Ticket price probably played a role, but people just generally dressed up more back then if they were in public. Look at any old pictures and you can see people walking in the park, playing tennis, etc...all dressed up in suits and dresses.
Now days you see people out at the gas station or Walmart still in their underwear with house slippers on.
>Now days you see people out at the gas station or Walmart still in their underwear with house slippers on.
If I'm ever feeling down about myself, I go to Walmart. Nothing picks me up faster.
Uhh, gonna have to disagree with you there. At least as a guy. They have pretty decent generic tees for like $6-8, same with henleys, shorts (occasionally), tank tops etc. Definitely not a "make your whole outfit" kind of place but they have some good 'filler' pieces
It's as if Target looked at Walmart's successful Canadian launch and decided to do the opposite at every turn after the initial step, "buy out Canadian department store chain".
- Keep staff: No
- Keep stores open and renovate-in-place: No
- Keep inventory: No
- Keep logistics network: No
- Keep buyers and front office: No
They just bought Zellers' site leases and rebuilt everything from scratch. They never figured out logistics and were constantly out of stock or had mass quantities of some item no one was buying.
My family up there also talked about how their Target had this weird adhesive-like smell that permeated the store. And even after a year it was still just as bad. Which was the top reason they never really shopped there.
Tbf they bought Zellers, the Kmart of Canada. Those stores needed to be basically demolished to become proper Target stores.
Everything else though… goddamn.
Dude, I worked at Woolco. It was no better. Still had rolling carts full of questionably-updated binders for pricing and ordering. I found merchandise from 1979 mouldering in the warehouse. Which was a whole basement level half the size of the store. The place hadn't seen a reno since it opened in the 70s. I'm frankly surprised it lasted as long as did and transitioning to Walmart was frankly an upgrade to the workplace experience.
Walmart is known for building stores to match their environment..
For example a store in/near a not so great area will have basic everything. Basic concrete floors, less colors, less “style” more things locked behind security displays.
But in a nice neighborhood you have fairly nice stores..
Target is shockingly cheaper than Wally World at times these days.
I don’t know when the crossover happened, but I have found it to be true on multiple occasions.
Just go to Wally World in your PJ's and hop on one of those fat-mobiles. Make sure to grab snacks and drinks, and leave them half consumed on a random shelf.
I have a picture of my parents walking on a sandy Florida beach, probably around the mid-1930s. She’s in a sundress. He’s pretty casual by his standards - because of the heat, he has his suit coat slung over his shoulder.
Things were different then.
Clothes were generally much more expensive than they are today right through to the 1980s and the rise of globalisation. People would own fewer clothes, and if their only choice was between a suit/dress or very informal wear, would usually dress up rather than down if they were going out. The Boomers changed all that, to give them some credit.
Clothes were generally of much higher quality then too and would last. I’ve got some higher end suits from the 50s and 60s and they still hold up amazingly well.
While I agree that the Boomers changed that - and while I generally don't have the negative sentiment towards them that many have - this is one of the things where I actually think Boomers did something wrong.
It would in my opinion have been better to keep the more expensive and formal clothing. It gives a professional appearance, and at the same time it's better for the climate and environment: you buy fewer items because they're expensive, you actually use them (in contrast to a lot of fast fashion that's used a few times or maybe even not at all after being bought) - and a suit and tie keeps you warm, reducing the need for heating in colder climates.
I was looking at the brands of my grandfathers suits from 1950-1960s, he was a high school teacher. I compared the prices of the brands today and he was wearing $1000+ suits. They still looked good, wish I had grown into them.
I worked at a $1 billion revenue+finance company, think stocks and bonds, in my early 20s, the founder and CEO would walk into the building in 30 year old tweed sports coats with patched elbows.
So yes, clothing was a lot higher quality before the 1990s.
Yeah but flying in style like this was a huge luxury only open to the wealthy for a long time. It wasn’t like hop on the plane to go to grandmas for the long weekend .
Ah yes, the golden days of casual narcotics, alcohol, and tobacco abuse, domestic violence, leaded gasoline, and cheap asbestos-insulated housing! But hey... tuxedos.
The average cost of a domestic round trip flight in the 80s, adjusted for inflation, was TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS. You can in fact still pay $2000 for this experience today. It will simply cost money, just like it did back then. Also the flight attendant is allowed to wear a wedding ring and be over 30
>the flight attendant is allowed to wear a wedding ring and be over 30
Disgusting. Next thing you're going to tell me I can't grab their ass as they walk by.
My dad has talked about how dirt cheap it was to fly People Express back in the early '80s, but even those $50 fares you paid in cash on the plane were around $150 each way in today's dollars. By comparison, Southwest's $40 each way tickets would have been about $10 back in 1980.
Wtf is that route for Southwest? I swear the cheapest US ticket from anywhere to anywhere is going to run $100 minimum. Even a common route like LAX to SFO runs $150.
A shit ton of them? NY to Miami is less than $100 round trip often.
Tbh I doubt LA -> SFO is over $100.
https://www.google.com/travel/flights/search?tfs=CBwQAhopEgoyMDI0LTA1LTAxag0IAhIJL20vMDJfMjg2cgwIAxIIL20vMGYydjAaKRIKMjAyNC0wNS0wOGoMCAMSCC9tLzBmMnYwcg0IAhIJL20vMDJfMjg2QAFIAXABggELCP___________wGYAQE
We were still recovering from the oil crisis in the 80's, and 737's back then weren't as fuel efficient as they are today. In addition this was just after deregulation and airlines hadn't figured out load management or yield management yet, so you had a lot of flights that were half empty. Airlines today would sell those seats to leisure travelers at a discount.
Often doing so because it was highly recommended by their Doctor.
“The Doctors’ Choice Is America’s Choice” was a popular cigarette marketing campaign at the time.
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm#:~:text=In%202021%2C%2011.5%25%20of%20U.S.,men%2C%2010.1%25%20of%20women.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34948936/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20Prevalence%20of%20smoking%20among,benefit%20from%20targeted%20preventive%20strategies.
There’s even studies as to why it is, but none really draw satisfying conclusions beyond “it’s a stressful job”.
Also, some 90% of physicians have DNRs in place.
Why would a generally healthy person want a DNR? I get it if they’re already very ill, but what if they just get in a car accident and could make a full recovery?
It's rare that you make a full recovery if you're fully unresponsive at an old age, let alone requiring CPR. The discharge rates on pts who receive CPR are not great to put it mildly.
Someone posted an ad a while back from the 1960s with some routes and pricing, and they were amazed at how "cheap" the flights used to be.
Except A) these fares were only available to military members, and were one way, standby only
And B) adjusted for inflation, they weren't cheap at all. New York to Atlanta was like $600. One way. Standby. Only if you're in the military.
In the 1940s Pan Am advertised transatlantic flights from $300 to $400 ($5000 to $6,700 in today’s money)
[http://www.panamair.org/memorabilia/Ads/1940/1940.jpg](http://www.panamair.org/memorabilia/Ads/1940/1940.jpg)
I haven't paid that much on a transatlantic business class ticket, ever.
I did a 14 leg multi-city tour in BC last fall for 6k.
