Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
isn't it kind of just the airline's fault for having a ticket price system in which it's cheaper to buy a ticket from A to B to C than just a 'direct flight' from A to B?

I mean for real 'hidden city' tickets shouldn't even be a thing.

TwoStepBoog posted:


they both start as the exact same flight, it's just that one goes on to New York

it's the same loving plane AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH what the actual gently caress

Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Dec 31, 2014

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
Well... I understand hub and spoke and how it applies to logistics and stuff but it still makes no loving sense at all as applied to why a ticket is $600 but the exact same seat on the same plane is now $150 if you're taking 2 flights.

Like it makes sense if it is waaay cheaper to take a flight from a hub or between two hubs but it's literally spoke to hub: $700 , spoke to hub to spoke: $180

idk maybe I'm rusty on my business/econ classes though.

Darth123123 posted:

What the market will bear. BTc really can solve this.

yeah that's probably the real reason. 'because we can and people pay for it!' but idk if they can base a lawsuit off of someone exploiting their 'glitch' with a website so to speak.

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless

icantfindaname posted:

you realize airliners are possibly the single least profitable industry on earth and have as a collective business not made a single penny over the last 100 years, instead being subsidized by governments as prestige projects?

a good reason for nationalization imo since that's what government run enterprise is basically for

filling a need that generates little or no profit

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
pointing out stupid poo poo and laughing at it is now a goonrage

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
idk you guys are kind of scrambling over yourselves to cry foul about government subsidies propping up unprofitable industries and forgetting the insane capital investment it requires to start an airline that can compete with established airlines and really low profits (if any) that can be attained by doing so

I think it's fine if we want to prop up an airline recognizing that it is important to have functioning airlines with well maintained equipment and such, but as a consequence the airlines have to follow government regulation and not be so weird with their pricing.

For what it's worth I've flown a lot of flights and I think air travel is way better than it used to be in terms of customer service and quality of the actual flight.


I agree that our government is totally failing to represent the interest of the citizens though it's pretty ridiculous. It wouldn't be so much of an issue if the FAA or something stepped in and said 'hey stop being dickbags or we'll revoke all your flight charters and poo poo (or whatever) and give them to your competitor' but lol.

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
lol if you don't have your own private jet with a couple pilots and a sexy stewardess on salary

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
who cares it costs $10k an hour to fly this thing

you think I give a poo poo about money

you know how many loving poors I kill every year son

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless

The Taint Reaper posted:

I kind of wish the government would stop propping up the airlines and would just let them fend for themselves.

but then we would have something much worse probably

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless

The Taint Reaper posted:

We could also have something better

huge capital investment into a business with very little expectation of profit sounds like something that is going to produce great results in a market

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless

The Taint Reaper posted:

If this was the case all forms of privately owned and/or personal travel would be null and void. But you have entire companies based on giving tours on busses that are run better than airlines.

you're comparing cars and buses to jet airplanes?

quote:

The only part of air travel that is run well are the Air Traffic Controllers. Everything else is huge garbage that could use major improvements.

sure but I don't think less government involvement is going to result in that

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless

The Taint Reaper posted:

I had a 10 hour flight and the meals they serve you aren't even worthy of being served in a prison.

You're paying for the right to be treated worse than a prisoner.

i've been on many transatlantic flights and i've also been served a meal in jail

the plane food is better by leaps and bounds

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
Surprisingly, being diplomatic works really well versus being a belligerent rear end in a top hat in most situations in general.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Moridin920
Nov 15, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
idk I had a job where I dealt with customers and you can usually tell people that are genuinely nice and trying to work out a problem and someone who is just being fake nice with the rage simmering just below the surface

  • Locked thread