fahrradman

Yawn.

Admittedly my FF airline doesn't have seat reservation fees and even if they did, I probably wouldn't have to pay them. When not flying on my FF airline I generally pay for a good extra legroom seat and am quite happy I can. Of course, this is usually company paid so I don't bear the cost.

OTOH, when I find myself paying out of my own pocket on holiday in economy I usually think it is money well spent. A few years back I spent $100 each way on a 16 hour flight for an exit row seat. Money well spent.

I do have some sympathy for a families with children sitting together exception (not couples). I can see how it could really add up if you needed 5 seat reservations per segment on domestic flights. It would be nice if airlines with seat reservation fees would have a "families seated together" fee for any group of seats at a lower cost than full seat reservations fees but that's not going to happen as there is no financial incentive for airlines to do so.

As is, in all other cases seat reservation fees allow those who value them more, either by being higher revenue flyers or those willing to pay for better seats, get the better seats. I'm all for this.

StuckInYYZ

I know of several airlines who do not charge when seating at least one parent with each child.(eg, Air Canada). In some cases, there may be IT issues that cause them to be separated (logic systems don't always work), but the issues can usually be resolved on-site if it happens. Not all airlines have the logic systems built in and in some cases, because they don't charge seating fees, it might not be possible because there are no "pairings" available. None of this is blackmailing.

It's true you don't vouch for airline interests, however, full disclosure, in the past, you do have numerous posts attempting to gain access to privileges that you have not earned and not in the interest of consumers. Just saying...

Actually, I would say seat fees are good for people period. Most airlines I know of (there are some that do not) allow for seat selection 24ish hours prior to a person's flight. If you want to select a seat sooner, then you have to pay for it. (part of the unbundling effect). I want to choose (within reason) my preferred seat. I don't want to compete with others at check-in to choose the seat I want.

Baggage fees are a different issue. They are focused on the wrong area. They should be charged for carry-on beyond the one piece + personal item (not counting special items). Where we have the problem are the people who take on 3-10 items... Usually duty free and stuff). That would decrease the space issue in-cabin. If you have fees on one or the other (carry-on vs. checked) you're not going to resolve the issue.

Actually, that's not true. As others have pointed out, you do get a seat. It just might not be the one you want/desire.Passengers will never be calm, they just focus on a different aspect that they're not happy about. Seat fees are not hidden. Neither are baggage fees. They are out in the open for everyone to see. But for some aspects of service, there is a price. If I want a specific range of seating, I can either pay for it (peace of mind) or I can take a gamble that I get it at check-in. Just like the food service. If I have any dietary restrictions, I have to bring enough food to get me to my destination because the airline may fail to onboard the special meal(s) I order. If I bring my own food, I have peace of mind that I will have food I can eat. If I don't, I gamble...

jnm21

Two people on the same booking, checked in at the same time, on a half empty plane, sat 20 rows apart - not blackmail? Bad luck?

Ok then, half a dozen people on one booking, checked in at the same time, no 2 of them sat within 3 or 4 rows of each other - that is a lot of bad luck.

In the UK, Ryanair have been on TV over their 'random' seating events, the odds of which seem lower than winning a lottery. They finally admitted that it was not random, instead prioritising middle seats. Next up will be the truth about the rows - bound to be a whistle blower soon.

Can I ask are the folk on here who hate seats beside the lavs or loos American? I don't understand, possibly because I am used to smaller planes, where the loo is beside the door.

trooper

Not quite sure what you mean there... but the seats are NOT all the same. Some are very much MORE desirable than others... and cost more to reserve as a result. Demand drives the price. Like with everything else. If the seats WERE actually all the same...why would you want to be able to pick a specific one anyway? There would be no benefit if they were "all the same".

StuckInYYZ

I'm not sure how you equate not automatically being placed in an AB/HK/BC/etc. as being blackmail. Bad luck? Maybe. Logic issue in the system? Possibly. Deliberately? Maybe for Ryanair, but unless you have definitive proof regarding other airlines, Unlikely.

I can't state for BA (I do know they charge for seat selection, however I do not know if that's still the case at T-24 or less), however, I assume you called customer service ahead of time to request seats together (since you're unwilling to pay). Or at the check-in counter? With the GA? Or FA once on board? (or if the cabin is half empty, then just pick another seat after you're in the air). I and others are willing to pay a small amount to get our preferences.

And yes, it is possible six people can be spread throughout a half filled cabin. However, I have also seen cases where 15+ people are broken up into 2-3 groups because others who have paid (or checked in earlier than the group) get set together (and then after boarding, made arrangements to regroup into sets of friends).

As a side note, If my SO is known to have anxiety issues while flying, I would have paid. Peace of mind for her and myself rather than having a panic attack mid-flight would be worth the additional funds. At least to me and my SO.