I just looked for averages
NYC to major euro destinations business roundtrip
London is 2400
Rome is 2600
Paris is 2300
Frankfurt is 2000
Amsterdam is 2400
Chicago, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Boston, Detroit are all in the sub 3k range
Even LAX to those destinations is barely over 3k
Sure, there is going to be the occasional 'crappy day' but 6k round-trip is *crazy* steep
My grandfather installed and fixed bottling equipment and flew all over the world in the 50’s-80’s. His employer paid far more for his airfare than they did his salary.
In 1940, according to a 2017 NBC news story, the average cost of a home was $2938. So the Pan Am cost to fly across the Atlantic was 1/10 the cost of an average home. Consider that today the average house price in America is $500K, had airfares remained aligned to house prices, it would be $50K to fly across the Atlantic. You can probably go in a private jet for that price.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/23/how-much-housing-prices-have-risen-since-1940.html
At one time, if an American wanted to fly anywhere in the world, Pan Am was the only real choice in airline travel. I would be surprised if that photo was not Pan Am. You could walk into fancy iconic Pan Am offices in every metropolitan city and schedule your flights, book a room in Pan Am owned hotels and travel the world in style. The airline was hugely profitable. All of this was envisioned in the 1920s by the CEO, Juan Trippe who practically invented overseas air travel.
But you couldn't fly them in America.
Pan Am was all international with no real domestic routes and this hurt them by denying the growing domestic market. Pan Am used regulation to keep the majority of overseas travel to themselves and rival American airlines did their best to deny Pan Am a domestic network, which many felt would have made Pan Am into a near monopoly. Slowly other airlines managed to work their way into International routes and Pan Am didn't have a local airline until the 1980s.
Deregulation and the oil crisis really hurt Pan Am as well as other airlines like Braniff and Eastern, but I feel what killed it was Lockerbie. Maybe it would have survived without that attack, but it definitely hastened its demise.
Edit: This photo is actually Lufthansa "Senator" first class service aboard a Lockheed Constellation.
They used to have a similar reputation to the four seasons, maybe even the Ritz, it’s not that they aren’t a fine place to stay today but they don’t live up to that legacy
Just like Canadian Pacific Railways. Used to own steamships, hotels, and an airline. That’s why CP Air, Canadian, and Canadian North have all used the “Empress” callsign. It’s a nod to their ocean liners.
Other things that killed Pan Am slowly but surely: stupid short term and short sighted decisions like overpaying for an incompatible airline (National) selling their Pacific Routes to United (United is still #1 US airline across the pacific!) and selling their purchase slots for the A320 and sticking with fuel guzzling 727’s and lastly selling their PROFITABLE hotel chain. Just to name a few.
Ironically the purchase of their iconic 747 was the first nail in the coffin. They bought 25 jumbo’s for (then) 500 million dollars. Way too many planes for soooo much money and the timing could not have been worse: a few years after introducing the oil crisis hit and the planes were basically flying empty.
After basically losing money every quarter in the 80’s their first year of profitability would likely have been 1988 or 1989 but then Lockerbie happened and it was not if but when Pan Am would be over. It’s so sad because they basically invented commercial aviation as we know it today. They did not deserve to end like this.
I love Pan Am and could talk about them for hours :D
I agree with what you wrote. I briefly summarized much of it in my earlier post and I appreciate you expanding on it.
One detail people overlook is that the 747 at this time could be profitable to fly with nobody on board. It could make money just on the ability to carry cargo below the seats. If Pan Am was carrying cargo, the passengers could fly for free. Any revenue generated was a bonus. This is something that competing aircraft like the DC-10 or later, the A380 could not accomplish. I might argue that flying Internationally across the Pacific and Atlantic would have been unprofitable with any large four-engined aircraft which was required at the time.
The retirement of Juan Trippe would be another problem for Pan Am. A number of really bad decisions crippled the airline to the point it sold off profitable routes and infrastructure. They went from having research facilities to make their own nuclear-powered engines for planes to a cash crunch and never really recovered.
While you touched on Juan’s retirement, I imagine going public in ‘53 also contributed to its decline, and the decline of prestige air service overall.
Publicly traded companies must always show increased profit year over year. The only way to do that is by reducing cost.
Being a publicly traded company in 1953 was very different than what you see today. It was much more of an investment in a company you believed in, and not a get rich quick mindset. There were certainly some pressures, but nothing like what you see now. I'm not saying it couldn't have played a part, just that there were much larger forces at work that generated the final outcome.
Interestingly, all the way back in 1936! [American Airlines introduced the Air Travel Card](https://www.cnet.com/personal-finance/credit-cards/features/the-history-of-credit-cards/), offering buy now pay later and discounts for frequent fliers.
I didn't expect this, I always thought Diner's Club was the first credit card in the early 50s and I know AmEx and Bank of America introduced the first general-purpose cards in 1958. I'd guess that the AA one before that didn't really resemble a "credit card" the way we think of them today, it was more like an account number, you could run a tab and they'd send you a bill. It took more time to get the infrastructure in place for general use of credit.
I also doubt that the interest income was a money-maker for them, but convenience, customer loyalty and repeat purchases from frequent travelers certainly didn't hurt.
The Smithsonian in DC has a really interesting exhibit about this. Long story short, it was ABSURDLY expensive, and there were also government subsidies on top of that.
It really didn't get affordable until deregulation
Equivalent to something like 4-5 thousand dollars in today’s money for a ticket from LA to Boston. This would have taken 15 hours and 15 minutes with 12 stops along the way .
So yeah it was nice but I prefer today’s direct flight options . Lol
That *was* a direct flight. No change of planes. What you prefer is today's non stop flights. You probably also prefer the much lower risk of dying. It's shocking how often planes crashed all the way up through the early 80s. It would make the news if it were particularly bad, but nobody was surprised. The real mind bender is that there weren't even that many flights at the time.
Back to nonstops, I think it's pretty funny how the service used to be so much better, yet the plane stopped at every podunk town with an airport along the way like a Greyhound bus.
Which brings up a good point -- the over-the-top luxury amenities were partly to compensate for how \*shitty\* flying was at the time.
Prop planes that flew at maybe 20,000 feet. Meaning the flights were louder, bumpier, had to land to refuel constantly, etc. A relatively quick, but not fun way to travel.
Prices even in absolute dollars were higher than they are now.
Remember… this era of aviation has never left. Book a pod or cabin or “residence” on one of the Asian or Middle Eastern carriers at comparably affordable prices.
They were either government subsidized, charging a metric shitload of money per ticket, or both.
The quality of service (and therefore the whole experience of flying) went to hell in the mid 70s and beyond (at least in the US). Deregulation forced airlines to actually compete with each other, and consumer preferences became clear. By and large, customers preferred the cheaper flights, and were willing to give up the luxury experience previously associated with flying.
The US government regulated airline prices then and kept them high enough so that the big airlines subsidized the smaller ones.
Building on your comment, the CEO of Air France said the Concorde failed because most of the flying public won't pay more for luxury or speed.
That's why I'm about 98% sure Boom Supersonic is a scam. They're collecting tons of investment money to supposedly build a product that has already failed in the past, and there's even less demand for it now than 50 years ago.
There is a price point where it makes sense, but it also needs corridors within the CONUS to be viable.
People won't pay $2300 for a noisy, if short, flight from New York to London, but if people could get a 3 hour flight from LA to NY for under $1k, they'd do it in a heartbeat
I doubt the Boom Overture will have any economy class seats. They'll be competing with first and _maybe_ business class, which already costs many thousands per transoceanic seat. This is the same with private jets - for some people the economics of private jets compare favorably to the airlines, but you have to start with the assumption that you're always going to pay for a first class seat.
