What's the book corporate America doesn't want you to read? Find out now -- or you could get scammed.

Paris to New York in 1953: “This says it all”

December 3, 2009

Paris to New York 1953If you’ve ever wondered how we ended up here, with sub-standard airline service, angry passengers and disgruntled employees, here’s something to consider. It’s a receipt for a Trans World Airlines flight from Paris to New York — in 1953.

“I dug this out after reading Bob Herbst’s piece yesterday,” says reader and former airline employee Jerry Castellano. “This says it all. No wonder airlines are in the dumpster.”

Castellano’s mother paid $295 for the flight. A deal, right? Yes, until you do the math.


He explains:

Adjusted for inflation, that one way ticket would today cost $2,388.

I brought my family to Italy this past summer and our tickets roundtrip from St. Louis to Rome were about $800.

Running that through an inflation calculator would price the 1953 ticket at just over $100

So what’s the problem? The business model is messed up.

I often point out to people that when I first joined Ozark Air Lines in 1978, if our system wide load factor was North of 55 percent, we were profitable. Bob Herbst could probably give you much more accurate information regarding load factor and yields.

There’s a paragraph in Airframe by Michael Crichton where one character mentions how startup carriers were in essence pyramid schemes. I saw a lot of this as at TWA we did a lot of contract training for these startups that had limited lives.

He’s right. This says it all.

Christopher Elliott is the author of Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals. Critics have called it “eye-opening” and “inspiring” — it’ll “grab your attention and won’t let go.” Order your copy now on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or iTunes.

Tagged as: , , ,

12 comments

  • sjclynn

    It is more complex than that. In 1953 it would have been once class service, roughly equivalent to F today. That included real food, china and silverware. It was not a mass market product.

    Making the comparison to the lowest price fare that you could purchase today ignores the fact that if the base fare from JFK to CDG today was $2400 there would be a very limited market.

    Just for fun I looked up something that I think is a more appropriate comparison. Air France #9 JFK-CDG on 12/10 in business class is: $2,068.

    The business model is still the problem and there are lots of reasons for it. Focusing on this one element and ignoring the engines that drove the growth of air travel in the 60s and 70s didn’t work for me.

  • Pingback: Pundits Say, Quit Whining About Airfare, You’re Not Paying Enough - That’s Baloney, and Here’s Why

  • LeeAnne

    I have to agree with sjclynn on this. I have heard over and over that the price of air travel is so much lower, in adjusted dollars, than it was many decades ago. And this is repeatedly cited as a reason…nay, an excuse…as to why air travel is so unpleasant these days. The thinking apparently is that we’re paying so much less, so we should expect less.

    But like sjclynn pointed out, that’s not the whole picture. The reality is that we SHOULD be paying less…and we SHOULDN’T have to expect an inferior product for it. Air travel as a product and industry has had decades to refine itself, to benefit from economies of scale, to synergistically improve, to the point where we should be able to buy the same product for LESS money than it cost way back then.

    On top of that, there’s a completely different product being sold today, vs. the 50′s: coach class. ALL air travel back in those days was more equivalent to first- or business-class today.

    I’d venture to guess that if the ability and equipment existed back in 1953 to offer a flight to Paris similar in quality to a coach-class flight to Paris today, it would probably have sold for…hmmm…around $100. And in this fictional 50′s coach class, I doubt that passengers would have been treated like cattle the way they are today.

    I’m not suggesting that the business model isn’t “messed up”…clearly it is. All I’m suggesting is that the very fact that today’s airfares are so much less (in adjusted dollars) than airfares of the past, should not give the airlines the right to say “well, you’re getting what you’re paying for.” Because we’re not.

  • Carver

    I’m going to have to mostly agree with Chris.

    Airfare are much, much lower than in the past, when you adjust for inflation. Even when you acount for the difference in service levels.

    Not including taxes, I paid $350 for a round trip ticket from San Francisco to Heathrow. Using various calculators that ticket would have cost betwen $7.00 and $47.25 in 1950.

