Am I missing something? Airfare

SWA's price was $169, while UA's was $340. Granted, SWA's route required 3 stops instead of one, and had 2 hours more total travel time, but is that worth $855?

And that is where the price/value ratio comes into play. Would I pay more to avoid 3 stops? YES, especially with small children. Someone else would buy the lowest price, no matter what. It's a similar decision when deciding on a resort. (ie value vs moderate vs deluxe)

Also, remember that most people buying airfare on this website have time to sit and watch fares change (ie they don't need to buy it on a particular day - they can monitor fares over a period of a few weeks or a few months)

I always recommend that people find the 'right' price for their route, and once they find a fare that is near that price, with routings that work for them, they purchase the fare.
 
Why do people need to be loyal to an airline?
Without loyalty, i.e., when customers choose primarily based on price, customers will drive suppliers to compete primarily on price, rather than competing on service. It is well-understood that this is the main reason why service is generally degrading, across-the-board, in the consumer marketplace.

The reason people look for the cheapest airfare is because most people can't afford to pay twice as much for a ticket just to go on the airline they prefer.
Understood. Folks need to acknowledge the consequence of this perspective you're advocating, i.e., that people cannot afford to expect good service.

For anything, really.

Sucks, huh? :(

But it's "our" fault, because, as you said, people look for the cheapest prices.
 
Understood. Folks need to acknowledge the consequence of this perspective you're advocating, i.e., that people cannot afford to expect good service.

IMO, this deserves to be qualified a bit. On the service front, I think that what tends to legitimately upset people is not the issue of "good" service (because that is such a subjective standard), but the issue of not getting the level of service that they believe was promised to them.

This is why, for example, SWA service satisfies me just fine, while AA's service generally does not. For me, what service satisfaction comes down to is that SWA will reliably deliver the service that it says that it will give me, while AA, IME, consistently fails to do so. I'm not asking for premium service for a budget price, but when an airline says that a certain level of service will be provided in consideration for my purchase, that is the level of service that I expect that airline to deliver. (And the same goes for a restaurant, a dry cleaner, a lawn service, or an auto shop.)
 
I'm not asking for premium service for a budget price

And unfortunately the reality is that while you may understand that, others don't, and get upset when they don't receive what they were expecting.

I think that 'low price' is too often confused with 'value' these days - 'price' simply refers to the $$, while 'value' refers to tangible and nontangible items received in exchange for the price.
 

I'll agree that's true to some extent, but the airlines are partly responsible for that expectation because of their pricing structure. When the person seated next to you in the same class of service bought their ticket for less than half of what you paid, it is difficult not to feel cheated. (Or to feel like you have gotten away with something when you are the one who got the lower price.)

Refund policies excepted, it really is rather an unfriendly business model, and I think it tends to put customers on the defensive right at the outset of the transaction. I think that this is at the heart of why employee business travelers tend to be most likely to exhibit airline loyalty -- they are not fighting a battle against the bottom line every time they choose a flight.
 
IMO, this deserves to be qualified a bit. On the service front, I think that what tends to legitimately upset people is not the issue of "good" service (because that is such a subjective standard), but the issue of not getting the level of service that they believe was promised to them.
Yes, I agree, though to be clear, folks can "believe" whatever they wish, but if you're talking about folks being "legitimately" upset, then you need to limit this to just what those folks were actually promised, rather than what they "believe" they were promised.

This is why, for example, SWA service satisfies me just fine, while AA's service generally does not.
Interesting example: Southwest promises little so delivers well, while American promises a lot and delivers more, but perhaps not so much more as they promise to. I could see that perspective.
 
I think that 'low price' is too often confused with 'value' these days - 'price' simply refers to the $$, while 'value' refers to tangible and nontangible items received in exchange for the price.
Yes, and what our modern mass-market has facilitated is an "almost perfect information" situation, so actual value differences between suppliers are almost non-existent: Price very closely tracks the quality and service provided, so the less you pay, the less you get, almost on a one-to-one basis.
 
When the person seated next to you in the same class of service bought their ticket for less than half of what you paid, it is difficult not to feel cheated. (Or to feel like you have gotten away with something when you are the one who got the lower price.)
When in reality, both passengers are getting full value for the price they paid. The low-fare traveler gets passage, with the requirement to book well in advance (less value) without the ability to back-out (less value), while the high-fare traveler gets passage with all the flexibility they wish (more value).
 
An airline is no different than a brand of car, or tv. Do you buy the same brand

Actually, I fly United whenever they serve my route; if they don't I'll fly a partner. Or drive 5 hours out of my way to fly them.

Cars? I am currently on Volkswagen #5 - the only brand of vehicle I have ever owned.

So, yes, I am brand loyal because I know that I am getting good value for what I paid.
 
When in reality, both passengers are getting full value for the price they paid. The low-fare traveler gets passage, with the requirement to book well in advance (less value) without the ability to back-out (less value), while the high-fare traveler gets passage with all the flexibility they wish (more value).

