"Prior to 'dergulation' airlines competed on service."

but they didn't - most belonged to IATA which set rules for everything including the size of sandwiches served and how long a movie could run. It was only when people like SQ and Laker arrived that things started to change in long haul and SW then blew open the shorthaul model

HH, you forget the sandwich wars between IATA members. And the Wardairs, ABC and affinity charters that pre-date Later by a few decades.

But compare the service, meaning the total experience from booking to collecting your luggage, and it certainly hasn't improved.

Despite cries to the contrary price is the driving factor in choosing a seat for 98% of the passengers.

In that case, please explain the ability to sell a substantial proportion of the aircraft's capacity for C and F fares at what can be up to 10 times (or more) the typical Y fares being paid - and receiving exactly the same flight time and many other aspects.

And in the rest of the world, the ability to sustain fine dining restaurants where we could instead go to McDonalds, or the ability of car buyers to purchase what is often, when buying a car, the most expensive one they can afford.

Frequent flyer upgrades and corporate accounts paying for business travel.

Notice how first class was removed from a raft of services following the GFC as corporations tightened belts on travel with many businesspeople now travelling in Y even on long haul flights. Don't agree that there are plenty of people willing to pay the extra out of their own pocket.

I think the main reason people want to pay less for flights is that it is a brief period of time. Friends of mine who were upgraded to BA 'WT+' from their usual 'WT' said that they would never pay for it and cheerfully sit in Y for 11hrs both ways at least once a year.

Short haul is the same, "Life is expensive enough - why pay more as we'll soon be on holiday?" and "... we'll soon be home." The fact that they moan about the cramped seating is another matter. It is well documented in this forum that when American Airlines took rows of seats out - it made no difference to their bookings and the seats went back in again. Price IS the determining factor for most pax.

I have said in here before that, following the global financial crisis of 2008, we would see 10 years of recession. I now update that to 15 years and folks will continue to want to pay the minimum.

I have stated on here before that this was an absolute spin put on the situation by AA management to justify squeezing the seats back up again. I was a long distance AA regular at the time, right through their More Room Through Coach era, and can say that it was a regular point of conversation with seatmates, and had absolutely contributed to an increase in bookings.

A change of AA management, when Robert Crandall retired, just led to a different perspective. Some thought that it cannibalised their premium class bookings. Probably the same US airline management that long held out against serving free alcohol in Economy when the rest of the world's mainstream carriers did it as a matter of course.

Sometimes the seat-mile cost zealots get to the top of carriers, and make embarrassing decisions. There have been several major purchases of turboprops over time which end up being prematurely parked, because, whatever the seat-mile spreadsheet may say, the competing jet service takes the passengers.

Competing on the basis of frequency of service is another major, yet seldom mentioned factor, in passenger choice and airline operating costs. For example 10 flights a day versus 5 flights a day..

Non-stop or stop-overs? Connecting flight or direct?

The airport is also a factor. To or from Newark or Laguardia? Heathrow or Gatwick? Vancouver or Abbotsford? Los Angeles or Burbank? It all depends...

Too many factors, too much thread drift..

Happy to be put right WHBM.

AA again: US carrier to slash legroom to 29 inches in certain economy seats

That's certain not all but should provide more opportunity to those with cameraphones.