Sponsor Message:
Travel Polls & Prefs Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Foreign Airlines Get Fed Up?  
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19516 posts, RR: 58
Posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3862 times:

So we all agree that the TSA's response to the recent NW incident at DTW is a mixture of absurdity and stupidity.

But the other half of the problem is that it's also expensive. The flight delays caused by these measures cost the airlines money. Not only that, but they will discourage Americans from traveling abroad and foreigners from coming here. No IFE, nothing in your lap, not even a paperback book an hour prior to landing, no getting out of your seat for the last hour.

At some point, do you think that a major foreign carrier might decide that the TSA's penchant for erratically enacting bizarre and unreasonable rules is simply too much of a risk to their already slim profit margin and simply stop serving the U.S.?

30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32703 posts, RR: 72
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3856 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Thread starter):

At some point, do you think that a major foreign carrier might decide that the TSA's penchant for erratically enacting bizarre and unreasonable rules is simply too much of a risk to their already slim profit margin and simply stop serving the U.S.?

Nope.

Trans-Atlantic revenue is far too important.



a.
User currently offlineElite From Hong Kong, joined Jun 2006, 2796 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3850 times:

The question is: Will PASSENGERS get fed up?

Restricted to their seats an hour before landing, even longer security lines(!), more checked bags and possibly more lost bags, etc.

Air travel is down 20% since 2008 (well, also due to the financial crisis) but this will not help things for the airline industry.


User currently offlineBOACCunard From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 864 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3783 times:

A major foreign carrier? No.

It might push over the edge a small one that was contemplating doing so anyway, but that's about it.

The US is an extremely important market for most of the world's major airlines. Only an airline with very limited US service might even consider such a thing.



Getting There is Half the Fun!
User currently offlineAusA380 From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3765 times:

I think the non US airlines will keep flying whilst there are pax, however the issue will be will the pax be there. Whilst I travel to the US on business from time to time, I don't think our family will holiday in the US in the future. I also think people who use to transit the US will seek alternatives.

User currently offlineStratosphere From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1651 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3676 times:



Quoting Elite (Reply 2):
The question is: Will PASSENGERS get fed up?

That is the million dollar question...You know there is an A net member here HAL an Hawaiian Airlines pilot who had tried to pursuade me that airline travel of the past had it's same trial and tribulations much like airline travel today..I still disagree with him even more so now..I as a passenger as much as I like aviation almost can't stand flying anymore because of the hassle and now with these islamic idiots it is getting progressively worse. As it is now if I have the time I will choose driving over flying up too 1000 miles. And if I am willing to do that I know others will.



NWA THE TRUE EVIL EMPIRE
User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3512 times:

I don't know, but I'll I have to say is foreign carriers, especially European ones, should not let their eye off the ball. There are parts of Europe, especially France and England that are ticking with disgusted youth. I hope this last incident heightens awareness for all. While it is a pain in the butt, these measures are necessary. Who knows what info the US is getting from this guy. It will cost more to prevent, train, etc. but the trans Atlantic market is too valueable. We are all in this together, love it or not.

[Edited 2009-12-27 02:27:59 by sflaflight]

User currently offlineSolair From Ireland, joined Dec 2009, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3439 times:

I'm a little concerned that I might not be able to survive a flight where I had to stay in my seat for the last hour. I have a slight problem where my stomach gets very sick during long-haul flights (very bad gas/cramps etc ... I think it's something to do with pressure changes) and frankly the thought of being stuck in my seat for that length of time without access to a WC would put me off flying long-haul permanently.

So, unfortunately, I think I will be postponing any holidays to the US for the time being.

I doubt I'm the only passenger who will find that restriction pretty off putting to put it mildly.


User currently offlineDavehammer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3439 times:

I cant see it myself. I think you may see a slight tail off in the people who used to do 3/4/5 day New York shopping trips or stuff like that but the US market is still too to see any major reduction. As someone who likes visiting the US though, often visiting 3 times a year for leisure purposes, I'm finding myself less and less willing to go. The latest TSA rules are really something else but I'm not surprised in the slightest. The restrictions on IFE and no standing 1 hour before landing is absolutely absurd.

Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 6):
I don't know, but I'll I have to say is foreign carriers, especially European ones, should not let their eye off the ball. There are parts of Europe, especially France and England that are ticking with disgusted youth.

It's nothing new at all over here. Before the extreme elements of Islam, we had the IRA trying anything and everything.


User currently offlineSlinky09 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2009, 827 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3392 times:

The answer is of course down to whether foreign visitors stop flying, and that seems incontrovertible according to your own government figures: spending by visitors down 12% in October from the previous year, airline receipts down 16% from the previous year. Now there's a likely reason for that and it's call recession, but the figures are interesting in noting that spending by Americans abroad is down less than spending by visitors to America ... I'd like to see the effect of these latest restrictions on January 2010 year on year.

See here: http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/tinews/archive/tinews2009/20091222.html

Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 6):
I don't know, but I'll I have to say is foreign carriers, especially European ones, should not let their eye off the ball. There are parts of Europe, especially France and England that are ticking with disgusted youth. I hope this last incident heightens awareness for all.

