United Makes Plans to Drop 'Baggage Neutrality' 682
theodp writes "If you need a clue as to how creative ISP execs might get in the absence of network neutrality, look no further than United Airlines CEO Glenn Tilton, who is wowing Wall Street with his willingness to examine new ways to wring money out of the carrier, including making economy passengers pay a fee unless they want their luggage to come last off the plane." Now I think when i was like gold ultimate handjob elite years ago my bags had tags that usually made them come out first, but this seems just kinda crappy. I mean, remember when you got a meal on airplanes? No wonder people hate to fly.
Not a dump truck (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean...yeah, I'm not thrilled with the 'cattle car' mentality you go through, but, hey....at least their prices are reasonable, they seem to be about the best with respect to flight times, and they don't seem to try to fsck the last $ out of their customers.
I hope, though, that they stop the policy of trying to keep good looking chicks with skimpy outfits off the planes....that was kinda stupid.
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:5, Interesting)
Now the other west coast carrier, America West was a horror story almost every time. I would wait overnight and fly SWA before I got on another AWA flight. We once arrived at the counter at 6:30am an hour before our flight, pre-9/11, only to be told that because we booked the flight over 30 days prior and failed to confirm in the last 24 hours we were bumped. Even though the seats were paid for. Of course they tell us this after our luggage went down the chute, which they told us we could retrieve if we ever got to Portland. Then promised us to get us on the next flight. Fast forward 8 hours and we are still being fed bullshit by the ticket agents, of course I forgot to mention the two little bored kids with us. AAAAAAAAAAAhhhhh never agian AWA we went done the counter and immediately got on a SWA flight, kids got to sit with the pilot during a lay over (pre-9/11 again dang I miss the old days) and arrived 12 hours after our luggage, which was dumped beside a carousel out in the open. Never again AmericaWorst!
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
WN is the two-letter airline code used by the industry for Southwest Airlines:
http://www.avrefdesk.com/two_letter_airline_codes.htm [avrefdesk.com]
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:5, Funny)
A work of fiction, I presume?
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:5, Funny)
A work of fiction, I presume?
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:5, Funny)
Of course not. It's a series of belts.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not a dump truck (Score:5, Insightful)
The analogous situation to no net neutrality would be to say the destination countries need to pay to guarantee good baggage delivery, so people don't associate them with lost baggage.
Charging the customer for better service is a perfectly acceptable way to handle getting more money, both the cable and phone companies do it.
Re:Not a dump truck - a racket (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is like offering customers a chance to save money by not even using checked luggage (which I pay for even though I don't use it).
How is tiers of service price gouging? And why can't I sacrifice decent service for cheaper prices? I do that for everything else.
Re:Not a dump truck - a racket (Score:5, Insightful)
It does sound like a protection racket, tho. Maybe next will be:
"Would you like your bag to be handled extra-carefully? For a small fee we can make sure your bag doesn't get dropped or run over by a baggage cart, or maybe show up with the handles wrenched off. Heh-heh."
Re:Less is more (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the same as the sweetheart deals they have with telcos to allow spying, or how they "punish" Microsoft, but are still their biggest customer.
Re:Less is more (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sick of people using 9-11 as an excuse for everything from having to bomb Iran to having to wiretap Americans without warrants to giving corporations special taxpayer-funded benefits (only after they make large contributions to candidates, though).
Let's see, what else is happening with 9-11 as the excuse? Um, how about creating an ex post facto law to give telcos immunity from prosecution for having broken the law (even though the illegal act took place 6 months before 9-11?
Bullshit. 3000 people die and a nation of 300 million goes belly up?
Bullshit. We are being played.
Re:Less is more (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a good point. If someone robs you of your car, the government is not going to reimburse you for it. They will try to catch the criminal and you can bring a civil suit against the criminal, but that is it. If the criminal robs you of your car and then drives it off a cliff and kills himself, you are out of luck. You get something between diddly and sq
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I suspect Amazon does this to me. For a long time while using Amazon, even when I picked "free shipping" my stuff would show up in the mail within a 3 or 4 days. But, in my last 5 orders or so, the orders spend several days in "getting ready to ship" mode.
