Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Carriers V/s Rest Of The World  
User currently offlineEastern023 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 861 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4932 times:

We all know about the US airlines and their financial struggles. Cost cutting have gone far and beyond eliminating amenities that we considered standard.

However some airlines in the world still keep those amenties up and manage to make money. I flew to Europe early this year (IAD-GVA via FRA). UA on coach and LH on the return. What a difference, on the same route LH even offered a travel kit and free alcohol. United still charges for that even on int'l routes. LA still serves meals, even on the domestic trips within Chile and Peru. Any changes on the horizon for our beloved US legacy carriers?.


AA will Rise Again!
10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSaab2000 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2001, 1609 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4927 times:

The US legacy carriers are all about making money for the top few managers. I have often asked why European and Asian carriers can offer vastly superior service, pay their employees more and still make money.

It has to do with competence and accountability - two things lacking in the US airline business.

[Edited 2006-11-09 17:03:31]


smrtrthnu
User currently offlinePanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4792 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4909 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Eastern023 (Thread starter):
What a difference, on the same route LH even offered a travel kit and free alcohol. United still charges for that even on int'l routes

Depends on what your priorities are. For those not into alcohol in the air, it's no big deal; however for those into even a modicum of comfort, LH's Y is like a slave ship compared to UA's. Also, some people may be more into PTVs in which case UA is a better deal in Y as LH pretty much doesn't offer any on its long-haul planes in Y.

Quoting Eastern023 (Thread starter):
Any changes on the horizon for our beloved US legacy carriers?.

Well, NW still offers free alcohol on its transatlantic flights (because of the KLM partnership) and DL offers one free alcoholic beverage with the main meal on its transatlantic flights in Y. DL will also be offering an amenity pack of ear plugs and eyeshades in Y on transatlantic and transpacific flights later this year.


User currently offlineEastern023 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 861 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4815 times:

Quoting Panamair (Reply 2):
Depends on what your priorities are. For those not into alcohol in the air, it's no big deal; however for those into even a modicum of comfort, LH's Y is like a slave ship compared to UA's. Also, some people may be more into PTVs in which case UA is a better deal in Y as LH pretty much doesn't offer any on its long-haul planes in Y.

Im just saying amenties in general. I flew LH FRA-GVA is about an hour if not less, they gave us a decent snack and beverages. Intra-Europe flight it would be something like US domestic, but is much better in comparison.

By the way UA segments on the trip 747-400 IAD-FRA no IFE. And paid for upgrade to Economy Plus.



AA will Rise Again!
User currently offlineNzrich From New Zealand, joined Dec 2005, 1515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4697 times:

Quoting Panamair (Reply 2):
Quoting Eastern023 (Thread starter):What a difference, on the same route LH even offered a travel kit and free alcohol. United still charges for that even on int'l routes
Depends on what your priorities are. For those not into alcohol in the air, it's no big deal; however for those into even a modicum of comfort, LH's Y is like a slave ship compared to UA's. Also, some people may be more into PTVs in which case UA is a better deal in Y as LH pretty much doesn't offer any on its long-haul planes in Y.

Quoting Eastern023 (Thread starter):Any changes on the horizon for our beloved US legacy carriers?.
Well, NW still offers free alcohol on its transatlantic flights (because of the KLM partnership) and DL offers one free alcoholic beverage with the main meal on its transatlantic flights in Y. DL will also be offering an amenity pack of ear plugs and eyeshades in Y on transatlantic and transpacific flights later this year.

Yes but also even LH is not as good as a lot of other international carriers also ie sq nz .. For example NZ you get free food, alcohol, avod ptv , friendly cabin service and up to 34" seat pitch and most asian pacific and european carriers offer most of these features on long haul flying..The main reason in my opinion the USA carriers get away with offering a sub standard service in general is because American passengers choose to fly a American airline or get customers going on price alone . I wouldnt mind less amenities if the price was less than the full service airlines on the whole exc US Airways its seems that they are as cheap/expensive as all the foreign carriers operating a route.



"Pride of the pacific"
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2822 posts, RR: 42
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4686 times:

Quoting Eastern023 (Thread starter):
However some airlines in the world still keep those amenties up and manage to make money. I flew to Europe early this year (IAD-GVA via FRA). UA on coach and LH on the return. What a difference, on the same route LH even offered a travel kit and free alcohol. United still charges for that even on int'l routes. LA still serves meals, even on the domestic trips within Chile and Peru. Any changes on the horizon for our beloved US legacy carriers?.

Beloved by whom? You make a lot of generalizations here. Most notably, I am more then happy with the service I get on FL, B6 and F9.

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 1):
The US legacy carriers are all about making money for the top few managers. I have often asked why European and Asian carriers can offer vastly superior service, pay their employees more and still make money.

As opposed to EasyJet and RyanAir, which make Southwest look like the Pan Am of the Golden Age?

It all depends on your point of view.


