https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-18/why-delta-decided-to-stop-being-the-mean-airline

Good read here about the different leadership styles of the former and current CEOs

I would call Basic Economy pretty customer unfriendly, I.E. "mean". Attempting to duplicate the Spirit product is certainly not "kind". This is just spin. Perhaps DL is a little better, but I'd say WN and B6 and AS are less mean than DL.

Shoddy, fake news article reads like an advertisement. Delta just the other day was railing more against the ME3 in Minnesota, trying to get them further behind them. It hardly mentions the massive April meltdown and subsequent lies about the causes to prevent giving out due compensation. And it lies about about the reality that Bastian was too busy at Augusta to make a public statement about it, nor did his execs give timely or accurate public statements. The track record is clear - it's still a mean airline.

TerminalD wrote:

I would call Basic Economy pretty customer unfriendly, I.E. "mean". Attempting to duplicate the Spirit product is certainly not "kind". This is just spin. Perhaps DL is a little better, but I'd say WN and B6 and AS are less mean than DL.

Bloomberg doesn't mean "mean" as unfriendly towards customers. By "mean" they meant DL taking a hard, vocal, and very public stance against other airlines/politicians/government policy to try and get what they wanted with minimal will to compromise. It often came across as DL trying to bully/intimidate others (e.g., dropping sponsorship for a theatre because they hosted a event for QR).

Polot wrote:

e.g., dropping sponsorship for a theatre because they hosted a event for QR)

Good example. I still can't believe they stooped so low as to pull their sponsorship for Atlanta's Fox Theater...such a petty move for a player of Delta's stature both in their hometown, and on the world stage. Sure Delta needs to look out for their interests but they must also consider the self-defeating optics of these types of actions.

Frostbite wrote:

Polot wrote:

e.g., dropping sponsorship for a theatre because they hosted a event for QR)

Good example. I still can't believe they stooped so low as to pull their sponsorship for Atlanta's Fox Theater...such a petty move for a player of Delta's stature both in their hometown, and on the world stage. Sure Delta needs to look out for their interests but they must also consider the self-defeating optics of these types of actions.

On the world stage, dropping a sponsorship for a small theater is not even a bump in the road.

MSPNWA wrote:

Shoddy, fake news article reads like an advertisement. Delta just the other day was railing more against the ME3 in Minnesota, trying to get them further behind them. It hardly mentions the massive April meltdown and subsequent lies about the causes to prevent giving out due compensation. And it lies about about the reality that Bastian was too busy at Augusta to make a public statement about it, nor did his execs give timely or accurate public statements. The track record is clear - it's still a mean airline.

Topic of article: "Within the industry, however, Delta Air Lines has spent the past year trying to shake a less- visible reputation as a bruising antagonist that fought with other airlines and bureaucrats alike." The only part of your response falling under the article's topic is DL railing against the ME3 in Minnesota. You'd only include all the other, very well publicized, issues you mentioned if you just had an ax to grind. But yeah, I guess whatever we don't agree with nowadays is just "fake news..."

It is sooooooooooo humerous how the same people come out swinging anytime something positive is said about DL. Your light is shining bright sweetie dahlings

When I worked in the airline industry, Delta was consistently the only carrier that upgraded me to its premium cabin even though I didn't work for it.
I have nothing bad to say about Delta for that reason and for the actions that it takes to show that it values its customers.

Kudos to Delta.

Polot wrote:

Bloomberg doesn't mean "mean" as unfriendly towards customers. By "mean" they meant DL taking a hard, vocal, and very public stance against other airlines/politicians/government policy to try and get what they wanted with minimal will to compromise. It often came across as DL trying to bully/intimidate others (e.g., dropping sponsorship for a theatre because they hosted a event for QR).

If that's what they only meant by "mean", why does the article sprinkle in (inaccurately) customer-service aspects that show their "humility" and imply kindness? Your belief doesn't match the article.