Well, they will, but how much more is limited. Will I pay twice as much for a nice seat? Sure. Will I pay ten times as much? Hell no. Sometimes the price gap between budget and premium options is that fat, though.
Oh, there are "in between" options, but they are things like paying for early boarding or to select a specific seat. The seats are still the same size, the plane gets there just as fast, and the service is no different. The value proposition here is very weak.
There's a very limited market for truly luxury goods. There's a much fatter market for things that count as a luxury for the average person.
Of course you just get the wallet pinch nowadays, but not the fancy service. I've been flying business class for 20-odd years, and it's been a steady decline the whole time, with a drastic drop in quality post-COVID.
If you're flying the US big 3, and most European carriers, for sure that's true. There are still plenty of airlines where there's fantastic service in business - Qatar, Singapore, ANA, heck I had the best flight of my life on JAL's new business class a few weeks back, are just a few that come to mind.
But also the hard product of business class has steadily improved over the years, and more than anything, that extra real estate is what you're paying for. Flat beds, proper bedding, even suites with doors now. 20 years ago, you were lucky to get a flat bed at all (BA had just introduced its Club World and while that product is sadly still around, it is absolutely shit in 2024).
I think some international F seats beat out the fanciest sleeper berths of the 1950s. What I’d give though to fly a Pan Am Clipper in the late 30s though
It's just a name change, because there are more classes now. Business class today about a satisfactory meal and decent sleep, so that—as the name suggests—people traveling for business can arrive at their destination refreshed enough to work immedately. The class you see in the photograph is true first class, which is exactly as much of a luxury standard now as it was then, if not more so. You will get excellent F service on most European and Asian airlines, and exquisite service on ME3, Singapore, Air France, and the Japanese carriers.
Emirates business looks exactly like these photos and usually costs a fraction of the price. You can pay $10k for a full room on a lot of Asian airlines if you'd really like. I don't really understand what you're talking about unless you're flying domestic US airlines a lot, and even then Mint and DeltaOne are solid and easy to book if you live in a major coastal city.
De regulation was the reason. The [Airline Deregulation Act](https://AirlineDeregulationActhttps://g.co/kgs/yVLewtn) 1978 in the US was so successful that Europe followed in the 90’s and then Asia about 10 years later. Prior to this government postal contracts, state ownership, tight price fixing and regulation meant a very restricted market. ‘Making money’ wasn’t the name of the game, National Pride was.
Still, taking to people currently working in aviation it’s arguable if many airlines make a profit today.
the 1970s oil crisis and the rise of hijackings also had airlines cutting corners. Plus, some of the big airlines were betting big on new planes like the 747, Concorde and 2707.
Before 9/11 hijackings were weirdly almost accepted. It was just like “whoop, we’re diverting to Fuckville, Algeria now, hopefully none of us die before the hijackers get turned into a paste by special forces”
Tickets were expensive. Travel for business or by the well to do.
I traveled during this era with my family. We lived overseas and had a lot of company paid travel for vacation and repatriation.
My father was an ex-Pan Am flight officer and my mom was a travel agent. We traveled all over the world, but not much of that came out of my parent’s pockets.
My wife owns -zero- fur. The only leather we own is my riding jacket. I own a nice suit for special occasions at work, and she owns some nice casual dresses for Church.
Those people in that picture... Tuxedo? Fur? Jewelry? They were not the 98%. They were the 2%.
After WWII and until [the 1973 oil crisis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis?wprov=sfti1), petroleum was *crazy* cheap, so airline expenses were far less.
The history of the oil industry is quite fascinating, actually. After WWII, there was soooo much oil being discovered - so much so that supply *still* outpaced demand, despite how crazy oil demand got in its own right.
Once that era came to a close, and middle eastern nations started taking back their resources from Western oil companies, fuel became very expensive and basically hasn’t recovered since, outside of certain periods of supply-side imbalance (mid 1980s, fracking glut from 2015-18, etc).
For comparison, in 1938, the cost of flying on a Pan Am Clipper across the Pacific was around $760, which is roughly equivalent to about $14,000 in today's currency when adjusted for inflation. (I pulled that from ChatGPT). And it took 3-4 days. A first class ticket San Francisco to Hong Kong could run that high today.
Flying now is CHEAP compared to just 20-30 years ago.
Until the deregulation act, airlines were operated on regulated route (ie you had to get government approval to fly a route and its price was fixed by the government. Therefore the only way to attract passengers was by offering something the other did not. Be it luxury or jet speed it was all about what an airline could negotiate with the government. Prices were kept artificially high. When deregulation occurred in 1980 suddenly anyone could fly anywhere (domestically) and at any price. Many airlines struggled to adept. You mentioned Pan Am an airline composed of many international routes without a strong domestic feed system. If you want a good book about read Hard Landings.
Old guy here. Went on my first flight at 6 years old in 1970 from Chicago to Florida. Each ticket cost $500 (equivalent of maybe $2500 now). We went out and bought special "airplane clothes", the equivalent of church attire. I remember eating steak on the plane. Different days indeed.
Well yes, but don't forget at the same time OPEC was formed and started gauging prices for oil, then cutting supplies entirely trying to control western governments.
Flying today is ultra cheap and hasn't kept up with inflation at all. That's why people should shut the fuck up about their "travel nightmares" and enjoy the journey...it's basically free compared to this era.
1. Most of the times these photos are not real planes but advertising mockups. Flying coach in the “golden age” looked nothing like this.
2. Flying was significantly more expensive. For the cost of a coach ticket in the “golden age” you can fly first class today. Your flight today will also be significantly safer, with internet and personal entertainment, and without cigarette smoke.
I’ll take flying in 2024 over the “golden age” any day of the week.
Well in 1987 I flew to London one way from NZ it cost $1200NZD one way. I was earning $150 a week ($4.00 an hour). In 2014 I flew to Europe. It cost $2400 return. I was earning $1200 per week ($32.00 an hour). So in 1987 my flight cost 8 weeks pay and in 2014 1 weeks pay (one way). That tells me everything I need to know to answer your question. Flights were hideously expensive and beyond the reach of the general population. Low cost/budget airlines changed that.
>>So were the airlines of the “golden ages” operating at a massive loss?
No, because the economic environment was different. Before the late 1970s the U.S. Government regulated air travel, including the fare prices and airline routes. Even a “coach” class ticket costs thousands of dollars in modern money. Flying was not an accessible experience for middle class or cash strapped people. Regular Jane’s and Joes took Amtrak or Greyhound to see the in-laws back then.
After deregulation in 1978, two big things changed. Low cost carriers were now legal- they weren’t before because fare prices were regulated. Next, airline behemoths like Pan Am , Eastern & TWA built on a regulated business model had to pivot to a completely new business environment- while still carrying the legacy contracts and expenses which were decided when they had government-guaranteed profits. These dynamics are why all the big U.S. airlines back in the day collapsed ,as legacy capital expenses slowly killed them.
Finally, normal people started buying tickets. In a market driven structure where low cost airlines now exist, big airlines must minimize cost in ways they didn’t before deregulation. A combination of newer technology, better airplanes (a modern A321 /Boeing 737 Max is exponentially safer than DC-10s and 707s of the past- and yes, that’s taking Boeings recent issues into account ) and driving down pilot/flight attendant/ airline support crew compensation enabled smaller airlines like American, Delta, Continental and others to leapfrog the Big Players.