My guess is that they are now holding the orders to make sure the "free shipping" doesn't get to me as fast
Airport clothes shop (Score:4, Interesting)
I pack my underwear and toiletries, and don't bring a single stitch of clothing, other than what's on my back. I'll stop at the shop and pick up a few USED dress shirts, a few casual shirts, pants, sometimes a suit. Everything's organized, in style and well marked. It takes me far less time to pick up my clothes than it would to pack at home, check my luggage, pick up my luggage, etc.
I leave a credit card imprint for the deposit on the clothes. When I return them, I usually get my full deposit back, less the cleaning and usage fee, which is far less than a typical laundry and dry cleaning bill.
OK, I made this service up, but doesn't it sound like it would appeal to some class of traveler?
TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Informative)
Deregulation brought about intense competition in airline fares. The flying public wants to get from Point A to Point B as quickly as possible. As a result, the airlines have been under continued pressure to reduce costs to stay competitive. This has resulted in charging for meals and in some cases, even pillows.
ISP's are in a similar boat with respect to intense pressure on keeping prices low. It's only a matter of time before they figure out how to charge additional
fees for "extras". You get what you pay for.
Oh, and you still get "priority" tags on your bags for being an elite frequent flyer. Whether or not your bags come out first though is strictly a matter of chance.
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:4, Insightful)
Proof: X is the base rate of a flight with unprioritized luggage delivery. The cost of having prioritized luggage delivery, per person, is Y.
Now you can either charge everyone X + Y and then offer a discount of Y to those who don't need it, or charge everyone X and offer a fee of Y to everyone who does need it. Either way, those who need it are paying X + Y and those who don't are paying X. However, offering it as an added fee gives the appearance of lower prices, which, if you're trying to stay competitive, is important. Removing meals from planes is the same thing. You can offer lower prices than your competition by not including meals in the base price. For those who don't want cold meat, or who don't eat that crap anyway, it's better incentive. It might make it marginally more expensive for those who do eat the meals (assuming it would cost less per person to have meals prepared for everyone than it would to prepare meals for only those who want it), but it would still be just as expensive if you were to offer the discount-method.
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Funny)
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Insightful)
The *reality* is that you either receive less for your X, or you have to pay X+Y to get what you used to get.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So, you mean to say that flying with EasyJet and Ryanair costs just as much as flying with, say Lufthansa?
As a matter of fact: It depends.I can't speak for Ryanair, but Easyjet may not be so darn cheap if you fly on short notice or during a popular period. The trick is to book as early as possible.
See, even when an airline only sports one class, the cabin for any specific flight is divided into a number of sub-classes. Each of those classes are priced in a specific range and this may fluctuate daily. There's probably not such a perishable product as an airline seat. An airline rather charges 50$, which is 5
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:4, Insightful)
Saving your a** in a crash also costs coin (Score:4, Insightful)
Never knew how they allocated exit-row seats, but now Northwest charges for them, either in terms of a cash surcharge or in terms flyer points or one of those "Elite" or "Gold" memberships.
One thing about exit-row seats is that each of the big exits are "manned" by a flight attendant -- that is what they are there for and anything else they do like get you a pillow or not get you anything to eat in this day and age is incidental. The exit row seats are unique in that they are "manned" by whatever passenger is seated there -- in other words, your safety depends on the conscientiousness of a fellow passenger rather than on an airline employee who at least has had some kind of training.
Mind you, this exit row thing is a kind of loophole to the safety rules that allows airlines to place revenue seats next to some exits instead of rear-facing jump seat with a flight attendant sitting there. The gummint was OK with this until a few years back that they started to "have issues" with it and issued those rules that the airline had to ask if you, as a customer, thought you were physically fit enough to lift a 40 pound exit door, and the airlines began this lameoid thing of "asking" customers if they wanted to be moved from the exit row -- apparently there are all of these 90-lb 90-year-old grannies who can lift 40 pounds from an awkward angle because no one ever volunteers to leave such a seat.
AvWeek had a discussion about passengers and exit rows, and the time it was suggested to qualify certain frequent flyers by having them demonstrate that they could operate and lift the plug doors and giving those passengers preferrential exit row seating. The current system, at least on Northwest, is that the exit row is a perk that you can pay for, never mind if you are the kind of jerk who never pays any attention to the safety demonstration or has never looked at a seat card.
