Agreed. Now if cabotage restrictions go away then it's time to worry. Until then nothing we can really do about it.

Then you upgraded. You didn't get charged to pick your seat and your assertstion is still wrong.

The point that in economy sections there is negligible difference between airlines is not wrong. They still charge for bags, they still charge for most drinks and food, MOST charge at least partially for assigned seats and overall the seat width and pitch is similar. Norwegian has a seat pitch of 31-32 inches in economy on the 788, United shows 32 inch pitch, Air Canada, American and British Airways all show 31 inches. On narrow body flights the Norwegian 737 seats are listed at 29-31 inch pitch, typical of most LCCs and not much different than the 30-31 inch pitch listed on Delta 737s or most European legacy airlines that operate the 737 (SAS shows 30-32 inch pitch and KLM shows 30 inch pitch).

THAT was the point, and it is still very much valid.

So here is the question you and everyone else must answer honestly-

JFK-CDG, departing Monday, April 24 and returning Friday April 28. Delta (really Air France) is showing the cheapest option is $2,596 in economy, round trip. On Norwegian, the same days, they are showing a round trip in low fare+, which includes a checked bag, free seat selection, inflight meals, and the standard inflight entertainment (seatback screens with selection of movies and television shows), for $713.70. If you are paying for the ticket, which are you going to choose when the seat and everything else is equal? Be honest...

We can discuss hypothetical fantasies all day long. They mean nothing.

Reality: Am I passenger or a pilot?

Last time I looked this a board for airline pilots.

Reality: Would I prefer to be some broke euro peasant competing with people all over the world to sign a 3 year bill of indentured servitude or have a respectable career that supports my family?


Tough choice man, idk.

btw, good job weaseling out of the lie on paying for a seat and baggage on UA.

You were incorrect and it was pointed out. You could of said 'my bad,' but you figured a diatribe was the better course. You were wrong. Deal with it next time instead of dwelling on inches.

I was wrong.

My point was correct. You could have acknowledged that, but you figured pointing out the error about why I had to pay for a seat assignment was the better course because you could not argue the point itself. Deal with the point of the argument next time instead of a minor error that does not change the overall context.

It was not a lie, it was a mistake about why I had to pay for the seat assignment. And if you can read, it actually was acknowledged by my comment "perhaps it was a blue or orange seat", or perhaps you missed that point. And yes, I have now acknowledged I was wrong on that point as it relates to United. But please acknowledge the correctness of the overall point, that the economy product on legacy airlines differs little, if at all, than the product offered on most LCCs. If you cannot see past my acknowledged mistake about my specific experience with a seat assignment on United two years ago, and see the overall point that was being made, then you really need some help with critical thinking and reasoning. That or you are using the mistake I made about why I had to purchase a seat to distract from the fact that my point was correct and you are afraid to acknowledge that.

But since the entire fear of NAI is based on hypotheticals, discussing hypothetical fantasies has been the whole point of all the Norwegian discussion.

Don't try using the argument that one can look at the history of the shipping industry as an example of the dangers of a "flag of convenience scheme" to apply to NAI. "Flag of Convenience" schemes were established to avoid labour laws, safety regulations and (in modern times) environmental regulations. Norway, as part of the EEA, is subject to all EU laws and regulations with the exception of agriculture and fishing. So NAI does not allow Norwegian to avoid EU labour, safety or environmental laws and regulations. Therefore it does not meet the established "flag of convenience" practices as used in the maritime industry. So any arguments comparing the two, but ignoring the very prominent role of the EU/EEA in the entire NAI matter, are strictly hypothetical.

PS - Reality: Do you shop at Wal Mart or do you go to more expensive stores?

No worries mate...

For some reason there's a term for people from NE who insist they are always correct. It starts with mass and ends in hole.

NAI 737 seat pitch = 29-31 inches

Delta 737 seat pitch = 31-32 inches (34 inches in comfort plus)

You don't think up to 5 inches of more legroom depending on the seat makes a difference?

I asked this in another NAI thread, just curious if anyone had any different thoughts. The legacies are making a ton of money, so why not just temporarily start competing service on the NAI routes with 757/767 for a lower cost ticket and eat the minimal loss? I am sure they can take the hit for a few months. Is that legal? feasible? why or why not?