# Anderson to AA?



## AmtrakFlyer

Just a rumor but I’m sure it’s good for a few comments.





__





Rumor: Richard Anderson to replace Doug Parker at AA - Airliners.net






www.airliners.net


----------



## LookingGlassTie

Well if it is true, that would be a good fit for him.

Not being snarky; rather I think he could make some improvements, being an airline guy and all that.

He just wasn't a good fit for Amtrak.


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Oh my. I stopped flying years ago and don't miss it.


----------



## me_little_me

AmtrakFlyer said:


> Just a rumor but I’m sure it’s good for a few comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rumor: Richard Anderson to replace Doug Parker at AA - Airliners.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airliners.net


That poor man was drinking too much? No wonder he made all those bad decisions!

Now, I feel sorry for him.

At least Mr. Parker is out of recovery. Hopefully, he'll stay dry.


----------



## zephyr17

Well, AA went from being a pretty nice airline to a really crappy one years ago.

He'll fit right in.


----------



## the_traveler

I used to fly DL a lot, but some things went downhill. Then I switched mostly to AA.

Anderson was at DL and then at Amtrak. (Is it a coincidence things went downhill?) I hope AA doesn’t join the group!


----------



## Mystic River Dragon

Aa is welcome to him.

Perhaps they could make him feel at home immediately by giving him a cheap frozen dinner (flexible and contemporary, of course), eliminating the positions of anyone in the building who could have guided him to his office or answered basic questions he might have, and providing a place for him to store his briefcase for a hefty fee each time he wants to go out for a few minutes. And whenever he flies, make him get off a plane after 750 miles and switch to another one.

That should give him warm and fuzzy memories of his Amtrak days.


----------



## dlagrua

I have no idea why people who have little or no experience in the railroad industry are appointed by the Amtrak BOD as CEO's. If the appointment has to be out of the railroad industry, then at least appoint someone who can do some good like a gourmet chef!


----------



## zephyr17

dlagrua said:


> I have no idea why people who have little or no experience in the railroad industry are appointed by the Amtrak BOD as CEO's. If the appointment has to be out of the railroad industry, then at least appoint someone who can do some good like a gourmet chef!


Seriously, Amtrak ought to look at execs from the hospitality industry.


----------



## MikefromCrete

AA is welcome to have him, just keep him away from Amtrak.


----------



## west point

Want to cry ? Anderson in his new position will try to make an interline agreement with Amtrak in AA's favor. Remember Amtrak's reservation system comes from a off shoot of the AA reservation system.


----------



## railiner

AmtrakFlyer said:


> Just a rumor but I’m sure it’s good for a few comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rumor: Richard Anderson to replace Doug Parker at AA - Airliners.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airliners.net


Looks like that site agrees....good for "a few" comments...


----------



## the_traveler

Maybe he can let AA work of a 50 year old reservation system! Since Arrow was based on AA’s reservation system in the 1970’s or before, they must be very familiar with it!


----------



## Devil's Advocate

I never saw a reason to support Anderson at Amtrak, in fact his tenure honestly made past presidents look better by comparison, but I'm not so sure he's a terrible fit for American. His previous employer Delta is far from the worst airline I've ever flown. Their loyalty program makes a mockery of the concept but the on board service isn't horrible. American was my first and favorite US airline long ago but they're rather uninspired today. The ghost of America West seems to live on while the golden era AA service is long gone. So long as the weather is clear and the aircraft is functional AA flights are generally fine if you can get a seat ahead of coach, but the service is nothing to look forward to and the "food" they serve on my flights is pretty sad. I also find their booking process rather tedious. If I want to check a premium economy ticket through an aggregator I first need to start with basic coach, upgrade to main cabin, and then upgrade again to premium economy. I wish they would just publish a separate booking code for Y+ so it would be easier to check and compare pricing. Maybe Anderson can fix that.


----------



## railiner

AmtrakFlyer said:


> Just a rumor but I’m sure it’s good for a few comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rumor: Richard Anderson to replace Doug Parker at AA - Airliners.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airliners.net


I see that the mod at that forum has locked the thread due to it being "a random rumor without substantiation"....


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

Interesting. One thing I will say: my friend who's an FA there (since the 70's) is taking a buyout and quitting flying.


----------



## MARC Rider

zephyr17 said:


> Seriously, Amtrak ought to look at execs from the hospitality industry.


Actually, Amtrak's main mission is transportation, with most passengers traveling short distances that don't really require much in the way of on-board services. Premium service on long-distance trains is a small part of Amtrak's total operations. It's useful because it cross-subsidizes the operations of the long distance trains, but really, the main reason Amtrak exists and gets government support is because it provides transportation, not hospitality.

Thus, an exec with railroad industry experience would probably be the best fit.


----------



## Michigan Mom

They're offering buyouts due to reduced flight schedules. That's what the legacy carriers do.
If things pick back up, they'll hire, probably at reduced pay or maybe outsource where possible.


