That's not what I'm suggesting.

I'm suggesting one pay scale for all current UaCo pilots, and a lower scale for all new hires.

This new scale is designed to keep new hires' pay lower even as they gain seniority.

This allows the company to keep the current pilots happy and pay consistent, and shifts the savings onto new hires.

I know ALPA will recoil at this proposal, but it could end up being the most likely compromise...

Not for me...I'd much rather have the other things than pay another $10 just for WiFi.
The discussion is happening. Just because I don't agree with where it is doesn't mean I can't participate. :rolleyes:

If UaCo moved PS to EWR, they'd better reintroduce the US. Helicopter service for the rich...infamous...and your DYKWIA types...

As I have mentioned in a few posts, I'm probably one of the few (if not the only) one here who actually buys tickets on UA PS FC for "Holywood" types as part of my business (I'm in the entertainment business).

The only concern I have ever heard in all the years of buying these tickets is that the "First Class" cabin meet the highest standard.

We always have a limo waiting at either end, so if the PS flight arrives at EWR instead of JFK, as long as the limo is there to whisk our "stars" to their suite at the Soho Grand or Gramercy Park Hotel, I think we're going to be OK...

Oh, and by the way, most people in this category I wouldn't describe as DYKWIA, because everyone knows who they are...if anything, they are always looking for as much privacy as possible.

But if CO had it, I'm sure you'd find a way to rationalize it as important/

:rolleyes:

Read every single one of my posts about in-flight internet on FlyerTalk or my blog. They all say the same thing: great if it is free but not something I'm willing to pay for on a frequent basis.

But thanks for once again suggesting an alternate reality of my opinion that better suits your views.

Not very likely. Scheduled helicopter airlines are notoriously difficult when it comes to producing a profit on a consistent basis. I'm in the Part 135 helicopter operations business and the company I was with at the time (one of the world's largest rotorcraft operators) talked with CO for several months about establishing this type of scheduled operation to feed the EWR hub. I led that effort and we passed on the idea (the advent of 9/11 did not help matters, of course). Then along came US Helicopter. Even with code sharing with AA, CO and DL, their business model was unsustainable.

The only successful helicopter airline operation in North America is Helijet linking downtown Vancouver and Victoria in B.C, Canada with Sikorsky S-76 rotorcraft. They've been in operation for 23 years now and have never experienced an accident.

If the "stars" want to fly, they will have to charter a helicopter.

OK, fair enough. I'm just curious, though: Do you feel the same way about paying $6 to watch TV (with commercials)?

And if it's a toss-up between paying $6 to watch TV or $10 for WiFi, which would you select?

Indeed, I do not pay to watch TV either. If I had to choose I would pay for the WiFi over TV but I'm also not a typical customer in that regard and I would not expect the airline to cater to that choice.

I don't know why you say you are not the typical customer, as most airlines have selected the pay internet service over pay TV, presumably based on their analysis of the market metrics.

Some carriers have both IFE and internet, but in these cases, the base IFE is usually free...

Also, let's not forget that the main reason CO opted for pay TV was not so much because they felt it was the right decision, but because they could do it at no cost.

Given the fact that pay WiFi is now becoming widespread, and that CO has still not implemented a WiFi solution, I am sure this is a decision they are regretting...

Anyway, I'm sure you've had your fill of LiveTV (for free, of course) on your AYCJ adventures...

That would require that CO is capable of feeling regret. The CO culture is such that they continuously pat themselves on the back, so many may believe they cannot fail or make a mistake.

Well, given the fact that CO is reported to make about $1 per customer on LiveTV, and that the margin is so much greater on WiFi, I am sure they would "regret" not having opted for this source of revenue....

Of course! Why wouldn't you pat yourself on the back when you're the best. Rah rah! ^

If "it's" free I'll use it; if I have to pay I'll read a book. "It" can be wifi or tv. That being said, most of my flying is personal or sub 2 hours (business); losing contact for that period of time won't kill me.

Fair enough, on the other hand, when you're on a 6-hour transcon, it can be hugely productive to have access to the internet, certainly more productive than paying 6 bucks to watch reruns of Judge Judy...

But there is scant evidence that offering the paid internet service is profitable, either for the airlines or the companies providing the service. Moreover, there isn't much evidence that booking trends are based on such offerings.

But when surveyed about which they would prefer to have, most passengers still choose IFE over internet. That's why I say I'm atypical.


Honestly, I really don't watch that much of it. I've listened to the XM enough to konw when to expect certain songs to repeat but mostly I'm reading Kindle or listening to my own music.

Ultimately this it the attitude most customers seem to end up with. If they do have to pay more will likely choose TV/movies over internet. Just the way the world is today. Maybe things will be different next year.