Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful | Hacker News Reader

Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful

viewfromthewing.com

78 pointsao9881 comments

I'm not sure why this piece mentions deregulation. The drinks limit was in 1956, while the sandwich spat was in 1958 – but deregulation wasn't until 1978, two decades later!

The collusion in question seems to only relate to regulation, which prohibited the airlines from competing on price. The incentives obviously don't work out the same with deregulation!

It was kind of a weirdly written intro, but I think it was meant to set up "here are some examples of how ridiculous things were before deregulation".

It mentions deregulation because it is challenging a purported assumption that the only airline regulations before 1978 were those set by government.

Arguably it was the government regulation against competing on price that led to the industry regulations on food service. Airlines tried to compete on other bases so food service was much better than what it is today.

This is obvious for anyone who took an airlines outside of USA eg Singapore air, Emirates, Cathay and ate real food with real cutlery and got a tub of hagendaz ice cream for dessert.

Interesting to hear that they serve a good American ice cream!

I would not put Häagen-Dazs in the category "good" necessarily. They also do crap.

Emirates?

Are we talking business or economy? Because emirates hasn’t served nice food on economy for years.

good airline food but at a higher ticket price is not what consumers actually choose to buy. They'd rather suffer and get a discount on the ticket. They merely complain about that suffering.

Isn't the point that food in economy class is often worse than it needs to be for the cost, and food in first class is not good enough to justify the massively increased ticket price?

Yes, but many don’t buy first class for the food. On a red eye (often don’t serve much food at all and if they do it’s very rushed) it might be you need to sleep for a meeting tomorrow. Or if you’re tall, leg room + basic comfort.

As a fat and tall guy, it's all about the extra free inches of space. Worst seat is the back isle. Person in front of my pushed seat back and dislocated my knee. Short notice flying for work can really suck.

I guess everything is relative.

I'm 180cm and definitely could stand to lose some weight so I've experienced some uncomfortable flights - generally on Qantas. Surprisingly (given average national height/weight) the best legroom I've had was on Thai, followed by Singapore airlines.

But then I can't compare to US airlines, which if stories are true, sound just horrific by comparison for any number of reasons before legroom is even a factor.

That's kind of irrelevant though.

The parent comment claimed that people "choose" the worse option, ignoring that the "better" option is marginally better food for usually 2x or 3x the price.

I haven't flown domestically (in any country) in about 10 years. The shortest leg of recent trips will be ~2 hours, either followed or preceded by a ~7-9 hour flight.

Parent's comment suggests I'm "choosing" worse food options (thankfully they are still an option, you can just choose not to eat on the plane) as if that's the only factor.

It couldn't possibly be that business class on the same route is more than 4x the cost, and for a family of 3 will cost the same as a brand new small car... just to get a slightly better reheated meal. Yes the meal is in a "nicer" seat, but that isn't the argument being made in the parent comment, is it?

Charge $100 more for a ticket to get a slightly better sandwich, then claim the consumer chose the worse sandwich.

Given airport food court pricing you might be surprised. Plenty of people pay 3x the price for 1.8x the space.

Airline upgrades is a market for lemons. Even if you, say, buy an upgraded seat you may get sat next to a big guy or a rowdy child and then your seat sucks. Instead you have to pay much more (sometimes multiple times a main-cabin ticket) for the cabins up front and even then you might have to set next to a drunk businessman.

If you complain you will get told there's nothing that can be done. Even if you get sat in a seat soiled with vomit or poop[1][2]. And of course you may get bumped from your flight, potentially violently[3] or have it delayed, rerouted or cancelled.

So it's a market for lemons, you buy the cheapest ticket you can since the experience is likely to suck no matter what you do, and you try to endure it.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2023/09/05/air-canada-... [2] https://www.newsweek.com/delta-passenger-forced-sit-seat-cov... [3] https://qz.com/954791/everything-that-went-wrong-in-uniteds-...

I've traveled for business a few times and a few times I got the company to pay for a first class seat up front. One time the first class cabin had a crying baby in it. Another time it was full of rowdy children. It turns out that rich people have children too. Paying for first class simply decreases your chances of dealing with such things, just like any other seat upgrade.

I suspect that airlines could offer seats which guarantee that you won't be subjected to various nuisances, but choose not to.

Why does first class decrease the chance of rowdy children?