Part of the thing is that 1) airlines have a "don't scare the passengers" approach to airline safety, and 2) most passengers believe that they are French toast in any kind of accident and that the safety info is pointless, and many if not most passengers make a demonstration out of pointedly not paying any attention to the safety drills.
My own personal perspective is twofold. One is that I lived in Chicago when the 727 jet was new, and pilots transitioning from prop planes lacking the high power-off sink rate of the 727 with all of the droops and flaps down were crumping 727's with alarming regularity. The Chicago Tribune told of one accident in Chicago where after one of these crumped landings, only two people got out, people seated next to exits with the presence of mind to operate them, and the rest of the people died from smoke and not from any other injuries. Secondly, I hold a private pilot certificate and have been indoctrinated in the ways of procedures and checklists. Unlike many other conveyances, airline passengers play an active role in the safe conduct of their flights. Can't be bothered to pay attention to the safety announcements and look at the seat card because you have flown the fourth leg of a trip and have flown hundreds of times? Gee, I guess the pilots can't be bothered with checklists because they have flown thousands of times and must know all of the settings by rote not, don't they?
So you got fat slobs with frequent-flier privileges who could care less about paying attention to the fact that they are in an exit row and have a role to play in an emergency, and you have the rest of us steerage passengers on the Titanic told we are last in line at the life boats.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, it is. However, how it's *perceived* can make a world of difference, and people are usually more responsive to a discount than an additional charge. For instance, when I do consulting gigs, I charge the customer a hefty fee for not paying on the agreed-upon schedule. Customers generally don't like that, so instead what I do is inflate the base rate slightly, then offer a discount on the b
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Interesting)
The company that says "oh, by the way, your baggage will come last if you but this cheap ticket" will likely lose out to the one that doesn't say that upfront. The company that doesn't implicitly "include" the discount in the price will appear at first glance to be more expensive and lose out- or if they explicitly mention the discount, they'll have the same problem as the company that makes clear your baggage will come last.
Better to keep it quiet, keep the price of the "basic" ticket very low and then make money charging for the "priority" gravy. Cynical, and it sucks but that's the way modern business works. And to be fair, when prices are being driven down to the bone, that's the sort of thing companies rely on to make money.
As I said, smart customers would realise all this- but real-world customers often don't, giving priority to obvious (and short term) savings over longer term ones. Either that or they know what's happening, but want to save every last cent on the ticket and *then* get annoyed when they actually have to live with the consequences of their decision.
IMHO, the companies are both victims and exploiters of this phenomenon.
I don't doubt that the "cost" of the business class meal was inflated way beyond the cost price, but I still bet that the cost price for the company was significant enough that it would be a serious issue for economy-class tickets. Remember that not only do you have the cost of the food, you also have to store it, serve it and clean up the mess.
And if you think I'm being picky, bear in mind that Ryanair (cheap Irish airline that is popular in the UK) kept their costs down by removing the magazine holders on the backs of seats, simply because it was one less thing to clean up before flying again.
So yeah, the meal does make a difference, and I suspect that most people on short or medium-haul flights would rather just save the money. It's easy to bitch about this stuff, but the days in which everyone got a "free" meal were the days in which flying was far more expensive.
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Informative)
That is not really true. (Score:5, Interesting)
Trust me, it does not make your luggage come out first. Not even an appreciable fraction of the time.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Moreover, I can't see how the proposed measure would save an airline money - they'd spend far more money on labor doing the sorting than they would earn, I think.
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Interesting)
My theory to explain its early arrival was that its odd shape caused handlers to put it to one side each time they were stacking something and then pop it on top of the trolley at the end. Worked for me anyway.
Re:TANSTAAFL (Score:5, Funny)
If it isn't so, why does everyone press right up to the belt, even if their bag isn't there, completely getting in the way of anyone whose bag is on on the belt?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe their trying to get dibs on overhead compartment space?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I do that, too, now, on domestic US flights.