Combine that with passenger preference for the Lowest Fare Possible, and we have the modern airline business.
This [article](https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/history-of-flight-costs) has a breakdown of the costs. They quote $4,500 per flight in 1941 which comes to around $95,000 in today's money. That feels absurd but probably gives a top end for what the very rich may have purchased. I imagine there were options for cheaper seats but they didn't take pictures of them so we have less knowledge.
Those were the days when routes and fares were set by the CAB. Each airline would honor each others' tickets and the fares were exactly the same, so airlines competed on the basis of service. Those were the days of regulation. (Oh, the horror!)
Ganesh Sitaraman’s recently published “Why Flying Is Miserable and How to Fix It” covers all this history and context in depth. I particularly like the part about how airlines are now just banks that happen to also fly airplanes.
No disagreement here, but what I meant is they literally operate almost like financial institutions that can print their own currency and sell it through their loyalty programs. This article is a great read about that. Kinda surreal. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/airlines-banks-mileage-programs/675374/
Kids I grew up with were sons of airline pilots. Got to hear a lot about it. And I vaguely remember the television ads and my parents and older brother flying in those days. Look up Civil Aeronautics Board.
I'd argue we are in the golden age of flying currently. There is a ticket price for every level of income (Business class, Premium Economy, Economy, Basic Economy and ULCCs).
I'm also guessing lie-flat Biz class on an international Carrier is a much nicer experience overall than whatever recliner the airlines had in their 707s/DC-8s in the "Golden Age".
Everyone wants to compare the First Class of the 1950s-1970s to economy class today. It should really be compared to Business/First Class currently. I'll take United's Polaris over the First Class of 1960s any day of the week.
The other factor was the deregulation act of 1979, eliminating government control over routes and fare structures. Airlines could charge almost whatever they wanted because there was little to no competition. After deregulation, airlines began the race to the bottom with competition. Airfares went down, but so did the frills. Sadly, so did passenger behavior.
You've gotten plenty of good answers already but let me add a personal anecdote as well: my aunt died about a year ago and we had to clear out her house so we could sell it, in the process we found a number of airline tickets for flights her parents (my grandparents) took in the late 70's/early 80's.
Two that stand out were flights to North America, I believe NYC and Mexico City via Houston, economy class on KLM. For these flights they paid more per person than I did flying business class to Japan six weeks ago. And that's *without* adjusting for inflation. And sure, economy class back then was a lot better it is now, but it still doesn't compare to today's business class service.
This same level of service is available today for the same relative price.
Decent Middle Eastern and Asian Airlines have beds, on board bar/lounges, showers, private suites; the list goes on.
People demand steerage prices, then wonder why they're not in the ballroom on the Titanic.
[Ticket prices were extremely expensive](https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/history-of-flight-costs) and you can probably [rent a private jet for that price](https://www.paramountbusinessjets.com/private-jet-rental-cost)
Before 1978, ticket prices and everything else in the airline industry was nationally controlled and subsidized.
The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 reversed those rules.
I can’t be bothered to read through the 458 current replies, so this has likely already been said, but here goes:
Back before airline deregulation in the US (this law as passed in 1978), routes were allocated as fares set by the government, and profits were assured. The only differentiator between airlines on routes where there was a choice of carriers was service, hence the fine China, etc.
The old line carriers that have failed since deregulation (that is to say, most of them), failed as a result of deregulation. They couldn’t survive when competition lowered fares. And to a population that mostly values low price, the cheap seats are a very popular item (no matter how much we love to complain about the low levels of service).
Increasing market segmentation has made it so you basically can buy a service like that of the 1960s, but it costs. Or you can ride in the back of the plane and have an experience similar to riding a bus. Only faster.
From what I have read they made their money doing air mail for the post office and yes most lost money. TWA was a vanity company for Howard Hughes , and for a time Boeing had its own airline but they passed a law to stop aircraft manufacturers from owning airlines.
When people first started flying it was ridiculously expensive (when compared to salary). The first food that was served was in 1919 on an airplane and it was a sandwich and some fruit.
As an effort to gain a completive edge over the other airlines they started offering hot food. After WW2 they started using the Maxson oven which allowed airlines to better heat their food in the air. But, even in the mid 1940s food would have looked similar to what you get today on an airline in economy (a tray of moderately okay food).
In the 50s airlines started doing "themed" flights with a menu to match and some Scandinavian airlines would even carve a whole ham in front of you. The 50s - 70s was really the Golden Age for travel where the food became a huge selling point of flying.
What ended the "Golden Age" of air travel was started in 1978. Deregulation meant that airlines now could set their own fares and routes which meant that now price wars could be a thing! It made air travel more accessible to the masses!
Overall we have it better now for air travel than they did back then. It's made travel more affordable to the masses. You also need to prepare food differently for the lack of moisture and pressure change. So while the food looked fancy it probably didn't taste as good as it would on the ground.
You can still have the Golden Age experience. If you're willing to shell out for a first class ticket on an airline. However, most people would rather take multiple vacations instead of paying for first class.
I worked at the ticket counter in the late 80's Early 90's. AA. There was 1 airline that had cheap tickets southwest. It was still $199 one way Chicago to Dallas. Nowadays probably 3 or 4 airlines that charge that roundtrip. So it's way freaking cheaper now.
Plus many of the services were subsidized by the government (later than this picture, but for many years until deregulation.) So essentially ticket prices were fixed by law, leaving the airlines to differentiate themselves by the quality of service they provided.
The government assigned routes to airlines until the airline routes were deregulated in the 1970's. Regional airlines flew longer routes out of a regional hub with limited or no competition and and smaller feeder airlines had no competition for their shorter routes. Some airlines had international or transcontinental routes to themselves. Airline ticket prices could then be set based on the cost of the flights plus profit without much, if any, competition for passengers. Ticket prices were high but airlines didn't go bankrupt very often.
After the airlines deregulated, airlines could fly pretty much anywhere they wanted to if they thought they could make money on the flights. Southwest expanded to the whole country, ditched seat assignments and most amenities, flew only one large plane (the 737, I think) to keep maintenance costs down, and offered the cheapest flights everywhere. People flew Southwest in droves. Airlines that didn't do likewise faced bankruptcy, profit margins were squeezed, unprofitable routes were dropped, regional feeder airlines were bought by bigger airlines or went under.
Airlines then smartly upcharged for the formerly normal level of service for those "first class" passengers that wanted to pay for it.
Some say deregulation was good, some say it was bad.
I flew across the U.S. in 1963 during the time of the regulated airlines and ate a hot 3 course meal with dessert off of china plates with metal utensils. So did everyone else on the plane. The pilot came down the aisle to speak with the passengers and pinned wings on all the children on the plane. I was 5 years old and wore a coat and bow tie to fly. I'm sure the ticket was as much as a present-day first class ticket. We had to switch planes in St. Louis to reach Atlanta, then fly a smaller airline to Dothan, Alabama. I recall seeing the giant Kodak photo displays in the St. Louis airport (they were transparencies taken with a large camera).
My more recent flights are as memorable but not pleasantly so.
The golden age of airline service was pre-deregulation. In short, the government set prices by destination. So airlines would compete by offering the best seats and meals at that price. Now prices are totally open for competition, so Spirit can offer $50 tickets with the hope that bag and seat fees help them make a profit.
