Charging for Soda Now!

[Flying Titan]

From the Washington Post...

Not Even Soda Is Sacred
By Keith L. Alexander
Tuesday, December 13, 2005; D01
Some frequent travelers have long joked that it was bound to happen, and now it has: An airline will begin charging $1 for a cup of soda, taking away one of the last in-flight perks that airlines historically have given away.

Beginning next month, American Airlines' regional carrier, American Eagle, will begin charging coach passengers for a 12-ounce soft drink as part of its latest effort to add revenue.
And there may be more costs to come. The airline may charge for its snacks and sell pillows and blankets so passengers can use them on other flights.

Eagle plans to begin charging for sodas on its flights in and out of Los Angeles. If the test is successful, American's mainline fleet -- the nation's largest carrier -- could adopt some of the initiatives, said Eagle spokesman Dave Jackson, who acknowledged the potential for passenger blowback.

"That's one of the reasons you test something, to see what kind of impact it might have," Jackson said. "There's a potential for it to go negatively. We also want to see what customers value."

During the past year, airline passengers have discovered what it really means to be a captive audience. Services and perks that were once complimentary are now on their way to becoming as much a part of airline history as the paper ticket. The carriers blame the food and service fees on stiff competition from low-cost carriers and on higher fuel prices.

Washington frequent flier Anne Seymour jokingly said her biggest fear these days is going to lavatory and having to insert money before the door opens.

"They're nickel and diming passengers to death," said Seymour, a national victim's advocate for Justice Solutions. "What's next, I sneeze and ask for a Kleenex and they tell me that'll be $1?"


Full Article

 

[ArtTang]

I believe it's a matter of time before the public becomes inured to such changes. Little by little, the public's perception of air travel will change to accept the reality of today's industry. We all know that air travel has changed since deregulation, and the public enjoys cheaper fares as a result. Few services and commodities are more affordable in real dollars today than they were 28 years ago. In 1978, a round-trip ticket between, say, San Francisco and New York was much more than it is today. That is a good thing for the public. The flip side of the coin is the level of creature comforts (i.e., personal space, amenities, meals) has obviously gone south.

The public will get used to the idea that plane travel in coach is becoming just like train travel in Europe. Either you bring the food and drink you plan to consume during the trip or you purchase it on board. If you want to stay warm, it will be necessary to bring a light sweater. If you want your head to be comfortable, it will necessary to carry one of those "neck supporters", etc. After 9-11, people rolled their eyes when newspapers were reduced, they cursed when the price of liquor went up, and they were indignant when meals were eliminated. Obviously none of us likes the "new reality." Passengers feel deprived and employees at AA have taken huge concessions to keep the company afloat, yet we are adjusting to the situation and remain hopeful things will get better for the industry.

Bit by bit, the traveling public has adjusted to these changes, and the new status quo is rarely a source of contention. In other words, the public seems to understand...for the most part...that they have secured a bargain with that round-trip fare of $199 between Fort Lauderdale and Los Angeles.

Brief, I predict that, in time, the public will grow to look upon air travel as the Europeans look upon train travel. No frills or extras...just a seat between point A to point B.

Peace and happy holidays to you all.
Art Tang

 

[local 12 proud]

....and it should be this way if people expect to travel at prices the Bus or rail system charges. Buy a Greyhound bus ticket across country and see what creature comforts are provided!

 

[Hopeful]

I agree. Passengers demand the lowest airfares but they should not expect anything more than a seat.

Not to put the blame on the flying public, but a passenger will fly one airline over another because the fare is $5 cheaper.

I think the cheap price should dictate whether you get complimetary peanuts and soda.

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

Is this the fruit of the "Performance Leadership Initiatives"?? :blink:

Please stop.

 

[Hopeful]

Is this the fruit of the "Performance Leadership Initiatives"?? :blink:

Please stop.

Oh yea.......Get ready for the announcements!

 

[Flying Titan]

Art and Local 12 -

You are both probably right, but your posts miss a couple of points that seem important to me.

1) The carriers that now drive the low fares you discuss are not going down this road. In fact, they're offering more ammenities than earlier LCCs....little TVs, leather seats, newer full-sized planes - and now - even complimentary soda. Not the right direction.

2) In the markets where legacy carriers remain dominant, there are no $200 transcons to be found. These are the mid-sized markets SWA, JetBlue, and AirTran have not yet invaded. Nickel and diming passengers on their $500+ restricted economy fare (or $1000+ biz fare) only serves to disgust these customers. In too many cases, these passengers choose to drive to another airport to fly an LCC or not travel at all. For those who do pay these fares, they know they're subsidizing the too-cheap fares of the person sitting next to them on their connecting flight.

Both of these issues are serious long-term problems for legacy airlines. The public already perceives more fairness and value from the LCCs. Moves like this soda "experiment" only reinforce this perception.

 

[czerny]

I believe it's a matter of time before the public becomes inured to such changes. Little by little, the public's perception of air travel will change to accept the reality of today's industry. We all know that air travel has changed since deregulation, and the public enjoys cheaper fares as a result. Few services and commodities are more affordable in real dollars today than they were 28 years ago.


And we will become used to fact that we are sales professioinals now.Do we get a commision for every soda sold?

Dr Pepper, anyone? How bout a pillow? We are holding a special on blankets and pillows this week! Get yours for only $3.99!