Because I am sick. to. fucking. death. of complete assclowns trying to stuff upto and including fullsize bags into the overhead compartment with zero concern for anyone else, just so they avoid having to check bags. I've lost track of the number of times I've had to try to stuff my (small) laptop backpack under the seat in front of me, and twice I had to have the bag taken from me and check it, becaus
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If I was the god of airlines, I would rip out the overhead bins entirely. Tons of time is wasted as everyone tries to squeeze past eachother in the crowded aisleways to find space to stuff in their giant (bigger than my checked luggage) suitcases. Then at the end of the flight you've got to wait for the same people to squeeze their way around to get the bags back down, often dropping their 50 pound suitcases on eachothers' heads in the process.
If it doesn't fit under the seat in front of you, it's not a ca
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Without Ethics, You Have Nothing. (Score:5, Informative)
Sometimes your money vanishes into a CEO's private yacht.
United is a prime example of an unethical company that fails to meet any of it's three primary responsibilities: customer service, job security, and investor return. It does not matter that this "plan" to screw customers is not a fact yet, because United customer service is already the pits. How could it be otherwise when the employees are demoralized by games like this:
One of the "concessions" was the elimination of employee pension plans. Bankruptcy, of course, screwed investors. It's little wonder that United is often mentioned when I hear bad travel stories. Please do not talk to me about regulation to protect such scumbags. The kinds of things United is accused of are crimes that should be punished.
The other half of TANSTAAFL is a free market. Without that, there's no such thing as a fairly priced sandwich lunch. Glenn Tilton is lucky there's air on the other side of most doors.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Without Ethics, You Have Nothing. (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, it is pretty much a misnomer to call the modern breed of stockholders 'Investors'. They just want to buy it, run it up and sell it. They are not interested in 'investing' in the company at all.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A company has whatever responsibilities the law dictates, because it is simply a fictitious legal entity rather than a real natural one. There is no natural right to keep on getting profits while being shielded from any consequences - such as jail time - of the actions your hirelings - the CEO,
Re:Without Ethics, You Have Nothing. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No contest there - Virgin has half-naked ladies on the noses of their individually-named aircraft, after all. The great service is just a bonus.
Like Linux and Windows (Score:3, Insightful)
Lin/Win: Macs are more expensive.
Mac: No they are not if you configure them Identically
Lin/Win: okay here's a Dell thats comparable and it costs $100 less
Mac: You are overlooking the value of a system that works. It's only cheaper if your time has no value.
Lin/Win: Well I get to choose with my PC, Mac forces me to pay the mac tax whether I want to or not.
So apparently there's a large number of people, larger than the max zealots, for which savi
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For cars in particular, you only need to spend a couple bucks on a Consumer Reports subscription to find that many luxury cars are extremely unreliable. So in this case, those luxury cars are really "bad apples" as far as reliability goes. I hap
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What are you talking about? United and other traditional carriers, Delta, AA, etc., are oriented (get most of their money from) toward business travelers and are certainly not the cheapest around. Many people are actually willing to pay a premium to fly them over ,say, Southwest, be
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, that is only an argument if one assumes that Macs work better than the other two, what depends on the kind of use and user the computer will have.
Inserting a hidden assumption into the argument is a quite used logical falacy... It makes dishonest argumentation looks like it is reliable.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Deregulation brought about intense competition in airline fares. The flying public wants to get from Point A to Point B as quickly as possible. As a result, the airlines have been under continued pressure to reduce costs to stay competitive. This has resulted in charging for meals and in some cases, even pillows.
That is because the commodity of airline transportation is highly fungible [wikipedia.org]. It really doesn't make much difference which flight you take, or which airline, so long as certain basic minimums are met,
No problem (Score:5, Funny)
Ah, but you see.. (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, remember when you got a meal on airplanes? (Score:5, Funny)
You are not old enough (Score:3)
I had it good WRT that. My father was an airline pilot so we got to fly free. And yes, even in coach the service and meals were good. Free Booze. I tend to think that Midwest airline had the right idea (leather seats; 4 across on a super 80; good service), but I believe
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You are not old enough (Score:5, Informative)
Question about meal = "terrorist screening" (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, service ... (Score:4, Informative)
That's not why flying sucks (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Did I say it was taking 12-14 hours for security? Pay attention lad.
