Air Travel » Cheap Air Travel » No movies on domestic NWA flights
Question:
–WebTV-Mail-812616703-2500 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT if northwest really wants to make a good impact with their customers they should offer news,current events, and travel info about the city that the flight is arriving at,as far as the headphones,how about a $5 refunable fee when you return the headset OR bring your own headset and listen for free –WebTV-Mail-812616703-2500 Content-Description: signature Content-Type: TEXT/HTML; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT <html> <embed src="http://www.wavbazaar.com/new/bark.wav">Sincerly yours,Edward D Webb </html> –WebTV-Mail-812616703-2500–
Response:
[...] > Joe, does the East Coast main (train) line in Britain provide free drinks > (to everybody)? How about movies? Why not? If I recall correctly, the > fastest train London to Edinburgh was (when I was a lad) the Flying Scotsman > (left Kings Cross at 10:35) which took 3 hours 45 minutes, and had not even > a short-subject video to watch. Food was available, either as a hugely > expensive set lunch, or a hugely expensive buffet thing. Either way, > expense was a watchword… > Today, the Eurostar train from London to Paris has absolutely NO movies! Or > headsets…. > Just a thought! [...] > Malc.
Many train routes do have a free form of entertainment the easily beats your average airline movie – it’s called scenery. I happen to like Zurich-Milan a lot… J:)rgen — Juergen Stockburger (213) 740-9337 phone USC Chem. Dept., SSC 717 (213) 740-8348 fax
Response:
In message > to appear as if it was written: > Joe, does the East Coast main (train) line in Britain provide free drinks > (to everybody)? How about movies? Why not? If I recall correctly, the > fastest train London to Edinburgh
[snip] Ouch! I shudder at the thought…. British train services are a disgrace. Journey times have come down and thats it.. Branson has taken over some long-distance trains and promises "Airline" type services but it remains to be seen if he suceeds. Air Travel is becoming more affordable in the UK with the appearance of Easyjet and Ryanair and they are very popular with budget minded pax. One would not expect inflight entertainment on these ‘no frills’ carriers. In fact BA are offering EDI/GLA/GLA tickets on selected flights for about $40 retun. Better than sitting on a train anyday! Joe Curry
Response:
t>… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – caused > to appear as if it was written: >> We are supposed to charge $4.00 regardless of which type >> of headset the pax are using, but at the same time we are not allowed to >> be confrontational. If they say they are listening to the music (even >> though they are watching the screen, and we see they are listening to >> channels 1 or 2) we are not allowed to challenge this. This is one >> factor, what do you suppose the others are? Do the movies in fact cost >> more now? I don’t know. >I cannot see any problem with this.. All the airlines have to do is to >show the entertainment and give the headsets to pax requiring them. >I believe that Virgin give each pax a complimentary pack which >contains headsets anyway. >Any airline that relies on a $4 sale for headsets has no right being >in business. Goodwill is the name of the game… > No, "profitability" is the name of the game… > Joe, does the East Coast main (train) line in Britain provide free drinks > (to everybody)? How about movies? Why not? If I recall correctly, the > fastest train London to Edinburgh was (when I was a lad) the Flying Scotsman > (left Kings Cross at 10:35) which took 3 hours 45 minutes, and had not even > a short-subject video to watch. Food was available, either as a hugely > expensive set lunch, or a hugely expensive buffet thing. Either way, > expense was a watchword… > Today, the Eurostar train from London to Paris has absolutely NO movies! Or > headsets….
When you’re on a train, you’re not hanging in the air at 35000 feet in a stale-aired pressurised tube. As airlines cut back on things like air-quality and in-flight comfort, you’d think they’d have the sense to bolster the (minimal) costs of escapist services like movies. What worries me is that as airlines cut back and cut back, they’ll find they’ve cut back all the luxuries they can and begin "trimming" at more vital services like safety and training. And we all know that the FAA is in the pocket of the US airline industry, so there won’t be many complaints from that quarter. It seems to me that "deregulation" will soon lead to safety deregulation. No doubt, this will attract flames, but just keep watching over the next few years…
Response:
>Today, the Eurostar train from London to Paris has absolutely NO movies! Or >headsets….
