Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yesterday I looked at flights to Anchorage Alaska from our regional airport, the cost for a return flight came in @$1,700 per person, there were some cheaper flights available but the flight/changeover time were ridiculous. One had us routed via Detroit, Austin TX, Phoenix AZ, Seattle WA and then on to Anchorage. This is from Northern Michigan.
Just for laughs I looked at some other flights
For $1,400 I can fly (return) to Dublin Ireland and Rome Italy
For $1,200 I can fly (return) to Tokyo Japan
For $2,100 I can fly to Sydney Australia.
Prices of flights within this country are totally rediculous and needless to say I'm not flying to Anchorage, the total cost would be about $5,000 for myself and hubby, hotel room and rental car added for a weekend!!!
Just tried to look at flights to Europe (Paris) from JFK in April. Found $560 with one stop, but it jumps to almost $850 for nonstop. However, it goes to ORY airport, not CDG.
Just tried to look at flights to Europe (Paris) from JFK in April. Found $560 with one stop, but it jumps to almost $850 for nonstop. However, it goes to ORY airport, not CDG.
Just be careful with the cheapest one-stop you can find -- right now all of those cheap EWR/JFK-CDG/ORY mid-April flights I see connect in Moscow and take advantage of the many super cheap direct flights from NYC to Moscow ($383 r/t on some days, almost always under $500). Unless you're looking for a mileage run, you probably don't want your NYC-Paris flight to turn into an 18+ hour ordeal.
You really should be fair when comparing prices. Everything on Norwegian costs extra. Norwegian, like some European airlines which charge extra for everything including luggage, isn't the bargain everyone thinks it is.
A bottle of water costs $4 (£2.55) and a small sandwich $11 (£7). An advance fee of $55 (£35) per leg gets economy passengers a meal with drink, checked-in baggage and a seat reservation. Earbuds cost $3 (£1.90), a blanket $5 (£3) and a full amenity kit including toothpaste and a toothbrush is $20 (£13).
Thats true, but Norwegian is super cheap if you don't care about any of that stuff. Some of the deals are unheard of, like $390 from LAX to Gatwick or CPH direct (in October). Usually LAX to JFK for $300 is considered a good deal. The OP is flying a long and uncommon route, which adds to the expense.
Europe and Asia seem to be doing just fine with pricing their tickets and running viable, profitable airline companies. The bottom line is that, if budget European air travel is any indication, people are just fine forgoing certain "luxuries" like the ability to choose their seat, having in-flight meal service (which sucks in the US as is) and the ability to check a bag, among other "luxuries" if it means saving serious dollars . . . for those who want them, they can pay a premium to get them (again, looking to budget European airlines, plenty of people will choose to do so). Again, this is something that is already being done, and viably so, by airlines in other countries; no, traditional airlines haven't fully embraced this model in other countries, which is why they continue to lose customers to the budget airlines. No need to reinvent (or invent) the wheel here.
No they are not. It's just you have not been paying attention.
Malaysian is not a good example due to their recent tragedies, however, many of the Asian flagship airlines (Garuda, Royal Thai, JAL, Quantas, Singapore) have required restructuring or capital infusions by their governments/investors to continue operating. Others (Korean Air) have profitable air-shipping routes that help subsidize their passenger side.
Europe is even worse. Alitalia continues to spiral downwards. The eternal Air France and Lufthansa strikes are due to management pressuring employee schedules, benefits, and salaries due to Ryanair on the low side, and Emirates/Etihad on the upper end.
Finally, low-cost airlines are not a money-making guarantee. Europe and Asia are littered with low-cost airlines trying to emulate AirAsia and RyanAir that have gone belly-up.
No they are not. It's just you have not been paying attention.
Malaysian is not a good example due to their recent tragedies, however, many of the Asian flagship airlines (Garuda, Royal Thai, JAL, Quantas, Singapore) have required restructuring or capital infusions by their governments/investors to continue operating. Others (Korean Air) have profitable air-shipping routes that help subsidize their passenger side.
Europe is even worse. Alitalia continues to spiral downwards. The eternal Air France and Lufthansa strikes are due to management pressuring employee schedules, benefits, and salaries due to Ryanair on the low side, and Emirates/Etihad on the upper end.
Finally, low-cost airlines are not a money-making guarantee. Europe and Asia are littered with low-cost airlines trying to emulate AirAsia and RyanAir that have gone belly-up.
Asia's profitability among budget airlines isn't universal (not that I intended to convey such), but the point is that Asian budget airlines do have viable, profitable businesses. For instance:
Average profit margins of leading low-cost airlines are in double-digits. Traditional carriers struggle to break even. To fight back, flag carriers have launched their own low-cost brands, such as Lufthansa’s Germanwings and IAG’s Vueling.
