mozilla

threeoh

If I buy my BE ticket for $100, my normal economy ticket for $200, or a fully Y ticket for $1000, I expect to be treated the same on board.

jsloan

Exactly, And if I buy a domestic P fare for $200, an international J fare for $12,000, or I clear a CPU on a $50 G fare, I expect the same. Setting service standards based upon who paid what is a great way to make everyone unhappy.

mozilla

I disagree, and I'm happy there is no room for this kind of egalitarian treatment on most carriers except the lowest of ULCC. Airlines have since their beginnings always provided differential treatment based on the amount paid. Additionally, taking this statement to the extreme would mean that GS status, or any status for that matter, should not exist. If someone paying $100 should be treated equally with someone paying $1000, why should it be any different for two people doing that 100 times over one year?

But... I believe you're misunderstanding my point. I was not implying that there should be a differential treatment in the same class. What I wanted to point out is that the mismatch between fares and classes that we see today is aberrant. Non-flexible F should begin at price levels above the highest non-flexible Y fare. Only then does it make sense to provide equal treatment in the same class.

Isn't that what service classes are supposed to be about.

ekwang

This is why I'm booking for 1k this year: I've got 70k booked for the year, with 27k in already and 11k coming tomorrow when I fly PDX-IAH-EWR-PDX. I prettty much always book Z and cannot stand having to put my carry on in the Economy section because there are so many GS/1k's ahead of me. And the fact that A320/319 have such limited overhead space, I need to ensure I get on board early for my stuff.Should have enough status runs in before the year is out to make 1k before 4Q19.

jsloan

What?

I didn't read that as saying "ignore status." I read it as saying "if I'm Gold, I'm Gold whether I"m on a BE ticket or a fully flexible ticket."

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about w.r.t. ULCCs. For the most part, UA does this today, which is what's driving some people up the wall - the "paid F" crowd want extra on-board benefits compared to others.

That business model failed miserably in the US, which is why we have CPUs in the first place. The market for F at those prices is very small, so you end up overselling Y and op-up'ing people anyway.

Sure. UA has 2-3 classes of service, depending upon the plane. It shouldn't matter if I bought the least expensive possible fare to get into the cabin or the most expensive -- I want (and expect, and generally get) the same treatment. The underlying current of the "paid F" crowd is elitism, and it's the last thing we need on the plane. Status elitism is bad enough.

It's your money, but that's an awful lot to pay to sit near your suitcase. You're saving maybe two to three minutes a flight, and only on those flights where you can't board early enough to keep your bag nearby.

threeoh

Airlines have "since their beginnings" basically treated people within a cabin the same.

mozilla

The point would be valid until a few years ago. Status, in the PQD-days at least, is largely differential treatment for the amount spent on a totality of tickets. The poster made the comment that such a thing should not exist. Obviously, status would be the macro-version of the micro-version that is differential treatment based on the amount spent on a single ticket.

The business model failed in days when aviation was not booming. Today's market and economy, with planes filled to the brim, is totally different. But I agree structural aspects are in the way (as it stands, F is simply not good enough). That being said, I do firmly believe that F is being sold for prices that are too low. In this economy, I'm not the only guy in the US flight shopping on UA only to find the lowest F fare or upgrade to be regularly below the allocated budget.

I agree, service has always been defined on the level of the cabin. So were prices until a decade ago.

It can make the difference towards making a connection, which in itself can make hours (if not a day) of difference.

Correct, airlines differentiate based on class, which historically is tied to fare, which is the amount that is paid.

jsloan

I think you're reading a lot more into that statement than was intended. Status is, and always has been, a fairly coarse differentiator at best.

I can't imagine paying for domestic F even at the prices they charge now. Admittedly, my willingness to pay for it decreases with the likelihood that they'll give it to me for free. E+ would be worth paying for if I didn't already get it -- and I do pay for it when I fly other airlines. Domestic F? Not unless I needed the luggage allotment, which I wouldn't on UA due to my status.

Well, OK. But there were upgrades a decade ago, too, and I felt the same way then that I did now: however I got into the cabin I'm in, I should have the same treatment as everyone else (with my status level).

In the abstract, sure, but in practice, it'd take the perfect storm.

threeoh

Ok I thought more about this, and I think I understand better why I don't like it.

Ticket prices vary wildly, but the product is pretty well defined ("an economy class seat from A to B at this time", for example). I can decide whether the price is worth it. What I don't know is what other people are going to pay.

Should I be punished with a worse flight experience because someone else waited too long to get their tickets and paid a higher price?

First class vs. Economy, PQDs, RDMs, BE, free drink for 1K, etc. are all well defined at purchase time, and don't depend on the fact some some price-insensitive passenger bought a ticket at the last minute.

What I don't like is I spend $450 on a M-class ticket and then I'm told the guy who spent $850 for his M-class ticket a week later gets to put his bag in the overhead and I have to check mine, because he spent more dollars.

mozilla

I agree, and I said that I was taking it to the extreme. But it's the same logic on a different level, and I'm glad it doesn't apply.

Well, as everyone regularly missing out on a CPU can attest, people do, although it varies from market to market. It has even come to a point when I often don't compare with Y anymore when it's on the corporate dime. Of course, this will only last until the next recession.

I agree, but this is a special case, as we're talking about unsold seats here. It makes sense to give those as a reward for loyalty, people already spending a lot, as it allows additional Y seats to be sold or used for displaced pax. Yes, they may not have spent the most on their current ticket, but that doesn't matter anymore when it comes to unsold seats, which won't generate any money when they fly empty.

jsloan

Except that it clearly does matter to the "Paid F" crowd. They want to be valued more highly than someone who occupied an otherwise unsold seat.

I guess I'd put it another way. If you want to get my sympathy, leave out a discussion of what you spent, and focus on the problem you have. ("I expect better than a broken seat when flying United."). My sympathy drops quite a bit with "I expect better than a broken seat as a J passenger when flying United," because you're implying that Y passengers deserve broken seats. And it disappears with "I expect better than a broken seat as a paid J passenger when flying United," because now you're implying that not only do Y passengers deserve broken seats, but so do J passengers who got an upgrade (and, implicitly, anyone who got an award ticket). The second one bothers me more because it's not even class-of-service based.

mozilla

Those are just DYKWIA's. You'll find them in the "Paid Y" crowd as well.

But I don't consider the expectation of having overhead space above your premium class seat to be an example of DYKWIA. It's a current and normal airline practice, often condoned by signs and enforced by FA's.

jsloan

There simply isn't enough overhead space to go around. There is no ordering of F passengers that will satisfy everyone on the A319, E70, and E75 in particular. You could hold Y passengers behind a rope and escort individual F passengers to their seats in whatever order desired, and the last person in line would have to put his bag above Y in most cases.

mozilla

That's true, but to come back on topic, this problem affects F pax more if they, by policy, have to board after a subset of Y pax, as there is a well-known practice of Y pax storing their bags in F bins on UA. And while that is convenient for a Y pax who can just pick it up when he leaves, it can be disastrous for the F pax when he's missing his connection because he had to wait till everyone got off the plane.

One pax gaining a small benefit at the cost of a huge inconvenience for another pax is a practice that should not be acceptable in any class - no matter who paid what - and is a sure way to generate customer dissatisfaction, as anecdotal evidence on this forum has shown.

Note that there's a difference when I'm 1A and my bag is above 4A vs when I'm 1A and my bag is above 23A. In the first case, I can ask 4AC to hand me my bag while the jetbridge is docking. In the second case, I cannot.

Anyway, points are made. In an ideal world, no one should want to board first.