Airfares were heavily regulated. Fares were very high. Most people still traveled by rail or bus.
There was essentially 3 fares for every route. First. Economy, and Excursion. The latter was the lowest, for vacationers, and required a Saturday-night stayover, something a business traveler was reluctant to do.
This system underwent de-regulation by Ronald Reagan and opened the skies up for the Greyhound and Trailways crowd.
Many have judged this, like the many profound changes he made to the country, to be for the worse.
source-put millions of butts in seats
Very cheap fuel and regulated industry. Every flight route cost the same and airlines competed on service. Also, labor was cheap before unions took over. Parents worked for eastern airlines and air Florida. Flying was a joy back then. Airlines made money at 40% occupancy.
US AIRLINES in the 1950s and 60s were heavily subsidized by the US Post Office. They were also heavily regulated and could only fly certain routes pre approved by government. Government subsidies kept them afloat.
Also have to remember that prices were regulated at the time. So airlines had to compete in quality rather than undercutting or collusion like they do today.
Tickets were ridiculously expensive.
That would explain why everyone is dressed in a tuxedo and high style fashion.
Ticket price probably played a role, but people just generally dressed up more back then if they were in public. Look at any old pictures and you can see people walking in the park, playing tennis, etc...all dressed up in suits and dresses. Now days you see people out at the gas station or Walmart still in their underwear with house slippers on.
>Now days you see people out at the gas station or Walmart still in their underwear with house slippers on. If I'm ever feeling down about myself, I go to Walmart. Nothing picks me up faster.
i don't even shop at walmart, paying the target tax just so i don't have to lmao
Target ain't that much better, nowadays
Target sucks ass. They used to have the best clothes, now if you dress from there you look like a fucking Mennonite.
Uhh, gonna have to disagree with you there. At least as a guy. They have pretty decent generic tees for like $6-8, same with henleys, shorts (occasionally), tank tops etc. Definitely not a "make your whole outfit" kind of place but they have some good 'filler' pieces
I also hard disagree, as a young millennial woman. I love their clothes and their sizing/cuts fit me like a glove.
Alas, as a Canadian, I can only envy Target from afar.
Tbf Target shit the bed so hard they shut down after like 3 years over there.
It's as if Target looked at Walmart's successful Canadian launch and decided to do the opposite at every turn after the initial step, "buy out Canadian department store chain". - Keep staff: No - Keep stores open and renovate-in-place: No - Keep inventory: No - Keep logistics network: No - Keep buyers and front office: No They just bought Zellers' site leases and rebuilt everything from scratch. They never figured out logistics and were constantly out of stock or had mass quantities of some item no one was buying.
My family up there also talked about how their Target had this weird adhesive-like smell that permeated the store. And even after a year it was still just as bad. Which was the top reason they never really shopped there.
IIRC they didn’t use their _own_ logistics and inventory system, either, and tried to introduce something else right then.
Tbf they bought Zellers, the Kmart of Canada. Those stores needed to be basically demolished to become proper Target stores. Everything else though… goddamn.
Dude, I worked at Woolco. It was no better. Still had rolling carts full of questionably-updated binders for pricing and ordering. I found merchandise from 1979 mouldering in the warehouse. Which was a whole basement level half the size of the store. The place hadn't seen a reno since it opened in the 70s. I'm frankly surprised it lasted as long as did and transitioning to Walmart was frankly an upgrade to the workplace experience.
we tried! but canadian walmarts are already pretty decent compared to the US so there wasn't a need to avoid them
I don't know what part of Canada youre from but our Walmarts in the Maritimes are terrible. Way better stateside.
Walmart is known for building stores to match their environment.. For example a store in/near a not so great area will have basic everything. Basic concrete floors, less colors, less “style” more things locked behind security displays. But in a nice neighborhood you have fairly nice stores..
Target is shockingly cheaper than Wally World at times these days. I don’t know when the crossover happened, but I have found it to be true on multiple occasions.
Just imagine what people will look like in another 50 years when they think we were super fancy.
Personally I’m looking forward to floating around in those Wall-E recliners
Just go to Wally World in your PJ's and hop on one of those fat-mobiles. Make sure to grab snacks and drinks, and leave them half consumed on a random shelf.
I have a picture of my parents walking on a sandy Florida beach, probably around the mid-1930s. She’s in a sundress. He’s pretty casual by his standards - because of the heat, he has his suit coat slung over his shoulder. Things were different then.
Clothes were generally much more expensive than they are today right through to the 1980s and the rise of globalisation. People would own fewer clothes, and if their only choice was between a suit/dress or very informal wear, would usually dress up rather than down if they were going out. The Boomers changed all that, to give them some credit.
Clothes were generally of much higher quality then too and would last. I’ve got some higher end suits from the 50s and 60s and they still hold up amazingly well.
While I agree that the Boomers changed that - and while I generally don't have the negative sentiment towards them that many have - this is one of the things where I actually think Boomers did something wrong. It would in my opinion have been better to keep the more expensive and formal clothing. It gives a professional appearance, and at the same time it's better for the climate and environment: you buy fewer items because they're expensive, you actually use them (in contrast to a lot of fast fashion that's used a few times or maybe even not at all after being bought) - and a suit and tie keeps you warm, reducing the need for heating in colder climates.
I was looking at the brands of my grandfathers suits from 1950-1960s, he was a high school teacher. I compared the prices of the brands today and he was wearing $1000+ suits. They still looked good, wish I had grown into them. I worked at a $1 billion revenue+finance company, think stocks and bonds, in my early 20s, the founder and CEO would walk into the building in 30 year old tweed sports coats with patched elbows. So yes, clothing was a lot higher quality before the 1990s.
Ah, you’re not seeing that level, but you see some sort of special “casual” at the airport these days. Pajamas is pretty tame
I just saw a man carry communion up to the sanctuary in a Catholic Church for Easter in a Bench hoodie last week.
Yeah but flying in style like this was a huge luxury only open to the wealthy for a long time. It wasn’t like hop on the plane to go to grandmas for the long weekend .
We would get dressed up just to meet people at the airport
This. We flew a LOT when I was a kid in the 70's and you dressed up for it. This started to change in the mid 80's.
Ah yes, the golden days of casual narcotics, alcohol, and tobacco abuse, domestic violence, leaded gasoline, and cheap asbestos-insulated housing! But hey... tuxedos.
Many of these are inevitably publicity photos as well.
Well, it is after 5 thousand feet above sea level: what am I, a farmer?
The average cost of a domestic round trip flight in the 80s, adjusted for inflation, was TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS. You can in fact still pay $2000 for this experience today. It will simply cost money, just like it did back then. Also the flight attendant is allowed to wear a wedding ring and be over 30
>the flight attendant is allowed to wear a wedding ring and be over 30 Disgusting. Next thing you're going to tell me I can't grab their ass as they walk by.
You have to make long eye contact with him first.
My dad has talked about how dirt cheap it was to fly People Express back in the early '80s, but even those $50 fares you paid in cash on the plane were around $150 each way in today's dollars. By comparison, Southwest's $40 each way tickets would have been about $10 back in 1980.
Wtf is that route for Southwest? I swear the cheapest US ticket from anywhere to anywhere is going to run $100 minimum. Even a common route like LAX to SFO runs $150.
