What if many travellers boycott paid advance seat selection ?
Jun 19, 2019, 2:52 pm
#16
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
+1
Sure most people don't want to pay more than necessary, but airlines do this to increase revenue. Even in premium cabins a few airlines are charging for advance seat selection. Though this leads me to my question below...
Is this practice all that prevalent that's it's really a major concern? I don't have to pay in advance for normal Y seats (i.e., non-extra legroom or "preferred") on regular (non-BE) economy fares on the major US airlines. I know it's much more common in some regions of the world. Though in the instances I do encounter it, the pricing has never been so high that I really give it much thought.
I do understand it can feel annoying to be nickel-and-dimed at every step. But boycotts rarely work - and especially not for something minor like this. I could be wrong, though, so if you feel strongly about it, give it a try.
Sure most people don't want to pay more than necessary, but airlines do this to increase revenue. Even in premium cabins a few airlines are charging for advance seat selection. Though this leads me to my question below...
I do understand it can feel annoying to be nickel-and-dimed at every step. But boycotts rarely work - and especially not for something minor like this. I could be wrong, though, so if you feel strongly about it, give it a try.
Jun 19, 2019, 7:20 pm
#19
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,338
Exactly this. I don't see how thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of infrequent flyers like myself (3-4 flights a year) will have enough leverage to where seat fees are scrapped. Don't get me wrong, it would be nice as a non-status holder to choose whichever seat for free, but those days are pretty much gone. If I also remember correctly, OP also created a thread where he tried to get Alaska to waive their change fee even though there was no changes made by AS on the booked itinerary. It's a bit odd seeing another similar fee-avoidance thread made again, assuming that it was the OP with that AS post.
Jun 19, 2019, 7:24 pm
#20
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore - the hot, little red dot
Programs: BA, SQ
Posts: 861
Who says you need polling to figure it out?
Just look at the demand of cheap seats e.g. LCC
To get these cheaper prices airlines have opted to un-bundle and then charge for the extra's to increase your revenues.
If flyers don't like the un-bundled fares they still have the option to pay extra or fly full service.
That's how the industry knows un-bundling is what the consumer wants.
Consumers just don't realise what they want e.g. cheap fare, comes with a compromise e.g. un-bundling
Just look at the demand of cheap seats e.g. LCC
To get these cheaper prices airlines have opted to un-bundle and then charge for the extra's to increase your revenues.
If flyers don't like the un-bundled fares they still have the option to pay extra or fly full service.
That's how the industry knows un-bundling is what the consumer wants.
Consumers just don't realise what they want e.g. cheap fare, comes with a compromise e.g. un-bundling
Jun 20, 2019, 12:12 am
#22
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kan@da
Programs: Anything with sweet spots
Posts: 1,790
The biggest issue is familles, especially with kids, being blackmailed: pay for advance seat selection to sit together or you will likely sit appart from each other.
Well I'm not gonna vouch for the airlines interests will I ? I vouch for the consumers
The OP's posts are mainly about hacks and tricks to maximise travel at the least cost. That's fair enough. Is it only me however that finds it somewhat ironic that he/she is objecting to airlines ALSO maximising the benefits...to themselves....by charging fees that so many are either happy to pay - to get good seats, or happy to NOT pay...and take what is available.?
Jun 20, 2019, 12:18 am
#23
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,307
I agree, but would like to see some stats to confirm.
Which doesn't actually happen.
Jun 20, 2019, 10:12 am
#24
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: PHX, SEA
Programs: Avis President's Club, Global Entry, Hilton/Marriott Gold. No more DL/AA status.
Posts: 4,422
Who says you need polling to figure it out?
Just look at the demand of cheap seats e.g. LCC
To get these cheaper prices airlines have opted to un-bundle and then charge for the extra's to increase your revenues.
If flyers don't like the un-bundled fares they still have the option to pay extra or fly full service.
That's how the industry knows un-bundling is what the consumer wants.
Consumers just don't realise what they want e.g. cheap fare, comes with a compromise e.g. un-bundling
Just look at the demand of cheap seats e.g. LCC
To get these cheaper prices airlines have opted to un-bundle and then charge for the extra's to increase your revenues.
If flyers don't like the un-bundled fares they still have the option to pay extra or fly full service.
That's how the industry knows un-bundling is what the consumer wants.
Consumers just don't realise what they want e.g. cheap fare, comes with a compromise e.g. un-bundling
Jun 20, 2019, 10:33 am
#25
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
Jun 20, 2019, 12:28 pm
#26
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,684
What if there was an initiative to boycott paid advance seat selection that gained massive/viral traction? Will airlines stop charging for advance seat selection ?
To me charging for seat selection is like to making travellers bid against each other for the desirable seats, but if travellers collude and constitute a collective collaborative bloc, perhaps there will be change.
To me charging for seat selection is like to making travellers bid against each other for the desirable seats, but if travellers collude and constitute a collective collaborative bloc, perhaps there will be change.