----------



## Trogdor

dlagrua said:


> I have no idea why people who have little or no experience in the railroad industry are appointed by the Amtrak BOD as CEO's. If the appointment has to be out of the railroad industry, then at least appoint someone who can do some good like a gourmet chef!




Because a gourmet chef would totally have experience running a multi-billion-dollar organization with dozens of labor unions, 20,000+ employees, and heavy political influence on its operation. Yep, makes sense.


----------



## railiner

In Amtrak's history, which of their presidents are widely considered their "best", and what was their particular background? Any things in common?


----------



## frequentflyer

Airliners.net link on an Amtrak site?  I have seen everything. But seriously, I would think Anderson still has a no compete clause to work at any major airline.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer

Amtrak comes up on Airliners.net more than one would think.


----------



## sttom

If Amtrak is going to pick someone from the airline industry, there are better picks than people from the big 3. From my own experience with airlines and that of my friends, people tend to speak highly of Southwest and Alaska Airlines and tend to hold the big 3 in fairly low regard. But Amtrak picks the guy who thinks you can cut your way to prosperity instead of people who would work on customer service and customer loyalty. But that is par for the course for people who live in the DC/NYC bubble.


----------



## railiner

AmtrakFlyer said:


> Amtrak comes up on Airliners.net more than one would think.


As do airlines on AU. But does AU come up on Airliners.net?


----------



## Devil's Advocate

MARC Rider said:


> Actually, Amtrak's main mission is transportation, with most passengers traveling short distances that don't really require much in the way of on-board services. Premium service on long-distance trains is a small part of Amtrak's total operations. It's useful because it cross-subsidizes the operations of the long distance trains, but really, the main reason Amtrak exists and gets government support is because it provides transportation, not hospitality.


I would say that Amtrak exists because it offers a unique service and enjoys support from a several areas of the country and several levels of government. If transportation alone were the focus then Amtrak would likely be called Ambus or Amfly by now. Take away the premium service and the national network would suffer. Lose the national network and the political support for Amtrak would suffer. Lose the political support and even commuter operations would be at risk. It's a balancing act that needs a broad range of supporters to survive, including premium long distance customers.


----------



## saxman

railiner said:


> As do airlines on AU. But does AU come up on Airliners.net?



Yup. I found AU back in 2004 because of Airliners.net! I had discovered A.net a couple years prior when internet forums were a new concept to me. Someone on there made a mention of AU on a discussion about Amtrak. Funny thing is that now I haven't been to A.net in years. I like FlyerTalk now.

And to keep things on topic. I was willing to give Anderson a chance when he first came on to Amtrak. After seeing the improvements he made at Delta after the merger with Northwest, I figured that Amtrak could use some new fresh ideas. I especially thought Wick would guide him well the first few months. Well when his Southwest Chief bus idea came about, I knew I was wrong. 

Anderson would be good for an airline again. I thought maybe he would retire by now though. I actually thought Doug Parker was doing a decent job at US Airways after the merger with America West. It became a profitable carrier even though it was turned into a bare bones, no frills carrier that happen to be a legacy airline. But his performance at AA has been pretty terrible as of late. Even United has made great strides at improvement over the last few years. I even made 1K status on United this year because of the recent change in status requirements.  I've never had airline status before!


----------



## jiml

Devil's Advocate said:


> I never saw a reason to support Anderson at Amtrak, in fact his tenure honestly made past presidents look better by comparison, but I'm not so sure he's a terrible fit for American. His previous employer Delta is far from the worst airline I've ever flown. Their loyalty program makes a mockery of the concept but the on board service isn't horrible. American was my first and favorite US airline long ago but they're rather uninspired today. The ghost of America West seems to live on while the golden era AA service is long gone. So long as the weather is clear and the aircraft is functional AA flights are generally fine if you can get a seat ahead of coach, but the service is nothing to look forward to and the "food" they serve on my flights is pretty sad. I also find their booking process rather tedious. If I want to check a premium economy ticket through an aggregator I first need to start with basic coach, upgrade to main cabin, and then upgrade again to premium economy. I wish they would just publish a separate booking code for Y+ so it would be easier to check and compare pricing. Maybe Anderson can fix that.


Can't disagree with any of your points - and I'm an AA Lifetime Plat, so have some loyalty.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

MARC Rider said:


> Thus, an exec with railroad industry experience would probably be the best fit.



You mean like Claytor or Moorman? Agreed. 



railiner said:


> In Amtrak's history, which of their presidents are widely considered their "best", and what was their particular background? Any things in common?



W. Graham Claytor and Charles “Wick” Moorman both came to Amtrak after leading Southern / Norfolk Southern. 

Joseph Boardman came from the FRA.

David Gunn came from a long line of railroad jobs that started with the Santa Fe.


----------



## B757Guy

My fiance is a pilot with AA, and she is hearing that Anderson has a pretty significant non-compete with Delta, and that will most likely preclude him from running AA. At my airline, thus far I'm happy with our new CEO.