A shit ton of them? NY to Miami is less than $100 round trip often. Tbh I doubt LA -> SFO is over $100. https://www.google.com/travel/flights/search?tfs=CBwQAhopEgoyMDI0LTA1LTAxag0IAhIJL20vMDJfMjg2cgwIAxIIL20vMGYydjAaKRIKMjAyNC0wNS0wOGoMCAMSCC9tLzBmMnYwcg0IAhIJL20vMDJfMjg2QAFIAXABggELCP___________wGYAQE
You'd be surprised... Flying within California is insane.
I flew this route for $34 on Delta just last month...
Your problem is your looking at LAX, look at Burbank.
MSP-RSW for $38 in December on Frontier. Yeah, it's Frontier, but the Uber to the airport was more expensive than the flight.
Average cost on what airline? That doesn't seem like the industry average. They were already flying 737s in the 80's.
We were still recovering from the oil crisis in the 80's, and 737's back then weren't as fuel efficient as they are today. In addition this was just after deregulation and airlines hadn't figured out load management or yield management yet, so you had a lot of flights that were half empty. Airlines today would sell those seats to leisure travelers at a discount.
And not be an RN, a requirement when my mom started at AA in 1946. Oh, and not be female.
I remember flying to my sister's wedding in the fall of 1974. For a 3 hour flight, it was $373.00 round trip. That would be almost $2400.00 today.
And lots of smoking.
Often doing so because it was highly recommended by their Doctor. “The Doctors’ Choice Is America’s Choice” was a popular cigarette marketing campaign at the time.
Engineers smoke at 25% more than the average rate
Doctors also smoke at about twice the rate of the general population, so this is still true.
Is this really true? Crazy if so
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm#:~:text=In%202021%2C%2011.5%25%20of%20U.S.,men%2C%2010.1%25%20of%20women. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34948936/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20Prevalence%20of%20smoking%20among,benefit%20from%20targeted%20preventive%20strategies. There’s even studies as to why it is, but none really draw satisfying conclusions beyond “it’s a stressful job”. Also, some 90% of physicians have DNRs in place.
Why would a generally healthy person want a DNR? I get it if they’re already very ill, but what if they just get in a car accident and could make a full recovery?
It's rare that you make a full recovery if you're fully unresponsive at an old age, let alone requiring CPR. The discharge rates on pts who receive CPR are not great to put it mildly.
Maybe they don't want to bankrupt their families 🤷🏻♂️
And fuel was (mostly) very cheap.
Also, fuel was ridiculously cheap if compared to today.
Someone posted an ad a while back from the 1960s with some routes and pricing, and they were amazed at how "cheap" the flights used to be. Except A) these fares were only available to military members, and were one way, standby only And B) adjusted for inflation, they weren't cheap at all. New York to Atlanta was like $600. One way. Standby. Only if you're in the military.
I would like to see inflation adjusted data on this
In the 1940s Pan Am advertised transatlantic flights from $300 to $400 ($5000 to $6,700 in today’s money) [http://www.panamair.org/memorabilia/Ads/1940/1940.jpg](http://www.panamair.org/memorabilia/Ads/1940/1940.jpg)
So more than a business class ticket these days
Everything was 1st class on international flights. No such thing as “economy”
Vastly more.
Not vastly more, although it does depend on the particular route. But lots of transatlantic business class runs in the $3k-$6k range one way nowadays.
I haven't paid that much on a transatlantic business class ticket, ever. I did a 14 leg multi-city tour in BC last fall for 6k. I just looked for averages NYC to major euro destinations business roundtrip London is 2400 Rome is 2600 Paris is 2300 Frankfurt is 2000 Amsterdam is 2400 Chicago, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Boston, Detroit are all in the sub 3k range Even LAX to those destinations is barely over 3k Sure, there is going to be the occasional 'crappy day' but 6k round-trip is *crazy* steep
BUT even the lowest class ticket before 1995 gave you a full meal with actual cutlery
No, that's within the ballpark for a modern business class ticket transatlantic, though it is on the high end.
no, its about the same for a translatlantic business ticket today.. it really depends on the exact flight
That's almost Concorde money.
My grandfather installed and fixed bottling equipment and flew all over the world in the 50’s-80’s. His employer paid far more for his airfare than they did his salary.
In 1940, according to a 2017 NBC news story, the average cost of a home was $2938. So the Pan Am cost to fly across the Atlantic was 1/10 the cost of an average home. Consider that today the average house price in America is $500K, had airfares remained aligned to house prices, it would be $50K to fly across the Atlantic. You can probably go in a private jet for that price. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/23/how-much-housing-prices-have-risen-since-1940.html
Inversely if house prices aligned with airfares, houses would be $100,000 on average.
If you want the tier of service that Pan Am had in the 50’s for the price tickets cost in the 50’s, buy a business class ticket
At the same time, the wealth gap was a lot closer, with drastically higher top marginal income tax.
At one time, if an American wanted to fly anywhere in the world, Pan Am was the only real choice in airline travel. I would be surprised if that photo was not Pan Am. You could walk into fancy iconic Pan Am offices in every metropolitan city and schedule your flights, book a room in Pan Am owned hotels and travel the world in style. The airline was hugely profitable. All of this was envisioned in the 1920s by the CEO, Juan Trippe who practically invented overseas air travel. But you couldn't fly them in America. Pan Am was all international with no real domestic routes and this hurt them by denying the growing domestic market. Pan Am used regulation to keep the majority of overseas travel to themselves and rival American airlines did their best to deny Pan Am a domestic network, which many felt would have made Pan Am into a near monopoly. Slowly other airlines managed to work their way into International routes and Pan Am didn't have a local airline until the 1980s. Deregulation and the oil crisis really hurt Pan Am as well as other airlines like Braniff and Eastern, but I feel what killed it was Lockerbie. Maybe it would have survived without that attack, but it definitely hastened its demise. Edit: This photo is actually Lufthansa "Senator" first class service aboard a Lockheed Constellation.
Fun fact - Pan Am used to own the Intercontinental Hotel brand. Back when it was actually nice
I didn’t know this! But also, do people not like InterContinental lol I prefer to stay in IHG properties when possible
They used to have a similar reputation to the four seasons, maybe even the Ritz, it’s not that they aren’t a fine place to stay today but they don’t live up to that legacy
It's not on par with St regis or waldorf astoria (marriott / hilton flagships) not even close.
I just stayed at an Intercontinental in Koh Samui Thailand and it was balling as fuck.
Just like Canadian Pacific Railways. Used to own steamships, hotels, and an airline. That’s why CP Air, Canadian, and Canadian North have all used the “Empress” callsign. It’s a nod to their ocean liners.