User currently offlineSupa7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4644 times:

In an all-out battle, I think the world would win. But the US carriers would launch a lot of nukes before they went down. It is better not to imagine this type of thing.

 Smile


User currently offlineSpacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3520 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4583 times:

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 1):
The US legacy carriers are all about making money for the top few managers. I have often asked why European and Asian carriers can offer vastly superior service, pay their employees more and still make money.

Well, not all Asian carriers are making money doing this. (I don't know much about European carriers.) JAL, for example, is still losing tons of money.

The difference is, there is not really even much thought given to cutting comfort and amenities in order to return to profitability in other territories. Business is just conducted differently, with the thinking being that the point of efficiency is to provide passengers the best service at the lowest cost, not that the point of efficiency is to make the most money even at the expense of passenger satisfaction. I think most other industries even in the United States operate in a manner closer to the way Asian airlines do, because they know that repeat business is the key to long-term success.

There are probably various reasons for this that would require a lengthy essay to deal with completely. But the point is airlines in other territories generally look to cut costs in areas other than those that directly affect passenger comfort, because they know that the last thing they need when losing money is to turn off customers. Other cultures also have higher expectations of service, so there is less that they can cut without passenger revolts.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineEastern023 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 861 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4579 times:

I can't help to wonder if the future brings brighter days. Some of us (trying really hard not to to generalize and upset AirFrnt) do not mind pay extra for the service and amenities. Specially long haul international.


AA will Rise Again!
User currently offlinePanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4792 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4542 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Eastern023 (Reply 8):
Some of us (trying really hard not to to generalize and upset AirFrnt) do not mind pay extra for the service and amenities. Specially long haul international.

Problem is, there is not enough of those 'some' who would be willing to pay extra for all of the legacy carriers in the world.

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 1):
The US legacy carriers are all about making money for the top few managers. I have often asked why European and Asian carriers can offer vastly superior service, pay their employees more and still make money.

It has to do with competence and accountability - two things lacking in the US airline business.

While some of that may be true for some carriers, it is too easy to just generalize as such. Many European and Asian carriers also do not make money on a consistent basis (KE, LX, AZ, IB, TG, JL), don't necessarily pay their employees more (SQ certainly comes to mind), nor do they offer vastly superior service (very subjective but suffice to say US carriers have some fans in this area too)


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11120 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4519 times:

Quoting Eastern023 (Thread starter):
However some airlines in the world still keep those amenties up and manage to make money. I flew to Europe early this year (IAD-GVA via FRA). UA on coach and LH on the return. What a difference, on the same route LH even offered a travel kit and free alcohol.

For now.

There was an article just this week in the Wall Street Journal about how the service changes that have been sweeping the U.S. air travel experience are now heading across the pond.

Quoting Eastern023 (Thread starter):
Any changes on the horizon for our beloved US legacy carriers?.

Not as long as Americans continue to choose money over service. American travelers have largely decided that they would rather forgo the thrills and get a lower fare. That's just reality. And -- bad news for our neighbors across the ocean -- it's rapidly coming to Europe too. Look at BA's completely pull-out of from any real point-to-point presence in the U.K. outside London, witness the national airline of Ireland giving up on a full-service model, etc.

If you honestly think that the superior service that has been sustained by some of Europe's legacy airlines because of cross-subsidization from profitable longhaul routes can last forever, you are -- in my view -- delusional.

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 1):
The US legacy carriers are all about making money for the top few managers. I have often asked why European and Asian carriers can offer vastly superior service, pay their employees more and still make money.

It has to do with competence and accountability - two things lacking in the US airline business.

That's ridiculous and idiotic.

U.S. legacy carriers are all about surviving, and giving customers what they want. U.S. consumers want low fares. It's as simple as that.

It's not about "competence and accountability" in any sense -- and by the way, there is plenty of both in the U.S. airline industry. (And coming from Europe, home to such competently well-run airlines as Alitalia and Olympic, I wouldn't be too prideful.)


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...
US Airlines Vs Rest Of The World posted Fri Aug 19 2005 01:38:14 by CO737800
US Reg #s Vs. The Rest Of The World posted Mon Jun 12 2000 17:14:36 by Corey777
Airliners.net Vs The Rest Of The World. posted Mon Jan 22 2001 13:13:39 by Thom@s
Luggage Allowance: US Vs Rest Of World?! posted Sun Feb 20 2005 09:47:47 by Ansett767
Change To US FFP Sign Of The Future? posted Sun Jun 18 2006 02:22:33 by PSA727
Is CLE The RJ Capital Of The World? posted Sat May 6 2006 22:57:29 by Tockeyhockey
EI Loads To ORD And The Rest Of The USA posted Fri Jan 6 2006 14:07:51 by BHXDTW
'AMS Best Airport Of The World' posted Tue Dec 13 2005 14:45:37 by JCS
New Magazine - Airports Of The World posted Tue Aug 23 2005 11:07:08 by CKT789
The "rest Of The Story" On DFW's 5/10 Study posted Fri May 27 2005 17:08:43 by OPNLguy