The fact that there are budget airlines that are not making money doesn't mean that this is true for all budget airlines (note, that's not what I intended to convey). Even if Ryanair and easyJet are generally the most profitable European budget airlines, this is due in part to the fact that they are among the oldest in operation. Many of the newer budget airlines (for instance, see: https://www.thefinancialist.com/echo...ling-airlines/) are not profitable (doesn't mean they aren't viable businesses) yet because they had to spend a lot of money on purchasing planes. Still, these companies largely are viable and expect to become profitable in the future.
In any event, these airlines are still presenting serious competition to traditional airlines, and don't appear to be going anywhere soon as a general matter, though some will undoubtedly shutter just as some traditional airlines have folded; they've already eaten up a serious portion of travelers, which, as the articles I've posted show, are hurting traditional airlines.
And no business is a guaranteed money-maker. But, in a free market where there is robust competition, there will be failures and success stories along the way. But with competition generally comes more competitive prices. Expansion of budget airline services, which several airlines have shown can be profitable, viable businesses, will further threaten traditional airlines, which is why many of them are fighting such expansions.
YOu also paid $.57 a gallon for gas, $.10 a pound for bananas, and $.10 a box for Kraft Mac N Cheese in the '70s. What you paid for airfare then is irrelevant to the cost of airfare today.
Right. I used to fly from Canada to Glasgow or Dublin for $135 RT.
Goodness me! Honestly? Take the trip to Bangkok, even if you have already been there. :-) Or, just splurge the extra $$ for the trip to Greece. Yes, that amount is high! Me thinks out of curiosity I shall take a look at Skyscanner to see what you're talking about.
Yesterday I looked at flights to Anchorage Alaska from our regional airport, the cost for a return flight came in @$1,700 per person, there were some cheaper flights available but the flight/changeover time were ridiculous. One had us routed via Detroit, Austin TX, Phoenix AZ, Seattle WA and then on to Anchorage. This is from Northern Michigan.
Just for laughs I looked at some other flights
For $1,400 I can fly (return) to Dublin Ireland and Rome Italy
For $1,200 I can fly (return) to Tokyo Japan
For $2,100 I can fly to Sydney Australia.
Prices of flights within this country are totally rediculous and needless to say I'm not flying to Anchorage, the total cost would be about $5,000 for myself and hubby, hotel room and rental car added for a weekend!!!
This is pretty useless without travel dates or the originating airport. It almost seems like you are intentionally looking for the most expensive options, just to prove a point. Of course you are going to get high prices and crazy routes if you limit your search to very small regional airports and look for flights leaving in the next few weeks or during peak travel times.
Just for fun, I checked flights from your area (Pellston, Traverse City, and Sault Ste. Marie). I looked for round trip flights leaving during the next month with a 6 day stay. I found multiple options <$700 with only one stop. For example, if you have a burning desire to go to Alaska for spring break, you can get a round trip from Traverse City to Anchorage with one stop in Chicago for $630. Flight leaves March 19 and returns March 25.
Quote:
Originally Posted by james777 You really should be fair when comparing prices. Everything on Norwegian costs extra. Norwegian, like some European airlines which charge extra for everything including luggage, isn't the bargain everyone thinks it is.
A bottle of water costs $4 (£2.55) and a small sandwich $11 (£7). An advance fee of $55 (£35) per leg gets economy passengers a meal with drink, checked-in baggage and a seat reservation. Earbuds cost $3 (£1.90), a blanket $5 (£3) and a full amenity kit including toothpaste and a toothbrush is $20 (£13).
Quote:
Originally Posted by rzzzz
Thats true, but Norwegian is super cheap if you don't care about any of that stuff. Some of the deals are unheard of, like $390 from LAX to Gatwick or CPH direct (in October). Usually LAX to JFK for $300 is considered a good deal. The OP is flying a long and uncommon route, which adds to the expense.
It may be super cheap on that one route at that time, but it is not always that way. Norwegian is only about $100 less than Finnair on the NY - Stockholm and NY - Copenhagen routes with next week departure dates, which should result in high fares for Finnair because it is so close to departure. That is adding on the meal, checked-in baggage and seat reservation to be fair because Finnair provides those. As far as not caring about any of that stuff, I don't know of anyone who can go to Europe with only a carryon. My checked baggage is at the absolute limit every time I go for a two or three week vacation, in addition to my carryon. Also, the Norwegian flight back to NY arrives at JFK at 10pm. After one gets through passport control and claims their luggage it is too late to catch a train or plane out of NYC, so add on a night at a hotel and it becomes more economical to fly Finnair, a full service airline which has long been rated as one of the best in the world, than it does to fly an airline which claims to be discount.
My point is that these airlines that brand themselves as discount aren't always discount. The major carriers, some of whom provide excellent service, many times aren't much difference in price.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
