Thems were the days.... But I found it cheaper and more convenient to bring a few .5L bottles from a $4 case I had at home.

It seems like every time I pick up a freakin' bottle of Pepsi-Water (aka Tap Water in a bottle) at the airport, it goes up another dime.

The fountain water from the DFW ACs I use to refill empty bottles is just vile.

I agree, I always pack my own food, better quality and no "surprises"

I do tend to agree that the food in F is pretty much a joke these days and that's why I won't pay money for extra stickers to get a chance to sit up front. When I do happen to score an upgrade (which isn't often as a Gold), the cheap-o meal they serve is OK, but as many others have said, I'm not there for a gourmet dining experience. It is nice because on longer flights it helps pass the time and the few free cocktails you can score is also a nice added touch. However I never go in with high expectations because I know I'll be disappointed each and every time. What I DO expect is good F class service even if the product being provided isn't that great. What ticks me off more than anything is a bad F class F/A who spends half the flight sitting on his/her jumpseat working the crossword rather than being attentive to the F class cabin. Just because the meal was served and there are two hours left in the flight doesn't mean that someone doesn't want a refill on their drink and sometimes its like pulling teeth to get the F/A to make an appearance after the meal service.

^ Agreed. I don't upgrade for the food at all.

So keeping that in mind, there are enough of us out there that could care less about the food that the F cabin will continue to be full. So I don't see the F boycott as viable. Contacting AA as others suggested is the way to go. Good luck..

I think the "MRTC" experience showed AA generally people will NOT pay for more anything, though they may talk a good game.

But there is considerably more room up front on domestic flights than, say, European airlines that sell "Business Class" with a moving curtain and food that isn't much better than AA food.

And this evening, the mid-con food was a passable salmon - better than fast food, and I didn't try the cheese enchilada offering. It was served with Sysco-quality green beans, a pancake-like affair of noodles (let the noodles be left behind!) a salad (green leaf lettuce, radish pieces and red Bell pepper slices, a balsamic dressing,) and a fairly fresh chocolate chip cookie, passable "vino da tavola" grade wines. I hardly missed the olive at all!

And I was much more comfortable for ~3:30 on a Mad Dog than I would have been on a BA 737, shuffled to the starboard side after they again "lost" my confirmed port seat. The music was fine, supplied by Chez iPod with some quieting by my earbuds, and I got some of my reading done. You won't see me joining a revolt any time soon.

Lest anyone forget (and I was there,) in the regulated days you paid relativelhy much more for a lengthy, droning trip on a DC-whatever, that would have not been able to climb above today's weather, with tiny open shelves capable of handling a hat, less comfortable seats, really smelly balky lavs, etc. The food was more varied, but guess what - it was still reheated airline food, dressed up as it was. (I still reminisce about DC-3s, 6s and 7s, Constellations and the like - but I also remember their deficits, and that they were pretty expensive, ergo fewer people flying.)

deleted

Most of my AA flying is in int'l F (via eVIP) or on Domestic F on a DONE4 - and not being based in the US I can't eat at home and often my meal on board is my only meal for 12 - 14 hours. I would love to see some improvement in food but I do choose the eVIP to int'l for more comfort and space (I rate the AA suite over QF and CX [oldF]) and would not forgoe that for better food - a few glasses of harsh red and you can't taste much.

Had Brunello from FCO not too long ago. Hard to improve on that.

Cheers.

Interesting. To the casual observer, this thread reads "the food sucks and you aren't giving us enough of it!" Further, wasn't the time to complain about cutbacks like 4 years ago WHEN THEY WERE CUTTING BACK and not now when some things are returning?

No wonder AA thinks were a bunch of whiners who want something for free! Half the time we are!

I for one think that if enough people complain, the airlines try to listen. They're competitive and sometimes it works. A classic example: In the late 90s or early 2000s, DL announced they would start charging for cocktails in the Crown Room. The furor that resulted caused them to eat crow and apologize.

There are other times.

By the way, I would clearly argue on AA that a recent example of customer revolt causing change was the Soy "Nut" debacle.

A few posters have noted they fly AA to get from A to B, and that usually works for them.

A to B is not working so well for me lately, and I've been wondering whether there are increasing mx issues leading to cxld or delayed flights. Perhaps I'm just getting unlucky.