----------



## the_traveler

saxman said:


> Yup. I found AU back in 2004 because of Airliners.net! I had discovered A.net a couple years prior when internet forums were a new concept to me. Someone on there made a mention of AU on a discussion about Amtrak. Funny thing is that now I haven't been to A.net in years. I like FlyerTalk now.


I first came to AU in 2007 because AlanB made a mention of AU on FlyerTalk. I haven’t been to FT in years.


----------



## jiml

the_traveler said:


> I first came to AU in 2007 because AlanB made a mention of AU on FlyerTalk. I haven’t been to FT in years.


Getting off-topic, but this is turning into one of those "small world" discussions. I've been on FT for years and know more than one person here who also participates on FT. The smart ones don't use the same username. I don't fly nearly as much as I used to and couldn't be described as an airline "fan", but I have a weakness for rail discussion.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

FlyerTalk is great for “insider travel” reviews. right now it’s interesting to read about how airlines and hotels are responding to Coronavirus (actually worse than Amtrak, at least Amtrak is still providing something that vaguely resembles a meal.)


----------



## capltd29

I am a Delta guy. I always had average to great experiences on Delta while RA was in charge. It seems that it went downhill a little bit after he left in terms of service. I swore off AA after the last flight I had with them where we landed at Ohare 20 minutes early and taxied on the tarmac for 90 minutes because there was no gate. Chicago was my destination, but multiple people missed their connections, and being late evening, likely the last connection of the day. Even better, was that it was an Embraer 145 and the gate checked bags were delayed coming to the gate, and when they did come to the gate, they just rolled up the door and said "have at it" so we had to each unload each other's bags on the jet bridge to find our bag. AA is an awful airline.


----------



## jiml

Everyone has an airline story. The last time we flew with Delta in paid FC they stranded us in Minneapolis at -28 degrees, then made us wait in the airport until 10pm while sending our bag to Las Vegas. They finally told us to get a hotel room at our own expense and they'd sort it out in the morning. The next morning had us back at the airport at 4am and completing our trip in economy, with an eventual refund of the difference. In almost 40 years with AA I've never had a similar experience that wasn't handled immediately and in my favor. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Back in the day when I was a Road Warrior, AA and United were considered the Premium Domestic Airlines ( I had the 200th AA Advantage Membership issued).

I would occasional fly other Airlines, and considered Eastern to be the Worst, with Pan Am, Quantas,CP,Mexicana and Air France being the best of the International Lines.

By the 2000s when I retired, most of them were gone, and the race to the bottom had started, (they were following the Class I Rail Roads Run 'em off Model )

I've only flown a few times in thevpast 10 years, and with the exception of the Airport expierence, really enjoyed my flights on Alaska Airlnes,Southwest and United. AA has really slipped! YMMV


----------



## west point

AA denied me boarding in ABQ. It came down to my employer paying me to take the SW chief home. Time was becoming critical for getting the Chief. However after employer intervened finally got on a later flight. AA never did admit wrong or give reason but suspected it was a mistake on a do not fly list ?


----------



## jiml

A few others have mentioned, but I'll second that Alaska Airlines is very good - if they go where you need to be. Best North American airline IMHO.


----------



## the_traveler

Bob Dylan said:


> Back in the day when I was a Road Warrior, AA and United were considered the Premium Domestic Airlines ( I had the 200th AA Advantage Membership issued).
> 
> I would occasional fly other Airlines, and considered Eastern to be the Worst, with Pan Am, Quantas,CP,Mexicana and Air France being the best of the International Lines.
> 
> By the 2000s when I retired, most of them were gone, and the race to the bottom had started, (they were following the Class I Rail Roads Run 'em off Model )
> 
> I've only flown a few times in thevpast 10 years, and with the exception of the Airport expierence, really enjoyed my flights on Alaska Airlnes,Southwest and United. AA has really slipped! YMMV


I used to like Eastern, flying them often. (I almost got a job with them, making it to the final cut of 5 people.) I’ll agree with you about Alaska. I used to like UA a lot, but now like them slightly less.


----------



## Seaboard92

Alaska is an amazing airline. I will go out of my way to fly on them even if the routing is a bit clunky. Of course I'm bias they let me fly on a travel agent rate so it's very economical too.


----------



## Qapla

jiml said:


> Everyone has an airline story



I don't - I don't fly and never have ... and don't plan to



Bob Dylan said:


> considered Eastern to be the Worst, with Pan Am, Quantas,CP,Mexicana and Air France being the best



A friend of ours who died a few weeks ago was retired from Pan Am ... he and his wife lived in a community where there were several Pam Am retirees



the_traveler said:


> I used to like Eastern



I have a friend in Jacksonville whose wife used to work for Eastern - way back when

As a side thought, one of Leann Rimes uncles used to be a pilot for Eastern - he got disability retirement when the plane he was flying dropped over 5,000 feet in what they described as a, "air pocket" ... the sudden jolt when they caught the air back and climbed damaged his back. I did some work for the family back when I used to install carpet.



