News and notes from around the interweb:
- Lufthansa launches Frankfurt – Austin effective May 3. It still wouldn’t surprise me to see Delta or Air France announce Paris service given Delta’s expected ramp up in the city — next year’s addition of 9 new gates (37% increase) will be huge for what’s already the fastest growing airport in the country by passengers.
- The Economist on seat size regulations.
There is good reason to believe that the bill will backfire and hurt the flyers it is meant to protect. If it sets seat pitch above the smallest levels employed by some airlines, passengers across the industry could end up paying more to fly. Gary Leff, a travel writer, makes this point persuasively on his blog, View From the Wing. Right now, the smallest seat pitch on American carriers is 28 inches (70cm) on ultra-low-cost airlines such as Spirit and Frontier. Travellers choosing to fly with these airlines know they are in for a cramped experience. But they fly with them anyway because of the low prices on offer. Meanwhile, legacy airlines such as American, Delta and United have been forced to reduce some of their own fares to remain competitive with these no-frills rivals.
- A United flight attendant talks about the airline finally merging United and Continental crew on Monday. It’s incredible this merger still isn’t done.
- Fuel surcharge scam: Lufthansa jacks up their already-high fuel surcharges and these are largely just a way to extract revenue from frequent flyers redeeming miles for ‘free’ tickets.
- “United’s President Scott Kirby says that it’s like buying a concert ticket where you pay more to sit closer to the stage. Unless the pilots are going to open that door and play some guitar, then this is an absurd comparison.”
- Southwest vs. American: the launch of Southwest Airlines in the 1970s. (HT: Jonathan W.)
Ironically, UA/CO flight attendants have systems and operational integration the same day as US/AA.
Ummm Gary, on the seat size regulation point, you’re quoting yourself. I’m not really sure if the intent was to show that you agree with yourself or to show that you were quoted in a national publication.
Where are my manners? Congratulations on being quoted in a recognized national publication!
The other unintended consequence of the misguided seat size bill would be if the size is set at or below any current seat pitch offering, then all the carriers would be incentived to drop their pitch down to the minimum allowable, since the gov’t has basically endorsed the move.
If there was any regulation I’d be in favor of, it’s simply to mandate disclosing the seat pitch/width when making purchase decisions.
How dares the Economist name you “a travel writer” without mentioning your thought-leadership or at least your Hyatt status. Such peasants.
Gary, there is no article about the United workgroup merger at the URL you linked to but I did read a really good story about the Oct 1 integration at United – http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com/2018/09/eight-years-after-merger-united-airlines-flight-attendants-to-work-together-on-flights/
Gary (this may be a duplicate as the page reloaded) but there is no article about the UA workforce integration at the link provided, it seems to have been pulled. I did read this excellent story earlier covering the Oct 1 integration. http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com/2018/09/eight-years-after-merger-united-airlines-flight-attendants-to-work-together-on-flights/
Ok, Cranky, we’ll have Brooks and Dunn performing in the forward galley to justify my thinking, but it’ll cost ya even more.
Did the blog that you like to for the united article pull it? Either that or the link is wrong…
I second Tom . . . link is wrong or article pulled.
So there is no difference between United and Trump when it comes to their BS claims..lol lol
Over and over and over we get the cr0p and nonsense that passengers can “choose” between larger and smaller seats.
Listen, it just isn’t true.
#1 Many of us live outside the range of departing/arriving at the ten largest airports. We have no choice. We barely have ANY airline service. We take what we can get, usually wasting most of a day flying to some hub airport, whiling away time there before we get on another cramped flight to where we want to go. That is NOT choice.
#2. The oft-used for illustration misery airline, Spirit, actually does fly from my airport, two times a WEEK to one location. That is NOT choice.
#3. What we do get, even for 2-3+ hour flights are Embraer jets or similar, period. That IS the choice Actually, I’m okay with these, though many people are not. However, it is NOT choice. They are like sitting in a hotel-supplied straight chair for hours in a conference room without the freedom to move.
#4. Overall, there are many fewer flights and just as many people flying. That means every seat, good and bad, is filled. That simply does NOT equal choice. Numerically it cannot.
#5. Airlines cadge and weasel on supplying information on the seating — or even the plane. I am one of the people who works at getting comfortable seating. It matters to me a lot as I get older and less flexible, but not much shorter. Yet, paying money or using miles, I seldom get what I paid for. Or, yes, on one flight, but not the other. Or, my paid-for seat is pre-empted for someone who needs it more. That’s entirely reasonable EXCEPT airlines do nothing to provide a decent alternative.
Airlines are squeezing passengers — literally and figuratively — for every dime. I now hate flying except long-haul business class on foreign carriers. All of you who have to fly for work have my pity.
But, quit trying to promote this particular deceptive nonsense about “choice.”