OA412 wrote:

Topic of article: "Within the industry, however, Delta Air Lines has spent the past year trying to shake a less- visible reputation as a bruising antagonist that fought with other airlines and bureaucrats alike." The only part of your response falling under the article's topic is DL railing against the ME3 in Minnesota. You'd only include all the other, very well publicized, issues you mentioned if you just had an ax to grind. But yeah, I guess whatever we don't agree with nowadays is just "fake news..."

Did you read the article? Did you read the inaccurate quote from a former board member about Ed during the meltdown? I call it fake news because that's exactly what it is. It's not a matter of disagreement. It's factually wrong, doesn't include real news about DL's continued assault on the ME3, it's no-show in Washington, and the truth about the biggest operational meltdown in U.S. airline history. You should be just as concerned about it if you want the truth from journalism.

Fluff piece, Delta clearly is trying to avoid talk about its recent issues, meltdown, incidents with denied boarding and removing passengers. Internally they view themselves as not UA and AA while everyone else just sees them as more of the same.

MSPNWA wrote:

Polot wrote:

Bloomberg doesn't mean "mean" as unfriendly towards customers. By "mean" they meant DL taking a hard, vocal, and very public stance against other airlines/politicians/government policy to try and get what they wanted with minimal will to compromise. It often came across as DL trying to bully/intimidate others (e.g., dropping sponsorship for a theatre because they hosted a event for QR).

If that's what they only meant by "mean", why does the article sprinkle in (inaccurately) customer-service aspects that show their "humility" and imply kindness? Your belief doesn't match the article.

OA412 wrote:

Topic of article: "Within the industry, however, Delta Air Lines has spent the past year trying to shake a less- visible reputation as a bruising antagonist that fought with other airlines and bureaucrats alike." The only part of your response falling under the article's topic is DL railing against the ME3 in Minnesota. You'd only include all the other, very well publicized, issues you mentioned if you just had an ax to grind. But yeah, I guess whatever we don't agree with nowadays is just "fake news..."

Did you read the article? Did you read the inaccurate quote from a former board member about Ed during the meltdown? I call it fake news because that's exactly what it is. It's not a matter of disagreement. It's factually wrong, doesn't include real news about DL's continued assault on the ME3, it's no-show in Washington, and the truth about the biggest operational meltdown in U.S. airline history. You should be just as concerned about it if you want the truth from journalism.

Bitter Betty. Lol. What part of it was inaccurate? Delta definitely messed up bad during their last operational meltdown but it's funny that you only come up with that in your arguments. Overall, they are the best run, most profitable, and highest rated legacy in the world.

I would note that Anderson came from NWA where he served in a number of roles. Northwest was known as a fierce competitor and would dump capacity on routes to stifle competition in MSP and DTW, and its labor woes were due, in large part, to its unnecessary sharp-elbow tactics. That Anderson carried the NWA method of to Delta should not come as a surprise.

TerminalD wrote:

I would call Basic Economy pretty customer unfriendly, I.E. "mean". Attempting to duplicate the Spirit product is certainly not "kind". This is just spin. Perhaps DL is a little better, but I'd say WN and B6 and AS are less mean than DL.

"Economy basic" on the legacies is nothing but a scam disguised as a program to save the passengers money. For the EXACT SAME fare you paid before they instituted this revolutionary innovation, you now get less...

Case and point: look up some of their fares between city pairs that WN also flies to domestically...I can just about guarantee you that WN has at least one flight selection that is at or within $10 of that DL/UA/AA "economy minus" fare...and you get two free bags, no change fee, less worry about seating for your family (unless you get the C group and can't do family boarding), full frequent flier credit, etc.

They do this to milk more $$ out of the flying public because they know the overwhelming majority of us are complete morons when it comes to booking fares...we instantly lock onto the cheapest fare and don't blink at the afterward nickel and diming.

Polot wrote:

TerminalD wrote:

I would call Basic Economy pretty customer unfriendly, I.E. "mean". Attempting to duplicate the Spirit product is certainly not "kind". This is just spin. Perhaps DL is a little better, but I'd say WN and B6 and AS are less mean than DL.