Or free cola and peanuts. — Editor, Star Tribune Online, Minneapolis-St. Paul http://www.startribune.com/ One of the world’s top 5 major newspaper Web sites (E&P/Interactive contest)
Response:
Strange. I’ve flown 120,000 miles on NW since July 1, 1996, and never watched one movie. I flew US last week and this week and watched three movies. — — Brian Charles Kohn RAB #Q01926, IRCA #A06644, QS-9000 #94-013 Speaking only for myself…
Response:
> >…watching a bad movie (they are invariably bad movies) on a plane became > Why are people posting this? I don’t think it’s true. I have seen "A > River Runs Through It," "The River Wild," "Clear and Present Danger,"
Wow. American Airlines showed _National Lampoon’s Vegas Vacation_ on the way from San Juan to Dallas, and it was so bad I wanted to cry. I haven’t seen a movie that bad in a looooooong time. Maybe "invariably" is too strong of a word to use, I really don’t have enough experience to tell. But, man, *that* one was. 
Carrie -o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o "Man transcends death by finding meaning in his life. It is the burning desire for the creature to count. What man really fears is not so much extinction, but extinction with *insignificance*." — Ernest Becker -x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x *+*+*Microsoft Works is an Oxymoron*+*+* Mahna Mahna! http://http.tamu.edu:8000/~cam7486/
Response:
> We are supposed to charge $4.00 regardless of which type > of headset the pax are using, but at the same time we are not allowed to > be confrontational. If they say they are listening to the music (even > though they are watching the screen, and we see they are listening to > channels 1 or 2) we are not allowed to challenge this. This is one > factor, what do you suppose the others are? Do the movies in fact cost > more now? I don’t know.
I cannot see any problem with this.. All the airlines have to do is to show the entertainment and give the headsets to pax requiring them. I believe that Virgin give each pax a complimentary pack which contains headsets anyway. Any airline that relies on a $4 sale for headsets has no right being in business. Goodwill is the name of the game… — Visit my Scottish Airport pages at http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/jcurry The top UK Air Travel newsgroup is alt.travel.uk.air Please ask your Internet Service Provider for access. There are over 58 airports in the UK, post news about your airport now.
Response:
to appear as if it was written: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> We are supposed to charge $4.00 regardless of which type > of headset the pax are using, but at the same time we are not allowed to > be confrontational. If they say they are listening to the music (even > though they are watching the screen, and we see they are listening to > channels 1 or 2) we are not allowed to challenge this. This is one > factor, what do you suppose the others are? Do the movies in fact cost > more now? I don’t know. >I cannot see any problem with this.. All the airlines have to do is to >show the entertainment and give the headsets to pax requiring them. >I believe that Virgin give each pax a complimentary pack which >contains headsets anyway. >Any airline that relies on a $4 sale for headsets has no right being >in business. Goodwill is the name of the game…
No, "profitability" is the name of the game… Joe, does the East Coast main (train) line in Britain provide free drinks (to everybody)? How about movies? Why not? If I recall correctly, the fastest train London to Edinburgh was (when I was a lad) the Flying Scotsman (left Kings Cross at 10:35) which took 3 hours 45 minutes, and had not even a short-subject video to watch. Food was available, either as a hugely expensive set lunch, or a hugely expensive buffet thing. Either way, expense was a watchword… Today, the Eurostar train from London to Paris has absolutely NO movies! Or headsets…. Just a thought! >Visit my Scottish Airport pages at http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/jcurry > The top UK Air Travel newsgroup is alt.travel.uk.air
Malc.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I have been wondering about this issue since NW announced this, > wondering if the other airlines would eventually follow suit. Movies > have always been considered revenue, along with liquor sales. I think > henry is correct, though, that they now cost more than they earn. This > wasn’t always the case. I have been thinking about the reasons for this. > I don’t know if the movies cost more these days, but I do know that > sales are down. The big reason for this is that people plug their own > headsets into the armrests. Technically, and we are supposed to announce > this, the ENTERTAINMENT charge is $4.00, and we will provide a headset > if you need it. We are supposed to charge $4.00 regardless of which type > of headset the pax are using, but at the same time we are not allowed to > be confrontational. If they say they are listening to the music (even > though they are watching the screen, and we see they are listening to > channels 1 or 2) we are not allowed to challenge this. This is one > factor, what do you suppose the others are? Do the movies in fact cost > more now? I don’t know. > Amy
I was surprised to read, not long ago, that the airlines pay an average of $75 for the rights to show a movie on any given flight. I would have thought it was more money, or a per-headset charge. But apparently not. Jeff
Response:
> 2) The article mensioned NW would be expirimenting with live TV and other > short subject type shows. Since these would be cheaper to acquire and > (presumably) don’t have pay per view type licencing, prehaps the headphones > are now free.
