For or against re-regulation?

ATN_Pilot said:
Markets like Toledo, OH, where 727s used to serve the community, now have no airline service whatsoever
Click to expand...

You might want to check your facts again. TOL is currently (2010) served by Delta, Eagle and Allegiant.

ATN_Pilot said:
This is what has caused the exodus of business travelers to the fractionals, not airport security or other hassles, as some like to claim. It's a price issue. It's cheaper to get a Marquis NetJets card for your executives than it is to buy them first class tickets on the airlines.
Click to expand...

:rotfl: As with airline management, you have no idea about why people have left for frax and other private modes. Airlines have forgotten what their true mission was/is. Airlines no longer provide the service as intended. FC passengers aren't bargain shoppers, but they understand the value of a service.....or lack thereof. It should be a snack in the face to the airlines that people will spend $10,000/hr for a jet, instead of a $1000 FC ticket.
 
NJA_Capt said:
As with airline management, you have no idea about why people have left for frax and other private modes. Airlines have forgotten what their true mission was/is. Airlines no longer provide the service as intended. FC passengers aren't bargain shoppers, but they understand the value of a service.....or lack thereof. It should be a snack in the face to the airlines that people will spend $10,000/hr for a jet, instead of a $1000 FC ticket.
Click to expand...

The principle reason for using private jets is time. Period. If my time is worth more than $10,000/hour to me, a private jet becomes more economical than an airline seat. If I am going someplace to negotiate contracts worth millions of dollars to me, I don't care if the trip costs $20,000, so long as it gets me there and back faster.

No one buys first class tickets anyway, they are really just a perk of being a frequent customer.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Let's just remember what "Regulation" was - it was the CAB setting fares and routes for interstate travel. Airlines were essentially treated like public utilities - just like the cable company or electric company.
Pay was never regulated, I can't imagine that ever happening.

I personally don't think traditional airline regulation would change much these days.
Click to expand...

And herein lies the problem with where the regulation is at these days. The government, by being bought by interest groups (and labor will never be able to compete on as grand a scale), has a "have our cake and eat it too" mentality.

Labor is regulated. Airline competition, is not. How can the argument that it is deregulated for free market somehow match up with the argument that the airlines and the government use when breaking strikes... "vital for transportation infrastructure".

Look, if we really think that re-regulation won't help.... why don't we explore complete DE-regulation in regards to the business. Let the labor be free market too.
 
cencal83406 said:
Labor is regulated. Airline competition, is not. How can the argument that it is deregulated for free market somehow match up with the argument that the airlines and the government use when breaking strikes... "vital for transportation infrastructure".
Click to expand...

Really? Does the government make you go to work? Does the government prevent you from quiting? Do they prevent you from working at another airline? Are you forced to join a union? (there are non-union flying jobs out there...)

I do, however, agree the RLA is very one sided. But it was around before deregulation, since 1936 it has applied to airline unions. There were more strikes before deregulation too.
 
Dr.Avion said:
We live in a free market.
Click to expand...

Here's where you're wrong. There's nothing "free" about our markets...the airline industry is a perfect example. Legacy carriers were "too big to fail" long before the banksters got ahold of the idea. A "free market" suggests that a business faces the chance of bankruptcy should it fail to compete/make money. This is not the case for many industries and hasn't been for some time.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Really? Does the government make you go to work? Does the government prevent you from quiting? Do they prevent you from working at another airline? Are you forced to join a union? (there are non-union flying jobs out there...)

I do, however, agree the RLA is very one sided. But it was around before deregulation, since 1936 it has applied to airline unions. There were more strikes before deregulation too.
Click to expand...

Of course not. They've definitely got us by the nuts because we like to fly and we like the job (for the most part).

Many other industries (heck, just look at the fearless leader CEOs), if you don't like the compensation package, you can basically threaten to quit and go somewhere better "unless they match it".
 