In some cities, only the rich can afford multiple kids.

In my experience, the cultural differences due to socioeconomics explains a reduced chance of having to tolerate rowdy children. Those children in first class will be better behaved on average, or the parents will be more likely to heed complaints.

That's because you're paying for a wider seat and better service.

I suspect they are just as happy to take some kids parents money for the seat as not.

And judging by the number of people I know that get upgraded, its not like they sell out every flight.

They do sell out upgraded seats every flight.

In the later 90s, I used to try to upgraded at check in. It was usually a 2x cost of the was a seat or less vs 3x of you got first class ahead of time. Since the 00s is pretty much never an option. Most flights are over sold and getting a decent seat (prefer front row) is really hard.

And the past couple years, even then they're often sold out when buying tickets less than months ahead of time. Mostly have traveled in occasion for work and mostly shorter notice.

First class is always full. If you have status with the airlines you can get free upgrades to first class now. So they start releasing upgrades like 3 days ahead of time for the best statusholders. Then 2 days before they release upgrades for the middle tiers, and same-day or day before is the lower tiers. They basically try to shift everyone up a tier in the flight and the extra coach seats that those people left behind will get filled with the basic-economy fliers, which is why they don't let them reserve seats: they just use them to fill in the gaps on the flight.

You are more likely to have an empty seat next to you in the back of the plane than in the first class.

Yes, its always full bit it's not always sold. An upgrade is the airline turning an unsold seat into a potential future sold seat or customer good will.

But they don't get full price for it in any way. They'll take money to seat kids there if you wanna pay.

From what I've noticed, first class in the US is usually around 3x the price. As a big guy I'll usually swallow the bullet on cost. I really don't mind kids too much and like chatty people.

Otherwise, I have noise cancelling headphones

That said. I do think I can handle a whole can of soda. On the food front, I can pretty much take it out leave it.

>I really don't mind kids too much

I agree, and besides: We were all that kid at some point or another in our lives, probably many times too. The adults then were patient with us, so I think it's our turn to pay that hospitality forward.

> were all that kid at some point or another in our lives

I wasn't because my mother would never have sat with me on her lap and let me kick the arm of the stranger next to us the entire flight..

I presume you don’t recall directly. I wouldn’t suppose your mother would tell you that “yeah, I let you run amok on flights”. Notwithstanding that the general point was a tad broader.

That's an interesting anecdote.

I fly first class a fair bit (10-12 flights per year), and children in first class is pretty rare. When I've seen it, they've never been rowdy. In fact, my experience is that its usually really quiet, which is one of the things I really value.

Maybe i'm just the luckiest person in the world. But its never happened to me and I fly a moderate amount to have some sample data.

I will concede, that flight rowdiness in general is very different based on time of day. The afternoon is the worst. Fridays and Mondays are the worst. I love night flights, to the point where I prefer them. Everyone is so much calmer on red-eyes.

Thanks for telling me what I want, I guess? there I was, being led astray by what I thought were my own preferences.

Our options are not determined by what we want, but by what the ticket-buying population as a whole has demonstrated is its actual (as opposed to merely stated) preferences. The marketplace for travel is not perfect, but it has never been more efficient.

It's all bundled though. It's pretty complex to get a dirt cheap ticket, with no checked luggage, but extra leg room, no extra entertainment or extra perk but just a better meal.

I see it as the same situation as cable TV, you'll never have the perfect bundle tailored to your tastes at the right price, and that's partly by design, as the company can charge more to have you pay for useless options.

Huh? Airline’s are near universally pricing their cheapest economy class tickets as unbundled as possible.

But they almost all sell nicer food on board or during online check in.

Didn't agree so much. I generally avoid air travel, when I have to, sometimes I'll bite the bullet for first class. I'll fly Delta over the cut rate carriers.

I'm not a luxury car guy... But have bought a few Buick cars along the way.

So I'll pay a premium for comfort and quality in general to a point. Not everyone does every time, but there should definitely be the option.

I think you're both right. Obviously, given the success of no frills airlines, the vast majority of consumers are absolutely price focused. The shorter the route, the more evident this is.

Equally some small minority (assumed from the relative tinyness of business/first class) are prepared to pay for more.

Both can be true at the same time, and are.

For longer flights, the desire for at least some amenities goes up. I don't expect in-flight entertainment from London to Schipol, but London to Sydney without a screen would be brutal.

