Airlines are going to regret...

[skipro3]

their latest ploy to milk more from wallets. NBC news reports airlines are charging more for aisle and window seats, leaving the middle seat for the regular fare. A family traveling who wants to sit together will have to pay more.
Well....
maybe not.

If this would have been in effect when I was a parent with young kids any ways. Imagine; a flight from New Zealand to California , a 12+ hour flight, with Mom, Dad, a 7 ,5 and a 3 year old. Now, imagine NOT sitting with the little cherubs. Kids in aisle 20, 21, 22 and mom/dad in 2 and 3. Let the guys who paid extra for the aisle and window seats in 20, 21 and 22 deal with a 5,7 and 3 year old in the middle seat for the next 20 hours. Heck, for the extra money, spend it on a first class ticket and let the buggers ride back in coach. Ha!!

My son and his family live in NZ. I imagine their next visit is going to be pretty interesting, if Air New Zealand adopts this policy.

[Koolau]

Apparently the airlines have given up on creating any loyalty from the flying public. Any scheme to make a few extra bucks, no matter the hassle or expense to passengers and they will jump on it with both feet. I fully support their right to do so as I am for free markets. Still, it seems short sighted and will only further turn folks against the airlines. We'll fly their d*** airplanes - but only if we have to. Personally, doing some serious mainland travel this year. Don't plan to get closer to an airplane then 30,000 feet or more between now and the time I'm forced to fly home.

Already, I 1) travel with carry-on only 2) use an internet booking agent OTHER than the airline's sight (though I check them just in case) 3) bring my own food. At some point, you'd think the airlines would figure out they've honked us off and would start working on getting back some loyalty. Wait until the next slow-down. THEN watch for a roll-back of all these silly "extras" in an effort to get folks to fly again. Trust me, only if there is no other choice! YMMV

[Texas Proud]

Well, to be fair to the airline (which I am not most of the time)...

They did report that the seats are reserved for frequent fliers and people who are willing to pay more... except for the back few rows... IOW, you can get seats together, but not up front...

They also said that closer to the time of flight, the seats are released and you might be able to snag one...

And last, they had a guy from an airline that said they usually ask someone to move and they do most of the time...

I have moved before, but from one aisle to another.... I did refuse to move from an aisle to a middle so two adults could sit next to each other....

[ziggy29]

They continue to find ways to make me more and more determined to never fly again unless I really *have* to.

[hankster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29 They continue to find ways to make me more and more determined to never fly again unless I really *have* to.

Me too. Only for the over water trips and journeys that are too long to reasonably be taken by road.

[rescueme]

FYI - for those that have children and fly United will no longer have the ability to board early:

Parental alert: United drops early boarding for children | Reno Gazette-Journal | rgj.com

I'll agree that flying is a pain (at least for those of us in "cattlecar seating"), but until they build a bridge to Europe, the far east, and even Hawaii, it's somthing you have to put up with.

IMHO, the only advantage is that looking at the percentage of a total trip/vacation hours, it's very little. Heck, I'm trying to look on the bright side ...

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolau Apparently the airlines have given up on creating any loyalty from the flying public. Any scheme to make a few extra bucks, no matter the hassle or expense to passengers and they will jump on it with both feet. I fully support their right to do so as I am for free markets. Still, it seems short sighted and will only further turn folks against the airlines. We'll fly their d*** airplanes - but only if we have to. Personally, doing some serious mainland travel this year. Don't plan to get closer to an airplane then 30,000 feet or more between now and the time I'm forced to fly home. Already, I 1) travel with carry-on only 2) use an internet booking agent OTHER than the airline's sight (though I check them just in case) 3) bring my own food. At some point, you'd think the airlines would figure out they've honked us off and would start working on getting back some loyalty. Wait until the next slow-down. THEN watch for a roll-back of all these silly "extras" in an effort to get folks to fly again. Trust me, only if there is no other choice! YMMV

It seems they're between a rock and a hard place...
U.S. airlines seen posting Q1 loss, 2012 profit | Reuters

[LRDave]

As a younger man I never thought I would've considered such a thing, but deregulating the airlines might turn out to be crappy for all parties involved in the long run.

