Too many complaints from FlyerTalkers
Jul 12, 2002, 5:02 pm
#76
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2001
Programs: Alaska Tanzanite 100K
Posts: 3,861
waddya mean not everyone has their own Gulfstream V??? I just washed mine the other day :P
But I decided I don't like the windows, so I'm trading her in for a Falcon 900EX...
-nate
But I decided I don't like the windows, so I'm trading her in for a Falcon 900EX...
-nate
Jul 12, 2002, 5:26 pm
#77
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Anywhere and Everywhere
Posts: 318
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by wingless:
There are too many complaints about complaints in FT.
Lifes too short.
You could be dead.
</font>
There are too many complaints about complaints in FT.
Lifes too short.
You could be dead.
</font>
Jul 12, 2002, 5:47 pm
#78
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 63,712
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by B Watson:
Humorous exercise or not, this really is the way I see the process working. Also, it is on its way to the vision that Asian carriers execute. Of course they do not need to deal with everyone expecting upgrades on every flight!! If you defend the premium cabin and make it worth the money, there are passengers who will pay. On my travels I am far too frequently scheduled to arrive in a city at 6AM and leave at 11PM that night - often with 2-3 such days back to back. The costs associated with removing all of the hassles from travel to allow me to do this truly productively is worth nearly any cost. If range were not a problem, we would have long since bought a corp. jet to address this issue. However, our price tolerance is about 1/3 of the cost of the kind of long range intercontinental jet required for these routes. There is a market for people who can't just hop the G5, but have similar schedules and value to their company.
</font>
Humorous exercise or not, this really is the way I see the process working. Also, it is on its way to the vision that Asian carriers execute. Of course they do not need to deal with everyone expecting upgrades on every flight!! If you defend the premium cabin and make it worth the money, there are passengers who will pay. On my travels I am far too frequently scheduled to arrive in a city at 6AM and leave at 11PM that night - often with 2-3 such days back to back. The costs associated with removing all of the hassles from travel to allow me to do this truly productively is worth nearly any cost. If range were not a problem, we would have long since bought a corp. jet to address this issue. However, our price tolerance is about 1/3 of the cost of the kind of long range intercontinental jet required for these routes. There is a market for people who can't just hop the G5, but have similar schedules and value to their company.
</font>
British Airways guards their premium class as well, and they're not believers in upgrading either. But BA is losing money.
Hence the lack of upgrades isn't the key to profitability.
Jul 12, 2002, 6:05 pm
#79
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle WA, USA
Programs: Hilton Diamond, Marriott LT Plat, AS Lounge
Posts: 3,478
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by B Watson:
I totally agree on the heavily discounted domestic travel point - it is not possible to provide the same level of service to the entire cabin on fares that are so historically low. However, that is not an explanation as to why I can pay almost 10K for a F RT to LHR and still get the attitude. We do not live in an egalitarian society and business are in business to make money. That means that you have three classes of passengers on board:
(A) Those that are on the cheapest ticket and should expect to get to their destination safely and not much else
(B) Those who are loyal (elite) flyers and may be on a cheap ticket as well expecting recognition that they are more valuable to the airline than category A
(C) Full fare front cabin that need to be treated like it from check in all the way to baggage claim.
THEN, we would all be able to get what we pay for. The Asian airlines get this stratification, but we are so worried about not being politically correct that the US airlines can't seem to get out of the own way to take care of those few customers that drive their yield.</font>
I totally agree on the heavily discounted domestic travel point - it is not possible to provide the same level of service to the entire cabin on fares that are so historically low. However, that is not an explanation as to why I can pay almost 10K for a F RT to LHR and still get the attitude. We do not live in an egalitarian society and business are in business to make money. That means that you have three classes of passengers on board:
(A) Those that are on the cheapest ticket and should expect to get to their destination safely and not much else
(B) Those who are loyal (elite) flyers and may be on a cheap ticket as well expecting recognition that they are more valuable to the airline than category A
(C) Full fare front cabin that need to be treated like it from check in all the way to baggage claim.
THEN, we would all be able to get what we pay for. The Asian airlines get this stratification, but we are so worried about not being politically correct that the US airlines can't seem to get out of the own way to take care of those few customers that drive their yield.</font>
So when I'm traveling an an "A", I do expect better treatment than just getting to my destination safely. I just don't expect it from UA.
Disclaimer: I understand completely that UA courts the high fare business travelers and doesn't feel any need to give a darn about low fare non-elites. They have every right to go after anyone they want. More power to them. I'm just glad that their competition offers something better.
(edited to correct spelling.)
[This message has been edited by Westcoaster (edited 07-12-2002).]
Jul 12, 2002, 6:26 pm
#80
In Memoriam
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Grand Rapids, MI USA UA 1K, AA EXP 1MM, SQ PPS, BA GOLD, Hyatt D, Hertz Plat and AMEX Cent
Posts: 2,996
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Plato90s:
There are reasons that the Asian carriers are profitable, but the lack of upgrades isn't the only reason.
British Airways guards their premium class as well, and they're not believers in upgrading either. But BA is losing money.
Hence the lack of upgrades isn't the key to profitability.
</font>
There are reasons that the Asian carriers are profitable, but the lack of upgrades isn't the only reason.
British Airways guards their premium class as well, and they're not believers in upgrading either. But BA is losing money.
Hence the lack of upgrades isn't the key to profitability.
</font>