Personally I'm in the camp where the worst food in the terminal is still 10 times better than the food on the plane, so I eat before and after, not during. But everyone else seems to love the hour killed discovering what they're being fed. So again, room for different opinions.

Wait, Buick is a luxury car now?

Yes ("premium"), between Chevrolet and Cadillac.

Premium is definitely not luxury as you implied, and is definitely not a premium automaker in any sense of the word.

I said I don't do luxury... But Buick is generally a step up.

Much like day Red Lobster is a steep up from Long John Silvers. It's not luxury but you are paying for and getting more.

Your answer is the only correct answer. The original article might have been correct for half a century ago but has nothing to do with today where food is universally bad on airplanes across the world with the only possible exception being airlines like Emirates whose business model is not to run an airline but to get people to fly to their host country.

Maybe that was the case pre-pandemic, but I shelled out for Business Class on a long-haul international flight, and it was worth it, and I'm not the only one: https://www.afr.com/life-and-luxury/travel/pointy-end-shake-...

Maybe we'll return to looking for lower costs, but an aging and wealthier world might prize comfort more than it did in the past.

The fact that airlines chose this to compete on suggests they in fact believed that this was something that consumers at least value to a higher degree than some other amenities. Which suggests they would probably have price sensitivity to it at some level.

I've flown long distance economy a lot, and business class a few times, and I just wish airlines would serve sandwiches instead of elaborate, mediocre meals. It would probably be better, and it would definitely be easier to eat in a cramped economy seat.

Dating myself, but I flew TWA back in the day and we got a complete bag lunch with sandwich and a few other things, complimentary. It's been downhill since then, but maybe that extra cost is why they're not around anymore?

I enjoyed flying Midwest Express a long time ago - it was like the whole plane of business class service

I’m living in Asia and when I need to fly I’ll just buy a meal at 7-Eleven or Family Mart to bring on the flight. It’s amazing how these convenience stores can make good quality food so cheap but the airlines somehow can’t provide.

Business class is rarely worth it, it’s not priced for mere mortals. Most people have a corporation buying their tickets, or are using air miles to reduce the price, or they are 1%ers, etc.

> Business class is rarely worth it

If you manage to buy it at 2x price of economy it's absolutely worth it, hands down. At more typical 6x it's not really.

Sandwiches can also be awful subpar meals though. I fully trust airlines to ruin them thoroughly the same way they did with the other meals.

I'd take tasteless warmed potato puree over tasteless soggy yet chewy triangle sandwich.

Who doesn't love applying frozen butter on a cold bun using plastic knife in an area sized 20x30cm..?

Read an article about this a few years back that was title Vile High Club. Loved it so much I grabbed the domain.

It may have been this article: https://skift.com/2012/11/18/fda-finds-airlines-outside-cate...

good name. goes with all sorts of possibilities. feature jenkum and mad dog 20/20 and airline food and it all fits together thematically.

you have vilehigh.club?

I recall how much better the experience of flying British Airways was, notably the food and drinks. Too bad it was only once

BA used to have the 777s with 9-across seating. That was the best way to cross the atlantic in the main cabin of any airline.

I've heard it as a general rule when flying internationally to always choose the foreign carriers over a US one.

That's a bad rule of thumb. Some foreign airlines are significantly worse than the better US airlines like Delta.

You also have to consider safety (some airlines only fly Airbus planes, some are mostly Boeing), cost, and convenience.

From what I’ve seen, it works extremely well if you’re traveling to a western country.

As another said, it depends on the country.

But if the options include JAL or ANA, always take them over any US carrier. They are not even the same kind of thing compared to what we endure in the US.

My TATLs:

BA on 777: really nice

Virgin Atlantic on A-340: awful

Icelandair on 757: truly awful

KLM on 777: pretty nice

I don't think just avoiding the American flag is enough.

Anecdotal story/take: The Aegean Airlines (Europe) business seat has much, much better food in a 20-minute flight than the comparable business 5-7-hour flight in the U.S. (And for a lower price, but I'm not sure that is important to the point.)

But the article does take a weird take. Also not sure how collusion is claimed here. I guess CAB counts as a forcing mechanism, but I am not sure one can argue collusion when it is the result of regulation. Was the regulation in bad faith?

> in a 20-minute flight than the comparable business 5-7-hour flight in the U.S. (And for a lower price, but I'm not sure that is important to the point.)

