Blogs > Liberty and Power > On the Pain of Air Travel

Feb 13, 2005

On the Pain of Air Travel




Via Paul Musgrave, Chris Busch asks a simple question about air travel: Why is it so unpleasant?
As I looked around the gate lounge while waiting to board a flight to LA today, I noticed that no one seemed to have any semblance of a happy look on their faces. I think it's because almost no one looks forward to the flying experience anymore, even when the flight is on time like it was today (way to go American)...

As far as I can see, airlines haven't changed much at the gates for decades. Maybe they could try to change this part of the flying experience at a few gates and see what the customer response is. Who knows, maybe the good experience revolution might even spread onto the planes someday.

Anyone else got some ideas?
As a matter of fact, I do. In The Future and Its Enemies, Virginia Postrel discusses (pp 59-61 of the paperback) how contact lenses came to be the convenient, inexpensive, easy-to-use wonders that they are today. And I think that there is a parallel to be found in the airline industry.

Contact lenses began as literal glass lenses placed directly upon the eye. They were expensive, uncomfortable, and dangerous. Incrementally, the technology improved and improved:"If people can wear lenses all day, they want to wear them all night, too, and that raises new safety hurdles. Soft lenses are easier to fit and wear, but they also require more care, leading doctors to worry about maintaining sterile conditions. Disposable lenses, which come packaged in sterile solutions, attempt to deal with that problem... The challenge then becomes to push costs down far enough to make such lenses affordable... Each problem solved leads to new demands and, sometimes, to new problems. It is an open-ended series (pp 60-61)."

With each new innovation, the price may rise for a time. Then comes a new challenge: Competitors now seek to produce the innovative product at a lower cost. Once they do, the race is on to find the next big innovation.

I think a similar situation is occurring in air travel right now.

It goes without saying that 9/11 made many people afraid to fly, although 9/11 only aggravated a challenge that many carriers were already facing: Virtually everyone I know now shops around for airline tickets using online travel services. Not so long ago, these time-saving, bargain-finding devices were completely unknown.

Online travel services allow us to find the cheapest fares more easily than ever. They also erode brand loyalty by suggesting to us that we might go with an unknown upstart carrier simply because its fares are cheapest. At one time, I might have asked whether my favorite carrier went to a given destination--and I might have been satisfied with its price simply because I did not bother to inquire further. Now, though, I can be as ruthless as I like in finding the best deal, and it costs me absolutely no additional trouble or effort.

Online travel services have provided a great boon to air travelers--but with it comes the new challenge of convincing these same travelers to demand new amenities with their flights. While these services have spread considerably, the realm of travel amenities has if anything grown even faster: We now want gourmet coffee, WiFi, satellite radio, cell phone connectivity, and all sorts of high-tech comforts.

Eventually, I suspect that airlines will come to recognize this, and perhaps a few of them will carve out niche markets catering to the traveler who is willing to pay a bit extra. Of course, the most successful carriers will be the ones who figure out the trick of providing these amenities at the least additional cost, and of properly publicizing their achievement.

So sure, it does look like a problem--for the moment. But it's also an opportunity for future entrepreneurs. If any of them are reading, they should take this as a notice: It's time to get to work. The rest of us stand ready to reward your efforts.

(And of course, if anyone finds a way to make a passenger railroad profitable again, I would much prefer going by train. The legroom and the better scenery are each reason enough by themselves. Moreover, the amenities that tech-savvy travlers now want would be vastly easier to provide on a train. This is to say nothing of bigger restrooms, better food, and the chance to get out and stretch your legs at every station if the mood so strikes you. Heck, with advantages like these, why do we bother flying at all?)

[Crossposted at Positive Liberty.]


comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


David Lion Salmanson - 2/16/2005

Seems to me that rail travel declined once government subsidies (land grants for starters) dried up in comparison to subsidies for roads, automobiles, etc.. Likewise, every airline that has tried to promote space and amenities has had to roll it back in favor of cattle carring passengers. People seem to consistently choose lower price knowing that they will be crammed in like sardines.


Jason Kuznicki - 2/15/2005

You are right on all these points, though this was not what the original post was complaining about. The point about government-subsidized failure is a good one, though.


Charles Johnson - 2/15/2005

is because "To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality."

The elephant in the middle of the airport is: nobody likes flying because it's so goddamned unpleasant to be poked, prodded, and shuffled around by government agents; to have to show up several hours in advance of your flight just to wait in interminable lines to be poked, prodded, and shuffled around; and then to sit and wait for hours on your flight to leave because you had to budget so much time in advance not to be lectured by the government agents about how to schedule your time or end up missing the flight because you didn't allow enough of a cushion for unexpected delays.

There are market opportunities for airports and airlines to improve their service, sure, but the dominant fact about the air transport market is that it <em>isn't</em> a free market. The most unpleasant aspects of flying are forcibly monopolized and forcibly implemented by the federal government (which has no reason to care whether you fly or not). Moreover, even many airline companies have little reason to make things more pleasant for their customers, because the market is cartelized and subsidized; they can reliably count on receiving billions in bailouts from the federal government if their bottom line ever falters.

The major players in the contact lens market all have strong reasons to scramble to do a better job at following what customers want on the margin. That doesn't happen with most of the unpleasantness that flyers face.

(Similar remarks, of course, apply to why the government-cartelized rail industry remains mostly useless to the vast majority of people in the U.S.)