Race to the bottom
#1
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
Race to the bottom
More entrants to driving prices down from Canada. Norwegian Air plans to fly between Canada and Europe this summer - Business - CBC News
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.
This race to the bottom is everywhere. https://www.google.ca/search?q=airli...hrome&ie=UTF-8
At what point are the customers likely to realize that lower prices have a cost that they are ignoring. I remember when the term 'Low Cost Carrier' began to be used. Of course everyone knew back then that they were inferior in service but provided a way for those with less money to afford air travel. Not a bad thing in and of itself obviously. However, now the LCCs are becoming 'mainline' in terms of number of passengers flown and they have now started referring to 'Ultra Low Cost Carriers' coming into the market.
This continuing reduction in comfort, service, health and safety applies everywhere (so don't move this to the Air Canada forum please). How low are you willing to go?
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.
This race to the bottom is everywhere. https://www.google.ca/search?q=airli...hrome&ie=UTF-8
At what point are the customers likely to realize that lower prices have a cost that they are ignoring. I remember when the term 'Low Cost Carrier' began to be used. Of course everyone knew back then that they were inferior in service but provided a way for those with less money to afford air travel. Not a bad thing in and of itself obviously. However, now the LCCs are becoming 'mainline' in terms of number of passengers flown and they have now started referring to 'Ultra Low Cost Carriers' coming into the market.
This continuing reduction in comfort, service, health and safety applies everywhere (so don't move this to the Air Canada forum please). How low are you willing to go?
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Programs: MR/SPG LT Titanium, AA LT PLT, UA SLV, Avis PreferredPlus
Posts: 31,004
Their success/failure will determine whether the market continues to evolve in that direction. Commoditization isn't a new thing - air travel is just the latest in a long line.
How low I'm willing to go isn't really relevant. Markets respond to aggregate demand.
I would challenge your bundling of health and safety in with comfort and service. What data do you have to show safety is being reduced? Certainly not air traffic accidents'fatalities.
#3
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Aspen, CO
Posts: 792
The market demands more low cost options, and mainline airlines are responding to this by cutting down costs in every way.
I'd say for the majority of the flying public, most people just want to get from A to B the cheapest way possible. There's a HUGE demand for this - especially over the Atlantic. If your preferred carrier (Air Canada) continues to devalue its product and/or subs in trash Air Canada Rouge planes to compete with the LCC's, switch to a better, all-inclusive airline such as Lufthansa, Swiss, Aer Lingus, etc.
I'd say for the majority of the flying public, most people just want to get from A to B the cheapest way possible. There's a HUGE demand for this - especially over the Atlantic. If your preferred carrier (Air Canada) continues to devalue its product and/or subs in trash Air Canada Rouge planes to compete with the LCC's, switch to a better, all-inclusive airline such as Lufthansa, Swiss, Aer Lingus, etc.
#4
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
If/when this happens, the reductions on price/service will stop. the fact that a flurry of low cost, low service providers are entering the market means the market is supporting them (or, at least, the providers think they will.)
Their success/failure will determine whether the market continues to evolve in that direction. Commoditization isn't a new thing - air travel is just the latest in a long line.
How low I'm willing to go isn't really relevant. Markets respond to aggregate demand.
I would challenge your bundling of health and safety in with comfort and service. What data do you have to show safety is being reduced? Certainly not air traffic accidents'fatalities.
Their success/failure will determine whether the market continues to evolve in that direction. Commoditization isn't a new thing - air travel is just the latest in a long line.
How low I'm willing to go isn't really relevant. Markets respond to aggregate demand.
I would challenge your bundling of health and safety in with comfort and service. What data do you have to show safety is being reduced? Certainly not air traffic accidents'fatalities.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...a-safety-issue
That a plane doesn't crash doesn't mean that flight conditions didn't kill anyone or cause any physical, mental or emotional problems. Air traffic/accident, fatatlies numbers show only one aspect of the health and safety of the passenger experience. I mean, do you really want to say, 'well any flight that didn't kill you was a good flight.'
#5
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: YYT
Programs: AC P25
Posts: 269
Regarding health and safety, there are already rumblings about health and safety issues as seat size and space continues to get smaller CPRich.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...a-safety-issue
That a plane doesn't crash doesn't mean that flight conditions didn't kill anyone or cause any physical, mental or emotional problems. Air traffic/accident, fatatlies numbers show only one aspect of the health and safety of the passenger experience. I mean, do you really want to say, 'well any flight that didn't kill you was a good flight.'
https://www.theguardian.com/business...a-safety-issue
That a plane doesn't crash doesn't mean that flight conditions didn't kill anyone or cause any physical, mental or emotional problems. Air traffic/accident, fatatlies numbers show only one aspect of the health and safety of the passenger experience. I mean, do you really want to say, 'well any flight that didn't kill you was a good flight.'