Now, back to talking about Anderson and AA


----------



## the_traveler

Qapla said:


> Now, back to talking about Anderson and AA


Why?  It seems that Eastern, Pan Am and TWA carry almost the same amount of passengers these days as Amtrak does!


----------



## MARC Rider

Bob Dylan said:


> Back in the day when I was a Road Warrior, AA and United were considered the Premium Domestic Airlines ( I had the 200th AA Advantage Membership issued).
> 
> I would occasional fly other Airlines, and considered Eastern to be the Worst, with Pan Am, Quantas,CP,Mexicana and Air France being the best of the International Lines.
> 
> By the 2000s when I retired, most of them were gone, and the race to the bottom had started, (they were following the Class I Rail Roads Run 'em off Model )
> 
> I've only flown a few times in thevpast 10 years, and with the exception of the Airport expierence, really enjoyed my flights on Alaska Airlnes,Southwest and United. AA has really slipped! YMMV


In my college days, my choices for PHL-ORD flights were TWA, United, and AA. My travel agent issued my first standby ticket on TWA, and thus I became a TWA fan, although I would also take United if I couldn't get on a TWA flight. When I started flying for work, United was my go-to airline to fly between BWI and Denver and BWI-SFO. Sometimes the government contract carrier was USAir (later USAirways), and although the service was OK, it was better on United. In any case, they had nonstops for both routes. At certain periods, I would have to fly TWA and change in St. Louis. By the later 1980s, TWA was definitely on the way down. If I was headed for Texas, I'd fly AA to DFW. The last time if needed to do that was in 2009, and service was perfectly good. For a short period around 1986-87, we had to fly Continental under the Lorenzo regime, and it was pretty terrible.

Lately, most of the time, when I fly, I take Southwest. In fact the last time I flew something that wasn't Southwest was in 2010 when I flew to SFO. The service was terrible, I mean OK in the plane, though they served no food, but the ground work was being handled by contractors at SFO and the check in process was terrible. Actually, I'm pretty happy with Southwest, even if they serve no food. I pay extra for Early-Bird check-in and don't have to worry about checking in at exactly 24 hours before flight to get a decent boarding position and the seat I want on the plane. The fare includes checked baggage, the planes are usually on time and seem to be in good condition, the check in process is smooth, and it's as good as it can one can expect in today's business climate for air travel. It helps that BWI is a Southwest hub, and I can fly them to pretty much anywhere I need to go in the US, mostly with non-stop flights.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

I really like southwest too MARCrider. I just wish they would offer a no-frills business class seat at the front. Those small 3 x 3 seats mess with my back on long flights.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha

AA is sitting on the lip of the toilet rim right now and Anderson will easily push them into the ranks of the fallen flags. C.R. Smith is going 'round and 'round in his grave as we speak!


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Among the remaining US airlines...

*Alaska *- Had good experiences but unless I'm flying to the Northwest or Asia it's probably not worth traveling out of the way with only one or two available flights per day. I have also heard good things about their loyalty program and should probably be crediting to AS whenever possible. I tried to do that with a some trips last year but buying OW flights through AA somehow locked them on AAvantage. I'd imagine there's a workaround but it wasn't easy or obvious to me.

*Allegiant* - Never heard a single positive comment about Allegiant. It sounds like they provide fewer protections than are legally mandated and essentially dare customers to lodge a complaint that Allegiant is convinced will have little or no material impact on their bottom line.

*American *- As mentioned above American was once my first and favorite airline. Even as a young child I felt they were better than the competition, in fact they fawned and doted on me back then, but that was a long time ago now. Today coach class has a pitch which is unusable for someone of my height, but they are one of only two airlines that serve an important airport for me and their F/J/W products remain workable for now.

*Delta* - Along with other airlines Delta's coach service has become unusable for someone of my height but as with American and Alaska their F/J/W products have worked fine for me. I have no problem using Delta for trips that either don't require or aren't negatively impacted by a connection in Georgia.

*Frontier* - Flew them back when they still had decent pitch as an LCC before they started following a much more aggressive ULCC path. They were fine for flights to/from the Rocky Mountains and Vegas but as with Spirit and Allegiant there is no way for someone of my height to travel comfortably with them today at any price.

*JetBlue* - Heard good things but they don't serve my airport, don't sell connections from here, and connecting through New York for North American trips makes little sense. They do serve Austin but that airport has become a bit of a mess in recent years and it's too long to drive for a domestic or regional flight. The distance isn't far but the traffic is so dense it takes hours each way. The toll roads don't even help due to how inefficiently they were designed and implemented.

*Southwest* - For decades I was a routine passenger on Southwest. Even as I would switch between American, United, and Delta I still flew Southwest as well. Initially this was because Southwest offered me more non-stops and because they made it so easy to reschedule if anything changed. Then as other airlines continued to cut back Southwest still included checked luggage, snacks, drinks, and larger aircraft than the competition. Unfortunately with continuing reductions in seat pitch my legs can only fit in the first row or the emergency exit rows, which Southwest cannot guarantee no matter when you book or how much you spend. When combined with changes in my travel patterns the new seat pitch made Southwest unusable and caused me to lose hundreds in credits.