Bloomberg doesn't mean "mean" as unfriendly towards customers. By "mean" they meant DL taking a hard, vocal, and very public stance against other airlines/politicians/government policy to try and get what they wanted with minimal will to compromise. It often came across as DL trying to bully/intimidate others (e.g., dropping sponsorship for a theatre because they hosted a event for QR).

What people fail to realize is if Delta is going to do this to what they deem as unfriendly or unfair competition what makes the employees and customers think they wouldn't unleash the wrath on them if it helped their bottom line. People need to get real Delta is only friendly to those who bolster their bottom line and anyone else who doesn't is fair game I. e. Customers and employees if need be.

bkflyguy wrote:

I would note that Anderson came from NWA where he served in a number of roles. Northwest was known as a fierce competitor and would dump capacity on routes to stifle competition in MSP and DTW, and its labor woes were due, in large part, to its unnecessary sharp-elbow tactics. That Anderson carried the NWA method of to Delta should not come as a surprise.

But at least when they were doing it in Detroit and Minneapolis they were deeply committed to those markets some thing that is not true today. As far as hubs go Detroit is now at the bottom of the list when I coms to better customer options an that's where I take issue. If your going t actively stifle competition and customer choice just so you can artificially drive up the cost of air travel then that's when the line in the sand needs to be drawn and someone needs to actively stimulate traffic in these market to keep the playing field level.

klm617 wrote:

People need to get real Delta is only friendly to those who bolster their bottom line and anyone else who doesn't is fair game.

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

11725Flyer wrote:

klm617 wrote:

People need to get real Delta is only friendly to those who bolster their bottom line and anyone else who doesn't is fair game.

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

His claim is not dependent upon what other airlines do or don't do. His claim is either true or not true.

But Southwest is clearly different in not zinging customers with so many ancillary charges.

BobPatterson wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

klm617 wrote:

People need to get real Delta is only friendly to those who bolster their bottom line and anyone else who doesn't is fair game.

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

His claim is not dependent upon what other airlines do or don't do. His claim is either true or not true.

Good point. Yes, it's either true or not true. Let's see how the poster justifies his claim for any person or company.

BobPatterson wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

klm617 wrote:

People need to get real Delta is only friendly to those who bolster their bottom line and anyone else who doesn't is fair game.

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

His claim is not dependent upon what other airlines do or don't do. His claim is either true or not true.
But Southwest is clearly different in not zinging customers with so many ancillary charges.

Unless you want to get a decent seat....

alfa164 wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

His claim is not dependent upon what other airlines do or don't do. His claim is either true or not true.
But Southwest is clearly different in not zinging customers with so many ancillary charges.

Unless you want to get a decent seat....

Is that true? Sure, you are going to wind up in C on a Monday morning BNA-DAL where A List more than fills Group A, but those sorts of flights are the exception.

11725Flyer wrote:

klm617 wrote:

People need to get real Delta is only friendly to those who bolster their bottom line and anyone else who doesn't is fair game.

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

More often than not when traveling Delta I have encountered rude unhelpful Delta CSAs more so in Atlanta than anywhere else. Never had an issue with AA the other carrier I have used most recently for my flights. As for United I really can't say as I have not flown them in eons. As far as foreign carriers go not ever had I had one single rude customer experience if anything they go above and beyond any level of service the US carriers give.

klm617 wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

klm617 wrote:

People need to get real Delta is only friendly to those who bolster their bottom line and anyone else who doesn't is fair game.

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

More often than not when traveling Delta I have encountered rude unhelpful Delta CSAs more so in Atlanta than anywhere else. Never had an issue with AA the other carrier I have used most recently for my flights. As for United I really can't say as I have not flown them in eons. As far as foreign carriers go not ever had I had one single rude customer experience if anything they go above and beyond any level of service the US carriers give.