[photoguy]

The one thing I wish airlines would charge for is carry-on luggage. This way i could be assured of getting space if needed.

[ChiliPepr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoguy The one thing I wish airlines would charge for is carry-on luggage. This way i could be assured of getting space if needed.

They already charge for checked luggage.... I can see it now... flight is $300, with an additional $25 per checked bag... and an addition $25 for all carryons.

[photoguy]

I should have said I would rather they charge for carry-on and not for checked luggage.

[palomalou]

All of this makes me glad that I've visited every international destination that
I'd care to. It is possible that I may only have to take one flight (and that one, one way, when we move) for the rest of my life!

[H2ODude]

I'd love to swear off flying but grandchildren (and daughter and SIL) in London and son is in Tanzania. I long for the days before deregulation, and yes I know it would be more expensive. Remember one flight from KC to Chicago, probably a 707, and I think there were 7 people on the whole flight! And remember the ALMONDS!!!? Pretzels.
Sheesh.

[Lancelot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29 They continue to find ways to make me more and more determined to never fly again unless I really *have* to.

I agree! Since I've retired I would seriously consider the "Slow boat to China" freighter travel for over seas trips...

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lancelot I agree! Since I've retired I would seriously consider the "Slow boat to China" freighter travel for over seas trips...

Sounds good to me also. Especially under these conditions...

On a Slow Boat to China - YouTube

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2ODude I'd love to swear off flying but grandchildren (and daughter and SIL) in London and son is in Tanzania. I long for the days before deregulation, and yes I know it would be more expensive. Remember one flight from KC to Chicago, probably a 707, and I think there were 7 people on the whole flight! And remember the ALMONDS!!!? Pretzels. Sheesh.

WHAT I really do not know for sure because I am younger, but I remember the prices being ridiculously high... not just more expensive...

I would bet that if there were regulated prices, tickets would be 2X higher if not more... that is why you only had 7 people on board...


I can remember only flying twice when I was young... and guess what... I was given a deck of cards to PLAY with... (I think it was Delta).... now you have to pay for peanuts

[DangerMouse]

I'm not sure that this is such a big deal in reality.

I have no issue with them reserving the best seats for their status flyers. They have put in the time and they deserve to be rewarded. That said, I have no status with any airline so I am not one of the privileged. I fly regularly and the norm seems to be when I make my booking the only seats available are the middle seats. However, everytime I have done OLCI I have been able to change seats so we are seated together or I can get an aisle.

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud WHAT I really do not know for sure because I am younger, but I remember the prices being ridiculously high... not just more expensive... I would bet that if there were regulated prices, tickets would be 2X higher if not more... that is why you only had 7 people on board... I can remember only flying twice when I was young... and guess what... I was given a deck of cards to PLAY with... (I think it was Delta).... now you have to pay for peanuts

Supreme Court Justice Breyer wrote this last year (from Wikipedia)

Quote:

Still, fares have come down. Airline revenue per passenger mile has declined from an inflation-adjusted 33.3 cents in 1974, to 13 cents in the first half of 2010. In 1974 the cheapest round-trip New York-Los Angeles flight (in inflation-adjusted dollars) that regulators would allow: $1,442. Today one can fly that same route for $268. That is why the number of travelers has gone way up. So we sit in crowded planes, munch potato chips, flare up when the loudspeaker announces yet another flight delay. But how many now will vote to go back to the "good old days" of paying high, regulated prices for better service? Even among business travelers, who wants to pay "full fare for the briefcase?"

If true, that's about a 60% decline in real prices. Probably more in the routes that are very competitive.

[Zero]

I fly quite a bit, and every flight, irrespective of airline, is full but they can't seem to make a profit. They charge for bags checked, extra for leg room, for the food and now for seat assignment, and I can feel it coming now, extra charge to use the toilet.

[jennypenny]

@photoguy--some airlines, like Spirit, charge for carry-on bags already if they don't fit under the seat in front of you.

I'm ok paying for better seats because there is actually a benefit to me. And I've always thought that families with little kids should be the last ones on the plane