Here's what it comes down to: I don't like flying -- it's cramped and uncomfortable, unable to sit in a way that has my knees /not/ touching the seat in front of me; parts of my body falling asleep that really shouldn't be; sitting shoulder-to-shoulder with other passengers (strangers), like so much tuna in a can. Add to that it smells bad (and worse depending on what my neighbor has eaten recently and if he is a mouth-breather) and is
EasyJet/RyanAir (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is, that taking one part of this model will not work, you have to take it all - very low cost tickets, fly only one type of plane, open seats, fast airport turn around, and so forth. The leading carriers in the US don't get this, so will nickel and dime without adding service or reducing costs/fares.
Re:EasyJet/RyanAir (Score:5, Informative)
To make things worse, our shared case was overweight, so we ended up paying 25GBP excess baggage - teach me to be a skinflint.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:EasyJet/RyanAir (Score:4, Funny)
If airlines ran Burger King
"I'd like a cheese burger please"
"That will be £1.20".
"But it was only 99p yesterday!"
"That was the weekend special price."
"Okay. Here you go"
"Oh, there's also 21p VAT"
"Riiight... any other hidden charges?"
"no. By the way, please pay the £2.15 purchase fee"
"I see. So that's not a hidden charge?"
"No. It's simply an extra surcharge that you are obliged to pay for the burger."
"Okay. What else will I have to pay?"
"Nothing at all. So, what would you prefer - Beef burger or vegetarian?"
"beef please"
"Okay, That will cost 45p on top"
"Oh. I'll go for the vegetarian option"
"Good choice. Certainly. That's only 60p"
"Right. Do I get my burger now?"
"No. You'll only be able to eat it between 20:00 and 21:00 though. Please check in at least half an hour early or you may forfeit your burger"
Not "Baggage Neutrality" (Score:4, Insightful)
This doesn't seem like a neutrality issue to me.
Isn't this closer to a customer just paying for a lower latency connection?
It already happens today (Score:5, Informative)
You will notice bright orange tags as they come off the converyor belt in baggage claim. Those tags are for GS, 1K, Premier Exec, Premier, *Gold, and *Silver. The idea is that you alert ground crews to the bags belonging to the best customers so that they will offload those first. This is no different from AA, Delta, USAirways, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, and every other airline that flies. All Tilton wants to do is offer this service as an add-on so if you are NOT an elite member and feel it necessary to get your bags off in a hurry (tight transfer in ORD or LHR perhaps) you can purchase that service.
*wacks subby over the head*
It is not a good analogy (Score:4, Insightful)
Dumb. Very, very dumb. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dumb. Very, very dumb. (Score:5, Interesting)
Because at the point they'd notice, they've already started boarding the plane and you've already gone through security (with the baggage check counter on the outside).
Except in the most egregious abuses, if they tried to enforce carry-on rules, every plane would start having extra half-hour to an hour delays (or in some cases, quite a few hours).
As the alternative to that, they'd need to let people cancel/transfer/change their tickets at the last minute, and they do not want to let people out of that little scam...
I drive at every opportunity (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone who travels quite regularly for their job, I avoid the airports whenever possible because of this type of crap. These days, if it's under 500 miles each way, I'll drive it. I used to wish for the airlines to all go out of business, hoping that they'd be forced to figure out a business model that was actually profitable, but gave up on that after we (US taxpayers) were forced to bail them out after 9/11. It's a mess with no easy fix in sight, unless someone can magically make all of the airline lobbyists disappear.
Re:I drive at every opportunity (Score:5, Insightful)
gold ultimate handjob elite (Score:5, Funny)
Re:gold ultimate handjob elite (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
> I haven't had one of those in years.
Of course not. After 9/11, they replaced with with the terrorist super anal probe extra.
Thinking it through (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's think this through for a bit. At first, only a couple of people pay the fee. No biggee, and not much impact. Then someone, whose baggage came off last, notices the "priority tag" or whatever they use to identify the "don't take me off the plane last" tag. So s/he now ponies up for the fee from now on. Repeat for a few iterations. Now, nearly everybody has paid the fee, and they all come off just as before.
EXCEPT when some poor customer has paid the fee, AND his stuff comes off AFTER someone who did NOT. Guaranteed Upset Passenger.