I can tell you from experience that LH customer service at FRA is about as unfriendly and unhelpful as they get, with the notable exception of TLV's people (but then again us Israelis are always abrasive)

Delta is among the most malevolent forces in the industry. Doesn't mean I don't respect them.

Their frequent flier program is watered down to the point of relatively clear-cut fraud, also. Their gamble is that we won't get enough lawyers to fight their lawyers.

ASQ400 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

Okay, you made the claim. What's the evidence any other airline is different?

More often than not when traveling Delta I have encountered rude unhelpful Delta CSAs more so in Atlanta than anywhere else. Never had an issue with AA the other carrier I have used most recently for my flights. As for United I really can't say as I have not flown them in eons. As far as foreign carriers go not ever had I had one single rude customer experience if anything they go above and beyond any level of service the US carriers give.

I can tell you from experience that LH customer service at FRA is about as unfriendly and unhelpful as they get, with the notable exception of TLV's people (but then again us Israelis are always abrasive)

Is it possible someone experienced less-than-ideal service in ATL because he/she/it is a fervent, self-absorbed anti-Delta troll with a chip on his/her/its shoulder... and it showed?

This thread has veered wildly off course.

Delta under Richard was a leading force in policy. Not every battle was won, but he was right on most issues. The Japan Open Skies agreement is open in name only, and led directly to the demise of the NRT hub that had stood for 60 years. Subsidized competition from the ME3 is and remains a major problem for the industry. Richard was not afraid to take point on the issues and consequently DL frequently found itself at odds with the regulators.

DL had taken over the reigns from AA as the leading voice in the industry. AA under Crandall argued vehemently against open skies, codesharing, and alliances. Who knows. If that had not happened there may be a lot more US metal flying internationally. They eventually lost the battle against city hall. But no one would argue that Crandall, like Richard was one of the greats.

TigerFlyer wrote:

This thread has veered wildly off course.

DL had taken over the reigns from AA as the leading voice in the industry. AA under Crandall argued vehemently against open skies, codesharing, and alliances. Who knows. If that had not happened there may be a lot more US metal flying internationally. They eventually lost the battle against city hall. But no one would argue that Crandall, like Richard was one of the greats.

Veering back to course, I feel impelled to ask, is there bias reflected in the choice of names used for persons under discussion?

Why is Robert "Bob" Crandall of American Airlines (not one of the greats) called "Crandall", while Ed Bastien of Delta Airlines is called by the familiar "Ed", or Richard Anderson of Northwest/Delta (one of the greats) is labeled "Richard"?

As I write this there have been 26 posts in this thread, and the thread itself has been viewed 5,066 times. Many of the viewers, seeking to be informed about issues in the airline industry, have no idea who Ed, Richard, Bob, Crandall, Bastien or Anderson might be.

I wish to suggest that, while it will take just a little more effort, that references to people should be a bit more formal in order to be informative. We are writing for a much, much wider audience than the "in crowd" that chooses to get involved in debate/discussion.

The style generally followed in newspapers ought to be followed here. On the first reference to a person, give complete information such as:

Ed Bastien, CEO of Delta Airlines............

Richard Anderson, former executive or CEO at Northwest and Delta Airlines........

The chummy use of Ed, Richard and Bob should be avoided (in secondary references) in favor of Mr. Bastien....or just plain Bastien.

I doubt that 1 in 1,000 posters here are actual buddies of Mr. Ed Bastien.

Respectfully, I would hazard to guess that if you cared enough about aviation to sign up for this board you know who the major players are.

Crandall was as mean as a Texas rattlesnake but there is no question he was a great leader and industry innovator. Under his leadership AA pioneered CRSs, advanced purchase "super saver" fares, and the frequent flyer program.

Richard was the Crandall of his day. That's not to say Ed is not a great leader. He's pragmatic and less sharp edged than the other two. It is probably more commercially strategic to pick your battles than be an industry crusader for everything you believe. That said, I respect Richard and Crandall for their vision and adherence to it.

