accounts they aren't paying for it (SEs etc). You could increase space across the board by getting rid of preferred seats and increasing legroom across the board. Any revenue loss (all incremental) is probably negligible.

- if pricing is at what the market can bear, there's not a whole lot of room to increase prices. Airlines aren't going to fly empty planes and charge more. They'll look to cut costs. There are ways to cut costs - but they won't be to the liking of the privileged few. Granted, the privileged few are more likely to have disposable income than the low rev pax ...so better prospects for revenue generation. Note that efficiency is not driven by prices increasing in lock step. It's forced on companies by consumers willingness to part with their money.