The real kicker: what happens when someone:
Yep, sure sounds like <sarcasm>great customer service</sarcasm> to me. With increasingly ubiquitous video cameras, all it takes is a couple of postings to YouTube, a few blog posts, and then the REAL FUN begins!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Hey, my bag came out way after all those people, and I paid the fee."
"Sir, sometimes our system fails to deliver your bag on time..."
"Well, give me my fee back. You didn't give me the service I paid for."
"Our policy is not to return any monies..."
I always wondered about the "Our policy is..." nonsense. "Our policy allows us to take your money and not give you anything in return; we know this because we wrote the policy." At some point it has to become absolute bullshit.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They solved the "bad publicity" problem in two ways:
1. Don't know how true this is elsewhere in Europe, but in the UK it's quite common to find that there's only
I used to like flying... (Score:4, Insightful)
Today pretty much everything about it is a hassle, so it's only worth flying when constrained by time, or when other driving just isn't practical. I've done long-haul Greyhound long ago, and to be honest that wasn't so hot, either. I've never traveled by train, just taken tourist-type train rides.
As an aside, the annoyance starts when you book a flight. My wife has checked it out, and for at least one airline, the magic interval is three-weeks-and-a-day. Booking closer than that, the rates are outrageous. That is, except for a flight with an empty seat that is so close in time that you can't even get to the airport. One thing we've realized is that it appears that they accept new bookings right up to flight time, even for full flights. For the prices they charge for a near-in booking, they can bump someone, give them a free flight at the longer-term booking rates, and still make more money on that seat.
Then there's TSA, and the overloaded ATC delays, and the overloaded airports, etc, etc, etc.
Flying is just a way to get from point A to point B when other means won't work out.
Re:I used to like flying... (Score:5, Informative)
Travelling by train actually pretty much rocks, if you don't need to get across the country in three to five hours (or cross an ocean, obviously).
They don't pack you in like sardines, you frequently have real tables and comfy seats (as in, you can face your travelling companions and play cards or something), you can move about (pee, go to the bar, etc) whenever you want, usually no assigned seating (which could count as a downside, but usually the non-commuter-trains have so few passengers you have all the choice you could want)... For a vacation rather than a business trip, I'd highly recommend going by train - And as a bonus, you'll actually see the country rather than seeing clouds.
Of course, like the rest of our lives, we Americans even make our leisure time a non-stop rush-rush-rush flurry of activity. Get "there" as fast as possible, then lose more sleep than normal trying to visit every point of interest in a 100mi radius of our destination. Thus we have the phenomenon of needing to come home an extra day before resuming work because we need to crash from what we call "relaxation".
Sad.
I don't agree and don't believe you travel Acela (Score:3, Informative)
I ride Acela (amtrak's NE corridor service) ALL the time between Boston-NYC-DC. I have NEVER seen bench seating in 8 years of travel. I have never seen bench style seating in any Amtrak car ever...
The cars on Acela are really nice, clean, have plenty of room, and even real electric sockets for laptops.
Cell phone use is not bad. I rarely get someone rude. AND if i don't like cell phone noise there are QUIET CARS available where cell phone use is not allowed.
Amtrak does have frequent
Re:I don't agree and don't believe you travel Acel (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't explain our different experiences (I too live in the NE), but I've found exactly the opposite of what you describe.
I have experienced a few delays (though nothing even close to the BS we have to put up with for air travel), but never more than a few minutes, and when you can sit back and comfortably read a book or play cards with a friend, who cares?
My true worst-case stories - Last time I flew (Northwest, though I don't blame them specifica
pay for non-damaged baggage (Score:5, Insightful)
Really, there are two issues with this. First, it seems that more people are using carry on anyway. In my experience flying, more carry on reduces the already dreadful flying experience. I see this as a competitive disincentive.
Second, I wonder if the cost of implementing such a plan, which would require marking and sorting bags, would be less than the additional revenue. This is the same question I have for the ISP. Will the costs of all the additional equipment really justify the additional fees such equipment would impose on the end user. Wouldn't it be better, like the airliines, to impose a fixed limit on throughput, and allow users to pay for more?