Fascinating thread. I asked a while back why people specifically did not like Delta (viewtopic.php?t=1344535). So much of the Delta hate is on anecdotal experiences or things that are issues across all airlines.

I have to book a flight to India soon. I'm planning on flying out of RDU vs ATL, just to get on DL metal from US to CDG, as Air France business product is a joke. Same with Emirates, the supposed king of the airlines. DL's hard and soft product on comparable planes is much better than Emirates business (I'm sure first is much nicer). I don't understand why long-haul business with 2-2-2 or 2-3-2 with seats that are not true lie-flat can be even considered "business". Don't get me started on "business" within Europe on EU flag carriers, either.

And after a decent amount of flying last year (just enough to hit Diamond), but certainly not a ton compared to other's standards, I'm blowing the miles on 2x round-trip tickets from ATL-SIN in business, and have miles leftover. Skypesos my ass. There's value to them, if you use them smartly.

Anyway, sorry to interject some common-sense to the thread, go ahead and let the DL bashing continue!

Within Delta, Ed Bastian prefers to be called Ed. His employee Q&A is called 'Ask Ed Anything.' I think it carries through in this forum where the level of formality is different for non-US posters.

bkflyguy wrote:

I would note that Anderson came from NWA where he served in a number of roles. Northwest was known as a fierce competitor and would dump capacity on routes to stifle competition in MSP and DTW, and its labor woes were due, in large part, to its unnecessary sharp-elbow tactics. That Anderson carried the NWA method of to Delta should not come as a surprise.

Richard was the best liked CEO at NWA by the Unions since...anyone. That doesn't mean they loved him. Some of the unions, like machinists, would've hated Jesus Christ too.

As any journalist will tell you off the record, we get calls to do these sort of puff-stories all the time. Can be pretty lucrative.

alfa164 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

More often than not when traveling Delta I have encountered rude unhelpful Delta CSAs more so in Atlanta than anywhere else. Never had an issue with AA the other carrier I have used most recently for my flights. As for United I really can't say as I have not flown them in eons. As far as foreign carriers go not ever had I had one single rude customer experience if anything they go above and beyond any level of service the US carriers give.

I can tell you from experience that LH customer service at FRA is about as unfriendly and unhelpful as they get, with the notable exception of TLV's people (but then again us Israelis are always abrasive)

Is it possible someone experienced less-than-ideal service in ATL because he/she/it is a fervent, self-absorbed anti-Delta troll with a chip on his/her/its shoulder... and it showed?

Actually no I was a very happy air traveler until those experiences befell me. In a years time I had flown about 10 segments and 50% of the were at least an hour late causing missed connections and the like not my fault and at every turn the Delta CSAs were very unhelpful. In on case my plan was still at the gate and the CSA was no where to be found only to find out her shift ended so she closed the flight and just left even though there we people that still needed to board. She should have stayed until her flight cleared the gate but it was more important for her to clock out and go home. Sorry but those kinds of thing don't sit well with a paying customer.

TigerFlyer wrote:

Respectfully, I would hazard to guess that if you cared enough about aviation to sign up for this board you know who the major players are.

Crandall was as mean as a Texas rattlesnake but there is no question he was a great leader and industry innovator. Under his leadership AA pioneered CRSs, advanced purchase "super saver" fares, and the frequent flyer program.

Richard was the Crandall of his day. That's not to say Ed is not a great leader. He's pragmatic and less sharp edged than the other two. It is probably more commercially strategic to pick your battles than be an industry crusader for everything you believe. That said, I respect Richard and Crandall for their vision and adherence to it.