Let's be clear here, while this is 100% true, no one has yet denied that this latest terrorist was on a US security watch list for two years. Alertness spans countries.

Quoting Solair (Reply 7):
I doubt I'm the only passenger who will find that restriction pretty off putting to put it mildly.

I 100% agree - there are going to be a lot of 'accidents' on seats and then legal claims for restriction of freedom to move and spend a penny. Of the five trips I have planned in Q1 I am now looking at what I can cancel unless these latest rules are repealed or replaced with something commonsensical.


User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3324 times:



Quoting Davehammer (Reply 8):
It's nothing new at all over here. Before the extreme elements of Islam, we had the IRA trying anything and everything.

Yes sorry guys, I should have worded it differently. I need to be fair here, I have been to Europe several times in the past 6 months passing through LHR, CDG, MXP, LIN, MAD and AMS, and I must say that LHR was the most stringent and cautious, but the rest, oh my! What I meant was that those carieers need to use their clout and make sure airports are vigilant.


User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13073 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3324 times:

As some others suggested, some airlines may end service to locations in Europe, USA and Canada not so much due to the costs of new rules, but rather that higher security fees, expansion of 'no-fly' lists reducing the number of people who can fly, fewer people who can afford to travel and some no longer wanting to deal with the increasing hassles of flying.

User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7877 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3303 times:

Jeeze, even after 9/11, getting through airports was a little more annoying sure, but come on, it's not the end of the world. They tried to blow up a plane! Multiple times! Of course the US is going to put restrictions on. It would hurt a carrier more to stop serving the US than it would hurt America. In fact, I'm sure the legacies over here would love to pick up the slack.


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineBrandonfsu05 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 152 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3207 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Thread starter):
So we all agree that the TSA's response to the recent NW incident at DTW is a mixture of absurdity and stupidity.

But the other half of the problem is that it's also expensive. The flight delays caused by these measures cost the airlines money. Not only that, but they will discourage Americans from traveling abroad and foreigners from coming here. No IFE, nothing in your lap, not even a paperback book an hour prior to landing, no getting out of your seat for the last hour.

At some point, do you think that a major foreign carrier might decide that the TSA's penchant for erratically enacting bizarre and unreasonable rules is simply too much of a risk to their already slim profit margin and simply stop serving the U.S.?

No they won't stop. The market is way too big for that. Besides I think we will see the rules ease up over time. I honestly don't think the rules are that bad....except for not being able to have any item in your lap. Lol. Okay that is ridiculous. I think not making announcements of the plane being in US airspace or being able to use the map is fine though (as much as I like the map). Lol I think these restrictions could be lifted if only we had Tel Aviv + El Al security worldwide. I think the Israelis need to come to the US and EU and show people how it is done lol.

But because of the sensationalism...people reading things in papers and what not I think we will definitely see some pax avoid the US. Some don't come now because they have to be fingerprinted and photographed everytime. But that's a trade off for ''security'' vs ''economic activity''


User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 23
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3140 times:



Quoting Davehammer (Reply 8):
The restrictions on IFE and no standing 1 hour before landing is absolutely absurd.

Restriction on moving map is nonsense:
Height above ground can be estimated.
Position can be determined after having memorized a map properly, if there is ground view.

"Remain seated for the last hour":
Some carriers were putting on the "Fasten Seatbelt" sign 1 hour prior to touchdown even now.
What was (is ?) the restrictive time to remain seated when flying into DCA post 9/11 ?
-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3137 times:

If the US used its money to build infrastructure, high speed rail and all that, we would have some choice domestically at least. But, we're pretty screwed there.


Internationally, leisure travelers will continue to travel on the yearly vacation no matter what.
Will the top end business travelers put up with this, or instead choose video conferencing, etc.


The problem is, ALL the security costs, all of that insanity, is passed on to the customers.
At a certain point, customers just throw up their hands and say: not worth it.



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3118 times:

Why was this moved from civil aviation to polls & preferences? Just trying to figure out where to post what.

User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 23
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3103 times:



Quoting BlatantEcho (Reply 15):
Will the top end business travelers put up with this, or instead choose video conferencing, etc.

The trend to limit travel expenses by replacing (short and longhaul) travel with video conferences has been in place for some years now. The recent recession (at least at my employer) was another reason to cut back on business travel even further.

Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 16):
Why was this moved from civil aviation to polls & preferences? Just trying to figure out where to post what.

Likely because, it is asking for opinions, as there is not a single answer to topic's question.
If you really need to know the reason, I suggest to email the mods at moderators@airliners.net

-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineLDIkaros From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3072 times:

I don't think that the newly implemented rules are well thought out and they may get revised soon. However, IF they stay in place as currently proposed then they will likely have an effect on int'l travel to the US.

