> I think the LCC hacked the public in to thinking travelling like cattle is good Your comment appears light-hearted so I don't want to come down too strongly,

> I think the LCC hacked the public in to thinking travelling like cattle is good Your comment appears light-hearted so I don't want to come down too strongly, but I must say I detect more than a whiff of elitism in this sentence. The public didn't need any "hacking" or manipulation; they don't fly these airlines because they "like travelling like cattle" (again, I detect a whiff of disdain for the "cattle-like" public), they fly these airlines in spite of that fact, because they're much cheaper. > When they travel like cattle on the London Underground they all complain! Again, light-hearted, but in juxtaposing these two sentences you're implying that the public is inconsistent in its criticism of the London Underground (although one wonders if the LCCs are so successful at "hacking" the public, why can't the LU tear a page out of their machiavellian book?). But there is indeed no inconsistency; the two examples are simply not comparable. A single fare on the LU costs around £5, this for a median travel distance of perhaps a few klicks. The scenario is, shall we say, somewhat different for LCCs! In addition, people use the LU to get to work; and being subjected to "cattle-like" circumstances on a daily basis is, again, a different kettle of fish from having to endure a 2 hours of mild discomfort in order to enjoy a couple of weeks in the sun once a year. > You can tell I'm a mac user can't you ;) You might want to consider whether it is you who's been "hacked" into paying a substantial premium for an equivalent product ;)