He sure was I got a hold of an AAVantage magazine when he was having trouble with the pilots and he was bold enough to put an editorial in that magazine that said if you flight is delayed or canceled it's not the fault of American Airlines the blame purely rests on the pilots who were trying to make his airline look bad ever since then I despise that man and had little respect for him at that point he was no better than the pilots who were inflicting an industrial action on his airline yes the man was ruthless.

toobz wrote:

It is sooooooooooo humerous how the same people come out swinging anytime something positive is said about DL. Your light is shining bright sweetie dahlings

This article is nothing but propaganda paid for by Delta. Fact is fact. You can't go anywhere near Delta without seeing anything railing against the ME3. Sky, commercials before watching a movie, busses, ads throughout terminals, billboards in NYC, ATL, MSP.....Delta has taken a hard stance and this article is pure malarkey. I just spent the past 26 hours with DL and I could go a lifetime without hearing Ed's voice or hearing about how airlines are circumventing open skies agreements and the need to fairly enforce them.

Sancho99504 wrote:

toobz wrote:

It is sooooooooooo humerous how the same people come out swinging anytime something positive is said about DL. Your light is shining bright sweetie dahlings

This article is nothing but propaganda paid for by Delta. Fact is fact. You can't go anywhere near Delta without seeing anything railing against the ME3. Sky, commercials before watching a movie, busses, ads throughout terminals, billboards in NYC, ATL, MSP.....Delta has taken a hard stance and this article is pure malarkey. I just spent the past 26 hours with DL and I could go a lifetime without hearing Ed's voice or hearing about how airlines are circumventing open skies agreements and the need to fairly enforce them.

Very well said Mr. Bastian is nothing more than a want to be politician talking about everyone else throwing his weight around to deflect attention away from his own crumbling infrastructure because at his short sightedness in running Delta by his big ego rather than with logic. We all talk about how great Delta is now but let's talk about it in five years when Bastian should have chased loyalty amongst customers rather than profits. Short term maybe his plan looks good on paper but long term not so much but hey then he'll be gone and Delta's troubles will be someone else's problem and he'll give himself a pat on the back for doing such a great job for a failing airline which he helped to create.

I am flying from JAN to AVL next Thursday evening. I was supposed to take this flight last month when Delta had its meltdown, and I rescheduled. I noticed that the flight from ATL to AVL that I will be on was almost 8 hours late last night and didn't arrive until this morning. I hope my flight won't be that bad. Doesn't seem Delta has gotten any better.

ehaase wrote:

I am flying from JAN to AVL next Thursday evening. I was supposed to take this flight last month when Delta had its meltdown, and I rescheduled. I noticed that the flight from ATL to AVL that I will be on was almost 8 hours late last night and didn't arrive until this morning. I hope my flight won't be that bad. Doesn't seem Delta has gotten any better.

You'd of been better off choosing American. Same flight time same price but wouldn't have to deal with that horrific ATL hub CLT is so much better. People hate to admit but most of Delta delays are caused by over loading their hub in Atlanta with flights and it ripples through their entire network.

TigerFlyer wrote:

Respectfully, I would hazard to guess that if you cared enough about aviation to sign up for this board you know who the major players are.

Crandall was as mean as a Texas rattlesnake but there is no question he was a great leader and industry innovator. Under his leadership AA pioneered CRSs, advanced purchase "super saver" fares, and the frequent flyer program.

Richard was the Crandall of his day. That's not to say Ed is not a great leader. He's pragmatic and less sharp edged than the other two. It is probably more commercially strategic to pick your battles than be an industry crusader for everything you believe. That said, I respect Richard and Crandall for their vision and adherence to it.

You are being wonderfully inconsistent. In your earlier post you stated:

"But no one would argue that Crandall, like Richard was one of the greats." [i.e., Crandall is not great]

In this post you state:

"Crandall was as mean as a Texas rattlesnake but there is no question he was a great leader and industry innovator. [Crandall is now great]

As for your statement:

"Respectfully, I would hazard to guess that if you cared enough about aviation to sign up for this board you know who the major players are."

You hazard at your risk. Your supposition falls very far short of reality.

A very large number of the members and readers of this board are not from North America and know very little about the CEOs and other executives of our airlines.

