"use it or lose it" say the airlines...
Sep 3rd, 2002, 09:12 AM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Of course the media keeps saying so. They are one of the biggest bashers of the airlines and were the largest purveyors of misinformation after Sept. 11th. The media kept/keeps using the term Bail Out even though it wasn't a bail out. The airlines said that it wasn't and congess said that it wasn't.
I live on planet earth where people shouldn't take the media as gospel, but of course most do.
What about the billions the airlines have paid in taxes? It would seem that we are to believe that the airlines don't pay the government anything and that the money came right out of your pocket. That's what the media and the few opponents to the "bail out" would have you to believe. Never mind that there were billions of dollars available for just such an occasion.
I live on planet earth where people shouldn't take the media as gospel, but of course most do.
What about the billions the airlines have paid in taxes? It would seem that we are to believe that the airlines don't pay the government anything and that the money came right out of your pocket. That's what the media and the few opponents to the "bail out" would have you to believe. Never mind that there were billions of dollars available for just such an occasion.
Sep 3rd, 2002, 09:37 AM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
COresBoy:
You really do sound exactly like Gordon,
good work! Everything is everybody else's fault. And facts, like the tax payers' bailout money to all US airlines, which is not a media invention, just ask you Congress person, are simply ignored or denied.
Oh- and did you just mention that the airlines paid billions in tax dollars?
Ha Ha Ha... it's the travelers that have paid these billions of dollars, added to the ticket price, not the airlines! Sure the airlines collected the money on behalf of the government, just like any other business does, but the actual money was paid by the consumer!!!
You really do sound exactly like Gordon,
good work! Everything is everybody else's fault. And facts, like the tax payers' bailout money to all US airlines, which is not a media invention, just ask you Congress person, are simply ignored or denied.
Oh- and did you just mention that the airlines paid billions in tax dollars?
Ha Ha Ha... it's the travelers that have paid these billions of dollars, added to the ticket price, not the airlines! Sure the airlines collected the money on behalf of the government, just like any other business does, but the actual money was paid by the consumer!!!
Sep 3rd, 2002, 10:37 AM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
What about the millions airlines paid as political contributions to candidates of both parties so they will vote for any bill that aid's the airlines.What about the mulit-million dollar sports stadiums that influence local politicians? Whether it is right or wrong it is true the Politicians are being paid to be on the side of the airlines.
And yes, that bail out was tax $$. Don't know how else the government would have anything to give out.
And yes, that bail out was tax $$. Don't know how else the government would have anything to give out.
Sep 3rd, 2002, 10:38 AM
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, I live on a planet earth where people shouldn't take their company's propaganda as gospel.
The media aside, fact is most of the airlines were running in the red before the tragedy of September 11. It is a fact that the government gave money to the airlines after Sep 11 to help sustain the industry until they got back on their feet. "Bail out" is a phrase that, like it or not, fits. Fact is that our tax money pays for the government. Fact is I just bought an airline ticket that has over $100 worth of taxes added to the fare. I'm sorry, who is paying your taxes too?
I own a profitable hotel. Before Sep 11 I was making a profit. After Sep 11 I am struggeling to stay open due to return of the lack of leisure travelers and the devistated economy. Should I be given government money to help me in my time of need? Even though, unlike the airlines, I proved I could carry myself and make a profit? Of course not because I don't pay millions of dollars a year to goverent political parties. Yes, I know, I'm sure you have the standard (insert major airline's name here) reply, a variation of "without the airlines this country would fall apart." But I think many of us realize that when one unprofitable airline folds, another will step in their place to give it a go. And for the record I don't feel that I need any government loans or "bail out" money. I was just making a point.
You should be down on your knees thanking the media for promoting all the spins the airlines like to chant. Next to the government, the media is your best friend.
When it comes to the airlines the American ideals of Capitalism and big business give the words new meaning.
The media aside, fact is most of the airlines were running in the red before the tragedy of September 11. It is a fact that the government gave money to the airlines after Sep 11 to help sustain the industry until they got back on their feet. "Bail out" is a phrase that, like it or not, fits. Fact is that our tax money pays for the government. Fact is I just bought an airline ticket that has over $100 worth of taxes added to the fare. I'm sorry, who is paying your taxes too?
