Uh. It's nothing like as bad as it was 20-30 years ago.
Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
11–20 of 88 posts
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#12I recall how much better the experience of flying British Airways was, notably the food and drinks. Too bad it was only once
BA used to have the 777s with 9-across seating. That was the best way to cross the atlantic in the main cabin of any airline.
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#13Read an article about this a few years back that was title Vile High Club. Loved it so much I grabbed the domain. It may have been this article: https://skift.com/2012/11/18/fda-finds-airlines-outside-cate...
you have vilehigh.club?
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#14I recall how much better the experience of flying British Airways was, notably the food and drinks. Too bad it was only once
I've heard it as a general rule when flying internationally to always choose the foreign carriers over a US one.
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#15It's actually not awful, and besides, without an oven or grill or fryer, how good could it possibly be?
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#16I'm not sure why this piece mentions deregulation. The drinks limit was in 1956, while the sandwich spat was in 1958 – but deregulation wasn't until 1978, two decades later!
The collusion in question seems to only relate to regulation, which prohibited the airlines from competing on price. The incentives obviously don't work out the same with deregulation!
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#17"My clients were concerned about how obese Americans were getting and this was their misguided answer, your Honor."
~ Some Defense Counselor
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#18good airline food but at a higher ticket price is not what consumers actually choose to buy. They'd rather suffer and get a discount on the ticket. They merely complain about that suffering.
Thanks for telling me what I want, I guess? there I was, being led astray by what I thought were my own preferences.
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#19good airline food but at a higher ticket price is not what consumers actually choose to buy. They'd rather suffer and get a discount on the ticket. They merely complain about that suffering.
Airline upgrades is a market for lemons. Even if you, say, buy an upgraded seat you may get sat next to a big guy or a rowdy child and then your seat sucks. Instead you have to pay much more (sometimes multiple times a main-cabin ticket) for the cabins up front and even then you might have to set next to a drunk businessman. If you complain you will get told there's nothing that can be done. Even if you get sat in a…
I've traveled for business a few times and a few times I got the company to pay for a first class seat up front. One time the first class cabin had a crying baby in it. Another time it was full of rowdy children. It turns out that rich people have children too. Paying for first class simply decreases your chances of dealing with such things, just like any other seat upgrade.
I suspect that airlines could offer seats which guarantee that you won't be subjected to various nuisances, but choose not to.
Re: Airlines Colluded to Ensure Onboard Food Would Be Awful
#20This is obvious for anyone who took an airlines outside of USA eg Singapore air, Emirates, Cathay and ate real food with real cutlery and got a tub of hagendaz ice cream for dessert.