I am now 79, and when I joined this board it was because I had adopted the hobby of airliner photography and wanted to learn about the airlines, all aspects of them. My knowledge of the airline industry was pretty much limited to knowing where BWI was located, that Southwest Airlines pretty well served my needs over the years, and that bags flew free. I couldn't ask questions here because I happened to come along at a time when the website had stopped selling memberships prior to the planned change of format. After the changeover to new format, board membership was free and everyone could post in the forums.

It is time for the "old hands" to realize (most of them already do) that airliners.net is no longer limited to an "in crowd" who have memorized all the airport and airline codes, and that 90+% of the readers are not on a first name basis with airline executives. What one (or any) executive does with respect to his company staff/newsletter is not always (or even usually) appropriate when dealing with the public at large.

All contributors to the forum should make at least minimum effort to increase clarity and promote understanding for those of us who are still in the knowledge gathering stage.

Thanks

klm617 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

I can tell you from experience that LH customer service at FRA is about as unfriendly and unhelpful as they get, with the notable exception of TLV's people (but then again us Israelis are always abrasive)

Is it possible someone experienced less-than-ideal service in ATL because he/she/it is a fervent, self-absorbed anti-Delta troll with a chip on his/her/its shoulder... and it showed?

Actually no I was a very happy air traveler until those experiences befell me. In a years time I had flown about 10 segments and 50% of the were at least an hour late causing missed connections and the like not my fault and at every turn the Delta CSAs were very unhelpful. In on case my plan was still at the gate and the CSA was no where to be found only to find out her shift ended so she closed the flight and just left even though there we people that still needed to board. She should have stayed until her flight cleared the gate but it was more important for her to clock out and go home. Sorry but those kinds of thing don't sit well with a paying customer.

This is how I know you are a joke. There is no way that a CSA could just leave a flight in the middle of boarding because it was the end of their shift and leave people still waiting to board. Enough with the absurdity. This forum needs to go back to banning people.

jfern022 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Is it possible someone experienced less-than-ideal service in ATL because he/she/it is a fervent, self-absorbed anti-Delta troll with a chip on his/her/its shoulder... and it showed?

Actually no I was a very happy air traveler until those experiences befell me. In a years time I had flown about 10 segments and 50% of the were at least an hour late causing missed connections and the like not my fault and at every turn the Delta CSAs were very unhelpful. In on case my plan was still at the gate and the CSA was no where to be found only to find out her shift ended so she closed the flight and just left even though there we people that still needed to board. She should have stayed until her flight cleared the gate but it was more important for her to clock out and go home. Sorry but those kinds of thing don't sit well with a paying customer.

This is how I know you are a joke. There is no way that a CSA could just leave a flight in the middle of boarding because it was the end of their shift and leave people still waiting to board. Enough with the absurdity. This forum needs to go back to banning people.

Read the post she gave the connecting passengers seats away closed the flight and took off. The aircraft was still at the gate connected to the jet bridge and the pilot was still in the departure lounge. You are pointing out the problem right there the gate agent on that flight did not do their job properly they were more interested in clocking out on time rather than waiting for connecting passengers.

BobPatterson wrote:

You are being wonderfully inconsistent. In your earlier post you stated:

"But no one would argue that Crandall, like Richard was one of the greats." [i.e., Crandall is not great]

In this post you state:

"Crandall was as mean as a Texas rattlesnake but there is no question he was a great leader and industry innovator. [Crandall is now great]

As for your statement:

"Respectfully, I would hazard to guess that if you cared enough about aviation to sign up for this board you know who the major players are."

You hazard at your risk. Your supposition falls very far short of reality.

A very large number of the members and readers of this board are not from North America and know very little about the CEOs and other executives of our airlines.

I am now 79, and when I joined this board it was because I had adopted the hobby of airliner photography and wanted to learn about the airlines, all aspects of them. My knowledge of the airline industry was pretty much limited to knowing where BWI was located, ...

All contributors to the forum should make at least minimum effort to increase clarity and promote understanding for those of us who are still in the knowledge gathering stage.

