Will the public pay for experience?

CaptBill

CaptBill

Well-Known Member
I was discussing with a friend the lengths people will go to while traveling to save $1. He posed a question to me that I thought I would get some opinions on.

If 1000 passengers were told the weather at their destination was bad (windy, snowy...whatever), and they were presented with $500 in cash, and offered two options, would they:

1. Pay the $500 and fly on the shiny new jet with a well seasoned and professional looking crew (pilots they would perceive as a bit older and more experienced)...

-or-

2. Pay $300 (pocketing the other $200) and get on a plane that looked old and worn out which was flown by younger (perceived as less experienced) and wearing uniforms that looked like they were slept in.


In other words, what percentage of the flying public really cares about the airplane and who is flying it so long as they get the cheapest fare???:confused:
And for those who do care, how much more would they be willing to pay for the perceived assurance of a safe and uneventful flight?

We all know that shiny airplanes and older pilots don't guarantee anything, and that is not my point here.....just wondering about public thinking and how they would justify choosing one option over the other.
 
The public will always go for the cheapest fare, while expecting the most service.

Especially in this economy.
 
calcapt said:
2. Pay $300 (pocketing the other $200) and get on a plane that looked old and worn out which was flown by younger (perceived as less experienced) and wearing uniforms that looked like they were slept in.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

All they care about is cheap tickets, a hot meal on a 30 minute flight and that the F/As will kiss their butt and wait on them....
 
This says it all

BudLight Presents

MR DISCOUNT AIRLINE PILOT GUY
Bud Light Presents Real Men of Genius
(Real Men of Genius)

Today we salute you, Mr. Discount Airline Pilot Guy.
(Mr. Discount Airline Pilot Guy)

Your minimal experience flying a plane will never land you at a reputable airline. Luckily, you don't work for one.
(Look at me I'm flying)

Sure, we're concerned for our lives, just not as concerned as saving nine bucks on a round trip to Fort Myers.
(Oooooooooh!)

The most direct route to Houston? Through Fort Lauderdale with layovers in Detroit, Vancouver, and Kalamazoo.
(I can't feel my legs)

So crack open an ice cold Bud Light, O’ Skipper of the Skies. You put the “fly” in fly-by-night operations.
(Mr. Discount Airline Pilot Guy)
 
If the $300 option is the likely choice (I agree by the way), we pilots will have to rely on other ways to put pressure on airlines to raise wages and working conditions to acceptable levels. We simply can't depend on the flying public to demand that the airlines pay their crews fairly and provide adequate work conditions (rest, training etc...) lest they drive the price of their $129 ticket up another $15. Is it possible that the consumer is as much at fault for pathetic aircrew wages as the scoundrels that run the airlines? :confused:
 
If you put all those factors out in front of the passengers, I am sure that you would get more people to take the more expensive flight. But it all comes down to the fact that the average passenger is not informed, Especially at the time of purchase.

Frankly aviation has gotten to the point that nobody considers a crash a possibility. Planes just aren't falling out of the sky fast enough for anyone to care. Just look at BUF for the best example. EVERYONE in BUF knows about Colgan. If this was a factor there would be a significant drop in bookings for Continental there when they send a Q400 over a 737 or ERJ. The fact that they still send Q400s to BUF, and they still sell tickets on them proves that the passengers just don't care.
 
I wonder what would happen if when your looking at all the available flights on expedia.com, along with the price and departure/arrival times, it also had pictures of the airplane you will be in (interior and exterior) as well as the scheduled TT of the flight crew, also the percentage of on time arrival given the history of that flight and the rate of lost baggage. Not that I'm for that, but it would make people have to think about it before double clicking.
 
calcapt said:
If the $300 option is the likely choice (I agree by the way), we pilots will have to rely on other ways to put pressure on airlines to raise wages and working conditions to acceptable levels. We simply can't depend on the flying public to demand that the airlines pay their crews fairly and provide adequate work conditions (rest, training etc...) lest they drive the price of their $129 ticket up another $15. Is it possible that the consumer is as much at fault for pathetic aircrew wages as the scoundrels that run the airlines? :confused:
Click to expand...

Thing is, the public doesn't give a rats ass about your wages or your working conditions; since airline pilots are still seen through the stereotype of guys who drive their BMWs to work and pull down $300K/yr, while only working 1 week out of the month. So for any airline pilot to expect or even think that the public will somehow "pick up the cause" for them, is folly; no matter how much "informational picketing" is done. And besides, the public has enough problems in their own lives, why should they care about yours? (which is how I believe they think).

The flying public gets what they pay for. And by extension, pilots will only make what they're willing to work for. Pilots willing to work for beans? They'll get beans.
 
OldTownPilot said:
If you put all those factors out in front of the passengers, I am sure that you would get more people to take the more expensive flight. But it all comes down to the fact that the average passenger is not informed, Especially at the time of purchase.