Let's face it - the US has a lot to offer for int'l visitors but there are many other countries where European or Asian visitors can go without much hassle. If people want to come here they still will come but they will likely come less often. Other countries/regions will gain tourists at the expense of the US. This has already happened after 9/11 and will most likely continue to happen in the future.

And it's not just these new rules - they are just the latest hassle factor. Add to them the whole TSA circus as it existed already, the lack of service on many domestic carriers, delays, etc and you have a situation where traveling becomes less and less inviting.


User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3049 times:

I think it will have a detrimental effect on total passenger figures for US visitors. Let's face it entering the US even before recent events has hardly been 'user friendly'.

I avoid even transiting the US nowadays. Yet a few years ago I loved to visit the US. It's simply not worth the trouble anymore. Yes there are reasons for extra security but frankly recent measures are just plain silly, and only serve to make geniune visitors feel unwelcome. Remember you can only make a first impression once.

Land of the free? Doubtful...over-restricted more like.
Home of the brave? Home of the paranoid knee-jerk reactionary.


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2972 times:

If US intelligence and international police work was worth its salt in combatting terrorist plots and if TSA and other security measures were based on this intelligence and a sound, methodical and long term risk management approach, I would gladly suffer the indignities they exact from me. But, having worked in Risk Management for a number of years, I know that the majority of TSA measures are knee jerk, make it up as you go, make 'em 'feel safe' BS. The only effective measures are the so called "secondary security" controls. I would rather we all were put through this, including the plastic explosives detection chamber, that the 'security theatre' we are currently playing at.

As it is, I am seriously considering routings via Canada for future trips to the US.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineCM767 From Panama, joined Dec 2004, 654 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2924 times:



Quoting Elite (Reply 2):
The question is: Will PASSENGERS get fed up?

I will say yes. I plan to move a vacation to the US to a Latin destination next year.



But The Best Thing God Has Created Is A New Day
User currently offlineLegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2070 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2897 times:

I flew from YVR-SFO today and six passengers missed the flight in YVR because they were held up in security. One carry on, no back packs,must carry your lap top in your hand or in a sleeve. It took me almost a full two hours from check in to gate. A lot of tempers flared and I for one, do not flying enjoyable anymore.


John@SFO
User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2800 times:



Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 20):

As it is, I am seriously considering routings via Canada for future trips to the US.

Why would you that? That just creates double hassle. Transiting Canada doesn't avoid dealing with US immigration/customs.


User currently offlineHirnie From Germany, joined May 2004, 594 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2754 times:



Quoting Elite (Reply 2):
The question is: Will PASSENGERS get fed up?

Yes, a lot allready are.

Friends of mine avoided the US last year on a RTW - trip. I try to avoid the US wherever I can. Not because of the country (it's really beautiful and there are a lot of nice and intrsting things to see), but because of all the sillyness you have to go through before entering the country. Travelling to the US reminds me to travelling to the former Soviet Union or the the former GDR.
These are very sad times, because I loved to visit the US in former times. I think my visit to NY in feb this year will be the last for a long time.
I'm not the only person thinking this way. I know a lot of people at work who think the same way I do.


25 MilesDependent : Agreed. I canned my trip to the USA for later in the year, and will go to Japan instead. I just don't want to deal with all that security nonsense. T
26 NicoEDDF : Yes, they will. That won't hurt business travel, but certainly vacationeers, especially on shorter (city-) trips to the US. But then again, when has
27 Soon7x7 : It's a tragedy that the pleasure of travelling worldwide has sucumbed to the nonsense that it has...The US had better get it's act together where prof
28 BE77 : The people I work with regularly travel Canada to South America...and universally everyone has changed flights to avoid connections through the US, ev
29 ZKEOJ : As many stated above, I also think that passenger numbers will decrease. I know people who actively avoid visiting the USA, although they are interes
30 Soon7x7 : The shame of it is not the terrorists, ( although we could do without them), it's the lack of effective response from our brainiac bureaucrats...who n
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Fed Up With (F)lying Blue? posted Wed Apr 1 2009 12:06:36 by Henkybaby
Will Business Class Get Cheaper? posted Fri Feb 6 2009 22:35:48 by VC10er
Just How Basic Do Budget Airlines Get? posted Fri May 4 2007 08:52:10 by NEMA
KC-135 Vs MD-95 Will The Real 717 Stand Up? posted Fri Jun 30 2006 19:38:20 by 747400sp
Will Song Airlines Be Able To Beat Jetblue? posted Tue May 4 2004 08:12:40 by Kieso
Will DL Bump Me Up To The Next Level? posted Sat Dec 5 2009 11:10:49 by JKJ777
Will I Get A Menu In CO F EWR-SAN? posted Wed Apr 15 2009 18:17:07 by USAirALB
Cut Up Your QF FF Card & NZ Will Match Status posted Mon Mar 9 2009 12:55:05 by Georgebush
Airlines Who Will Upgrade Non-company Non-revs? posted Fri Feb 20 2009 00:59:18 by KLMCedric
Airlines That Will Probably Never Order Again posted Fri Dec 12 2008 13:54:55 by SXDFC