And I assume you have proof of this "conspiracy" with BA and TK and the other airlines that they are doing this on purpose... There could be a multitude of reasons why it happens... The logical sorting you'd need to do at the programming level isn't exactly a few lines of code. Factor in data collision as well as other conditionals. And those are just two examples from the technical end.

Wide-bodies often have them mid-cabin and/or at one end of the cabin. But I don't see the relevance to the discussion. If you don't want to be seated near one, then select a different seat.

pinniped

I've read this before, but I don't quite understand it: Southwest almost always makes a profit using their current model.

Sure, they're selling some EBCI and BS upgrades as part of that, but overall everybody seems pretty happy with their model. Allowing checked bags contributes to their quick-turn strategy: boarding is fast, FAs rarely have to gate-check things, and the overall operation seems to flow pretty well. I often pay a premium to fly them - granted that's in part because of the premium overall product and the larger, more comfortable aircraft - and I almost never check bags, but my willingness to pay the premium will deteriorate somewhat if the boarding process turns into an AA-style sh**show with tons of people having to gate-check bags, delaying our departure.

fahrradman

With apologies to Karl Marx:

Flyers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your middle seats!

jnm21

You are missing the point I am trying to make (possibly deliberately); for many years it was possible for airlines like Ryanair (and still is for others) to seat two passengers on a booking checking in at the same time relatively close if not beside each other. I am unsure of your many abbreviations, but I'm not fussed about not getting an aisle/window/extra leg room/front/back seat (i.e. a preference), but where a plane is half empty at check in, allocate whatever seats they wish, but allocate two close together (at worst 2 middle seats in the same row or one behind the other).

The logistics/coding suggestion doesn't wash - they did it for years before they decided it would bring money in to deliberately not do it (which must have require coding effort)! My wife & I decide on a case by case basis whether to concede defeat & pay (on longer flights generally) or risk it. I would agree not to even do this as part of a boycott, to get the industry to take note - you can only take the extraction of fees so far. I don't expect a return to free seat selection (to boycott in this aim would be as underhand as the tactics of some airlines currently are), I am just happy to protest for a return to fair free seat auto-allocation and/or reasonable pricing on non-premium seats.

Your quotes didn't work very well, so can you confirm what "conspiracy" I have suggested or which conspiracy theory I have supported and therefore should be able to evidence? By the way the actions of a single airline or several airlines acting independently, though in a similar way driven by profit, is not a conspiracy.

lhrsfo

As you probably know, on Ryanair when you check in you can either pay to choose your seat, or you get allocated one. If you decide to pay, it generally starts at £2 for a window or an aisle, or indeed a middle, but nobody would choose the latter if travelling together. When you look at the seat map, generally many more aisles and windows have been chosen that middles. If you decide not to pay, and thus subject yourself to Ryanair's allocation, of course they are going to allocate you a seat which they are less likely to sell - a middle seat between a booked window and aisle. That, in my book, is entirely reasonable, sensible and expected. If you have views on the matter, pay the £2 and factor it in as part of the airfare.

As a general observation, I often find people boasting of how much they have saved flying Ryanair but when you look at the price of getting to STN, and back (about £45 over LHR for me), the time cost (an extra 2 hours over LHR for me), and all the other associated costs and deprivations, I usually find it cheaper simply to fly BA or one of the *A airlines out of LHR.

StuckInYYZ

The abbreviations were some random seat pairings without the numbers... that said, the IT system randomly assigns seat pairings. Just because you are on the same PNR, your preferences may or may not be to be seated together. If you search the forums, you will find others where both (or more) the passengers prefer aisle seats or window seats, parters in front/back, etc. in addition to being seated beside each other. In fact, some couples prefer not to be seated together. Then there are the passengers who try to game the systems (eg, choose window and aisle, leaving the middle seat open, hoping to get the additional space). How is the computer system supposed to know which ones you want? The scenarios are boundless.

The airlines identified a potential revenue stream and acted upon it. Whether you like it or not, with people demanding cheaper tickets, they have to find other avenues of profit. Advance seat selection works because there is a demand for it. It is a little to no cost benefit that the airline can offer to its frequent flyers. People who want/need a specific selection of seats can pay for it. They aren't denying you seat selection. You're just further down the selection list. But back to coding, to code the whole thing could be complicated as well as you need to manage quite a few things. It's not impossible, but can take up a lot of work.

(fixed the quoting issue)

Correct. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy. But you are suggesting something with the quote above. If you have evidence, please by all means, share with the class.

It is entirely possible that it all is being randomly assigned. You may not like it, but that doesn't mean they are willfully splitting people up. And if you are split, there are ways to mitigate this... at checkin-in (in person), gate attendant... once on board (flight attendant can assist). Nine times out of 10, I'm sure you can find someone to swap seats with at the very least if the seats are full. If the seats are not, then just change seats once in flight.

Productivity