"But AMTRAK charges for all beverages" is a lame excuse

[freedom]

You are trying to provoke a silly and ultimately meaningless argument.

If it is so important to you to get a free beverage when you travel, exercise your choice as a consumer in our market economy and fly one of the many airlines which offer that service.

Eventually so many people will do the same that LCC's bottom line will be impacted relative to its peers and LCC will reinstate free beverages, right? That will have a much bigger impact than trying to "convince" front-line airline employees on an internet message board that some corporate decision into which they had no input is a poor one.

i agree , your either right that charing 2 dollars is a bad move to make money or your wrong ... the bottom line will tell , and with oil at 140 a barrel , all that matters now is the bottom line .

C.R.E.A.M

 

[sharktooth]

Does BuffaloJoe equal USFlyer?

So, what you are saying is that other than transporting people from A to B, there is little to compare between trains and planes, right? One could just as easily compare submarines with dirigibles or stagecoaches with SSTs.

 

[luvn737s]

How ‘bout that?

A few weeks ago I was enjoying some complimentary coffee by the popcorn machine at the Ford dealer while I was having the rotors turned on my pickup. Oh, and guess what? Ford has new rewards program for vehicle maintenance.

And I still have yet to see a beverage as a line item on the invoice from my accounting firm, even though my CPA’s assistant always offers me something to drink when I’m there for a meeting.

That popcorn was not free.

For the difference you paid to get your rotors turned at the dealer versus one of millions of machine shops or smaller repair shops, you could buy a lifetime supply of popcorn.

They offer that rewards program to try and keep people from defecting to smaller shops once the warranty runs out. But it doesn't save you any money. Suppose you could shop on-line for repair services and they came up in the order of price. Would you bother scrolling through page after page to get to the dealer, or just go with the first one or two that pop up?

If you allow access to all prices, as in the case of Expedia, etc., you ensure that you won't be able to price in any premium to your product. The alternative is WN which has to drive people to their site with advertising and a highly polished image that gets trotted out every chance they get.

 

[sharktooth]

The alternative is WN which has to drive people to their site with advertising and a highly polished image that gets trotted out every chance they get.

I think what drives people to WNs site is perceived value and consistency, two concepts that demand hard work. The winners celebrate their employees every day, the losers, not so much.

and, if they work so hard polishing their image, why should they not "trot it out"? Is that bad, at all?

 

[jimntx]

The alternative is WN which has to drive people to their site with advertising and a highly polished image that gets trotted out every chance they get.

And, this is wrong, how? By not paying fees to booking sites, such as Expedia, they reduce their costs which allows them in some small way to keep their ticket prices lower. As far as the "highly polished image," don't we all wish we could have some of the same?

As a frequent commuter on WN, I am constantly amazed at the quality and consistency of their product delivery. I've never encountered a crabby gate agent (as I often do at my company at DFW). Their f/as are the BEST. Even I (who art the soul of patience and compassion and humor ) do not measure up in the "putting up with jerks" department like the WN f/as do.

My favorite personal story: While dealing with an oversold flight to DAL (that I already knew I was not getting on), the agent working that flight found and took the time to find an alternate routing for me (a non-rev) that got me home to Dallas only about an hour later than I would have on that flight! (As opposed to sitting in STL for 2 hours waiting for the next non-stop that was also close to oversold,) Now, THAT'S customer service.

 

[luvn737s]

And, this is wrong, how?

I didn't say it was a wrong strategy, just different.

I do argue that the reality differs from the perception of Southwest as evidenced by how quickly the story about airplanes being flown outside the Airworthiness Directives and the coziness between the FAA and WN middle management.

They're good, they're friendly, but they're not as perfect as many would have us believe.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Does BuffaloJoe equal USFlyer?

So, what you are saying is that other than transporting people from A to B, there is little to compare between trains and planes, right? One could just as easily compare submarines with dirigibles or stagecoaches with SSTs.

I was simply answering your questions!

 

[JS]

You are trying to provoke a silly and ultimately meaningless argument.

If it is so important to you to get a free beverage when you travel, exercise your choice as a consumer in our market economy and fly one of the many airlines which offer that service.

Eventually so many people will do the same that LCC's bottom line will be impacted relative to its peers and LCC will reinstate free beverages, right? That will have a much bigger impact than trying to "convince" front-line airline employees on an internet message board that some corporate decision into which they had no input is a poor one.

Thanks for the advice but I already do that. I usually fly Delta, sometimes AA or Southwest. I never fly US or United, because they stink.

The purpose of my thread, which apparently you missed, was that the fact that Amtrak charges for beverages does not make it logical for US Airways to do so. Amtrak isn't even an airline, let alone a legacy airline, not to mention the fact that it's a 100% government-owned monopoly.

 

[Bear96]

The purpose of my thread, which apparently you missed, was that the fact that Amtrak charges for beverages does not make it logical for US Airways to do so.

Similarly, the fact that Amtrak charges for beverages does not make it illogical for USAirways to do so, which seems to be the premise of your posts in this thread.

 

[JS]

Similarly, the fact that Amtrak charges for beverages does not make it illogical for USAirways to do so, which seems to be the premise of your posts in this thread.

OK. Then what's the rationale?

 

[sharktooth]

I was simply answering your questions!

Thank you sir.

 

[luvn737s]

The purpose of my thread, which apparently you missed, was that the fact that Amtrak charges for beverages does not make it logical for US Airways to do so. Amtrak isn't even an airline, let alone a legacy airline, not to mention the fact that it's a 100% government-owned monopoly.

People got used to the airlines providing food and drink as a way of bridging the experience from predominantly train travel in the early 20th century, to airline travel. The cost of the ticket for basic travel isn't because there is a premium for air travel (since no real alternative exists) but because of the high cost of providing the service (which has been ignored by airline execs). Now the travelling public needs to readjust their perception and expectations for airline travel, just as airline employees have had to readjust their perception and expectation of their careers.

 

[sharktooth]

OK. Then what's the rationale?

I wonder what the sales will have to be to break-even with the costs associated with the actual operation, mx and service of the register units, not to mention who will inventory (each time) the inventory? Who will guarantee the safety of the items sold and what the spoilage will be.

Why do I have a feeling the Snadcastle has not even gotten that far.

 

[Bear96]

OK. Then what's the rationale?

Of charging for beverages?

You'd have to ask the people who came up with that policy what their rationale was.

 

[JS]

Of charging for beverages?

You'd have to ask the people who came up with that policy what their rationale was.

nice troll response, bu-bye