3 ms·
My guess is that it was less consistently profitable than a more typical cabin arrangement. The reality is it's harder to fully book a plane like the one you d
by gen220 4y ago
My guess is that it was less consistently profitable than a more typical cabin arrangement.
The reality is it's harder to fully book a plane like the one you describe, than one with a distribution of seats that more closely resembles the distribution of the commercial airline customer population, especially when you consider how to pass on the cost of spiky jet fuel to the people in the cabin.
On a plan with 8 business class seats, you can pass on most of that price to those 8, and you'll still fill the rest of the cabin and make money on the flight. With "only" 30 business class seats, it's a different story. Missing 6 seats might cause you to lose money.
Wikipedia says Ted folded in 2008, amid a spike in fuel prices.
- giantrobot 4y agoOh I'm sure Ted was only marginally profitable at best. A flight would have the same fixed costs as a traditionally laid out plane with fewer paying seats. Since the cost of the seats wasn't much higher than other airlines' economy class, there weren't many avenues for Ted to make a profit. I am just lamenting the loss of an airline where I, being taller than the average human economy seating is optimized for, was actually comfortable for the whole flight. The only times I've been comfortable on a plane have been in exit rows or the small number of times I've splurged and flown first class.