Frankly aviation has gotten to the point that nobody considers a crash a possibility. Planes just aren't falling out of the sky fast enough for anyone to care. Just look at BUF for the best example. EVERYONE in BUF knows about Colgan. If this was a factor there would be a significant drop in bookings for Continental there when they send a Q400 over a 737 or ERJ. The fact that they still send Q400s to BUF, and they still sell tickets on them proves that the passengers just don't care.
Click to expand...
That's why we should repeal part 121. Let anyone and everyone sell airline tickets on whatever bucket of bolts that they can drag out of a T-hangar. Planes will start falling out of the sky, people will become aware of the cost of safety, and bingo, people who really care about getting to point "B" in a form more lively that a crisp will pay more.

And because the results would be really, really fascinating.
 
calcapt said:
........ Is it possible that the consumer is as much at fault for pathetic aircrew wages as the scoundrels that run the airlines? :confused:
Click to expand...

As far as ticket prices goes, its all about perceived value. When it used to cost $600 to fly across the country and back a $500 ticket seemed like a good deal to the consumer. Now the average fare is $350 and that same $500 fare seems like a rip-off. In the end a seat has a expiration date, certain people at the airlines want to get whatever they can money wise for that product that expires. It all started with the consolidator fares (hotwire, etc.) that sold the off-peak timed flights for cheap, but the passengers don't understand off-peak vs peak timings, saturday layovers, and the whole fare structure, they only understand the end price, and when they get cheap fares consistently that is what they expect. Management has basically fed this passenger mentality created machine to the point of feeding it the whole airline.
 
Roger said:
That's why we should repeal part 121. Let anyone and everyone sell airline tickets on whatever bucket of bolts that they can drag out of a T-hangar. Planes will start falling out of the sky, people will become aware of the cost of safety, and bingo, people who really care about getting to point "B" in a form more lively that a crisp will pay more.

And because the results would be really, really fascinating.
Click to expand...

Oh yes they would be fascinating.


Burn the FARs!!!!:D
 
So Mike, are you trying to tell me that John Q Public doesn't care that Doug and Kristie's BMW is due for a major service and is likely to cost big bucks? Doug needs a raise to service his ride and to get his pool cleaned. Fairness demands a public outcry.
 
calcapt said:
So Mike, are you trying to tell me that John Q Public doesn't care that Doug and Kristie's BMW is due for a major service and is likely to cost big bucks? Doug needs a raise to service his ride and to get his pool cleaned. Fairness demands a public outcry.
Click to expand...

LOL! Yes.

I jus think that the general public is so engrossed in their own daily lives, that the airlines are no more than a city bus to them. So the problems of the airlines, to them, are like the problems of the planet Saturn's rings fading, to you and me. :)
 
MikeD said:
So the problems of the airlines, to them, are like the problems of the planet Saturn's rings fading, to you and me. :)
Click to expand...


I didn't even know Saturn had rings and I don't really care if they fade or not. I guess that sums up the whole thread question doesn't it? :)
 
calcapt said:
I didn't even know Saturn had rings and I don't really care if they fade or not. I guess that sums up the whole thread question doesn't it? :)
Click to expand...

LOL! But you bring up a very interesting dilemma for pilots and by extension, the industry. How do conditions get improved for pilots and the airlines if the public seemingly doesn't care (ie- with no public support, getting backing for change will be tough)? What will it TRULY take in order to get this needed public support? Another Tenerife?
 
OldTownPilot said:
EVERYONE in BUF knows about Colgan. If this was a factor there would be a significant drop in bookings for Continental there when they send a Q400 over a 737 or ERJ. The fact that they still send Q400s to BUF, and they still sell tickets on them proves that the passengers just don't care.
Click to expand...


Excellent point.
 
MikeD said:
Thing is, the public doesn't give a rats ass about your wages or your working conditions; since airline pilots are still seen through the stereotype of guys who drive their BMWs to work and pull down $300K/yr, while only working 1 week out of the month. So for any airline pilot to expect or even think that the public will somehow "pick up the cause" for them, is folly; no matter how much "informational picketing" is done. And besides, the public has enough problems in their own lives, why should they care about yours? (which is how I believe they think).

The flying public gets what they pay for. And by extension, pilots will only make what they're willing to work for. Pilots willing to work for beans? They'll get beans.
Click to expand...

I agree and will add one of the reasons the public doesn't care is because they assume anyone allowed to fly a plane that has a major airline's name painted on the side is fully qualified to fly them safely. They assume there are reasonable checks and balances that ensure qualified pilots are up front no matter what they pay. So shopping for the cheapest fare bears no consequence when it comes to safety.
 
What if airlines had to fly under their own colors, while still doing all the contract flying.? Would that change anything?
 
Douglas said:
What if airlines had to fly under their own colors, while still doing all the contract flying.? Would that change anything?
Click to expand...
People fly Cape Air... a relatively little know name with very small prop planes.
 
Ian J said:
I agree and will add one of the reasons the public doesn't care is because they assume anyone allowed to fly a plane that has a major airline's name painted on the side is fully qualified to fly them safely. They assume there are reasonable checks and balances that ensure qualified pilots are up front no matter what they pay. So shopping for the cheapest fare bears no consequence when it comes to safety.
Click to expand...

Agree. The ATR-72 with "American Eagle", still means "American" Airlines to them, staffed with American pilots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top