There are a lot of rumblings in the world about a lot of things. doesn't mean they're true. If you could provide some evidence I'm sure the regulatory bodies would love to see it.
Your campaign to bring back 70's style economy seating isn't going to work with todays market.
#6
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
More entrants to driving prices down from Canada. Norwegian Air plans to fly between Canada and Europe this summer - Business - CBC News
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.
This race to the bottom is everywhere. https://www.google.ca/search?q=airli...hrome&ie=UTF-8
At what point are the customers likely to realize that lower prices have a cost that they are ignoring. I remember when the term 'Low Cost Carrier' began to be used. Of course everyone knew back then that they were inferior in service but provided a way for those with less money to afford air travel. Not a bad thing in and of itself obviously. However, now the LCCs are becoming 'mainline' in terms of number of passengers flown and they have now started referring to 'Ultra Low Cost Carriers' coming into the market.
This continuing reduction in comfort, service, health and safety applies everywhere (so don't move this to the Air Canada forum please). How low are you willing to go?
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.
This race to the bottom is everywhere. https://www.google.ca/search?q=airli...hrome&ie=UTF-8
At what point are the customers likely to realize that lower prices have a cost that they are ignoring. I remember when the term 'Low Cost Carrier' began to be used. Of course everyone knew back then that they were inferior in service but provided a way for those with less money to afford air travel. Not a bad thing in and of itself obviously. However, now the LCCs are becoming 'mainline' in terms of number of passengers flown and they have now started referring to 'Ultra Low Cost Carriers' coming into the market.
This continuing reduction in comfort, service, health and safety applies everywhere (so don't move this to the Air Canada forum please). How low are you willing to go?
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Programs: MR/SPG LT Titanium, AA LT PLT, UA SLV, Avis PreferredPlus
Posts: 31,004
If my "rumbling" about things makes it true, then there are a lot of new facts in the world. And the earth is flat. And Obama is a Kenyan. And Mr. Rogers was a sniper.
And yes, flight safety is in fact measured in terms of accidents and deaths. If you consider "emotional damage" as a factor in the safety of our airline system, then further discussion is rather pointless. Feel free to protest low-cost providers because people feel bad.
Better yet - don't fly them. And let others make their own choices. And see how the market sorts out. After all, high cost/quality has won out over low price in mass markets goods in other places like, ummm.....
And yes, flight safety is in fact measured in terms of accidents and deaths. If you consider "emotional damage" as a factor in the safety of our airline system, then further discussion is rather pointless. Feel free to protest low-cost providers because people feel bad.
Better yet - don't fly them. And let others make their own choices. And see how the market sorts out. After all, high cost/quality has won out over low price in mass markets goods in other places like, ummm.....
#8
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
If only there were a super high speed train across the oceans.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/trave...trak/18471389/
It used to be people took the bus because they couldn't afford to fly. Now flying is no better than taking the bus.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/trave...trak/18471389/
It used to be people took the bus because they couldn't afford to fly. Now flying is no better than taking the bus.
#9
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,808
Norwegian has been flying to the US for a few years now. I took them from LAX to CPH a few years back and yes, it certainly illustrates just how low a lcc can get. They subcontract everything to cheap companies, including gate agents and cabin crew. The food is terrible enough to be poison. The service spotty. The crews are annoyed. All you get is from point A to point B, and I guess that's what you have to be prepared to put up with. Buy cheap, GET cheap.
As someone who can afford more, I have no problem parting with more money not to get what legacies offer, but to AVOID lcc service. My hope is that legacies will get more competitive to survive against the lcc's and drop their own prices, but the reality is that in order to do that, THEY have been dropping services and benefits in order to afford it. And this is the race to the bottom.
As someone who can afford more, I have no problem parting with more money not to get what legacies offer, but to AVOID lcc service. My hope is that legacies will get more competitive to survive against the lcc's and drop their own prices, but the reality is that in order to do that, THEY have been dropping services and benefits in order to afford it. And this is the race to the bottom.
#10
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: PEK
Programs: A3*G, UA Gold EY Silver
Posts: 8,954
Norwegian has been flying to the US for a few years now. I took them from LAX to CPH a few years back and yes, it certainly illustrates just how low a lcc can get. They subcontract everything to cheap companies, including gate agents and cabin crew. The food is terrible enough to be poison. The service spotty. The crews are annoyed. All you get is from point A to point B, and I guess that's what you have to be prepared to put up with. Buy cheap, GET cheap.
As someone who can afford more, I have no problem parting with more money not to get what legacies offer, but to AVOID lcc service. My hope is that legacies will get more competitive to survive against the lcc's and drop their own prices, but the reality is that in order to do that, THEY have been dropping services and benefits in order to afford it. And this is the race to the bottom.
