[1united6]

You have GOT to be kidding me! Our flight was scheduled to leave around 5:30PM, and got pushed back (slowly and steadily, an hour at a time) to 8:30PM. The captain and crew were apparently arriving from Washington D.C. Flying out of a hub (Newark), I would have expected an extra crew / captain / ANYTHING to be available for a flight. But NO, we had to wait for that specific crew to show up. I felt like I was in the middle of nowhere! Seems like cost-cutting via the United / Continental merger has really done the trick for customer service... Specifically, the woman at the gate who is supposed to be able to communicate with stranded passengers instead giggled her way through our delay, deciding to mosey around and chat with friends rather than relaying accurate information to us. While waiting for the plane, somehow the operations team thought that leaving the checked-in baggage out in the rain was a great idea -- all of it was wet by the time it came around the carousel at our destination. No apology, nothing at all. Did you not think that we would notice? Sorry to say, we did notice. The problem with airlines these days is that, since your routes are not particularly unique (as many airlines fly the same routes), the business is effectively commoditized. As a result, the only way (that you can think of) to bring customers back to fly with a particular airline is by using a frequent flyer program. Thus, the airline is able to get away with poor customer service because it knows that, either way, the customers have no choice! A smart idea in the short-run, until the airline goes bankrupt (again!) and then everyone wonders why!? It's the customer service, stupid! The frequent flyer programs are but a quick fix! Take a look at the airlines across both oceans. Singapore, Emirates, Thai (to name a few) -- why are they doing well (profitability-wise), growing, and bringing customers back? Courtesy. A lack of Complacency. A general sense of Customer Service. Put it in your Mission Statement for all I care! The three Cs -- it has a ring to it! They invest in their crew and captains for the long-run! They don't worry (as much as US-based airlines do) about Diluted EPS and accounting methodologies and what the research analysts will think of the numbers posted every quarter. They stick to their core competency -- comfortable, cheap, and effective travel by air -- and not frustrating their customers as they attempt to perform this task. America invented the concept of customer service and, at least in the airline industry, has completely and totally forgotten not only the definition of the term, but the term itself! It is completely non-existent, and this flight experience was one of many examples that substantiates my argument. Despite my frustrations, I know that it will all work out in the end. Someday, somehow, several of the more successful international airlines, perhaps even one of those three previously mentioned, will penetrate the US Domestic flight market and soon enough, lead to the bankruptcy of many US-based airlines. And this time, it won't be Chapter 11.

[jimworcs]

Sadly, foreign ownership of airlines operating in the US is prohibited in law. The airlines pay large sums to lobby law-makers to keep it that way. I wonder why, in the home of free market competition, this should be. What are they afraid of?

[Burgers]

Jimworcs I'm going to take you to task as you are clearly wrong.
The US does allow foreign ownership - LH group owns a percentage of JetBlue for example. There is no decent sized developed country that allows 100% foreign ownership. Lobbying.... not a chance. Like most countries domestic control is seen as critical for economic security and defense -ie troop lift.
The issue in the US is legacy carriers are saddled with long tenured employees with ridiculous union wages.

[jimworcs]

Burger, check your facts before posting categoric statements..google is your friend.

Point 1 - Lufty does not have a controlling stake in Jet Blue
Point 2 - Foreign ownership of US based carriers is still prohibited in law
Point 3 - You say that no decent sized developed country allows 100% ownership. What about Switzerland, Austria, Netherlands, France, Spain, Australia, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Ireland, Great Britain.. all allow 100% foreign ownership of their airlines. Lufthansa owns Austrian and Swiss airlines and until recently owned the UK BMI group. AirFrance controls KLM, and BA controls Iberia (although both set up overarching group companies, to manage those controlling interests). Singapore airlines owns an Australian based airline. There are so many examples, I don't know where to stop.

[azstar]

Originally Posted by Burgers

The issue in the US is legacy carriers are saddled with long tenured employees with ridiculous union wages.

I have to strongly disagree on this one. The problem is not "ridiculous union wages" it's executive level excess compensation and entitlement programs. Plus, the airline business complete disregard for the accountability of their employees towards their customers. There is no incentive for any airline employee to be better than the worst employee.

Southwest is one of the most heavily unionized, and profitable, airlines in the world. I'm pretty sure their executives don't have company provided limousines and drivers, or expensive townhouses for their executives to live in, rent free.

The former CEO of Chrysler once said "I don't mind paying union wages because they're the people buying our cars". The collapse of the American job has been the "Walmarting of America" (paying substandard wages so that full time employees must depend on taxpayers for their survival while Walmart owners and executives are multi billionaires) not unionization.

Oh, btw, foreign corporations can own up to 25% of a U.S. airline.

[A320FAN]

Originally Posted by jimworcs

Burger, check your facts before posting categoric statements..google is your friend.

Point 1 - Lufty does not have a controlling stake in Jet Blue
Point 2 - Foreign ownership of US based carriers is still prohibited in law
Point 3 - You say that no decent sized developed country allows 100% ownership. What about Switzerland, Austria, Netherlands, France, Spain, Australia, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Ireland, Great Britain.. all allow 100% foreign ownership of their airlines. Lufthansa owns Austrian and Swiss airlines and until recently owned the UK BMI group. AirFrance controls KLM, and BA controls Iberia (although both set up overarching group companies, to manage those controlling interests). Singapore airlines owns an Australian based airline. There are so many examples, I don't know where to stop.

Mr Worcs....you need to have your eyes examined you head checked, and you glasses fine tuned.

No one ever said Lufthansa held a controlling stake in jetBlue. It was a 19% stake they bought, paid for part of the conversion to Sabre, and gave jetblue their 1st real codeshare after Cape Air.

2. US law prohibit foreign entities from owning no more then a 25% of non voting stock, and the max allotment can be up to 49%. the remaining 51% MUST BE FROM PEOPLE/BUSINESSES IN THE UNITED STATES.

3. What you guys do in Europe is your business.

[jimworcs]

A320... I am hoping you don't fly no A320's, cos your eyesight seems to be lacking. I made the point that you cannot own a US airline.... 19% ain't no controlling stake, which was exactly my point. Burgers suggested that the US does allow foreign ownership and cited the LH stake in jetBlue as an example.

Secondly, Australia and Singapore are not in Europe in my atlas...so I don't think this is just about Europe. (you are going to get lost in that A320 with your atlas). It is about American based airlines' fear of the free market and protectionism at the cost of the American consumer. It is also about a corrupt political system which allows huge monolith airlines to buy themselves anti-trust immunity and protectionist measures to avoid having to compete.