Jun 20, 2019, 1:15 pm
#27
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,575
- The airlines' best customers don't pay the fees, so your boycott is basically targeted people who rarely fly. In other words, people who don't care about seat fees enough to boycott them. It's like getting vegans to boycott fast-food chains.
- Seat fees are actually *good* for frequent travelers. They're a mechanism by which infrequent travelers are ever-so-slightly subsidizing frequent travelers' in the form of slightly lower ticket prices. Same with bag fees, which have the dual benefit of further subsidizing frequent travelers and causing people to bring less crap, resulting in smoother baggage operations and fewer bags to get onto the belt when I actually need to check a bag.
- I have no fundamental ethical problem with seat fees. I buy a Spirit ticket out of necessity every once in a while - with no Delta status, it's my only nonstop way to Detroit. I know their drill, know what I'm getting into when I hand over my credit card to buy a $19 ticket. As soon as I have my receipt, I pull out my phone and pay $30-35 for the BFS. (I check. I won't book unless it's available.) I now have a somewhat comfortable $50 ticket to Detroit, and am reasonably happy with it.
- I have no fundamental ethical problem with legacies offering Basic Economy, although they never seem to price it in a way that interests me. They seem to only want to compete with their own regular coach fare, not with Spirit and Allegiant. If a legacy is going to give me a trash product, give it to me at a ULCC price, not just a $25 knock off your own high fares.
- Hotel resort fees are an entirely different scenario. Those are basic fraud, with no intent other than to deceive, and should be made 100% illegal, full stop.
- If I was going to lobby the government for something, it would be a strong bill of rights defining airline obligations and compensation for delays, much higher payouts for IDB, basic parameters to prevent them from defrauding people during VDB, and that kind of thing. Airlines can argue that seat fees are never mandatory, and because of that I don't see how the government could outlaw them.
- Seat fees are actually *good* for frequent travelers. They're a mechanism by which infrequent travelers are ever-so-slightly subsidizing frequent travelers' in the form of slightly lower ticket prices. Same with bag fees, which have the dual benefit of further subsidizing frequent travelers and causing people to bring less crap, resulting in smoother baggage operations and fewer bags to get onto the belt when I actually need to check a bag.
- I have no fundamental ethical problem with seat fees. I buy a Spirit ticket out of necessity every once in a while - with no Delta status, it's my only nonstop way to Detroit. I know their drill, know what I'm getting into when I hand over my credit card to buy a $19 ticket. As soon as I have my receipt, I pull out my phone and pay $30-35 for the BFS. (I check. I won't book unless it's available.) I now have a somewhat comfortable $50 ticket to Detroit, and am reasonably happy with it.
- I have no fundamental ethical problem with legacies offering Basic Economy, although they never seem to price it in a way that interests me. They seem to only want to compete with their own regular coach fare, not with Spirit and Allegiant. If a legacy is going to give me a trash product, give it to me at a ULCC price, not just a $25 knock off your own high fares.
- Hotel resort fees are an entirely different scenario. Those are basic fraud, with no intent other than to deceive, and should be made 100% illegal, full stop.
- If I was going to lobby the government for something, it would be a strong bill of rights defining airline obligations and compensation for delays, much higher payouts for IDB, basic parameters to prevent them from defrauding people during VDB, and that kind of thing. Airlines can argue that seat fees are never mandatory, and because of that I don't see how the government could outlaw them.
Jun 20, 2019, 7:23 pm
#28
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore - the hot, little red dot
Programs: BA, SQ
Posts: 861
....and this is where I will just walk away from the conversation
Jun 20, 2019, 9:24 pm
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,375
once again, I’ll invoke “Newton’s Law of the Online Forum”:
For every so-called or self-proclaimed “expert” opinion, there is at least one equal and opposite so-called or self-proclaimed “expert” opinion
For every so-called or self-proclaimed “expert” opinion, there is at least one equal and opposite so-called or self-proclaimed “expert” opinion
Jun 21, 2019, 9:07 am
#30
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,227
The great majority of customers don't pay for seat selection. If it's, for example, BA, you only have to look at the seat map 24h before departure and see it nearly empty and then see how the flight goes out full. And, with them, bear in mind that their regular customers get free seat selection. Or, for example, if it's Ryanair, it's because the great majority want cheap. And why should one resent the handful who pay an extra £2 or £5 for a particular seat, when the whole object for most is to save money?
Of course everyone wants something for nothing, but the point with seat fees is that they provide options - they are not compulsory. If you ban them, on the basis that some people are willing to pay for better seats, you might as well ban Business Class as well since those customers have payed for better seats. There are many, many good cases where consumer protection is required but this simply isn't one of them.
And, if the OP wants to start some form of social media campaign, good luck to him. I suspect one banning or restricting flying altogether would attract much more interest.
Of course everyone wants something for nothing, but the point with seat fees is that they provide options - they are not compulsory. If you ban them, on the basis that some people are willing to pay for better seats, you might as well ban Business Class as well since those customers have payed for better seats. There are many, many good cases where consumer protection is required but this simply isn't one of them.
And, if the OP wants to start some form of social media campaign, good luck to him. I suspect one banning or restricting flying altogether would attract much more interest.