The primary point remains, surely...
A
majority of customers are
not over 6'1", nor are they over 100kgs. Like it or not, in an environment where space and weight are finite and a source of revenue, hard commercial decisions have to be made - to do otherwise would be business suicide. Presumably, this is in part why AA are withdrawing their seat pitch USP -
because it did not generate as much revenue as the alternative(s).
Customers who are too large to fit in one passenger seat are required to purchase an additional seat ( see Southwest's excellent explanation
here). The logic for this policy seems inescapable, although I'm sure somebody will disagree
. The same logic must apply to height, just as to mass/volume.
At 5'11½" I am fractionally above average height - at 28" seat pitch, I'm not comfortable, but the discomfort is at an acceptable level, proportionate to the fair paid. There are customers who are larger, but still physically fit in the seats: These customers must make their own value judgements, and opt to spend more or less discretionary income on comfort, as they see fit. There are a
numerically minute number of customers who cannot pysically fit in our seats: These customers usually contact the airline in advance and ask for assistance, which is happily provided whenever possible, also, whenever possible, FOC. There is also a sub-group of these customers who make no effort to pre-arrange assistance, but just arrive and then create unpleasantness for everybody around when their unreasonable demands are not met with the promptness and obsequity that they require.