Originally Posted by emcampbe

yes, people thought 9-across was fine. If it had been initially standardized at 8, and went to 9, you can bet people would be complaining just as much. Most carriers around the world have either already switched to 10 across in Y, or are doing it. DL Is an exception, but given it is such a small part of the fleet (what...17 or 18?), it probably isn’t much of an advantage unless you happen to be flying one of the handful of routes where DL flies it.

Look at the 787, which was designed for 8 across, but is almost exclusively flown in a 9 across configuration. JAL I believe is the only exception. It’s tight, sure, but if you need to fly a route in a 787, that’s really the only choice.

The fact is, most travelers focus specifically on price. They only complain about things like seat size after they choose the cheapest price, and then sit in it. Then next time, they would do the same. It’s not everyone’s preference - but enough of a majority that that’s the way carriers are configuring their planes. If there was enough of a majority willing to pay $X extra for their flights to get a bigger seat, airlines would do it. And to and extent, they do. That’s why you can buy E+ (I realize that only legroom, not width), Premium Economy or Business. Or F on the carriers that still offer it. So the bigger seats are there for the minority that are willing to pay.

I don’t fly DL much (at least, right now), so don’t know the general E to C+ Price difference is, but IME, the E+ prices on UA seem like a lot to me. When I’ve seen it, it’s been about $24 on pretty short flights (something like ORD-YYZ, so about 1.5 hours) - which isn’t bad. But to see > $100 on mid-con routes (I’ve sent that on routes like IAH-SJC OR CVG-SFO, and even SFO-DEN at ~$95), seems like too much. If it came with the extras like on DL (free drinks, snack plates, etc.) I think it would be reasonable.