Well, it does cost considerably more to fly an airplane for 5-7 hours than it does to fly an airplane for 20 minutes.

If anyone is longing for the pre-deregulation days of aviation, ticket prices were a lot higher back then.

My grandmother was telling me about her honeymoon in Europe in the 1960s. Inflation-adjusted, the tickets were $3000 each!

Flying back then was better for smokers. They used to have smoking sections on planes. Grandpa loved his Chesterfields.

It's actually not awful, and besides, without an oven or grill or fryer, how good could it possibly be?

Check out some youtube video on Emirates or Singapore airlines on their suite experience on the A380. You will see how great the food can be before you go take your shower and go to sleep in your full size bed.

Yeah, but that's a A380.. Normal airplanes, especially basic two row jets, doesn't have the same kitchen space.

I've been on Emirates A380. Best in-air experience there is. The food is good. But even in First Class you're getting, at best, reheated tray food, just transfered to fine china. It's not even close to eating at a great restaurant.

Sandwich press, pie heater or anything that a gas station or convenience store can serve can be trivially done onboard.

Your standard for quality food is a gas station?

Not saying it's "quality" but you might never seen a decent gas station food.

In Lithuania I often prefer gas station sub over local restaurants. In NZ some stations cater decent pies. Either of two is better than "chicken or vegetarian" option on many flights.

The U.S. has fresh food at some gas stations as well. Wawa is probably the model. But, just like any sub shop, they make one sandwich at a time, not 200 all at once.

Uh. It's nothing like as bad as it was 20-30 years ago.

The article is about the ’70s.

Thanks, I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking this.

Airline food used to be AWFUL. Like you would honestly not even bother unless you were on a very long flight and needed it. My experience is that the last 10 years or so, most airlines have decent food. It is nothing to get excited about or to look forward to, but compared to how bad it used to be it is now quite good. I would rate a lot of the food I've had on flights as fair to average. Compare that to "i'll only eat it if this flight spans two mealtimes" of the 80s-90s and here we are.

Singapore Airlines is actually quite good (even in coach). ANA is also good. If you fly on a US Carrier, just know its all the same provider regardless of airline. Their food is meh: perfectly edible, but not good. Pasta dishes usually reheat quite well, so that's often the safe bet when choosing a meal option.

Trust us guys. If you think food now is bad... you don't know what they COULD be serving you.

> but compared to how bad it used to be it is now quite good

Now there is no food (unless you pay first class) so how can it be better?

Airplane food was never great but in the 90s it was fine, and free, and if nothing else it provided for something to do in the endless boredom of a long flight.

Today there's nothing, so it's worse in every way.

Granted I generally fly business class on Delta and ANA (because long hauls in economy is miserable), I find the food is great given the context. YMMV.

Same, meals in Delta One on both transatlantic and North<->South America routes are actually something I look forward to on my trips—those short ribs are scrumptious! Domestic first can be hit or miss, mostly miss because I miss lunch time flights (haha), but they too also been mostly acceptable.

If I anticipate something not great, I’ll stow away some shake shack.

I came here to say the same thing (well, about Delta's domestic coach service). I will fuck with Delta's chicken salad sandwich all day long and am always disappointed if they're out before I can order one.

> The airline industry body declared that sandwiches had to be “cold… simple… unadorned… inexpensive”

Lol, it reminds be Robert Sheckley's "A Ticket To Tranai", where they were looking for innovative ideas how to make robots worse on purpose.

It's pretty decent, to be honest, but I usually bring snacks if I'm not flying out of Hawaii (which does not permit that).

Years back, I read the life hack of requesting a Halal meal. I can confirm that on the one flight that I both got fed and received the same, the food seemed superior to the non-Halal options.

The other life hack is, of course, to bring your own food. I can confirm that I've gotten the stink-eye a couple times for pulling out my own food while everyone else was suffering whatever was rejected by the inmates at the state penitentiary.

Frankly, if you're flying out of Italy, and are eating airline food, you're flat-out doing it wrong.

I gave my partner stink eye for trying to bring hard boiled eggs onboard ("Kids love them and we had leftover ones I didn't wanna leave")...

"My clients were concerned about how obese Americans were getting and this was their misguided answer, your Honor."

~ Some Defense Counselor

Reply on news.ycombinator.com