Why every airline executive needs to be fired, and replaced with entrepreneurs. | Hacker News Reader

Why every airline executive needs to be fired, and replaced with entrepreneurs.

blog.tripfab.com

12 pointsmtjl7925 comments

This guy has apparently never heard of first class. You pay $200 extra, just like he suggested, and you get every perk he suggested that isn't impossible due to government regulation. They'll give you more legroom, better food (and you don't have to pay for it), and even load your carryon for you.

Of course I have heard of first class.

But what I am talking about is an entirely different travel experience. Airlines trying to be different and innovating - and airlines trying to MAKE A PROFIT.

What's different between the experience you suggest and first class?

I wasn't trying to define an experience, but give ideas of things I hate when I fly.

The whole point of the article is why airlines can't make money - and maybe it's because they are all the same?

So why do you think airlines can't make money?

So why do you think airlines can't make money?

Because not enough people are willing to pay $200 more for slightly more legroom, nor for better food, nor for this or that or anything else you mentioned.

As the OP said, airlines already do let you pay for as much of this as they can.

So you are saying if 20% of the 1 billion people that travel every year didn't pay $200 more - it wouldn't generate profit?

First Class cabins are sized what they are because they reliably are all that will pay for them.

Very few people find it worth it.

Many people just don't get how well off they are compared to random person in a random town in the country.

$290. That's a weeks pay at minimum wage.

$290 is pre-tax btw.

Officers of corporations are obligated, by market forces and law, to try to make a profit for their investors.

edit: except for registered not-for-profit corporations.

This is just the incoherent rambling of someone who has no real knowledge of one of the most complicated businesses in the world.

MOAR! BETTER! FIRE THEM ALL! He never got the memo that airlines operate under thousands of regulations, with extraordinary capital costs, in a marketplace where consumers will pick the ticket that's $20 cheaper every time.

So this is all because of regulations?

This is what this whole article is about - not picking the $20 cheaper ticket every time. That all the companies are the same, so why should anyone NOT pick the $20 cheaper ticket every time?

The companies are not all the same. Virgin America, Singapore Airlines, Southwest Airlines, British Airways, Emirates, all occupy different marketing niches compared to the standard US carriers (United, Delta, Northwest, etc.)

What the few successful airlines have realized is that there isn't THAT much room to go premium in economy class -- that consumers might pay $20 more for an airline they like, but not $50.

This blogger wants business class service for an economy class price plus a few dollars, and it's just delusional. A Boeing 777 costs $300 million.

What marketing niches? My different areas in the world - but airlines are all pretty much the same.

Show me something amazing an innovate that an airline has done compared to a competitor. There are slight differences - and I travel all the time, I don't have any one airline I absolutely love and MUST fly.

And if I did, you can be assured I would pay more. I am not looking for business class services for an economy price - I am looking for a DIFFERENT airline.

I hope I wasn't implying that the regulations are bad -- the incredible rigor of the airline industry, by all parties, is one of the major reasons that you can get in a gigantic metal tube for 20 hours, 7 miles in the air, going halfway across the globe, more safely than walking down the sidewalk.

Yeah. There are two possible scenarios.

1) Everyone who has run an airline for 30 years is an idiot. It never occurred to them that people would pay more for better service, even though they all went to prestigious b-schools. The author of this blog post is a genius.

2) The author of this blog post has no idea about the myriad of government regulations and economic realities of the airline industry.

If I'm ever arrogant enough to assume #1, shoot me.

You are correct on both points.

Maybe you have a solution as to why the travel industry doesn't make any money? Because obviously what they have now doesn't work.

They don't make money because they compete on fares, which is because that's all most people care about. Those who care about luxury just fly first, but that's a small percent of the market. Even most people in first got there via free upgrades.

After deregulation, especially in the advent of low cost regional carriers, there have simply been too many airlines. Bankruptcies and consolidation are going to take care of that very soon. This happens all the time in new industries (and the airline industry is effectively new since deregulation reshaped it so much).

Airlines don't control airports, air traffic control or airport security. Flying has become a bad experience largely in the areas airlines are powerless to correct. Granted, marginally solvent entities probably don't have the capital to support these facilities too, but this just says the business model is very broken as it stands today.

Could airports, air traffic control or the security detail (excluding the TSA) actually pay for themselves from flight revenues? I would guess they should since we won't go back to ocean liners or zeppelins.

I don't think you're completely correct. Flying hasn't just become a bad experience due to the fact of airlines being powerless.

So it's TSA's fault that I can move my legs on a flight, or I have to fight over armrests?

You are saying that every airline is EXACTLY the same because of TSA? I completely disagree.

"There should be two types of travel. Spit these airplanes up. People that want to pay the cheapest possible price, and pack them into an airplane and give them a shitty experience. And people that are willing to pay extra and be loyal, give me a completely different experience."

This already exists, it's called First Class and platinum status. It may not exist at the price point that OP wants.

But it's all still the same.

I agree, there are minor differences in first class with airlines in my experience - but I am talking about an entirely different travel experience than what exists.

For $45,000 down and about 15k a flight plus gas milage, you can have this experience with Delta.

They'll fly you around the country in small jets used for business class clientele only.

Now, its pricey but it exists. That's the seperate "class" that you're talking about.

They meet you at the gate, take your luggage, and even send a limo to pick you up and take you to your destination. You never see security screening either.

Flew Delta across country. Food was good (and you paid for it). Had TV+games on the back of every chair in coach. Even served Ben and Jerry's icecream.

I think planes ARE being divvyed up like he is saying (business and or first class, sky lounges, etc), just he's underestimating the amount of people who don't want to pay to sit in luxury at 35000ft.

I may be misremembering this because I'm not a major traveller, but wasn't there a time when fares were regulated, so the government set the fare for a given route and class of travel, and the airlines competed for passengers by trying to make the travel experience better (since they could not compete on price)?

Well, it seems there's a lot of the author's points covered by upgrading to business class, but that's an extra $1000 transatlantic, not $200. If it was $200, I'd pay the upgrade fee myself even if my employer wouldn't cover it. Unfortunately, $1k is simply too much :(

Reply on news.ycombinator.com