*Spirit* - Heard nothing but horror stories about the ULCC version. Once upon a time they offered a larger seat with more pitch suitable for tall people. Then they got rid of those seats. It's crazy to think that merely being tall could become a disability but that's where we're heading with so many airlines following in the footsteps of Spirit and Ryanair. Spirit used to serve my airport and then left. To which I can only say good riddance and don't bother coming back.

*United* - I left UA after the David Dao incident. I didn't leave merely because of the decision to forcibly remove a revenue passenger for non-revenue staff, or even because a paying customer was beaten and bloodied in the process. I left because of how United management responded when the news hit the fan. Rather than acknowledge that it was a terrible outcome that deserved a deeper look into their policies and protocols they praised their staff while criticizing a customer who did nothing more than refuse to abandon his paid seat for an arbitrary non-safety related reason. UA's blind faith in their bureaucracy and their use of security staff to resolve a civil dispute was genuinely dangerous and could have been resolved without bloodshed but they chose to blame the victim instead. That was enough for me to leave and never look back.


----------



## railiner

I still maintain that flying was better overall, in the regulated era. Even if you couldn't get very low cut rates for advanced purchases, you didn't get gouged for last minute purchases, either.

And flying on any carrier back then was a delightful experience, where you were treated like they really welcomed you on board. Some even more than other's. Their fares were identical, so they competed with ever greater airplanes and amenities, as well as faster or more frequent schedules....

Not to mention, their employees received a decent wage, pension, and benefits.


----------



## me_little_me

Why is this thread part of "Amtrak Rail Discussion"? It has nothing to do with Amtrak other than a former employee of it has a new job outside of the company. None of the discussion relates to his Amtrak employment other than the fact that he used to be there.

If we're going to include discussions of former employees and their new jobs, can we include a discussion of a former LSA who now works cleaning at a hotel chain? It's just as relevant. And she was a lot nicer and did a better job for Amtrak.


----------



## MARC Rider

railiner said:


> I still maintain that flying was better overall, in the regulated era. Even if you couldn't get very low cut rates for advanced purchases, you didn't get gouged for last minute purchases, either.
> 
> And flying on any carrier back then was a delightful experience, where you were treated like they really welcomed you on board. Some even more than other's. Their fares were identical, so they competed with ever greater airplanes and amenities, as well as faster or more frequent schedules....
> 
> Not to mention, their employees received a decent wage, pension, and benefits.


I tend to agree with you, but I also remembered that we all complained a lot back then, too. The best thing I liked was that my standby ticket was honored by all the airlines, and if I couldn't get a seat on one, I just went over to another counter, and eventually I found something. The meals on the PHL-ORD flights were convenient, even if we complained about the food, because if you took a no-meal flight, you would be in the airport during meal time, and the only thing worse than airline food at the time was airport food.

But they also had better bus service back then, so if the short-haul flights were too expensive, you could always take a bus, or even Amtrak if you happened to be traveling somewhere served by Amtrak. So the expensive air fares back in the regulated era weren't as much of a burden as they might be today if they reregulated airlines.


----------



## Seaboard92

In my opinion Frontier and Spirit are the "City Buses" of the sky. I will fly them if it's convenient to my destination but neither are my first choice. If you remember what you pay for on Spirit and aren't expecting anything above that it usually isn't bad.


----------



## the_traveler

Even today, meals are iffy.

I flew on DL in F from ATL to DTW. This flight is between 2 of the major hubs on DL, and was midday (a “normal” meal period). However, since the flight is under 900 miles, DL does not offer any meal or “food for sale”! So I got a light snack (I believe fruit & a candy bar) in F!

Luckily, DTW has a SkyClub, so I got some food (and not just snacks either)!


----------



## Dakota 400

railiner said:


> I still maintain that flying was better overall, in the regulated era.



I agree with you. Coach passengers were treated as guests and not as cattle. A very good dinner could be enjoyed in Coach on flights from DAY to LGA on AA. Or a very good breakfast on TWA from DCA to CMH and DAY.


----------



## willem

the_traveler said:


> Luckily, DTW has a SkyClub, so I got some food (and not just snacks either)!



I thought that Delta only allowed first class passengers access to its lounges if the customers were flying either international or transcontinental. Did I misunderstand?


----------



## jebr

Moderator note: This thread has been moved to non-rail transportation.


----------



## jebr

willem said:


> I thought that Delta only allowed first class passengers access to its lounges if the customers were flying either international or transcontinental. Did I misunderstand?



There's also access available with some credit cards, a paid membership, or a benefit after reaching certain frequent flyer status levels. I'm guessing most people use one of those options to enter into the Sky Clubs.


----------



## railiner

jebr said:


> Moderator note: This thread has been moved to non-rail transportation.


Thank you. Should make #me_liitle_me happy..


