←back to thread

663 points duxup | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jmull ◴[] No.45362692[source]
Making flying even crappier doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

Regulations that put a floor on how crappy airlines can be should be pretty neutral on competition since all the airlines would have the same rules.

That's not to say all rules are a good idea, even rules that raise quality -- raising the floor raises prices, and if the floor is raised higher than necessary, prices are higher than necessary too, making flying less affordable. Set the floor too low and people fly less because it's too crappy. Set the floor too high and people fly less because it's too expensive. You're looking for the balance point.

IMO, the floor is too low right now. I think it's a mistake to try to lower it.

replies(6): >>45362771 #>>45365364 #>>45365378 #>>45365429 #>>45365447 #>>45366481 #
Ajedi32 ◴[] No.45365378[source]
> Set the floor too low and people fly less because it's too crappy.

Seems like a great opportunity for an airline to be less crappy and make a lot of money selling tickets to all those people who are "flying less" on other airlines, no?

So the question then becomes why hasn't someone done that already, if the floor really is "too low"?

replies(5): >>45365497 #>>45366043 #>>45366100 #>>45366155 #>>45366498 #
smcg ◴[] No.45365497[source]
High barrier to entry, consolidation, and collusion. Look at how many airline mergers have happened over the past decades.
replies(2): >>45365662 #>>45365707 #
sershe ◴[] No.45365662[source]
That wouldn't explain why the reverse happened. Everyone introduced the crappier economy tier; even the airlines initially saying they wouldn't eventually caved and now there's a crappy economy tier default. Moreover, gradually these crappy tiers converged, including some (united iirc) getting slightly less crappy following user demand.

Most people want cheaper tickets and don't shop on quality. In the rare cases that they do airlines readily adjust. But the airlines trying to offer quality as the default would go out of business

replies(1): >>45365821 #
1. matthewdgreen ◴[] No.45365821[source]
Price aggregators like Google Flights continue to show the crappy tier by default, which means that airlines have to offer that tier to appear competitive. No idea why Google wants to build its product this way, but there are only a few companies in this business.
replies(1): >>45366032 #
2. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45366032[source]
One of the fundamental truths of American aviation is a significant fraction of fliers will buy the cheapest ticket every time. They’ll bitch about it. But if you cut some leg room and a few dollars off your tag, you’ll swing them from another.

Basic economy doesn’t exist because of Google Flights. It exists because it sells. Well enough that it sustained entire discount airline fleets until the majors copied their model.

replies(1): >>45367672 #
3. matthewdgreen ◴[] No.45367672[source]
I don’t want basic economy because it means my kids will end up scattered across the airplane instead of sitting with me. So I always have to upgrade to the “normal economy” seats. I’m willing to bet a large chunk of money that a huge fraction of the airlines’ customers do the same “upgrade” because their sites are more or less built around the idea of funneling people into it. Yet on Google Flights there’s no easy option to specify that I want this popular product: the only options are Economy, Premium Economy (a very different product), Business and First.
replies(1): >>45370716 #
4. abduhl ◴[] No.45370716{3}[source]
Google flights actually has an option for Economy (exclude Basic) now. I’m not sure when this was rolled out. Previously, you could accomplish the same functionality by adding a single carryon bag in the drop down to force non-Basic.
replies(1): >>45372645 #
5. matthewdgreen ◴[] No.45372645{4}[source]
Thanks! I didn't notice it because it's invisible when you initiate the search, you have to search first and then go back and change the cabin class. I wouldn't say this option is hidden exactly, but it certainly isn't made particularly easy for users to find.