    Addressing the service question, the $2400 is still twice the cost of a business class ticket from paris to New York.

    The public has spoken. We’d rather be treated like cattle if we get a cheaper ticket.

  • sjclynn

    @Carver

    In 1953 there was a fare that got you from New York to Paris. You didn’t get a break by buying it a month in advance and you weren’t penalized for walking up to the counter, buying a ticket to fly the same day either.

    As I said in my first response, if I had gone ahead and booked the ticket on Air France for a week from now (compromise between advance purchase and a walk up fare) would have cost $2,038 before fees and taxes.

    We are trying to compare products that are fundamentally as different as comparing train travel then to now. The kind of folks that could afford the $300 ticket in 1953 can still afford the $2,400 ticket now. The majority of people going to and from Europe went by steam ship.

    While I agree that the public is getting the low fares that they want, it is fair to say that the airlines not only made this possible but created the monster that is now poised to consume them. They have trained us well. Brand loyalty? Why? I already know that regardless of what airline I choose, I will probably get poor service, be treated as self loading cargo and, for flights under 1000 miles, spend as much time door to door as I did in 1953. If I can save $20 I might as well because that is the only thing left that I can control.

    Oh, the airline got the $20 for the bag I checked. Welcome to the new third world.

  • David Z

    should not give the airlines the right to say “well, you’re getting what you’re paying for.” Because we’re not.

    Not getting what you’re paying for? Or…not getting what you’re expecting to get based on what you’re willing to pay for?

    Just a thought. Happy thoughts, folks.

  • Cynthia

    The difference in fares notwithstanding there is still a fundamental problem with respect to the target market. Unless the airlines only expect to target the wealthy and businesses that are not constrained by government rules they have to have a model that takes into account the differing income levels of potential passengers. If fares were as high as Chris and others have suggested in this and other articles the load factor would drop significantly.

    The airlines need both types of passengers and they need to provide a level of service that inspires customer loyalty and repeat business.

    They way they do things today it is no wonder they’re in a hole . . .

  • Stan King

    The airlines might well consider targeting wealthy and business (which are more and more constrained by the government anyway) market. When government travelers or business travelers (constrained by government travel regulations) make airline reservations, they are forced to take the cheapest flight. No matter that their labor hours increase exponentially for each additional (and fare-saving) segment. Increase the majority of airfares and provide better service. If a tourist can score an occasional low-priced fare, that will be great, but the worker who travels 100,000 + miles per year needs better accomodation than the priviledge of boarding the aircraft first via a red carpet. Personally, I aviod air travel whenever possible, opting instead to drive or take a train; unfortunately that only works for travel up to about 500 miles.

  • Carver

    @sjclynn

    You make my point. During the so-called good old days of treavel the airlines sold a product that was affordable by only a small segment of the population. Accordingly, the price was much higher. If you figure an international ticket costs twice a domestic ticket, that would mean that every domestic flight would cost $1200 each way. Not exacly affordable travel. Sure, if the airlines could fill their planes with passengers paying $1200 each way, they’d be thrilled. But you and I wouldn’t ever fly.

    Today, air travel is a commodity. If you can affod to travel, you can afford to travel by plane.

    Therefore we have a choice. Option A. Luxurious air, but only for the well heeled, or Option B. Commoditized travel, but affordable for all.

    The public has overwhelming picked option B.

  • sjclynn

    @Carver

    I think that we are in violent agreement. Further evidence is the fact that since 1978 there have been several airline start-ups that were variations on all first class. They all failed in pretty short order.

  • http://www.myticketsite.com Ticket Brocker

    Loved your book. I can tell you have been doing this for a while and know what you are doing. Many of the points were common sense, but many I would have never thought of. You saved me a lot of money.

  • Pingback: Private corporation tests new spacecraft with crew for the first time - ValueMD Medical Schools Forum

Previous post:

Next post: