35 ms·

The airlines weren't broken up in the 70s. They were deregulated and allowed to add or remove routes and set fares as they saw fit. Less government oversight in

The airlines weren't broken up in the 70s. They were deregulated and allowed to add or remove routes and set fares as they saw fit. Less government oversight in this case turned out to be a good thing for consumers.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
paulgerhardt 2y ago
That’s a literal interpretation, but it misses the point of “Hard Landing”. The book argues that while the airlines weren’t monopolies in name, they acted like a government-sanctioned monopoly under the Civil Aviation Board. The Airline Deregulation Act was essentially meant to break up this cartel, and was pushed through despite heavy resistance from those same airlines. They didn’t want the Civil Aeronautics Board dismantled because it protected their monopolies over routes and guaranteed income, and they feared new entrants would disrupt their control. So, while the airlines weren’t formally ‘broken up,’ the airline business, the route monopolies, and CAB were which directly led to the dissolution of companies like Eastern and Pan Am, and the creation or expansion of new entrants like Frontier, JetBlue, and Southwest which were previously prohibited from competing in these markets.
jmward01 2y ago
In the short term? The flying experience is less than miserable now and the costs are going up. I see a lot of articles out there talking about how prices have fallen, but I haven't actually seen the data. The one article that actually cited prices as examples was obviously wrong about those prices, had cherry-picked them or used the laughable quoted prices you see to sucker you into clicking (which then triple as you go through the actual process of getting the ticket). Looking at BTS stats [1] the price appears to be going down somewhat since 1995, but it then goes on to say that the price only covers the base fare, not extras like baggage and the like. We all know by the time you actually fly the cost has gone up considerably. I was forced to pay 150$ for a bag on a recent flight (not even over-weight), that price isn't listed in the base fare anymore but it used to be part of the ticket. Looking at the BTS numbers I see an industry that has had 30 years of technology improvements and customers that aren't seeing that benefit. [1] https://www.bts.gov/air-fares https://www.bts.gov/air-fares (edit) I said 'DOT' when I meant 'BTS' Bureau of transportation Statistics
- ineedaj0b 2y ago
  i'd argue most of the annoyance is tsa type things... no water of x amount... stuck in security line arrive an hour early... disrobe and pull everything out now put it back on... this is all gov regulation
  - jmward01 2y ago
    This is the natural result of businesses only fighting the regulations that actually hurt them and quietly letting the bad ones that help them stay. They have no incentive to lobby to get rid of that silliness. In fact, the worse the airport experience is because of someone other than them the easier it is to give us the worst experiences of our life and charge us for it. It shows who actually has representation, and who doesn't. We don't need less govt regulation, we need better representation.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      If enough people care about a thing, it will filter up to representation. If not, it won't. It's not bad representation if no one knows about it.
- graeme 2y ago
  The phrase "jet set" referred to the elite able to afford airfare. Now everyone can Looking at 1995 prices is not relevant to the question: those are post deregulation prices
  - jmward01 2y ago
    I believed you missed my point about 'in the short term'. My argument, backed by the linked data, was that for the last 30 years the prices actually look flat when you factor in the lost services like luggage. (is that actually a service?) Combine that with the completely horrific experience and there is a clear argument that the overall value proposition for consumers is tanking, badly. Deregulation happened in 1978. The trends I pointed out are lined back to 1995. the consumer benefit looks like it is lasting less time than the detractors to me so 'in the short term' is, I think, a good discussion point.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

paulgerhardt 2y ago

That’s a literal interpretation, but it misses the point of “Hard Landing”. The book argues that while the airlines weren’t monopolies in name, they acted like a government-sanctioned monopoly under the Civil Aviation Board. The Airline Deregulation Act was essentially meant to break up this cartel, and was pushed through despite heavy resistance from those same airlines. They didn’t want the Civil Aeronautics Board dismantled because it protected their monopolies over routes and guaranteed income, and they feared new entrants would disrupt their control. So, while the airlines weren’t formally ‘broken up,’ the airline business, the route monopolies, and CAB were which directly led to the dissolution of companies like Eastern and Pan Am, and the creation or expansion of new entrants like Frontier, JetBlue, and Southwest which were previously prohibited from competing in these markets.

jmward01 2y ago

In the short term? The flying experience is less than miserable now and the costs are going up. I see a lot of articles out there talking about how prices have fallen, but I haven't actually seen the data. The one article that actually cited prices as examples was obviously wrong about those prices, had cherry-picked them or used the laughable quoted prices you see to sucker you into clicking (which then triple as you go through the actual process of getting the ticket). Looking at BTS stats [1] the price appears to be going down somewhat since 1995, but it then goes on to say that the price only covers the base fare, not extras like baggage and the like. We all know by the time you actually fly the cost has gone up considerably. I was forced to pay 150$ for a bag on a recent flight (not even over-weight), that price isn't listed in the base fare anymore but it used to be part of the ticket. Looking at the BTS numbers I see an industry that has had 30 years of technology improvements and customers that aren't seeing that benefit. [1] https://www.bts.gov/air-fares https://www.bts.gov/air-fares (edit) I said 'DOT' when I meant 'BTS' Bureau of transportation Statistics

ineedaj0b 2y ago
i'd argue most of the annoyance is tsa type things... no water of x amount... stuck in security line arrive an hour early... disrobe and pull everything out now put it back on... this is all gov regulation
- jmward01 2y ago
  This is the natural result of businesses only fighting the regulations that actually hurt them and quietly letting the bad ones that help them stay. They have no incentive to lobby to get rid of that silliness. In fact, the worse the airport experience is because of someone other than them the easier it is to give us the worst experiences of our life and charge us for it. It shows who actually has representation, and who doesn't. We don't need less govt regulation, we need better representation.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    If enough people care about a thing, it will filter up to representation. If not, it won't. It's not bad representation if no one knows about it.
graeme 2y ago
The phrase "jet set" referred to the elite able to afford airfare. Now everyone can Looking at 1995 prices is not relevant to the question: those are post deregulation prices
- jmward01 2y ago
  I believed you missed my point about 'in the short term'. My argument, backed by the linked data, was that for the last 30 years the prices actually look flat when you factor in the lost services like luggage. (is that actually a service?) Combine that with the completely horrific experience and there is a clear argument that the overall value proposition for consumers is tanking, badly. Deregulation happened in 1978. The trends I pointed out are lined back to 1995. the consumer benefit looks like it is lasting less time than the detractors to me so 'in the short term' is, I think, a good discussion point.