Thanks

Crandall was one of the greats, and I think that was clear from the context. I apologize that my grammar was less than perfect, but I was tapping it in from an iPhone.

I'm not sure your comments on posting format belong in this thread. From what I've seen on this board, posters generally refer to well know figures like "Crandall" and "Richard" as they are commonly known in the industry and in the press. These are two of the most famous living figures in aviation, and, in their day, each ran the largest airline in the world. They were both outspoken and widely known, both within and without the United States. I agree that for more obscure figures, like C.E. Woolman (founder of Delta) more explanation might be necessary. LHR hardly needs introduction as "London Heathrow Airport". But, as for more obscure codes, I would simply write Kansas City rather than MCI. If you don't understand a reference, the miracle of google has it at your fingertips.

Speaking of CE Woolman (Delta's founder) the quotes below reflect the culture of the company. He was lionized by Richard and Ed. While everyone has an occasional unpleasant event, Delta has an unswerving commitment to customer service. Delta is not and never was a "mean" airline, and being outspoken on policy and politics does not make it so.

From the Delta flight museum website:

Through good times and bad, Delta founder C.E. Woolman's faith in aviation's future never flagged. Here are C.E. Woolman's most famous quotes, which he used in many variations whenever he faced an audience of Delta employees:

"Any individual or business that is completely honest in all its dealings is likely to succeed."
"Let's put ourselves on the other side of the counter. We have a responsibility over and above the price of a ticket."
"Bring me one more passenger!"
"Quality begins with people."
"No one person is an airline. An airline is a team. It must be friendly, courteous, cooperative, efficient and bound as closely as a devoted family."
"An employee's devotion to his or her company, dedication to the job and consideration for the customer determine a company's reputation.
"It is never sufficient to just transport people. We must transport people and goods with the highest respect and safety."
"Consideration is an extension of safety. It begins with the first contact with our passengers, no matter where this is—reservations, porter, ticket agent or wherever. Make the customer feel special. There's more to flying than just buying a ticket."
"Make the best with what you have. We need to make a profit, but watch carefully how our money is spent."
"Do the best you can in your job, but if you come across some way to save while doing your job, then do it."
"Be considerate of your fellow employees."
"The only monotonous thing about the aviation industry is the constant change."

TerminalD wrote:

I would call Basic Economy pretty customer unfriendly, I.E. "mean". Attempting to duplicate the Spirit product is certainly not "kind". This is just spin. Perhaps DL is a little better, but I'd say WN and B6 and AS are less mean than DL.

Totally agree. Delta hasn't started being classy. Southwest, Jetblue and Virgin America are the closest things offered to being "nice". Delta is just doing their job of spinning things for the press to get coverage when United is down. Its smart for Delta to try a "we changed" angle with so many people mad at United. Delta is just smart not nice.

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

TerminalD wrote:

I would call Basic Economy pretty customer unfriendly, I.E. "mean". Attempting to duplicate the Spirit product is certainly not "kind". This is just spin. Perhaps DL is a little better, but I'd say WN and B6 and AS are less mean than DL.

Totally agree. Delta hasn't started being classy. Southwest, Jetblue and Virgin America are the closest things offered to being "nice". Delta is just doing their job of spinning things for the press to get coverage when United is down. Its smart for Delta to try a "we changed" angle with so many people mad at United. Delta is just smart not nice.

This is simply not true. Delta needs to compete in all segments of the market, and tailors its products to do so. As Michael Levine (former EVP NWA, marketing/international) once explained, the airline business is unique in that multiple products are being made in the same "factory" onboard the airplane. Premium product for those that value and are willing to pay for it; lower value product for those that simply want the lowest fare. You have a choice of Delta First; Delta Comfort; Main Cabin; and Basic Economy. Delta is very clear about what you are getting for each price point. Basic Economy is the lowest class of service with the fewest amenities. Competing for the most price sensitive passengers, Delta's Basic Economy is certainly not "mean", and I would argue far more "kind" than the likes of Spirit that compete for these types of travelers.