As someone who can afford more, I have no problem parting with more money not to get what legacies offer, but to AVOID lcc service. My hope is that legacies will get more competitive to survive against the lcc's and drop their own prices, but the reality is that in order to do that, THEY have been dropping services and benefits in order to afford it. And this is the race to the bottom.
#11
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oxford, Mississippi
Programs: Delta Silver thanks to Million Miles; Choice Plat., point scrounger everywhere
Posts: 1,595
More entrants to driving prices down from Canada. Norwegian Air plans to fly between Canada and Europe this summer - Business - CBC News
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.
This race to the bottom is everywhere. https://www.google.ca/search?q=airli...hrome&ie=UTF-8
At what point are the customers likely to realize that lower prices have a cost that they are ignoring. I remember when the term 'Low Cost Carrier' began to be used. Of course everyone knew back then that they were inferior in service but provided a way for those with less money to afford air travel. Not a bad thing in and of itself obviously. However, now the LCCs are becoming 'mainline' in terms of number of passengers flown and they have now started referring to 'Ultra Low Cost Carriers' coming into the market.
This continuing reduction in comfort, service, health and safety applies everywhere (so don't move this to the Air Canada forum please). How low are you willing to go?
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.
This race to the bottom is everywhere. https://www.google.ca/search?q=airli...hrome&ie=UTF-8
At what point are the customers likely to realize that lower prices have a cost that they are ignoring. I remember when the term 'Low Cost Carrier' began to be used. Of course everyone knew back then that they were inferior in service but provided a way for those with less money to afford air travel. Not a bad thing in and of itself obviously. However, now the LCCs are becoming 'mainline' in terms of number of passengers flown and they have now started referring to 'Ultra Low Cost Carriers' coming into the market.
This continuing reduction in comfort, service, health and safety applies everywhere (so don't move this to the Air Canada forum please). How low are you willing to go?
#12
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
It used to be if you had 'little money' you took the bus. If you had 'some money' you took the train. If you 'had money' you took the plane. Now as per the link I gave above, in terms of seat width and pitch, it is the train that comes out on top and the plane has shrunk to the size of a bus seat and pitch.
So if you 'have money' and more importantly 'have the time', you would do better to take a train where available. Which just goes to show that time is worth more than money! Maybe we should start considering those who 'don't have enough time' as the 'new poor.'
#13
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
Norwegian has been flying to the US for a few years now. I took them from LAX to CPH a few years back and yes, it certainly illustrates just how low a lcc can get. They subcontract everything to cheap companies, including gate agents and cabin crew. The food is terrible enough to be poison. The service spotty. The crews are annoyed. All you get is from point A to point B, and I guess that's what you have to be prepared to put up with. Buy cheap, GET cheap.
As someone who can afford more, I have no problem parting with more money not to get what legacies offer, but to AVOID lcc service. My hope is that legacies will get more competitive to survive against the lcc's and drop their own prices, but the reality is that in order to do that, THEY have been dropping services and benefits in order to afford it. And this is the race to the bottom.
As someone who can afford more, I have no problem parting with more money not to get what legacies offer, but to AVOID lcc service. My hope is that legacies will get more competitive to survive against the lcc's and drop their own prices, but the reality is that in order to do that, THEY have been dropping services and benefits in order to afford it. And this is the race to the bottom.
The only other way to maintain profit without reducing costs is to increase sales but as the majority of travellers today focus only on price, the mainline carriers are not likely to be able to increase sales of seats as long as people keep booking the cheap seats on low cost carriers. A true 'Catch 22'.
I'd like to see mainline carriers increase the number of premium seats(what used to be a standard economy) per plane and I'll pay for one. But that's not likely to happen, it's the opposite that is more likely.
#14
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SJC/SFO
Programs: WN A+ CP, UA 1MM/*A Gold, Mar LT Tit, IHG Plat, HH Dia
Posts: 6,284
Norwegian has been flying to the US for a few years now. I took them from LAX to CPH a few years back and yes, it certainly illustrates just how low a lcc can get. They subcontract everything to cheap companies, including gate agents and cabin crew. The food is terrible enough to be poison. The service spotty. The crews are annoyed. All you get is from point A to point B, and I guess that's what you have to be prepared to put up with. Buy cheap, GET cheap.
#15
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the air
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Bonvoy LT Plat, Hilton Gold, GHA Tit, BA Gold, Turkish Elite
Posts: 8,717
More entrants to driving prices down from Canada. Norwegian Air plans to fly between Canada and Europe this summer - Business - CBC News
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.
Trouble is, they drive down service at the same time and if not enough people will pay for a better level of service, the better level of service starts to be removed from the market. Thus the rise of Rouge flights and the reduction of mainline Air Canada flights.