4 ms·

I had clear for a bit when I traveled for work more often. It was nice, and it's definitely not "for rich people". It's less than $200 a year. I bet most peo

I had clear for a bit when I traveled for work more often. It was nice, and it's definitely not "for rich people". It's less than $200 a year. I bet most people pay more for streaming services for non-essential entertainment. I've always been torn on if it's something viable long term though. While they're at it, they should ban fast passes at amusement parks.

kondu 2y ago
That's $800 for a family of 4. With the median household income at under $80,000, it's ridiculous to think the average person can afford to spend that much just to skip a line a couple times a year.
- gottorf 2y ago
  > it's ridiculous to think the average person can afford to spend that much just to skip a line a couple times a year. Well, sure, it's ridiculous to pay that much if you only travel a couple times a year. It's like how paying $700/year for airline lounge access is ridiculous if you only travel a couple times a year. But $800 for a family of 4 is much closer to the average person than, say, using a private jet to skip security lines.
- hgschmie 2y ago
  It is not. Your partner is discounted abd kids go free.
- awildfivreld 2y ago
  But a family of 4 is not the value proposition here. They are explicitly targeting frequent flyers that stand in the queue so often that the time saves add up. If you're only traveling once a year, you can handle a 45 minute wait twice (although yes, it still sucks). If you're traveling once a week, it's a completely different ballpark.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]