----------



## saxman

willem said:


> I thought that Delta only allowed first class passengers access to its lounges if the customers were flying either international or transcontinental. Did I misunderstand?




Of the US Legacy carriers, their respective lounges are actually paid memberships. You just had to be a member of the club to get in or have the right high fee credit card to get in. Domestic first class alone does not get you in the clubs. You still have to be a member or certain credit card holder.

Long-haul international first or business does grant you access to a club though. If in a major hub, you definitely want to head to the international lounges though. American offers the Flagship Lounge and United now offers the Polaris Lounges. Both are very nice and a step above the normal airline clubs. 

This differs from many foreign airlines clubs. Simply being in first class or having status grants you access to their clubs. My GF has One World Sapphire from being Platinum on AA. When we went to Australia on Qantas, we were allowed to enter the Qantas lounges, even on a domestic itinerary. I just made 1K Premier status on United. I can enter any Star Alliance lounge (Lufthansa, ANA, Turkish, etc) when traveling in international coach, but I can't enter a United Club lounge. Go figure. I would still need to buy the United Club membership, though at a discount.


----------



## Willbridge

railiner said:


> In Amtrak's history, which of their presidents are widely considered their "best", and what was their particular background? Any things in common?


I've been thinking about that. Even the "best" had disappointments and some ordinary ones shone brightly on one issue or another. I'll put forward Paul Reistrup (1975-78), Graham Claytor (1982-93), and David Gunn (2002-2005).


----------



## MARC Rider

Dakota 400 said:


> I agree with you. Coach passengers were treated as guests and not as cattle. A very good dinner could be enjoyed in Coach on flights from DAY to LGA on AA. Or a very good breakfast on TWA from DCA to CMH and DAY.


For flights 4 hours or less (and maybe even the 5-6 hour transcontinental flights), I'm not sure meal service is necessary. That's one thing that the budget airlines have demonstrated -- that passengers will fly without the meal service. I myself have adapted quite well to not being served a meal. Sure, if you offer me one, I'll eat it, but lack of one is not a deal-breaker for me in terms of choosing an airline to fly.

The longer overseas 8 hour plus flights probably still need to serve something to keep the passengers' blood sugar in balance. The shorter flights can deal with this by handing out prepackaged snacks. (The snacks could be a bit more protein-rich, like energy bars or beef jerky/beef sticks, though.) 

An airplane with it's lack of humidity and low-pressure high altitude conditions is the last place you'd want to enjoy a gourmet meal. Where you're served crammed into a small seat and tray table, and you could hit turbulence at any moment. Why should the airlines have to go through all the trouble to prepare and serve one, especially if the flight is short? 

Now there are some service upgrades, even for the passengers in the cheap seats, that would be nice to revive. Checked luggage being included in all fares is my top priority. Sufficient staffing to eliminate cattle lines at check-in is another. Pillows and blankets. A reasonable minimum seat pitch and seat width. Reasonable change/cancellation/refund policies. The most important thing for me, however, is that they fly planes in good mechanical condition that safely get me to my destination on schedule (although I have no problem with an early arrival.)


----------



## the_traveler

I accessed the airline club by being a same day flyer to get a day pass. If I regularly flew out of (or thru) a club location, I would get a lounge membership. But for me, with connections usually within an hour or so, it’s not worth it.


----------



## Palmetto

the_traveler said:


> I accessed the airline club by being a same day flyer to get a day pass. If I regularly flew out of (or thru) a club location, I would get a lounge membership. But for me, with connections usually within an hour or so, it’s not worth it.



Good point, which is one reason I book longer connections, if available. I'm in no hurry these days. And the credit card I have with CitiBank gets me plus 10 authorized users into the Admiral's Clubs on American Airlines. But because I am the primary member, I also have access to many clubs in the One World Alliance airlines on most continents.


----------



## jiml

Airlines have some widely different rules governing their clubs. Both Delta and AA consider Canada as a domestic destination, so no club access, however UA considers Canada as international so a flyer in Business can get access for a one-hour flight between Toronto and Chicago at both ends. Some also offer a discount package of seat selection, checked bag and club access for one low price - usually cheaper than a day pass alone.


----------



## sttom

Seaboard92 said:


> In my opinion Frontier and Spirit are the "City Buses" of the sky. I will fly them if it's convenient to my destination but neither are my first choice. If you remember what you pay for on Spirit and aren't expecting anything above that it usually isn't bad.


Frontier and Spirit also have weird schedules and even out of Oakland, which is basically a budget hub at this point, Spirit is never the cheapest option or most convenient option when compared to any other domestic airline. I guess that is a good thing for Southwest since it is one of their hubs and Alaska has made it a priority to expand service there. 

I know I am way to young to have been alive during the regulated era, but not serving the East Bay and other mid sized cities seems to be shortsighted and was something the old regulations at least made sure mid sized cities had halfway useful schedules. Now, even in the East Bay, if you want a direct or semi direct flight anywhere in the US your options are Southwest, Alaska or go to SFO. Pretty much every other airline has a limited and indirect service to the rest of the country out of Oakland, if it even has one at all.


