really?

Wasn�t Virgin America supposed to be that? And look what happened to them.

Also, B6 was somewhat trying to be that in their early days (for all pax). But they�re no different than the legacies these days.

There are lots of examples of US carriers aiming to provide a better experience and charge more, and it never works financially. Ask those of us old enough to remember the MRTC experiment on AA. These things just don�t work on any level in the US.

People like to say they would pay for better service and more luxurious flights but sales seem to indicate they won't. When it comes down to it, more people seem to opt for the lower fare even if they would get the seats they like, more service, better food, etc. by paying more. I really can't blame the airlines for following what the sales data tells them.

I seriously believe times have changed. On my last flight, the F-cabin was filled with a group of young women (22-25) who worked together in Manhattan. They didn't even know about PlusPoints and UGs and hadn't even applied to join any FF program, yet there they were in F. They told me that they were on vacation together and were sorely disappointed in the food and service. They asked me if this was normal. I told them that it was and that almost every carrier was striving to cut costs to compete with the LCCs. They told me that they're willing to spend their money on luxury travel and hotels when they were on vacation because they saw no benefit in saving anymore due to inflation and the impossibility of finding affordable housing to buy in the city. These women want to feel like they're getting special treatment when they pay for F, and there may be a market for a better F product if this paradigm takes hold with young professionals across the country.

Just one data point, I know. But F is being purchased by non-FFs at a higher level than I've ever seen before.

Also, as a counterpoint, UA wouldn't be thinking about upselling a better Polaris experience � la carte.
if they didn't believe that there was a market for it.

As always, the market will decide.

There is no doubt there are customers willing to pay for higher level of service, just look at the stratification in the lodging market.
But airlines are different beast. While a few routes could support such as high end line (although nearly all attempts have failed). NETJETS is a attempt to partially serve a high end customers but not the place for great food or WW service.

An airline needs regular service, once-a-day high-end isn't going to cut. Needs to service a fairly large number of destinations. Needs connectablity.

Air travel is either a niche-market or a mass market. While regional carriers exist, they need volume and regional service is not what the high end customers.

People have been saying I'll pay for better service for 30, 40 years. Dozens of ventures have tried and have all failed. Baring some revolutionary approach, it ain't happening. That is what the market has decided time and time again.

While I was an engineer in college, I knew enough of the marketing and finance majors to know some of them absolutely would think about this kind of a change without any evidence of a market for it. Of course, the guys I knew are -- like me -- past middle-age but it wouldn't surprise me to find their kids are also blow-hard marketing and finance types who will flog any idea to stand out from the crowd. Guys like this were not the majority of business school students or even a sizable minority but there were enough of them that I wouldn't be surprised to find the recent surveys are the brainchild of someone without any real evidence (in fact, the surveys may be an attempt to GET that evidence).

sounds to me those ladies need to learn what a brokerage account is and where they should put their money

They did talk to me about Bitcoin, which I told them I had no interest in. My read on their attitude was that Wall Street is a rigged game and that the little guy has no chance.

Absolutely true but I am loyal flyer on La Compagnie if I am heading towards one of their destinations. Their airport experience is not the best but my onboard experience, post 757s, has been good.

While I agree with them about the state of commercial air travel up front, I also snicker at their fundamental naivete about personal finance.

I agree -- except that I would add that airline travel -- especially domestically -- today is really just a commodity with very little differentiation at all any longer. Lodging as you point out is seen more as an experience -- therefore a wide range of property types are available....

Some of you may be old enough to remember the airline Midwest Express - "The Best Care in the Air" - AFAIK this was the only long term "premium" airline to exist for more than just a few years in the US market. Their cookies were amazing!

I am getting old as I recall those old DC-9-10s fondly. Little hot rods they were.

People are all hooked on the drip of earning miles or having status. The applies to everyone from Gen Z to boomers.

I would point out some respectable hotels brands have been killed by large corporations. Ritz Carltons flat out suck and St Regis, hard pass. There are great hoteliers out there that I, for one, love. Is it ironic none of them give anyone points or status and they have no problem getting a substantially higher nightly rate of the "5 star" corporate brands?

As a counterpoint to the post above, I flew F on JAL domestic OKA-HND a few days ago and the food was fairly mediocre. Service was pleasant.

Any idea what kind of jobs they had?

They did tell me who they worked for, but I'll keep that info private. It was a major fashion design house though.