"Jeff Hacker" wrote in message
...

"mrtravel" wrote in message
om...

In the case of MRTC, AA clearly advertised that it was offering more
space. However, if you are booking though an online search engine, all
you would see is that carrier A is charging $30 more than carrier B for
Economy service on a 737.

I fly often on American and find the rates to be competitive with other
carriers on the same routes, depending on the day and time of day varying by
up to 100%. The MRTC didn't change any fares, simply provided more legroom,
as AA kept it's Economy fares the level with competition (other than WN
advance purchase/internet specials)

Someone posted that the legacy carriers charge a lot more. This is not
generally true in markets where they compete with low fare carriers.
Although some people aren't convinced the airlines are taking good
surveys, this logically makes no sense. Why would an airline purposely
put the seats back in if it was more profitable to leave them out and
charge more?

AA put the seats back in on their Caribbean and SAmerican routes, bot US
domestic or TransAtlantic which remain "MRTC"
Legend is that a research company told AA that travelers to the Islands and
SAmerica were natives with short legs or tourists who had no alterantives
except Latin American Airlines, some of which remain a bit primitive


In the case of American, they really do seem to believe that they can get
away with it. They are about as arrogant as any airline ever was.

Only "Half Arrogant", not in the domestic service where MRTC has helped to
keep'em afloat, especially with DL deflation of service and capacity. The
innocuous MD80 series remain 34" I believe.

TMO