ROH111 – You are absolutely right. I wasn’t there and I don’t know the facts. And as I said in an earlier post, I am sure everyone did their best to resolve the matter the best way they could given a compounding situation. That said, I don’t believe I am one of those Qantas Bashin’, as you put it. I too stand up for Qantas – it’s a great airline and I for one am very keen to keep it just that way. Indeed, that is my point.
That said, in my opinion customers are asking about the ‘value’ of paying for a ‘full service’ airline v’s a ‘low cost’ carrier.
Lowerlobe – Yes, if my wife knew exactly what time her commitments were going to finish she would have booked a flight to suit that time. One of the reasons she (and numerous others) pay premium fares with a ‘full service’ airline is to have the flexibility of making changes at the last minute. This is how business customers operate. I respect your right to disagree with this, but in my opinion the airline that can meet that expectation will win. Otherwise customers will simply ‘lock in’ to the $39 with a ‘low cost’ carrier and wait until the prescribed time.
Assasin8 – so, I could not agree more that . . . “Aircraft components do break down... Engineers do an excellent job at fixing things, but can't always predict EXACTLY how long it will take, especially when more damage is discovered than what was originally thought... The whole process takes time and it can roll on... Frustrating, yes, but it's a fact!”
However, from a customer’s point of view the difference is how well the airline recovers from such a situation.
If ‘full service’ airlines don’t have “spare aircraft and crew just hanging around at every port just waiting for unforeseen circumstances” (ie fleet and crew flexibility to recover from scheduling problems), what then is the value of a ‘full service’ airline over a ‘low cost’ airline?
Some passengers do indeed pay extra to ‘full service’ airlines with the expectation that there will be something of value return – and I can assure you it is not the food served in flight. And the bulk of them that I know don’t check in any baggage either.
I don’t for a moment condone ‘mob rules’ behaviour in any situation like what may have happened in Perth the other evening. But to simply pass it off as ‘bogan’ behaviour is also misleading. Don’t you sense there might be an emerging theme that customers are expecting what they have paid for?
Cheers to all
Pedota