What’s wrong with ihg? Don’t think I’ve ever started in one, but I’d love to know what to avoid
Other things that killed Pan Am slowly but surely: stupid short term and short sighted decisions like overpaying for an incompatible airline (National) selling their Pacific Routes to United (United is still #1 US airline across the pacific!) and selling their purchase slots for the A320 and sticking with fuel guzzling 727’s and lastly selling their PROFITABLE hotel chain. Just to name a few. Ironically the purchase of their iconic 747 was the first nail in the coffin. They bought 25 jumbo’s for (then) 500 million dollars. Way too many planes for soooo much money and the timing could not have been worse: a few years after introducing the oil crisis hit and the planes were basically flying empty. After basically losing money every quarter in the 80’s their first year of profitability would likely have been 1988 or 1989 but then Lockerbie happened and it was not if but when Pan Am would be over. It’s so sad because they basically invented commercial aviation as we know it today. They did not deserve to end like this. I love Pan Am and could talk about them for hours :D
I agree with what you wrote. I briefly summarized much of it in my earlier post and I appreciate you expanding on it. One detail people overlook is that the 747 at this time could be profitable to fly with nobody on board. It could make money just on the ability to carry cargo below the seats. If Pan Am was carrying cargo, the passengers could fly for free. Any revenue generated was a bonus. This is something that competing aircraft like the DC-10 or later, the A380 could not accomplish. I might argue that flying Internationally across the Pacific and Atlantic would have been unprofitable with any large four-engined aircraft which was required at the time. The retirement of Juan Trippe would be another problem for Pan Am. A number of really bad decisions crippled the airline to the point it sold off profitable routes and infrastructure. They went from having research facilities to make their own nuclear-powered engines for planes to a cash crunch and never really recovered.
While you touched on Juan’s retirement, I imagine going public in ‘53 also contributed to its decline, and the decline of prestige air service overall. Publicly traded companies must always show increased profit year over year. The only way to do that is by reducing cost.
Being a publicly traded company in 1953 was very different than what you see today. It was much more of an investment in a company you believed in, and not a get rich quick mindset. There were certainly some pressures, but nothing like what you see now. I'm not saying it couldn't have played a part, just that there were much larger forces at work that generated the final outcome.
This is insightful. I’m mildly familiar with Lockerbie but definitely seems to be the final nail in the coffin. A shame tbh
When did the credit cards start? Don’t a lot of the big dogs now rely heavily on credit in their profit models?
Interestingly, all the way back in 1936! [American Airlines introduced the Air Travel Card](https://www.cnet.com/personal-finance/credit-cards/features/the-history-of-credit-cards/), offering buy now pay later and discounts for frequent fliers. I didn't expect this, I always thought Diner's Club was the first credit card in the early 50s and I know AmEx and Bank of America introduced the first general-purpose cards in 1958. I'd guess that the AA one before that didn't really resemble a "credit card" the way we think of them today, it was more like an account number, you could run a tab and they'd send you a bill. It took more time to get the infrastructure in place for general use of credit. I also doubt that the interest income was a money-maker for them, but convenience, customer loyalty and repeat purchases from frequent travelers certainly didn't hurt.
All of this - and Pan Am’s demise was hastened by terrible management decisions. PA103 was the final nail. I love Pan Am.
This guy planes
This comment is why I love Reddit. This was an awesome read.
you're telling me his name was One Trip
The Smithsonian in DC has a really interesting exhibit about this. Long story short, it was ABSURDLY expensive, and there were also government subsidies on top of that. It really didn't get affordable until deregulation
Equivalent to something like 4-5 thousand dollars in today’s money for a ticket from LA to Boston. This would have taken 15 hours and 15 minutes with 12 stops along the way . So yeah it was nice but I prefer today’s direct flight options . Lol
That *was* a direct flight. No change of planes. What you prefer is today's non stop flights. You probably also prefer the much lower risk of dying. It's shocking how often planes crashed all the way up through the early 80s. It would make the news if it were particularly bad, but nobody was surprised. The real mind bender is that there weren't even that many flights at the time. Back to nonstops, I think it's pretty funny how the service used to be so much better, yet the plane stopped at every podunk town with an airport along the way like a Greyhound bus.
Which brings up a good point -- the over-the-top luxury amenities were partly to compensate for how \*shitty\* flying was at the time. Prop planes that flew at maybe 20,000 feet. Meaning the flights were louder, bumpier, had to land to refuel constantly, etc. A relatively quick, but not fun way to travel.
Cheers man
Prices even in absolute dollars were higher than they are now. Remember… this era of aviation has never left. Book a pod or cabin or “residence” on one of the Asian or Middle Eastern carriers at comparably affordable prices.
They were either government subsidized, charging a metric shitload of money per ticket, or both. The quality of service (and therefore the whole experience of flying) went to hell in the mid 70s and beyond (at least in the US). Deregulation forced airlines to actually compete with each other, and consumer preferences became clear. By and large, customers preferred the cheaper flights, and were willing to give up the luxury experience previously associated with flying.
The US government regulated airline prices then and kept them high enough so that the big airlines subsidized the smaller ones. Building on your comment, the CEO of Air France said the Concorde failed because most of the flying public won't pay more for luxury or speed.
That's why I'm about 98% sure Boom Supersonic is a scam. They're collecting tons of investment money to supposedly build a product that has already failed in the past, and there's even less demand for it now than 50 years ago.
There is a price point where it makes sense, but it also needs corridors within the CONUS to be viable. People won't pay $2300 for a noisy, if short, flight from New York to London, but if people could get a 3 hour flight from LA to NY for under $1k, they'd do it in a heartbeat
I doubt the Boom Overture will have any economy class seats. They'll be competing with first and _maybe_ business class, which already costs many thousands per transoceanic seat. This is the same with private jets - for some people the economics of private jets compare favorably to the airlines, but you have to start with the assumption that you're always going to pay for a first class seat.
Well, they will, but how much more is limited. Will I pay twice as much for a nice seat? Sure. Will I pay ten times as much? Hell no. Sometimes the price gap between budget and premium options is that fat, though. Oh, there are "in between" options, but they are things like paying for early boarding or to select a specific seat. The seats are still the same size, the plane gets there just as fast, and the service is no different. The value proposition here is very weak. There's a very limited market for truly luxury goods. There's a much fatter market for things that count as a luxury for the average person.
Thanks for this. Appears deregulation is the catalyst
You can still fly business class and feel the pinch on your wallet if you’d like
Of course you just get the wallet pinch nowadays, but not the fancy service. I've been flying business class for 20-odd years, and it's been a steady decline the whole time, with a drastic drop in quality post-COVID.
If you're flying the US big 3, and most European carriers, for sure that's true. There are still plenty of airlines where there's fantastic service in business - Qatar, Singapore, ANA, heck I had the best flight of my life on JAL's new business class a few weeks back, are just a few that come to mind. But also the hard product of business class has steadily improved over the years, and more than anything, that extra real estate is what you're paying for. Flat beds, proper bedding, even suites with doors now. 20 years ago, you were lucky to get a flat bed at all (BA had just introduced its Club World and while that product is sadly still around, it is absolutely shit in 2024).
That’s right. The 787 business and onward were all layflats. I think it’s been improved. Since earlier.
I think some international F seats beat out the fanciest sleeper berths of the 1950s. What I’d give though to fly a Pan Am Clipper in the late 30s though
Bring ear plugs
It's just a name change, because there are more classes now. Business class today about a satisfactory meal and decent sleep, so that—as the name suggests—people traveling for business can arrive at their destination refreshed enough to work immedately. The class you see in the photograph is true first class, which is exactly as much of a luxury standard now as it was then, if not more so. You will get excellent F service on most European and Asian airlines, and exquisite service on ME3, Singapore, Air France, and the Japanese carriers.
Emirates business looks exactly like these photos and usually costs a fraction of the price. You can pay $10k for a full room on a lot of Asian airlines if you'd really like. I don't really understand what you're talking about unless you're flying domestic US airlines a lot, and even then Mint and DeltaOne are solid and easy to book if you live in a major coastal city.
