I typically only fly within NA (mostly AC, but some UA and US Airways). I find the service from FA's comparable between the three. Oddly, AC's staff seem a little younger (and I have status on AC) but for the most part the three airlines have flight attendants in similar moods - some good, some bad

I always preferred US FA's to UA FA's, because UA were generally older, unpleasant, and could care less about you. (And this was pre-merger) Though I only flew the US carriers a few times a year when I was living in Hawaii, and it would be when it was too expensive to book AC to YVR or YYZ and then a second booking back to the states. (Because you can't book US-US even though AC is so much more pleasant than US carriers.) But now, living in the UK, I only flew US once last year on a domestic flight on a trip visiting my family. I definitely avoid USA carriers as much as possible.

Inflight service is the last of my concerns. Get me from A to B. Even if plans change. If it's >4hrs flight give me a cheap lie flat seat. Like Delta "S" fares. I have a Kindle, I have a laptop, I can entertain myself, food I do not care much about... so, that's there.

...and the 99 percent of the rest of the international flyers do not...

I do prefer EU airlines for TATL travel for these reasons (in no particular order):

1 - stupid security rules (see the answer to iahphx below)
2 - US pilots using the seat belt sign stupidly (e.g. after take off, the seat belt sign stays on until the plane reaches cruising altitude - which can take up to an hour to reach - and if there is any rumor of turbulence anywhere on Earth, it stays on forever and you can't go to the bathroom; on EU airlines the seat belt sign is turned off when the plane reaches 10,000 ft and it only comes on if more serious turbulence is encountered)
3 - boxed wine (e.g. Delta) :td:
4 - US carriers fly way too many raggedy 767s
5 - EU carriers [almost] always have to have IFE available; some US carriers are still stuck in 1990
6 - EU carriers clean the bathrooms during the flight
7 - Some EU carriers (e.g. AF) leave the IFE on during taxi. Where taxiing can take a really long time (e.g. JFK, CDG) it's nice to be entertained.

Service is hit or miss on both; I've had exceptional service and sub-par service on both,.

I have. Case in point - I used to fly between CDG and CVG quite a bit. On DL there was an announcement about pax not being allowed to congregate (because it was seen as a security threat). On AF there was no such issue. There are also fewer restrictions when a pilot has to use the bathroom.

Stereotype? Have you ever been to Asia?

I recently was offered pajamas on flights on OZ and CA. The pajamas given to me were both marked "XL" and they both fit perfectly. During both flights, I was wearing a common Ralph Lauren Polo shirt: each was size Small and each had been purchased in the U.S.!

About the "security" dog and pony show, I fly TATL multiple times a month and the chances of check-in and gate "security" questioning by "security" contractors and other "supplemental" "security" is far, far higher with US airlines than with EU airlines on TATL routes.

About service in the face of irregular operations, there is also a difference and a reason to tend to book away from US carriers at least for TATL service: in the event of long flight delays or cancellations, the EU airline members of the big 3 airline alliances are more likely to take better care of passengers than US airlines in the same alliances. They both may fail in this regard, but the US airlines are less likely to pay up on routes serviced by bother kinds of carriers.

Your experience on OZ and CA aren't that different than what I have seen with LH pajamas on flights that don't serve Asia.

Yes.
I must say that most of my flights are still on *A carriers, and I've found the AC inflight crews to have dramatically improved over the past 5 years. That said, the AC ground staff are the rudest and least helpful of any airline I fly, particularly in YYZ and especially at the priority check-in counters. Am flying a lot of UA this week and the inflight attitude leaves much to be desired. I've also had very good service on AF during the last year, which has prompted me to book more with them.

I'm not so sure that "normal people" don't also book away from the USA carriers when they travel internationally. Many times a year, "civilians" comment to me about how well they were treated on various foreign carriers. Sure, these people don't travel that much, but I think many of them will look to take the foreign carrier on their next trip.

Also, the "flyertalk business" for these foreign flights is huge. Even if we're a small percentage of the population, we're a very material percentage of airline revenue. Anyone see the stats: I'd guess 5% of Americans take 50% of int'l flights, and that 1% take 20%.

This one came as a shock to me about a week ago. The possibility of such a thing never crossed my mind until I jumped into the shortest line. I didn't even realize it was there until I was standing in front of it and then had to remove my wallet and other articles, slowing down the whole process and looking like a fool. :(

I have no issues with US carriers other than the fact they are poorly managed, which unfortunately spills over into the overall customer service experience. A good rule of thumb when flying on a U.S carrier is to not have any high expectations. It is what it is. If your paying $200 for a round trip ticket from JFK to MCO, what would you really expect in terms of service? In the U.S, you get what you pay for.

I don't avoid them and actually prefer them if it fits my needs for routing for the following reasons:

1) I suspect this will be highly unpopular, but I'm an American, I'm not ashamed of it and I'm fairly nationalistic. So I prefer to support American-based companies and workers. This includes favoring routing on Boeing aircraft (my ears seem to do better on them as well). I'm never arrogant about it, but as a consumer it is my choice.

2) I don't care about smiles and pleasantries of the FA's if they perform all the other job functions ok. Heck, anymore I'm asleep before takeoff on TATL's and don't remember much of the flight anyway.

3) They seem to do better when oddities come up. A few times when I've flown foreign carries I've really not been treated well when fights have been missed/cancel. I still remember Air France telling me to "sit over there" and wait for them to get me on the next flight after missing a CDG-ATL connection because the ground staff were absent to deploy the jetway to the aircraft for de-planing, because of a shift change I was told. I eventually after waiting over 3 hours nagged them enough to do something about it. They were tired enough of dealing with me that they sent me to an office somewhere in the bowels fo the airport and was given a hand-written boarding pass CDG-JFK. Was mad enough at the treatment that I gave up the hotel and dinner Air France wanted to give me for a night in JFK termianl 3.

Maybe it is because of the common culture, but USA carrier staff seem to understand my problems more and our logic seems to mesh.

I was thinking about booking an open-jaw TPE-TYO-SIN (or similar) on Delta and my friend stopped me. I ended up spending an additional night in TPE returning home from Tokyo and sticking to Scoot instead, since it's Singaporean and could not be THAT bad.

Friend does not like American airlines in general, and then she had a bad experience trying to fly out of Singapore to the US where one of them overbooked the flight resulting in her almost missing an important job interview. She ended up forking up more money booking a SQ flight.

I don't like European carriers all that much either; Asian airlines are generally a lot better.

But we aren't talking about JFK-MCO.
Of course I have low expectation when flying domestic flight.
The real question is, when you fly SFO-ICN, which carrier would you fly?
Certainly not UA when buying F or C.
And UA isn't any cheaper than OZ in my experience.

1 Proud to be, even though I was actually born in another country. I dont chose routing based on aircraft since both major companies employ people worldwide after all

2 While I enjoy Gods artwork of female sculpture as much as the next guy, the tone here on FT about the FAs sometimes gets pretty tacky TTTT. If having hottie FAs on a long haul TPAC is your thing, fine, but eventually we all grow up out of Penthouse Forum age.. I certainly dont reward an airline for having an "under 27 year old single" job requirement for obvious professional reasons. I satisfy my prurient needs at home, thank you.

:D:D:D