Put the seats back in.

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bagsmasher

Guest
Okay, I admit MRTC is nice, but are people willing to pay a premium for it? Are customer''s going to be loyal to AA because of it? Right now it seems that price is the only factor in choosing an airline, and we face the no-frills airlines in 70% of our domestic market. So we are a full-service airline, with no-frills prices, and we are bleeding red ink profusely. I say put the seats back in as we eliminate the 74 Fokker''s and have more seats, but with fewer aircraft. Give the public what they are willing to pay for, nothing else.
 

FlyAA777

Member
Aug 23, 2002
26
0
Plenty of people, myself included do pay more to fly AA. Granted less so then pre - 9/11, take away MRTC, and AA looses any competitive advantage whatsoever. Food on transcons...who cares. The ability to cross legs...lots of people care.

Already complained about the addition of a $100 chg. fee for changing award reservations. That change takes a lot of value away from Aadvantage miles for me, and according to flyertalk.com, many others.
 

verhalen2003

Member
Aug 20, 2002
52
0
I would likely remain loyal to AA even if MRTC goes away, but from the profitability standpoint there really are pros and cons (it's not a black-and-white decision):

1) It might not help with the retirement of the F100s. If you replace an F100 with an MD80, you already have more seats than the route probably needed.

2) If you get rid of MRTC, you may lose a number of high coach-class fares and have to replace them with really low, bottom of the barrel fares. Even though fares overall are lower right now, I think that some people are still paying premium to fly AA... as evidence, in late April I found that AA's trans-atlantic coach seats were selling at H fares (this is relatively expensive) while UA and others were still at deeper discount fares.

3) On routes where the passengers are overwhelmingly low yield, why not try removing 1st class and replacing it with more MRTC coach, rather than making the coach class LRTC. To me this would be the best of both worlds -- more coach seats to sell, plus keeping MRTC. And on those low yield routes, most likely the 1st class pax are all upgrades that bought low coach fares... not much reason to keep 1st class around in that case.
 

ss278

Member
Aug 25, 2002
34
0
Boy I lost a lot of "seniority" numbers in this change over. That'll teach me to go on an extended vacation.
 

ss278

Member
Aug 25, 2002
34
0
MRTC is one of the reasons I switched to AA. It is more difficult for me to fly AA out of SLC, only three nonstop destinations, none of which are ever my "final" destination. On Delta I could fly nonstop to all of them, but because of what I perceive as a better product, I'm willing to put up with connections and sometimes pay more. Without MRTC, then price and convenience would have more weight in my decision-making process. Long live MRTC!
 

MiAAmi

Veteran
Aug 21, 2002
1,490
0
www.usaviation.com
----------------
On 8/24/2002 11:48:21 PM

Right now it seems that price is the only factor in choosing an airline, and we face the no-frills airlines in 70% of our domestic market. So we are a full-service airline, with no-frills prices----------------

On most of our flights pax get nothing more than they would on SW. Even on some short INTL flights a bag of cheese snacks and a beverage only. Oh, I forgot. They get the luxury of watching CBS eye on America too.
 

techgirl

Newbie
Aug 31, 2002
2
0
When AA is running 90%+ loads consistently domestically, I would be willing to see MRTC be reduced to an elite-only benefit like on UA... more legroom in the first several rows restricted to elites and full fare passengers. This is making the assumption that AA would be turning away paying passengers for a lack of seats.

When those aircraft are full, however, I'm sure AA will find that the differentiation of the product is responsible for the increased loads and it would make more sense to bring more flight frequencies back into the mix.
 

JFK777

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
694
0
Doing away with "More Room in Coach" is a big mistake. This is one distinguishing feature of AA.
 

lownslow

Advanced
Aug 19, 2002
127
0
www.usaviation.com
----------------
On 9/1/2002 12:10:04 AM

When AA is running 90%+ loads consistently domestically, I would be willing to see MRTC be reduced to an elite-only benefit like on UA... more legroom in the first several rows restricted to elites and full fare passengers.
----------------

That sort of a change would drive me away as a customer... I'm not elite, though my miles tend not to be that far off (a few roundtrips a year). Right now, I fly AA whenever possible because of MRTC, but if you take away that guarantee, I won't stick with AA. I'd gladly pay a few $$$ more for the extra legroom, but I won't pay the exorbitant fares for first or business class, and of course a setup like UA doesn't offer an option to guarantee that you can get Econ-plus if you're not elite....
 
OP
B

bagsmasher

Guest
I'm wondering what percent of customer's are willing to pay a premium for a little extra legroom? Most tall people would like the extra space, but are customer's that are 5'8" or shorter willing to pay for the extra room? Another advantage to MRTC is that you now can let someone out of your row without getting up, that's nice.
 

OLDFART

Newbie
Aug 28, 2002
9
0
January 14, 1993 TWA inaugurates "Comfort Class" service, "the most comfortable way to fly," with extra leg room in the main cabin.

Hoping the MRTC program stays put. It's a great marketing tool.

AA's got the money to push it, TWA didn't.
 

JS

Veteran
Aug 24, 2002
2,004
1
DFW
Visit site
MRTC does not provide enough extra legroom to make it worthwhile. The Delta Shuttle seats are soft leather with more legroom than MRTC, and UA Economy Plus is definitely the best. In UA E+, I can cross my legs. I cannot do so in MRTC.

If you end up in the "bad" half of the plane (depends on aircraft type), MRTC isn't worth anything. Sure, you could select a seat in the "good" half, but part of the MRTC advertising is THROUGHOUT COACH, and that is not the case. It's like a dumbed-down version of UA E+.

Either 1) put the seats back in, 2) take out another row in the bad half so the entire plane truly has MRTC, or 3) move all the additional legroom only to the front of coach like UA E+.
 
Aug 20, 2002
664
50
Why would anybody honestly think it is a good idea to put the seats back in?
All you would be doing is wasting more gas flying around even more empty seats.
 

mga707

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,330
2
----------------
On 9/4/2002 9:49:07 PM

If you end up in the "bad" half of the plane (depends on aircraft type), MRTC isn't worth anything. Sure, you could select a seat in the "good" half, but part of the MRTC advertising is THROUGHOUT COACH, and that is not the case. It's like a dumbed-down version of UA E+.

"Bad half"?! What is the source for your assertion? Is it just personal experience (which can be subjective) or do you have an actual factual source that states that there is indeed a "bad half" in the coach cabin?
AFAIK, the seat pitch is SUPPOSED to be the same throughout the cabin, with the possible exception of a row or two either just ahead of or behind the exit row(s), or in the very rear. Nowhere have I ever seen or heard anything about a "bad half"...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.