The UK’s largest charter carrier Britannia Airways, make no charge for headphones. They have audio channels and the video’s are mainly top rated British Television shows which are of course repeated on Britannia. Nobody seems to mind though, the shows are hugely popular and in the main, comedies. They also show travel videos of popular tourist destinations as well as kiddies cartoons etc. It works for Britannia and passengers are disappointed if they find an aircraft not equipped for inflight entertainment. In fact Britannia have received complaints from pax who have to fly with sub-contracters. — Visit my Scottish Airport pages at http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/jcurry The top UK Air Travel newsgroup is alt.travel.uk.air Please ask your Internet Service Provider for access. There are over 58 airports in the UK, post news about your airport now.
Response:
>…This is one >factor, what do you suppose the others are? Do the movies in fact cost >more now? I don’t know.
If my own experience is representative, many years ago watching a movie during a flight was quite an amazing luxury, and I would watch any garbage and pay the headphone charge. (In those stone-age times we had to pay even on international flights). Of course, then one had to make a trip downtown to see a movie. Subsequently, VCRs and video rental arrived, cable arrived, there was lots of choice all the time at home, so watching a bad movie (they are invariably bad movies) on a plane became less appealing… I would guess that the flying public is much more selective about what they want to watch than they used to be when airlines first started showing movies some decades ago. NW’s change suggests that they have recognized this. When individual units offer choice, partly mimicking what we are used to at home, viewing may go up again. Occasionally I get upgraded to business class (international) and of the multiple movies playing there is usually one that isn’t too bad. But I am flying NW next week to London in coach and their web page says they’re going to show ‘Dante’s peak’. Well, you can bet I’m going to work or sleep instead, so I certainly wouldn’t pay $4 for it on a domestic flight. Video may become a revenue source again when gambling, Nintendo etc. is offered in individual video units.
Response:
Of course, I’m sure that it never occured to them to lower the prices. I would be will to bet that if they dropped the price from $4 to $1, I bet they would get more than 4x as many people renting. Brad
Response:
You’re right. Profit maximization can often occur as a result of lowering price. Instead of charging $4 for a no-name one star movie that you wouldn’t even consider renting in the video store, maybe they should choose a current four start hit movie and charge about the same as the video store $2-3. They might find that most of the passengers would view it and it might be a win-win all the way around. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Of course, I’m sure that it never occured to them to lower the prices. I >would be will to bet that if they dropped the price from $4 to $1, I bet >they would get more than 4x as many people renting. >Brad
Response:
> Excuse my ignorance, but aren’t movies a profit center for the > airlines? They get some one star/second rate movie and then start > charging $4 for headset rentals to passengers deserate for force fed > entertainment.
Charging for headsets seems to be a USA phenomenon. I can only imagine the reaction of a KLM passenger on a domestic flight operated by NWA when the FA wants $4.00 for headsets. The headsets do cost money (either to reycle or brand new ones), and so does the movie. And real airlines show fairly recent movies (eg: a few months old)
Response:
> What am I missing?
the movies cost more than they earn. # henry mensch / <henry at q.com> / pob 14592; sf, ca 94114-0592; usa
Response:
>Why?? >Excuse my ignorance, but aren’t movies a profit center for the >airlines? They get some one star/second rate movie and then start >charging $4 for headset rentals to passengers deserate for force fed >entertainment. When the movie is playing the FA’s can kick back and >thus the service expectation’s are lessoned.. >What am I missing?
Read the article and your ignorance will evaporate. Movies are evidentally a big money looser because nobody watches them. I suspect the problem exists on all airlines, not just NW. NW just chose to do something about it. Oh, and if nobody watches movies, the FA’s can not simply "kick back". — Because the junk mailers of the world think my address is their play thing, my e-mail address will not be revealed. Please respond publicly.
Response:
>generally, i think that customers are looking for airlines to make >tangible improvements to those services; if an airline changes their >service, then the benefit has to be crystal clear to the passenger. >clearly northwest is going to save a few million dollars by making this >move, but how are they going to make their service *better* as a result >of that savings?