----------



## Dakota 400

the_traveler said:


> I accessed the airline club by being a same day flyer to get a day pass.



I understood that purchasing a day pass was no longer possible. The regulations must have changed.


----------



## Dakota 400

MARC Rider said:


> you'd want to enjoy a gourmet meal. Where you're served crammed into a small seat and tray table, and you could hit turbulence at any moment.



The strangest meal that I have experienced on a flight was on a Piedmont Airlines lunch flight from DAY to BOS. The entree was a bowl of vegetable beef soup. It was good, but trying to eat it, sitting in a coach seat with the tray table lower than a normal table and hoping that there would be no turbulence: well, I don't want to repeat that experience again!


----------



## me_little_me

MARC Rider said:


> I tend to agree with you, but I also remembered that we all complained a lot back then, too. The best thing I liked was that my standby ticket was honored by all the airlines, and if I couldn't get a seat on one, I just went over to another counter, and eventually I found something. The meals on the PHL-ORD flights were convenient, even if we complained about the food, because if you took a no-meal flight, you would be in the airport during meal time, and the only thing worse than airline food at the time was airport food.
> 
> But they also had better bus service back then, so if the short-haul flights were too expensive, you could always take a bus, or even Amtrak if you happened to be traveling somewhere served by Amtrak. So the expensive air fares back in the regulated era weren't as much of a burden as they might be today if they reregulated airlines.


And more ...
They interlined your bags and if they were misplaced (no computer control in those days), no problem on them putting your bags on the competitor's next flight out.

If they screwed up on your reservations, they took care of putting you on a competitor's plane even if it meant having to upgrade you.

At the lounges, and even at the counter if you were really nice, they'd see if they could upgrade you.

First Class had first class distances between rows, not as they do now, make them as short as coach used to be.

Continental used to advertise "we never crowd you in six across" with their 2x3 seating in those older, smaller 727 jets.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

saxman said:


> This differs from many foreign airlines clubs. Simply being in first class or having status grants you access to their clubs. My GF has One World Sapphire from being Platinum on AA. When we went to Australia on Qantas, we were allowed to enter the Qantas lounges, even on a domestic itinerary. I just made 1K Premier status on United. I can enter any Star Alliance lounge (Lufthansa, ANA, Turkish, etc) when traveling in international coach, but I can't enter a United Club lounge.


To the best of my understanding you were most likely granted reciprocal lounge access because it was a foreign flight _for you_. Local passengers flying domestic First/Business would most likely not enjoy the same lounge access with a domestic ticket and status alone. Those passengers would be granted lounge status when traveling in countries foreign_ to them,_ such as with a domestic flight here in the US. I'm no expert on Qantas or Australia specifically but that's generally how foreign lounge access works in my experience.



MARC Rider said:


> An airplane with it's lack of humidity and low-pressure high altitude conditions is the last place you'd want to enjoy a gourmet meal. Where you're served crammed into a small seat and tray table, and you could hit turbulence at any moment. Why should the airlines have to go through all the trouble to prepare and serve one, especially if the flight is short?


It's true that elevation and humidity need to be planned around when designing onboard menus but the idea that gourmet food is difficult or impossible to enjoy on an aircraft is a myth. I spent many years living in a location not much different in relative elevation and humidity than the interior of modern aircraft cabins. We had to make adjustments but we still enjoyed quality ingredients and finer foods as much as anyone else. If you've never been able to enjoy a gourmet meal onboard an aircraft you might want to consider choosing a different airline. I've had good experiences with Cathay Pacific, Japan Airlines, and EVA Air.


----------



## saxman

Devil's Advocate said:


> To the best of my understanding you were most likely granted reciprocal lounge access because it was a foreign flight _for you_. Local passengers flying domestic First/Business would most likely not enjoy the same lounge access with a domestic ticket and status alone. Those passengers would be granted lounge status when traveling in countries foreign_ to them,_ such as with a domestic flight here in the US. I'm no expert on Qantas or Australia specifically but that's generally how foreign lounge access works in my experience.



This was not the case though. This was a domestic flight itinerary entirely within Australia. They didn't know we were from outside the country. We just showed our boarding passed that had our One World status on them. That's it.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

saxman said:


> This was not the case though. This was a domestic flight itinerary entirely within Australia. They didn't know we were from outside the country. We just showed our boarding passed that had our One World status on them. That's it.


It sounds like Qantas is extremely generous with lounge rules. Looking over their recent history this privilege may be related to fending off Virgin Australia's attempts to woo business travelers and further solidifying QF's stranglehold on the corporate contract market. Hopefully QF's lounges are large enough to comfortably accommodate the number of people with access. What did you think of QF's service standards? Did you have an opportunity to compare them with Air New Zealand?



saxman said:


> I can enter any Star Alliance lounge (Lufthansa, ANA, Turkish, etc) when traveling in international coach, but I can't enter a United Club lounge. Go figure. I would still need to buy the United Club membership, though at a discount.