With Southwest, you don't have to book well in advance and there's no fee to cancel or change flights. What does the high-fare traveller get in terms of flexibility?
Southwest had a ding yesterday for $29 from Philly to Tampa. Even for Saturday flights, non-stop. No one can compete with that. For that price I don't need a lot of "service." Just take us from point A to point B safely. SWA is not operating in the red like many other airlines.
 
... But very often both fares were bought within days (or even minutes) of one another and are both nonrefundable -- what's the value difference then?

Just about zilch, really. Yield management is roulette from the passenger POV.


Note that on SWA, the only value difference is in purchasing the fully-refundable fare; the so-called walkup fare. Cancel that and you get a full cash refund, as opposed to only a credit.
 
Don't forget reserved seating, as well.
 
Sorry to be unclear.

Bicker, that last bit about SWA wasn't addressed to you; it was meant for the poster who asked what value advantage high-fare SWA customers had over other SWA customers. Refund vs. credit is the only advantage of that kind within SWA's culture.

As to legacy airlines vs. SWA on the matter of assigned seating, I think you already know my opinion on that. I'll count a seat assignment as added value when it is guaranteed (or at least when you get some sort of compensation when an assignment is vacated) -- until then I'm going to maintain that SWA's system is the better value because it leaves the choice completely up to the passenger.
 
I don't see any reason right now for me to be loyal to a particular airline for Orlando flights. I can sit in anybody's seat for 2 hours.
 
Miles add up quickly *if* you play the traveler's mileage game, and if you fly long-distance at least some of the time. There is no way that a once-a-yr. flyer who only flies domestically and doesn't at least occasionally overnight for business is going to consistently earn awards at a profit unless the mileage is supplemented with a CC program (AND unless the CC is PIF every month. Interest will gobble up that couple of hundred dollars in a heartbeat.)

I'm not saying that mileage programs are useless for the occasional flyer -- it is easy and free to sign up, and I'll happily take whatever bennies I get. However, it takes planning, awareness, and a lot of self-discipline to actually profit off of a FF program in these circumstances. THAT is where a lot of people see a diminishing return.

Just for grins I checked SWA and UA from Boise to MCO on a random date at a slow time (not November, obviously, since SWA doesn't sell this far out.) I picked days in early May, travelling on Tues & Wed to make it cheaper. SWA's price was $169, while UA's was $340. Granted, SWA's route required 3 stops instead of one, and had 2 hours more total travel time, but is that worth $855? (Or let's say she did have a free UA ticket -- is it worth $515?) For further grins I looked at UAL and Frontier in the first week of November: $380 vs. $322. Closer price competition, but it certainly comes down when SWA fares are added to the mix.

I'd say that unless the travel is Thanksgiving peak days, she is better off waiting until SWA opens her dates.

I think this is a brilliant idea. We are going to book everything else, then just watch airfare over the next few months. Another poster mentioned the watchdog site, thanks for that tip as well!! The worst that could happen is we pay $400 a ticket anyway...I hope!!!

I lost any sense of loyalty to my airline of choice (Delta) when my family grew to 5. It makes more sense to fly cheap, we can afford to travel more often!! I don't care if we stop a couple times on the way, it's a long flight from WA to FL and a stretch can be nice. :rotfl:
 
I'll count a seat assignment as added value when it is guaranteed
Seat assignments are effectively guaranteed once boarding has begun. Assigned seats versus cattle call? My choice is assigned seats.
 
Seat assignments are effectively guaranteed once boarding has begun. Assigned seats versus cattle call? My choice is assigned seats.

We've used SWA for 5/6 of our last vacations. We always get a seat that we chose and my kids have never had to sit alone or have to ask someone to trade seats in order to stay together.
We used to be loyal to USAirways and still have thousands of miles banked but every time we'd book with them, we'd choose our seats, then later they would change the flight time by around 15 mins. or change the flight #(sometimes serveral times prior to flight.) All of our assigned seats would be lost and my kids are scattered all over the plane. I'd have to call every time to have the seats reassigned, wait on hold, etc. Then they lost our luggage twice.
I don't need an airline to kiss my butt and I really don't even need their peanuts. I can bring my own $2.00 snacks. Just take us there safely. Who ever can do that for less money gets my vote.
If a family of 4 can get $50 off each ticket, that's $200. I look at it like getting my car rental for free if I go with the cheaper airline.
I would however pay more for a non-stop. It's just too easy to have the 1st leg delayed and miss the connection. Luckily most of our flights are Philly to MCO, or some other point in FL and so many non-stops are available.
 
Yes, I agree, though to be clear, folks can "believe" whatever they wish, but if you're talking about folks being "legitimately" upset, then you need to limit this to just what those folks were actually promised, rather than what they "believe" they were promised.

Interesting example: Southwest promises little so delivers well, while American promises a lot and delivers more, but perhaps not so much more as they promise to. I could see that perspective.

The airline WestJet here in Canada is a good example of that - they started as a "no-frills" airline, with great prices & most people were pleased with the level of service they get. They've managed to build a brand identity of "hey, we're just like you folks" that has created a lot of loyal customers. Meanwhile, Air Canada tried to bill itself as the airline with amenities & they're failing miserably - financially & otherwise, as they can't measure up to their "image."
 













Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE














DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Back
Top