Long wait for bags - just de riguer nowadays?
Jan 5, 2006, 4:47 am
#16
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle WA, USA
Programs: Hilton Diamond, Marriott LT Plat, AS Lounge
Posts: 3,478
With respect to the OP's comments, I agree that bags seem to be taking longer on average at SEA than in past years. As I've mentioned on othere threads, in past years when arriving at SEA you would hear FAs say something like "Your bags will be available in about 15 minutes..." I haven't heard them say that in a while.
I'm not saying they always take a long time, but my colleagues and I seem to experience more variability.
I'm not saying they always take a long time, but my colleagues and I seem to experience more variability.
Jan 5, 2006, 9:38 am
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Programs: Bar Alliance Gold
Posts: 16,271
Originally Posted by AS Flyer
What came first, the decrease in amenities and service an airline provides, or rock bottom fares. I think, if you look back, you have to agree that the airlines started reducing services and amenities after the fares started falling to unsustainable levels...My point to all this is that people were demanding low fares when airlines were still offering many amenities (magazines, pillows/blankets, meals, snacks, etc.) and services (paper ticketing, city ticket offices, etc.). Low fares definetely came first.
Jan 5, 2006, 9:56 am
#18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: HH Gold, AA Gold
Posts: 10,458
Originally Posted by rjque
I think most people have had experience on more than one airline and, with the exception of Southwest, realize that each offers a nearly identical (and unpredictable) inflight experience. Why pay more to fly AA instead of UA when AA is unwilling to guarantee that the $100 buys anthing more than what UA is offering (a seat on the flight)? Everone knows that the person who paid $1000 for their coach seat is going to get exactly the same service as the person who paid $99. Why would anyone want to be that $1000 chump?
Jan 5, 2006, 10:12 am
#19
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Some where in the Mountains
Posts: 5,361
Originally Posted by SEA_Tigger
Yup. Too many AS customers would rather have low fares and poor service then high fares and good service, so AS continues to replace their own expensive ramp workers with cheap outsourced ones.
Jan 5, 2006, 10:16 am
#20
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Some where in the Mountains
Posts: 5,361
Originally Posted by Westcoaster
With respect to the OP's comments, I agree that bags seem to be taking longer on average at SEA than in past years. As I've mentioned on othere threads, in past years when arriving at SEA you would hear FAs say something like "Your bags will be available in about 15 minutes..." I haven't heard them say that in a while.
Jan 5, 2006, 10:26 am
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Programs: Bar Alliance Gold
Posts: 16,271
Originally Posted by toadman
High fares does not equate to better service. If SWA or B6 can offer good service for the same or lower fares, then there's something not adding up.
So unless you look at AS and WN, you may not realize that AS is $129 and WN is $159. You just assume WN's $159 is the cheapest and AS must be more expensive. And when WN announces a $49 fare, even if they only make two available, AS has to offer more then two seats at $49 because otherwise people will look at AS, see that it's $99 and believe they're being ripped off and book with WN (which may be $89 by that point for a different time while AS is $79 for the same time, but they didn't look and assume AS is always $99).
In the end, you can't but help be impressed with WN's marketing strategy. I wonder how many former members of the KGB's Eighth Chief Directorate went to work for their marketing department after 1992...
Jan 5, 2006, 10:31 am
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,572
Originally Posted by SEA_Tigger
Bingo. If fares remain "sustainable", then so does the service. UA now only offers complimentary meals (hot meals) in Economy between SFO/LAX and JFK on their p.s. route, because those fares average $400 round-trip vs. the $200 round-trip from ONT/LAX/BUR/OAK/SFO to LGA/EWR.
Jan 5, 2006, 10:35 am
#23
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Some where in the Mountains
Posts: 5,361
Originally Posted by rjque
Well, fares on SFO-PDX are now about 50% higher than they were five years ago. Where is my three course meal in F?
Jan 5, 2006, 12:10 pm
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,572
Originally Posted by toadman
I think jet fuel was about $1/gallon 5 years ago. So your 3 course meal is sitting in the fuel truck.
Jan 5, 2006, 12:25 pm
#25
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, Or USA
Posts: 1,800
Originally Posted by rjque
Yeah, but UA is able to offer a free meal on a 5000 mile flight (SFO-JFK) at an average of $400 per fare, but AS is unable to offer a free meal on an 1100 mile flight (SFO-PDX) at an average of $200 per fare? It doesn't make sense until your realize that the meal service is completely unrelated to the fare paid. You think UA would offer PS at all if AA didn't offer three class internationally configured flights on LAX/SFO-JFK?