I own a profitable hotel. Before Sep 11 I was making a profit. After Sep 11 I am struggeling to stay open due to return of the lack of leisure travelers and the devistated economy. Should I be given government money to help me in my time of need? Even though, unlike the airlines, I proved I could carry myself and make a profit? Of course not because I don't pay millions of dollars a year to goverent political parties. Yes, I know, I'm sure you have the standard (insert major airline's name here) reply, a variation of "without the airlines this country would fall apart." But I think many of us realize that when one unprofitable airline folds, another will step in their place to give it a go. And for the record I don't feel that I need any government loans or "bail out" money. I was just making a point.
You should be down on your knees thanking the media for promoting all the spins the airlines like to chant. Next to the government, the media is your best friend.
When it comes to the airlines the American ideals of Capitalism and big business give the words new meaning.
Sep 3rd, 2002, 12:05 PM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
....these new policies will drive away customers to consumer friendly airlines. Most small-businessmen fly on those reduced fares in order to cut costs, however due to extenuating circumstances some have their plans cancelled at the last minute. To penalize them is immoral at best! What the airlines need to do is look within. Their frequent flier programs are economic drains by virtue they give away seats below costs. My flight yesterday on AA from Orlando had about 25% of it's first class passengers holding paid seats, yet 75% of first class was from upgrade seats. This version of Voodoo economics is what has broke the airlines, not the consumer or the travel agent....
Sep 3rd, 2002, 02:02 PM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
OK, let me understand this:
Let's say that I make an honest effort to get to the airport in time to make my flight, but there's a bad accident on the freeway to the airport, and it's shut down for a couple of hours. When I finally get to the airport after my flight has left, instead of simply being put on the next empty seat, they're going to charge me $100+ to get that empty seat?
. . . is this correct?
If so, then it's incredibly cheesy at least, and astonishingly contemptious of the customer at worse. Why can't reason, fairness, common sense, and yes, customer service prevail? I think it would be totally acceptable to make me wait until the next empty seat becomes available, no matter how long it takes. But to sock it to the customer (whom the airlines claim is first) to make up for years of mismanagement and financial incompetence is most definitely not the answer.
And sorry, CoresBoy, but the government did use tax dollars to "help" the airlines after September 11. And while you are absolutely correct that the airlines do pay taxes, so do many other companies that were severely affected by the tragedy, and they did not get one red cent in bailout money. Perhaps you should check YOUR facts . . .
How about assessing the airlines $100+ for every passenger who is delayed (under 2 hours), even if a flight is one minute late? Or, how about making the airlines pay a $5000 penalty plus FULL replacement cost for every lost bag? How about making non-refundable tickets transferable?
After all, if we're going to start implementing a system of draconian penalties, then it seems to me that it should work BOTH ways . . .
Let's say that I make an honest effort to get to the airport in time to make my flight, but there's a bad accident on the freeway to the airport, and it's shut down for a couple of hours. When I finally get to the airport after my flight has left, instead of simply being put on the next empty seat, they're going to charge me $100+ to get that empty seat?
. . . is this correct?
If so, then it's incredibly cheesy at least, and astonishingly contemptious of the customer at worse. Why can't reason, fairness, common sense, and yes, customer service prevail? I think it would be totally acceptable to make me wait until the next empty seat becomes available, no matter how long it takes. But to sock it to the customer (whom the airlines claim is first) to make up for years of mismanagement and financial incompetence is most definitely not the answer.
And sorry, CoresBoy, but the government did use tax dollars to "help" the airlines after September 11. And while you are absolutely correct that the airlines do pay taxes, so do many other companies that were severely affected by the tragedy, and they did not get one red cent in bailout money. Perhaps you should check YOUR facts . . .
How about assessing the airlines $100+ for every passenger who is delayed (under 2 hours), even if a flight is one minute late? Or, how about making the airlines pay a $5000 penalty plus FULL replacement cost for every lost bag? How about making non-refundable tickets transferable?
After all, if we're going to start implementing a system of draconian penalties, then it seems to me that it should work BOTH ways . . .