Re:pay for non-damaged baggage (Score:5, Interesting)
-- Fat Tony, United Airlines Revenue Enhancement Agent
Can it get worse? (Score:5, Insightful)
So now my bags are going to be delayed a few minutes? Who gives a shit? That's like being told that in addition to being worked over for an hour by mafia goons, someone will now call you a sissy at the end of your beating.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't even believe half the stories I hear. I've flown eight times this year for work, and other than it being slow, I've yet to see anyone even taken to the side. There's nothing to get get good at. Hell, I was hand carrying a box of A/D converter chips in an ESD bag and it was no problem.
most planes make the city bus feel like a luxury limo by comparison
Yeah, but a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And the horrible part of flying is living 20 minutes from the airport, but still having to show up three hours early in case there are traffic delays... inside the airport! Not baggage claim. It's line after line after line, where I'm always mentall
A Lesson in Airline Revenue Managment for /. (Score:5, Informative)
Domestic air travel is one of the five most price elastic products avaliable for purchase today. This means when you go on to Orbitz we all charge practically the same thing. Internal tests in the airlines have proven that a $5 difference in airfare will dry up your demand. So, no people for the most part say they want everything but time again have proven through actions that they will only buy for the most part on price. International flights are a different story.
Price, Schedule, Frequency in that order is how people buy airfare. The idea now is to shrink the price as much as possible and try to recoup through the difference with ancillary revenue streams. This is why you see such things as purchase of Snacks on Board, charging for pillows, SkyBus and RyanAir charging for everything. People complain about buying a $5 meal on the plane but you can create a better product and for most part people realize they will pay $10 in airport for the same caliber of meal.
Since the industry is so price sensitive it is trying to debundle the product. It costs money to serve meals and when you make as little as $200 on a flight from JFK to LAX TOTAL, you have to find other ways. So what do we do, we try to offer things that people are willing to purchase. Economy Plus 5 additional inches of leg room on most United flights...it makes a big difference when you go cross-country or across the ocean. Purchase an Admirals Club ticket from AA for $35 for the day so you have a place to shower and change because you can't check into your hotel in London until after 4:00 PM but you got there at 10:00 AM.
Programs like giving luggage priority to the customer that flys 1 or 2 times a year is to give customers what they want (a lower flight price), but also for those folks that want something extra a place where they can purchase it.
The Point Is... (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't get what you pay for, but you're required to pay anyway. As in:
1) You pay for homeowners' insurance only to find that your particular disaster isn't going to be covered. Just ask the people on the Gulf Coast.
2) You pay for a utility, like phone or cable, only to find that when you've got a problem or outage, you're without your service--not for hours, but for days or possibly even weeks. (Ever try to get a rebate from, say, your phone company when they take four days to send out a "technician" to spend twenty minutes fixing your trouble?)
3) You pay ever-increasing costs for your health insurance only to find that a catastrophic illness or accident leaves you in debt for years.
4) You pay for what is termed "unlimited" Internet services only to find that your ISP is cutting you back because they have a different idea of what constitutes "unlimited."
5) You earn your money, but you are required to pay the bank ever-increasing "fees" so that they can use it until you need it. In some cases, you even have to pay to speak with a human being (as opposed to an automated system) to receive an answer to your question.
We're all part of a vast pool of money to be tapped into at will, and the game is to return the bare minimum of value for what we're all willing (or able) to pay. Why should the airlines be any different? An interesting article appeared on CNN [cnn.com] a couple of days ago. It seems the "working poor" are having increasing trouble making that paycheck stretch from one payday to the next--and the term "working poor" is now encroaching more and more into the "middle class." The Big Box Marts are starting to notice an impact to their bottom lines.
The airlines will find that fewer and fewer people can afford to fly, so they'll focus on ways to wring more out of the people who can still afford to fly. It's not surprising.
Long-term profitability (Score:3, Interesting)
This sense of serenity is surely not measurable by such pedestrian metrics as dollars and hours.
How to travel without going nuts (Score:5, Informative)
1. Travel light. [travelite.org] If you're crossing the ocean for two weeks, plan to use a laundry.
2. Avoid connections. If at all possible, drive to a hub airport.
3. Planeside check on your outward trip. This ensures the baggage monkeys don't lose your luggage. If you failed to follow tip #1, and you must check your bag, be sure you carry with you the basics for an overnight stay.