My recent flights:

SFO-IAD r/t. Outbound plane taken out of service. 2nd plane unable to start engines due to non-functional power at DFW gate and non-functional APU on 2nd plane. 2.5-hour delay. Return flight cxld, I'm re-routed.

SFO-JFK r/t. No problems (!).

SFO-ORD r/t. Outbound flight ~30 min late. Return flight delayed, but I get the last seat on a different standby thanks to a friendly GA who reissues my ticket for it.

SFO-EZE r/t. Outbound DFW-EZE cxld. I'm rerouted through MIA. MIA-EZE flight departs 2 hrs late, but my bag and the other SFO connecting bags are left in MIA. Return EZE-MIA 2 hrs late due to mx. Miss connex, rebooked through LAX. LAX aircraft 4 hours late due to multiple mx problems. Rebooked on later LAX-SFO flights as MIA delays mount. LAX-SFO flight 45 min late.


Is this what others' flying experience looks like recently? 767s out of service, other planes flying delayed, reroutes and schedule changes? I like flying AA--some of the flight attendants know me and say hello, I can sit where I want, etc.--but my friends joke with me when I call 'em to tell 'em I'll be late "oh, are you on AA again?"

I wouldn't mind better catering, but perhaps the mx issues could be reduced, as well.

-Hayden

All I can say is that (hopefully) this too shall pass, but I empathize with your travails.

A few years ago I had a similar spell. I swear every plane I boarded was delayed or cancelled due to a mechanical problem or crew availability. And if and when that was finally resolved, bad weather would strike. Nothing (it seemed) departed on time and the few flights that arrived on schedule were held up waiting for an available gate. I had almost as many missed connections and reroutes in that short period as I've had the rest of my life combined.

I wish you a speedy recovery.

Agreed. Has been my experience as well at times and my friends also joke about it.

Most on this thread agree that most people fly the cheapest carrier but most of us don't fly LCCs. I dare to venture that most frequent flyers (50K a year and above) don't select on price alone. I think we select on a variety of factors (the importance of each will vary by person):

1) Likelihood to get from A-B
2) Schedule
3) Ability to obtain and use frequent flyer miles
4) Room and seat comfort (although MRTC showed that not every flyer cares about it, E+ has shown that it can be a market differentiator -- I've read many threads where UA FT'ers don't want to fly AA because of lack of E+....although we have our semi-E+ with exit rows)
5) Ease of upgrading
6) Service
7) Food
8) Quality of food
?) Interior maintance and cleanliness -- I really want this to be a deciding factor but I keep flying AA's decrepit, dirty planes so it must not be too important.

If AA falls too far behind its competitors, it risks losing its frequent flyers. I admit at times UA and CO look really attractive to me, but AAdvantage and my ease of upgrading keep me with AA.

From my limited non-scientific research, I think schedule, likelihood to get A-B, seat comfort, QUALITY of FOOD, and SERVICE are even more important to domestic paid F and international paid J. I'm surprised we haven't seen improvements in domestic F seats, F service and quality of food from AA. United seems to be making improvements to go after this market.

I used to think that way until I flew CX in F. The food there was good. Unfortunately, while I am willing to pay a hundred dollars or two more for that kind of food on a long flight, I am not willing to pay twelve thousand dollars for it. And CX no longer seems to have any availability for Z rewards using Aadvantage miles.

If there were decent airport food to take on a plane, I would just buy that and bring it on board. That, however, seems to be a rarity except at a few airports. And I really don't want to take an extra 45 minutes to an hour before my flight diverting my drive to a decent restaurant for food.

So, given the cost of using sticker upgrades, the minimal difference between domestic F and coach, the horrible food offerings for purchase in coach, and the apparent inability to upgrade on most routes with stickers except at the very last second, I just anticipate no food or lousy food and don't even bother with it unless I am starving. Instead, I opt for a nice meal in a new locale after I land.

flew AA 32 in F today LAX-JFK. The salad was small but fine - no chicken or lobster like the old days, but some decent vegetables.

I didnt have the main course (there were only two lunch choices), but the chicken melt sandwich looked like a a Quiznos reject. I noticed the gentlement next to me and in the Captain Kirk chair at most at a bite or two of theirs.

All in all, pretty lame for 3 class transcon F...