Sep 3rd, 2002, 02:36 PM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
I feel very badly for airline gate agents having to deal with the many angry passengers that they are going to encounter. I have heard that the 'flat tire' rule will allow for standbys, but what happens when all late passengers use it and cannot prove it? This is all going to be bad for some passengers and all airline gate agents. CEO's, res agents and travel agents will be unaffected for the most part. Except for adding new conditions when explaining fare rules which I doubt many people actually listen to.
Sep 3rd, 2002, 04:10 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
Of course, the way to respond to these actions is to switch airlines. If U, AMR, and CO lose a large number of customers, what do you think there response will be? If the remaining airlines see a large increase in passengers, do you think they will follow the lead? If you continue to fly these airlines, you have no reason to complain. It's really that simple!
Sep 4th, 2002, 03:49 PM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why couldn't the Airlines figure out what they need to stay in business and make a fair profit and then base their fares on a milage basis. Seems simple to a simple mind like mine.
Then the price wars could begin(.02 per mile vs. .03) if you booked 2 years in advance!
Then the price wars could begin(.02 per mile vs. .03) if you booked 2 years in advance!
Sep 4th, 2002, 05:08 PM
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
COresBoy:
You seem to keep harping on the fact that the airlines were temporarily shut down after September 11. Yes, the government prevented them for flying for a few days. The government also sealed the borders, thus disrupting trucking companies, rail companies, and other companies like the auto manufacturers, who rely on foreign (Canadian) plants for parts (just-in-time delivery). So much for your argument that the airlines were the only ones affected by what happened . . .
And even though the government did not shut them down, there were hundreds, and perhaps thousands of other businesses who were just as adversely impacted by what happened. Yet NONE of them got ONE RED CENT from the U.S. taxpayer.
And just because the airline industry spends hundreds of thousands of dollars every year greasing the political wheels (instead of on customer service) does not mean that they automatically deserve government $$.
This might actually surprise you, but I really didn't have a problem with the bailout when it happened. But when the airlines turn around and pass incredibly petty and nasty rules and penalties like this, as a "thank you" for our tax dollars going to save their mismanaging behinds, then I now regret my support for that bailout, and I can only hope that nothing like it will EVER happen again . . .
You seem to keep harping on the fact that the airlines were temporarily shut down after September 11. Yes, the government prevented them for flying for a few days. The government also sealed the borders, thus disrupting trucking companies, rail companies, and other companies like the auto manufacturers, who rely on foreign (Canadian) plants for parts (just-in-time delivery). So much for your argument that the airlines were the only ones affected by what happened . . .
And even though the government did not shut them down, there were hundreds, and perhaps thousands of other businesses who were just as adversely impacted by what happened. Yet NONE of them got ONE RED CENT from the U.S. taxpayer.
And just because the airline industry spends hundreds of thousands of dollars every year greasing the political wheels (instead of on customer service) does not mean that they automatically deserve government $$.
This might actually surprise you, but I really didn't have a problem with the bailout when it happened. But when the airlines turn around and pass incredibly petty and nasty rules and penalties like this, as a "thank you" for our tax dollars going to save their mismanaging behinds, then I now regret my support for that bailout, and I can only hope that nothing like it will EVER happen again . . .
Sep 5th, 2002, 09:04 AM
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Add Northwest to the list of carriers. I'm sure Delta and UA will follow soon - who else is left?
DS,
On CO you can show up 2 hours late and fly standby (I guess this is their way of accomodating traffic delays). But AA and US Air don't appear to make any exceptions.
DS,
On CO you can show up 2 hours late and fly standby (I guess this is their way of accomodating traffic delays). But AA and US Air don't appear to make any exceptions.
Sep 5th, 2002, 12:12 PM
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
Delta has followed. UA is the only hold out. I am sure they will join by tomorrow.
Who is left? Air Tran (if you cancel 1 hour prior, you have up to a year to use credit)
Southwest
JetBlue
America West (hopefully they will not join the pack.
Most of the small upstart OW Fare airlines have not joined the PACK.
Who is left? Air Tran (if you cancel 1 hour prior, you have up to a year to use credit)
Southwest
JetBlue
America West (hopefully they will not join the pack.
Most of the small upstart OW Fare airlines have not joined the PACK.