4. Check your heavy baggage on the return trip. Barcode scanners track everything in a database in Atlanta. Airlines don't actually lose your luggage, they just misroute it. On the way home that's a benefit: You don't have to carry your bags to your car! They'll deliver to your home, eventually.
5. Eat a good breakfast. You're not getting fed on the plane unless you're crossing an ocean.
6. Bring your own entertainment -- a book, videogame, etc. Unless you're crossing the ocean on one of those new 767s with the cool Linux personal entertainment system, you're going to be on your own. On most flights, even if they're showing a movie, you won't be able to see it.
7. Noise-suppression headphones really do work.
8. Book early, book online, and select an exit-row seat. Legroom and laptop space will be adequate for a change.
There is a solution... (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously--lest some idiot thinks I'm trolling: After seeing so many of my more well traveled friends dealing with lost luggage--not to mention having to put on locks rigged so that baggage people can open and paw through your stuff--I take carry on luggage and haven't had a problem stowing it. You don't need half the things you think you do on trips (and restricted to small amount of carry on liquids now saves space.) And if you forgot or need something, unless you're going to 'outer Mongolia', you can usually purchase it at your destination. I haven't lost a bag yet! And I can just grab my bag and head out of the airport instead of hanging out in baggage claim.
shareholder value is a verb (Score:3, Interesting)
You know why I fly Emirates? (Score:3, Informative)
Has absolutely amazing staff. Friendly, professional, speak the languages of source and destination country, take their time with difficult passengers.
Has comfortable, cheap economy seats, with video entertainments systems in each seat back - that work.
Provides free drinks and fantastic meals. The best I've ever had on any airline.
The major hub, Dubai, is a large, roomy, comfortable airport with every and any convenience. It has friendly, professional staff. The queues are managable.
They do not treat their customers like criminals (USA take note), while providing excellent security.
They are the cheapest airline to fly the route.
They are not alone in this quality service. Singapore Airlines is just as good, if not better, and other new Arabian Gulf Carriers like Air Qatar and Al Etihad are also competing at this level.
United Airlines is going to lose any business they have on the routes these other airlines fly if they treat their passengers badly and charge them for things that have been normal part of service... on buses!
Re:Bring back regulation! (Score:4, Informative)
Part of the reason that flights to Podunk didn't reflect the cost of service was that the longer flights subsidized them - Congress pressured airlines to keep service to their districts, in exchange for a price structure that allowed the airlines to make up for losses on other flights. Not very efficient.
Because they couldn't compete on price, they had to compete on service, and the service was damn good. Decent food, bigger seats than now, toys for the kids, free decks of cards, pens, and note-paper for the adults. A single thunderstorm in Chicago didn't screw up the whole nation. Flight attendants weren't horribly overworked on jam-packed flights.
You can get that today - fly on an air charter or fractional jet service, as long as you are willing to pay for the service. You actually have more choices today than you did under regulation; at widely different price points.
Midwest offers Signature Seating (all leather 2 abreast cabins) on many flights but is moving away from that on leisure routes - a good sign that enough people don't want to pay extra for service to make it a viable long term strategy for a scheduled domestic airline. If Midwest could keep a price differential that made up for the lower capacity I bet they would offer that service everywhere they flew.
Yeah, it cost a lot more in real dollars. Yeah, not so many people flew in those days (they took the train or the bus, duh). But look what would happen if we implemented it now. The higher prices would drive people back to ground transportation, reducing their carbon footprint.
It would also have a serious impact on our economy.
Higher prices would also mean companies in the service industry would need staff within driving distance - as opposed to having staff that live where they want and fly to the client.
Vacation destinations would become more regional since the cost of flying a family of 4 would rise significantly; and driving two days to visit Disney World would become a once in a lifetime (if that) trip for many families.
Visit families overseas? Forget about it.
Yes, I remember when you got served on real china in economy class; and the 707 had to land in Shannon before going on to the continent; but in real dollars I can fly the same route in Business Class for the same as I paid then for coach; with about the same level of service.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Therefore, even though cargo trains are required
Re:This is just tiered service (Score:5, Insightful)
This is just another method for separating out the classes. Have money? We'll make your life more convenient at the inconvenience of everyone else. It's one thing to give people better service in exchange for value-add, it's another to create that value by taking from someone else.