 

[ArtTang]

Well, flight attendants have sold things on planes for as long as I have been flying, so I won't be surprised when pillows and sodas are added to the goods. In all fairness, I did write in my first post that nobody likes these changes. I also wrote that I think such changes will result in air travel 'morphing' into something similar to train travel where passengers will either bring along whatever creature comforts they want to enjoy during the trip or they will purchase them.

As for other carriers not going down this road: I agree that some carriers are still offering amenities, and they may continue to do so. However, with the price of fuel hovering at precarious levels which are poised to rise as demand tightens, these carriers (I am thinking of Jet Blue in particular) will be facing challenging times as well. They too will reconsider offering such amenities.

It all boils down, in my opinion, to what another poster wrote: The average passenger will select the cheaper air fare regardless of whether or not a pillow is offered in the deal. Those who desire greater comfort along with the amenities will pay for the seat in the corresponding cabin...just like on the trains in Europe.

People love to criticize the "legacy carriers" for not being able to compete with the others, but what the public sometimes forgets is the fact that in order to run a world carrier (i.e., an airline that takes off and lands in cities like Shanghai and Rome as well as Denver), an airline must pay extremely high landing fees, airport fees, transportation fees for the crews, hotel fees, etc. Domestic carriers simply do not have to deal with these costs. I am not making excuses for years of terrible decisions made by management that have cost us employees tremendous loss of income, but I am trying to put into context some of the challenges that beset the legacy carriers.

I know most of you already realize these things since you either have a stake in or are familiar with the industry. I just thought I'd bring up what I perceive to be a big difference between the "legacy" vs. the "upstart" carriers. Also, I stand by my prediction that air travel will become very much like train travel, and these changes will eventually be perceived as the norm.

Peace,
Art Tang

 

[FWAAA]

I'll gladly pony up a buck for a soda. Why? I'm sick and tired of the sighs, the rolling eyes and the damned excuses when I ask for the whole can or god forbid, ask for a second.

We don't have enough. Catering screwed up. Everyone gets only half a can because most people throw away most of their soda.

If you're charging separately for it, I'm more likely to get what I want. Sure, it would be nice if a free soda were bundled, but if charging for it means I can rely on AA to sell me what I want when I want - I'm all for it.

I didn't mind paying the PeoplExpress FAs $0.50 for a soda 20+ years ago, and I won't mind paying the AA/AE FAs a dollar now.

 

[Wretched Wrench]

As is true in so many areas, good will is hard bought, but easily lost.

 

[formeraa]

Art and Local 12 -

You are both probably right, but your posts miss a couple of points that seem important to me.

1) The carriers that now drive the low fares you discuss are not going down this road. In fact, they're offering more ammenities than earlier LCCs....little TVs, leather seats, newer full-sized planes - and now - even complimentary soda. Not the right direction.

2) In the markets where legacy carriers remain dominant, there are no $200 transcons to be found. These are the mid-sized markets SWA, JetBlue, and AirTran have not yet invaded. Nickel and diming passengers on their $500+ restricted economy fare (or $1000+ biz fare) only serves to disgust these customers. In too many cases, these passengers choose to drive to another airport to fly an LCC or not travel at all. For those who do pay these fares, they know they're subsidizing the too-cheap fares of the person sitting next to them on their connecting flight.

Both of these issues are serious long-term problems for legacy airlines. The public already perceives more fairness and value from the LCCs. Moves like this soda "experiment" only reinforce this perception.

But we act like $500 is a HIGH fare. In 1980, I paid $339 to get from BOS-SEA roundtrip. At the time, I thought it was an EXCELLENT fare. What I got for that fare: I flew a packed UA DC-10 with about 32/33 inches of legroom, a cold snack from BOS-ORD, a hot dinner from ORD-SEA, paid $3 for a movie between ORD-SEA. That same excellent fare would be $800+ in today's dollars. So, are a couple of crappy meals/snacks worth $300 or more?

That being said, I urge people to refuse to pay for a soda on American Eagle and let AA know that we refuse to do this. Of course, what will happen is that AA will stop all service on Eagle and we will just be thirsty.

 

[corl737]

[...]
I urge people to refuse to pay for a soda on American Eagle and let AA know that we refuse to do this. Of course, what will happen is that AA will stop all service on Eagle and we will just be thirsty.

I wonder if there will be any benefit to the airport concessionaires? Where previoulsy I might delay buying a beverage at the snack bar because I could get one free on the airplane there is now no such incentive to wait. I'll give my buck to the airport, get more choices, and undoubtedly a larger product serving.

And yes, I'm one of those infamous cheapskate pilots!

 

[usflyguy]

from a f/a perspective (not AA) i think it's cheesy. would love to hear from some AA stews on this topic.

 

[Dea Certe]

I'm not sure how it works, but it seems to me that any savings created would be gobbled up by the whole accounting process.

Someone is going to have count the money and balance the inventory, like is done now with the liquor and headsets. I would think extra people would have to be hired just to manage the sodas and the revenue brought in by their sales.

The flight attendants are darn busy before boarding now with preflight checks of the emergency equipment and cabin cleaning between flights.

Which department handles the money coming in from liquor sales? I'm sure many more customers will buy sodas than liquor, so that adds up to a lot of extra work in that department.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

Dea