Jan 5, 2006, 12:48 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Programs: Bar Alliance Gold
Posts: 16,271
Yes I know SFO/LAX-JFK is the one "fluke route" in North America that actually has consistent demand for three-class paid F. But UA flies three-class equipment between LAX/SFO and IAD and they don't serve meals in Economy on those flights.
The main reason UA's Economy fares on that route are so expensive is because of lack of capacity (72 seats), and not because UA is offering a meal. Does AA feed folks in Economy on their Flagship Service?
That same lack of capacity might explain why SFO-PDX is so high.
And considering inflation, 50% over five years is probably underperforming and AS is probably making less RASM now with the higher fare then they were five years ago at the cheaper fare.
The main reason UA's Economy fares on that route are so expensive is because of lack of capacity (72 seats), and not because UA is offering a meal. Does AA feed folks in Economy on their Flagship Service?
That same lack of capacity might explain why SFO-PDX is so high.
And considering inflation, 50% over five years is probably underperforming and AS is probably making less RASM now with the higher fare then they were five years ago at the cheaper fare.
Jan 5, 2006, 1:11 pm
#27
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, Or USA
Posts: 1,800
Originally Posted by SEA_Tigger
Yes I know SFO/LAX-JFK is the one "fluke route" in North America that actually has consistent demand for three-class paid F. But UA flies three-class equipment between LAX/SFO and IAD and they don't serve meals in Economy on those flights.
The main reason UA's Economy fares on that route are so expensive is because of lack of capacity (72 seats), and not because UA is offering a meal. Does AA feed folks in Economy on their Flagship Service?
That same lack of capacity might explain why SFO-PDX is so high.
And considering inflation, 50% over five years is probably underperforming and AS is probably making less RASM now with the higher fare then they were five years ago at the cheaper fare.
The main reason UA's Economy fares on that route are so expensive is because of lack of capacity (72 seats), and not because UA is offering a meal. Does AA feed folks in Economy on their Flagship Service?
That same lack of capacity might explain why SFO-PDX is so high.
And considering inflation, 50% over five years is probably underperforming and AS is probably making less RASM now with the higher fare then they were five years ago at the cheaper fare.
They would also do well to tell you exactly what to expect on the website, with the flight listings. "Snack" is not very descriptive. That doesn't tell me that I'll enjoy a warmed breakfast pastry. Or that on evening flights I might enjoy a warm cookie. (Do they really still do these? That's what the website currently says!) Having been on UA flights, I know that I'll get some kinda granola bar in the morning, and snack mix in the evening. All other things being equal, I might like a cookie. I think that the services are so haphazzard that the average flyer never knows what to expect, so they assume and plan for nothing. If they plan for nothing, then all the cookies and breakfast pastries around aren't going to influence anyone's decision.
Jan 6, 2006, 10:58 am
#28
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bellevue WA USA
Programs: AS MVP Gold
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by johnp012001
Well, the topic is kind of wandering, but I think that they would do well to actually communicate to the customers what services and amenities to expect. How about a guarantee that your bags will be available within 30 mins of landing or you get 500 miles, similar to the express line guarantee.
Jan 17, 2006, 5:04 pm
#29
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pacific Northwest
Programs: 2011 Air: AA (Plat) UA (Prem); Hotel: HGP (Dia), HH (Dia), KIT (IC); Car: HZ (PC) AF
Posts: 688
I've been highly critical of AS in the last two years and I have had poor baggage service and long waits. But, I have to report a positive experience.
I recently flew AS RT SEA-OAK and bags came w/i 10 minutes of arriving at the gate at both ends. Admittedly, I was traveling mid-day so it wasn't peak travel time, but I was still pleasantly surprised.
The only downer was that bags started rolling out before the flight was posted on the overhead signs at SEA -- a problem, I've witnessed many times.
I recently flew AS RT SEA-OAK and bags came w/i 10 minutes of arriving at the gate at both ends. Admittedly, I was traveling mid-day so it wasn't peak travel time, but I was still pleasantly surprised.
The only downer was that bags started rolling out before the flight was posted on the overhead signs at SEA -- a problem, I've witnessed many times.
Last edited by wth; Jan 18, 2006 at 1:01 pm