I understand that the airlines are in major financial trouble since 9/11, however I didn’t realize how bad it is. I flew from the NE through Denver to Honolulu and was not served a single meal. Instead the airline charged me $5 for a minimeal. While delicious was not exactly filling. Because of my connection, I didn’t have time to grab food at the food court, or else I would not be complaining. Not that airport food is cheaper, if anything it’s more expensive.
But the meal I was served was terrible, and no where near $5. I guess what really upset me is that I was flying one of the longest flights out there and the food was not included on the flight. Granted the price of my ticket was great, but I had flown home in March and found that meals were still served. Is this what way of the new airlines? Any flights less than 10 hours will have no food served unless it’s paid for out of the customer’s pocket? If so then we should be encouraged to bring on food from the terminal. And more choices on the plane should be given rather than a chicken sandwich and chicken salad.
But where is all new savings measures going? Is it going to lower priced tickets? Is it to save the underfunded pensions of the airlines? Haven’t most of the airlines already sent their pension to the government run HPBC to bail themselves out? They were unable to stay solvent after 9/11. I think this outrageous. But since I am a true cheapskate, I suppose that not serving meals makes my ticket cheaper than it should be. But is it still worth it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Problem is with the ban on liquids/gels on flights who knows what kind of food you can bring on? So I don't try. Until that came in a lot of people were bringing food on board.
On international flights there is still food.
I took this flight in March and there was still food. Sigh, times are changing fast. However even on international flights, they cut quite a bit.
Post a Comment