Bingo! The OP severely underestimates the price elasticity of air travel to the median consumer. I can tell you we've had several opportunities to partake in discretionary travel this year and all times we've elected to drive or not go at all. So yeah, grandma IS staying at home as it is. My fiancé is driving 840 miles one way to a friends wedding precisely due to the high ticket prices...there may be 99 airfares in some city-pairings, yet we've (the median consumer) never been able to take advantage of them in our market, more like 350 bucks one ways, yeah sorry grandma, driving it is...$4/gal gas you say..sorry grandma hope you're still around next year.
You must live in a very rural area.
My buddy Rook (who is on this board) is getting married next weekend. We found out last-minute that we could get child care and are going. Southwest 10-day advance fare purchase? $70 plus tax each way, $298.50 including taxes. Would have cost us $280 to drive the car. Break-even.
You're in the minority. For most people, it's still cheaper to fly than to drive, and I guarantee you that airlines aren't covering their costs. Take a look at this quarter's reports with higher-priced fuel... just about EVERYONE is in the red.
Increases in air fare in the order of what re-regulation calls for will yield a fatal drop in passenger traffic without a doubt, most will revert to using air travel for emergencies and deaths only.
One word. BULLSH*T. BULLLLL SH*T.
25+ years ago, before Southwest greatly expanded, before jetBlue and airTran became a household name, airfares were substantially higher than they are now. I know, I was non-revving around with my Dad whenever the loads were low enough to go (rarely).
Those airplanes were full. With higher ticket prices. You're alarmist crap has absolutely ZERO basis in fact. People will still travel. Yes, loads will fall off somewhat as the trailer trash of America finds it's cheaper to drive or take Greyhound again (as it should be), but the airline industry will not collapse.
Maybe you and Al Gore should become golf buddies.
Even if we were to accept the fantasy land version of passenger price elasticity, you're still bidding against your own economic interest by function of economies of scale. Those at the top will gain salary and QOL while an increasing numbers can't find a job at all.
True, but not in the numbers you're screaming about. ANY fix to this industry is going to be painful, either for consumers, or for our national budget, or for the employees, and a possible combination of two or all three of those factors.
Look I'm all about making attempts to restore some of the viability of the career, but I think that ship has sailed. I don't think re-regulation (which I doubt will ever happen) would prove viable.
To some extent I agree. The biggest issue here is the first paragraph of the original poster's mission statement; I've been saying the same thing for 7 years.
Until the airline industry is FORCED by legislation to charge AT LEAST the price of producing their commodity, an aircraft seat, on each and every seat pairing ON AN INDIVIDUAL LEG-BY-LEG BASIS, this cyclical industry cycle of "profit, corporate raiding, bankruptcy, government bailout" will continue.
Add to that the need for strict limits on the amount of cash reserves/capital/stock that can be used for corporate executive compensation packages to prevent the "raiding of the kitty" before the executives exercise their golden parachutes.
Full re-regulation of the industry? Not viable in all likelihood.
However, putting constraints on the industry that FORCE the CEO's to operate it in a fiscally-responsible way and limit their options to corporate raiding and/or bankruptcy, and we might have something that's even REMOTELY sell-able in Washington and to the American public.
Yes, ticket prices would likely go up in this scenario, but not nearly as drastically as full re-regulation.
Just my .02 cents (which is probably worth about the same amount - not even a Starbucks...).