I have no idea, but I have a couple of thoughts: 1) The service may not improve per say, but the savings could prevent other cuts that would be more noticeable or important (such as NW joining the brown bag lunch crowd of DL, AA, HP). 2) The article mensioned NW would be expirimenting with live TV and other short subject type shows. Since these would be cheaper to acquire and (presumably) don’t have pay per view type licencing, prehaps the headphones are now free. Personally, I think NW could have a winner here (despite the critisism) if the cards are played right. If movie viewership is really as low as NW claims, it probably won’t be missed by the average Joe Q. Traveler. If the head phones are free I think the mass public will be very receptive no matter what garbage is on the screen. On the other hand, if they still want $4 for headphones it is going to be an even bigger flop than movies. I have yet to here what they are doing with regards to the headphone situation though. — Because the junk mailers of the world think my address is their play thing, my e-mail address will not be revealed. Please respond publicly.
Response:
I have been wondering about this issue since NW announced this, wondering if the other airlines would eventually follow suit. Movies have always been considered revenue, along with liquor sales. I think henry is correct, though, that they now cost more than they earn. This wasn’t always the case. I have been thinking about the reasons for this. I don’t know if the movies cost more these days, but I do know that sales are down. The big reason for this is that people plug their own headsets into the armrests. Technically, and we are supposed to announce this, the ENTERTAINMENT charge is $4.00, and we will provide a headset if you need it. We are supposed to charge $4.00 regardless of which type of headset the pax are using, but at the same time we are not allowed to be confrontational. If they say they are listening to the music (even though they are watching the screen, and we see they are listening to channels 1 or 2) we are not allowed to challenge this. This is one factor, what do you suppose the others are? Do the movies in fact cost more now? I don’t know. Amy
Response:
In view of the recent discussion of US airline policies regarding charges for motion pictures, see the following from last Tuesday: Northwest Airlines takes off without movies Travelers accustomed to settling in for a movie aboard long domestic flights may want to pack a book for their next excursion on Northwest Airlines. Effective today, Northwest is dropping movies from all domestic flights within the continental United States. http://webserv1.startribune.com/cgi-bin/stOnLine/article?thisSlug=NWA… — Editor, Star Tribune Online, Minneapolis-St. Paul http://www.startribune.com/ One of the world’s top 5 major newspaper Web sites (E&P/Interactive contest)
Response:
> Northwest Airlines takes off without movies
this sounds fine to me; i rarely want anything to do with the movie anyway. i suspect that joe sixpack won’t feel the same way, though. generally, i think that customers are looking for airlines to make tangible improvements to those services; if an airline changes their service, then the benefit has to be crystal clear to the passenger. clearly northwest is going to save a few million dollars by making this move, but how are they going to make their service *better* as a result of that savings? # henry mensch / <henry at q.com> / pob 14592; sf, ca 94114-0592; usa
Response:
When they get restless passengers harassing FAs, they will change their minds. .
: In view of the recent discussion of US airline policies regarding charges : for motion pictures, see the following from last Tuesday: : Northwest Airlines takes off without movies : Travelers accustomed to settling in for a movie aboard long domestic flights : may want to pack a book for their next excursion on Northwest Airlines. : Effective today, Northwest is dropping movies from all domestic flights : within the continental United States. : http://webserv1.startribune.com/cgi-bin/stOnLine/article?thisSlug=NWA… : — : Editor, Star Tribune Online, Minneapolis-St. Paul http://www.startribune.com/ : One of the world’s top 5 major newspaper Web sites (E&P/Interactive contest) — Hassan Alam
Response:
Why?? Excuse my ignorance, but aren’t movies a profit center for the airlines? They get some one star/second rate movie and then start charging $4 for headset rentals to passengers deserate for force fed entertainment. When the movie is playing the FA’s can kick back and thus the service expectation’s are lessoned.. What am I missing? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->In view of the recent discussion of US airline policies regarding charges >for motion pictures, see the following from last Tuesday: >Northwest Airlines takes off without movies >Travelers accustomed to settling in for a movie aboard long domestic flights >may want to pack a book for their next excursion on Northwest Airlines. >Effective today, Northwest is dropping movies from all domestic flights >within the continental United States. >http://webserv1.startribune.com/cgi-bin/stOnLine/article?thisSlug=NWA… >– >Editor, Star Tribune Online, Minneapolis-St. Paul http://www.startribune.com/ >One of the world’s top 5 major newspaper Web sites (E&P/Interactive contest)
no comment untill now