Boris Badenov said:
Here's where you're wrong. There's nothing "free" about our markets...the airline industry is a perfect example. Legacy carriers were "too big to fail" long before the banksters got ahold of the idea. A "free market" suggests that a business faces the chance of bankruptcy should it fail to compete/make money. This is not the case for many industries and hasn't been for some time.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:
 
NJA_Capt said:
:rotfl: As with airline management, you have no idea about why people have left for frax and other private modes. Airlines have forgotten what their true mission was/is. Airlines no longer provide the service as intended. FC passengers aren't bargain shoppers, but they understand the value of a service.....or lack thereof. It should be a snack in the face to the airlines that people will spend $10,000/hr for a jet, instead of a $1000 FC ticket.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

The justification for private jet service is indeed the time/convenience benefit and not quality of service. Sure, first class service should consist of a near private jet quality of comfort, entertainment, food, etc. Regardless of how well an airline provides this type of service, it will never provide the time/convenience benefit of a private (err....corporate)...jet. A few items that we all know are: security screening, boarding, luggage check, luggage claim and pick up from busy airport terminals. In addition, the first class passenger also has far fewer, far more busy destination airports to choose from. What I'm getting at here is door to door time. No matter what level of service first class passengers recieve....it will never be as good as private/corporate jet.

For example, expectations of an executive on a biz trip:
My airport will be close and convenient...perhaps half the drive and half the traffic. I want to leave the office, drive directly to the door of the plane, watch my bags go in the back, and get on the plane. I can work on ANYTHING (confidential, private, intimate) while en route. At the destination, someone picks me up at the door of the plane and loads my bags at that point as well. No lines, no parking, no terminal, no checked/claimed/lost bags. I'm productive (can work on sensitive stuff) on the plane and in the car, and the amount of time I'm in either is much less.

There are some things you simply can't expect, no matter the service class, when you get on a plane with 200 of your friends....
 
ferguson354 said:
I disagree.

The justification for private jet service is indeed the time/convenience benefit and not quality of service. Sure, first class service should consist of a near private jet quality of comfort, entertainment, food, etc. Regardless of how well an airline provides this type of service, it will never provide the time/convenience benefit of a private (err....corporate)...jet. A few items that we all know are: security screening, boarding, luggage check, luggage claim and pick up from busy airport terminals. In addition, the first class passenger also has far fewer, far more busy destination airports to choose from. What I'm getting at here is door to door time. No matter what level of service first class passengers recieve....it will never be as good as private/corporate jet.

For example, expectations of an executive on a biz trip:
My airport will be close and convenient...perhaps half the drive and half the traffic. I want to leave the office, drive directly to the door of the plane, watch my bags go in the back, and get on the plane. I can work on ANYTHING (confidential, private, intimate) while en route. At the destination, someone picks me up at the door of the plane and loads my bags at that point as well. No lines, no parking, no terminal, no checked/claimed/lost bags. I'm productive (can work on sensitive stuff) on the plane and in the car, and the amount of time I'm in either is much less.

There are some things you simply can't expect, no matter the service class, when you get on a plane with 200 of your friends....
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with a guy who is in the fractional business and has day-to-day interaction and visibility to the private jet industry....
 
meritflyer said:
I tend to agree with a guy who is in the fractional business and has day-to-day interaction and visibility to the private jet industry....
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of NJA Cept's position with folks over on Bridgeway Avenue, and I meant no disrespect. I simply disagree and wanted to present my arguement.
 
ferguson354 said:
I'm well aware of NJA Capt's position with folks over on Bridgeway Avenue, and I meant no disrespect. I simply disagree and wanted to present my argument.
Click to expand...
No worries. You actually support my opinion, not disagree. I left it pretty open that the airlines have forgotten the essence of their being. You laid out many of the accurate reasons that people have left the airlines in favor of private travel.

Airlines fly A to C, via B (which is most likely 2 hours the wrong direction). People would put up with slightly out of the way travel and FC tickets.....IF the service was somewhat existent. Current airline routes are poor, aircraft condition/size is poor, service isn't what it used to be. Not by fault of the employees, but what management has tried to get by on. People walked with their feet. I see people chose one jet over another because they will arrive :20 mins sooner. The airlines just can't meet that kind of schedule or the service required to meet it.

drunkenbeagle said:
Or blowing things up, or getting to places that can't be reached by land, or taking pictures of things. Not all airplanes are used for moving passengers...
Click to expand...
If figured Mr. Literal would come out somewhere. I know they aren't always for passengers, but for the intent of the thread it was accurate.

but

Ships, tanks, and helos can blow things up....planes are faster
Ships and helicopters can reach things not on land....planes are faster
Satellites, helos and blimps can take pictures......planes are faster (yes...satellites aren't always in the right orbit).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top