I probably should have used this quote as the basis for my previous reply.


----------



## Bob Dylan

When I was a frequent International Traveler back in the day ( 70s/90s), I often went through SFO and was allowed to use the Qantas Lounge when catching CP Air to Canada, and of course Qantas to Australia.

I found the Quantas Lounge @ SFO to be the Best Overall Lounge expierence I ever had, and the Service on CP and Quantas, whether Coach or FC, was among my most pleasant flight memories.


----------



## me_little_me

Short airline trips are often not so short. Between delays at the beginning and when changing planes, it could be a long time between meals.


----------



## Dakota 400

Devil's Advocate said:


> If you've never been able to enjoy a gourmet meal onboard an aircraft you might want to consider choosing a different airline.



The meal service on Singapore Airlines is quite good. Their "Book the Cook" program offers a very wide variety of menu options that can be booked prior to one's flight.


----------



## MARC Rider

Dakota 400 said:


> The meal service on Singapore Airlines is quite good. Their "Book the Cook" program offers a very wide variety of menu options that can be booked prior to one's flight.


That's wonderful, if you are flying from and to someplace served by Singapore Airlines and you can afford first class or business class.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Dakota 400 said:


> The meal service on Singapore Airlines is quite good. Their "Book the Cook" program offers a very wide variety of menu options that can be booked prior to one's flight.


SQ is one of my favorite airlines and SIN is one of my favorite airports. I've never had a bad experience across several flights. I haven't had a chance to book the cook yet but I plan to do so in the future.



MARC Rider said:


> That's wonderful, if you are flying from and to someplace served by Singapore Airlines and you can afford first class or business class.


Even if you aren't traveling through Singapore my advice is to try some other options and get out of your (dis)comfort zone once in a while. In my experience traveler loyalty is overrated and a good airline will treat infrequent passengers better than a bad airline treats routine travelers.


----------



## MARC Rider

me_little_me said:


> Short airline trips are often not so short. Between delays at the beginning and when changing planes, it could be a long time between meals.


One usually changes planes in airports. Airports have all sorts of food outlets where once can buy perfectly acceptable food while waiting for a delayed flight or changing planes. I myself have done this, most recently at Dallas Love Field on a flight between BWI and LAX that involved a plane change in Dallas.


----------



## railiner

MARC Rider said:


> One usually changes planes in airports. Airports have all sorts of food outlets where once can buy perfectly acceptable food while waiting for a delayed flight or changing planes. I myself have done this, most recently at Dallas Love Field on a flight between BWI and LAX that involved a plane change in Dallas.


Agreed...ever since they eliminated most domestic in-flight service, the airport airside restaurants have really grown to fill that 'vacuum'. At one time, there wasn't much more than newstands and bars on the concourses. You had to exit security, when they started that, to find a decent terminal restaurant.


----------



## Bob Dylan

railiner said:


> Agreed...ever since they eliminated most domestic in-flight service, the airport airside restaurants have really grown to fill that 'vacuum'. At one time, there wasn't much more than newstands and bars on the concourses. You had to exit security, when they started that, to find a decent terminal restaurant.


Except for Starbucks, all of the Eating and Drinking Places @ the Austin Airport are Local Joints and we even have Live Music going on!


----------



## Dakota 400

railiner said:


> the airport airside restaurants have really grown to fill that 'vacuum'.



The increase in the variety of different restaurant types has been interesting to watch. Not so interesting has been the increase in the prices for the same food, i.e. at a McDonald's, at a restaurant off the airport's perimeter.


----------



## railiner

Dakota 400 said:


> The increase in the variety of different restaurant types has been interesting to watch. Not so interesting has been the increase in the prices for the same food, i.e. at a McDonald's, at a restaurant off the airport's perimeter.


In their defense, airport establishment's cite the 'exorbitant' rental and other fees they pay to the airport operator. 

IIRC, a while back, the Pittsburgh airport got their retail tenants to agree to all charge "street prices" for their items. They did this to try to make the airport into a 'neighborhood shopping mall', and attract a lot of extra non traveling customer's to shop and dine there. Since it is no longer a hub airport (US Air), I don't know if that practice still continues or if it fell by the wayside...


----------



## saxman

railiner said:


> IIRC, a while back, the Pittsburgh airport got their retail tenants to agree to all charge "street prices" for their items. They did this to try to make the airport into a 'neighborhood shopping mall', and attract a lot of extra non traveling customer's to shop and dine there. Since it is no longer a hub airport (US Air), I don't know if that practice still continues or if it fell by the wayside...



I think they still do this. Or maybe I'm mixing it up with Portland. 

Airport retail is a big money maker for airports, which in turn keeps airline fees lower. I use to be friends with an airport manager at DFW and his main job was retail and restaurants. Over the last 20 years, they've discovered that bringing in local cuisine and retail really made the passenger experience a positive one.


----------

