5 ms·

Honestly, it sounds less like a problem with “elite overproduction”, and more a problem of a society lacking imagination and creativity to divert resources in e

by nis0s 1y ago

Honestly, it sounds less like a problem with “elite overproduction”, and more a problem of a society lacking imagination and creativity to divert resources in efficient ways. It’s especially appalling that a company service meant to sell experiences is literally complaining about too many people having too much money. What the fuck are they paying their MBAs for, to create spin? Come up with services and products and experiences to sell, you numpties!

PaulHoule 1y ago
Articles about the airport lounge are popular precisely because so many people are interested in the airport lounge. Personally I'm much more interested in issues that people don't talk about -- such as the "scope clause" that keeps aircraft like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family out of American skies. Smaller airports are served only by crappy 50-seat jets that manufacturers no longer make. If they could upgrade to 70-90 state-of-the-art jets they could provide a cheaper and more attractive service that would fill the seats. Most organizations in my town rate the "quality of the airport" as the worst challenge they have in their environment. Real elites fly on private jets. You can cross the pond faster in one of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulfstream_G650/G700/G800 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulfstream_G650/G700/G800 than you can on a 7(7|8)7.
- nis0s 1y ago
  In general, I think the “private jet” model is useful for figuring out how to develop different experiences for people with different needs or resources. I don’t care about airport lounges per se, but more about the lack of imagination from service providers and experience sellers. It’s not a problem that more people have more money to spend! Figure out how to separate them from it.
  - PaulHoule 1y ago
    Isn't there a contradiction between luxury experiences being personalized and luxury experiences being legible as luxury experiences? That is, something that is private doesn't put you on display as a luxury consumer. I've read a lot about luxury car, watch and other brands that make ultra-rich customers jump through hoops, other than financial, to prove themselves to be worthy to buy their most wanted products. Makes no sense to me -- luxury for me is spending my money and being served, but hey, I'm not ultra-rich. I've also read that luxury brands have resisted selling their wares online, I mean, they assume that if you want their products you're going to go to their intimidating stores on 5th Avenue.
    - nis0s 1y ago
      Exclusive doesn’t always mean luxurious, for example a social media site that’s exclusive to certain genders etc., but luxury services and items are often by their nature exclusive because of the barriers needed to attain them. The other feature often misattributed to luxury is desirability, but people choose experiences based on flexible criteria, and this means they’ll often choose something that’s not necessarily luxurious like a Michelin-starred restaurant over a mom-and-pop noodle shop they like for the “homey” vibes. But the point is that they’ll spend their money one way or another on some experience, and that experience may not necessarily be luxurious or exclusive. But note also that exclusive environments aren’t always for status symbol purposes, but sometimes a necessity for people who may desire not to be publicly exposed at all times. Circling back to airport lounges, there’s a lot that can be done to create stellar experiences which aren’t exactly luxurious but still money-makers for service providers. Complaining about people having too much money sounds really dumb to me.
- stockresearcher 1y ago
  I assume that you mean American carriers aren’t using the linked Embraer, because Porter flies it between the US and Canada a lot. For example, their LAX/Toronto route as well as most if not all of their routes from Toronto to Florida. They generally only use their De Havilland turboprops if the flight operates out of Billy Bishop instead of Pearson. The advantage of Billy Bishop is that you can literally walk to the Rogers Centre or the CN tower in less than 20 minutes from Billy Bishop, so that’s a decent trade off.

by nis0s 1y ago

PaulHoule 1y ago

Articles about the airport lounge are popular precisely because so many people are interested in the airport lounge. Personally I'm much more interested in issues that people don't talk about -- such as the "scope clause" that keeps aircraft like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family out of American skies. Smaller airports are served only by crappy 50-seat jets that manufacturers no longer make. If they could upgrade to 70-90 state-of-the-art jets they could provide a cheaper and more attractive service that would fill the seats. Most organizations in my town rate the "quality of the airport" as the worst challenge they have in their environment. Real elites fly on private jets. You can cross the pond faster in one of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulfstream_G650/G700/G800 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulfstream_G650/G700/G800 than you can on a 7(7|8)7.

nis0s 1y ago
In general, I think the “private jet” model is useful for figuring out how to develop different experiences for people with different needs or resources. I don’t care about airport lounges per se, but more about the lack of imagination from service providers and experience sellers. It’s not a problem that more people have more money to spend! Figure out how to separate them from it.
- PaulHoule 1y ago
  Isn't there a contradiction between luxury experiences being personalized and luxury experiences being legible as luxury experiences? That is, something that is private doesn't put you on display as a luxury consumer. I've read a lot about luxury car, watch and other brands that make ultra-rich customers jump through hoops, other than financial, to prove themselves to be worthy to buy their most wanted products. Makes no sense to me -- luxury for me is spending my money and being served, but hey, I'm not ultra-rich. I've also read that luxury brands have resisted selling their wares online, I mean, they assume that if you want their products you're going to go to their intimidating stores on 5th Avenue.
  - nis0s 1y ago
    Exclusive doesn’t always mean luxurious, for example a social media site that’s exclusive to certain genders etc., but luxury services and items are often by their nature exclusive because of the barriers needed to attain them. The other feature often misattributed to luxury is desirability, but people choose experiences based on flexible criteria, and this means they’ll often choose something that’s not necessarily luxurious like a Michelin-starred restaurant over a mom-and-pop noodle shop they like for the “homey” vibes. But the point is that they’ll spend their money one way or another on some experience, and that experience may not necessarily be luxurious or exclusive. But note also that exclusive environments aren’t always for status symbol purposes, but sometimes a necessity for people who may desire not to be publicly exposed at all times. Circling back to airport lounges, there’s a lot that can be done to create stellar experiences which aren’t exactly luxurious but still money-makers for service providers. Complaining about people having too much money sounds really dumb to me.
stockresearcher 1y ago
I assume that you mean American carriers aren’t using the linked Embraer, because Porter flies it between the US and Canada a lot. For example, their LAX/Toronto route as well as most if not all of their routes from Toronto to Florida. They generally only use their De Havilland turboprops if the flight operates out of Billy Bishop instead of Pearson. The advantage of Billy Bishop is that you can literally walk to the Rogers Centre or the CN tower in less than 20 minutes from Billy Bishop, so that’s a decent trade off.