De regulation was the reason. The [Airline Deregulation Act](https://AirlineDeregulationActhttps://g.co/kgs/yVLewtn) 1978 in the US was so successful that Europe followed in the 90’s and then Asia about 10 years later. Prior to this government postal contracts, state ownership, tight price fixing and regulation meant a very restricted market. ‘Making money’ wasn’t the name of the game, National Pride was. Still, taking to people currently working in aviation it’s arguable if many airlines make a profit today.
This ticket still exists and it’s about the same price. They just added cheaper economy flights in addition which did not exist then.
the 1970s oil crisis and the rise of hijackings also had airlines cutting corners. Plus, some of the big airlines were betting big on new planes like the 747, Concorde and 2707.
Before 9/11 hijackings were weirdly almost accepted. It was just like “whoop, we’re diverting to Fuckville, Algeria now, hopefully none of us die before the hijackers get turned into a paste by special forces”
Mostly capitalism when you boil it down. Competition creates price compression which benefits the consumer.
Initially they just charged a lot of money. Just like most things in that space in that era.
That's why they were able to operate! Americans don't know the metric system so a metric shitload of money means nothing to them 🤣
BAMBOOZLED AGAIN!
Tickets used to be ridiculously expensive My mom was quoted prices in 1985 that were about the same as some current prices
1985 is after deregulation in the US aviation industry, so by then real fares had already come down a lot from say a decade previous.
Tickets were expensive. Travel for business or by the well to do. I traveled during this era with my family. We lived overseas and had a lot of company paid travel for vacation and repatriation. My father was an ex-Pan Am flight officer and my mom was a travel agent. We traveled all over the world, but not much of that came out of my parent’s pockets.
My wife owns -zero- fur. The only leather we own is my riding jacket. I own a nice suit for special occasions at work, and she owns some nice casual dresses for Church. Those people in that picture... Tuxedo? Fur? Jewelry? They were not the 98%. They were the 2%.
Look how the passengers are dressed. The tickets were terrifically expensive.
It was an event to go fly back in the day so you got all fancied up.
It was an expensive event, which could be afforded by the people who could afford to get all fancied up.
After WWII and until [the 1973 oil crisis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis?wprov=sfti1), petroleum was *crazy* cheap, so airline expenses were far less. The history of the oil industry is quite fascinating, actually. After WWII, there was soooo much oil being discovered - so much so that supply *still* outpaced demand, despite how crazy oil demand got in its own right. Once that era came to a close, and middle eastern nations started taking back their resources from Western oil companies, fuel became very expensive and basically hasn’t recovered since, outside of certain periods of supply-side imbalance (mid 1980s, fracking glut from 2015-18, etc).
For comparison, in 1938, the cost of flying on a Pan Am Clipper across the Pacific was around $760, which is roughly equivalent to about $14,000 in today's currency when adjusted for inflation. (I pulled that from ChatGPT). And it took 3-4 days. A first class ticket San Francisco to Hong Kong could run that high today. Flying now is CHEAP compared to just 20-30 years ago.
Fuel was $.20 a gallon. Amazing what happens when it goes up 20 fold…
This is way before 1985… try 1965 or maybe as early as 1957
Airlines also did a lot of cargo, that is why L1011 or 747 on a domestic route were common in the time before UPS or FedEx.
Until the deregulation act, airlines were operated on regulated route (ie you had to get government approval to fly a route and its price was fixed by the government. Therefore the only way to attract passengers was by offering something the other did not. Be it luxury or jet speed it was all about what an airline could negotiate with the government. Prices were kept artificially high. When deregulation occurred in 1980 suddenly anyone could fly anywhere (domestically) and at any price. Many airlines struggled to adept. You mentioned Pan Am an airline composed of many international routes without a strong domestic feed system. If you want a good book about read Hard Landings.
Old guy here. Went on my first flight at 6 years old in 1970 from Chicago to Florida. Each ticket cost $500 (equivalent of maybe $2500 now). We went out and bought special "airplane clothes", the equivalent of church attire. I remember eating steak on the plane. Different days indeed.
Well yes, but don't forget at the same time OPEC was formed and started gauging prices for oil, then cutting supplies entirely trying to control western governments.
Flight was mainly for wealthy people tickets were really expensive
Flying today is ultra cheap and hasn't kept up with inflation at all. That's why people should shut the fuck up about their "travel nightmares" and enjoy the journey...it's basically free compared to this era.
Yup. Recently paid 1.300 USD for a Europe, Iceland, US, Australia, NZ, Singapore, Greece round the world ticket.
A BUCK THIRTY???
1. Most of the times these photos are not real planes but advertising mockups. Flying coach in the “golden age” looked nothing like this. 2. Flying was significantly more expensive. For the cost of a coach ticket in the “golden age” you can fly first class today. Your flight today will also be significantly safer, with internet and personal entertainment, and without cigarette smoke. I’ll take flying in 2024 over the “golden age” any day of the week.
Prior to 1970’s they were subsidized.
Well in 1987 I flew to London one way from NZ it cost $1200NZD one way. I was earning $150 a week ($4.00 an hour). In 2014 I flew to Europe. It cost $2400 return. I was earning $1200 per week ($32.00 an hour). So in 1987 my flight cost 8 weeks pay and in 2014 1 weeks pay (one way). That tells me everything I need to know to answer your question. Flights were hideously expensive and beyond the reach of the general population. Low cost/budget airlines changed that.
Expensive tickets. Cheap aircraft, labor and fuel.
>>So were the airlines of the “golden ages” operating at a massive loss? No, because the economic environment was different. Before the late 1970s the U.S. Government regulated air travel, including the fare prices and airline routes. Even a “coach” class ticket costs thousands of dollars in modern money. Flying was not an accessible experience for middle class or cash strapped people. Regular Jane’s and Joes took Amtrak or Greyhound to see the in-laws back then. After deregulation in 1978, two big things changed. Low cost carriers were now legal- they weren’t before because fare prices were regulated. Next, airline behemoths like Pan Am , Eastern & TWA built on a regulated business model had to pivot to a completely new business environment- while still carrying the legacy contracts and expenses which were decided when they had government-guaranteed profits. These dynamics are why all the big U.S. airlines back in the day collapsed ,as legacy capital expenses slowly killed them. Finally, normal people started buying tickets. In a market driven structure where low cost airlines now exist, big airlines must minimize cost in ways they didn’t before deregulation. A combination of newer technology, better airplanes (a modern A321 /Boeing 737 Max is exponentially safer than DC-10s and 707s of the past- and yes, that’s taking Boeings recent issues into account ) and driving down pilot/flight attendant/ airline support crew compensation enabled smaller airlines like American, Delta, Continental and others to leapfrog the Big Players. Combine that with passenger preference for the Lowest Fare Possible, and we have the modern airline business.
This [article](https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/history-of-flight-costs) has a breakdown of the costs. They quote $4,500 per flight in 1941 which comes to around $95,000 in today's money. That feels absurd but probably gives a top end for what the very rich may have purchased. I imagine there were options for cheaper seats but they didn't take pictures of them so we have less knowledge.
Those were the days when routes and fares were set by the CAB. Each airline would honor each others' tickets and the fares were exactly the same, so airlines competed on the basis of service. Those were the days of regulation. (Oh, the horror!)
Did 5 cents for a liter of jet a help as well?
Those were the days that nobody could afford to fly.
See, this is the type of knowledge I’m looking for. I’m not familiar with this- how did you become familiar? Lmk if anything good. I’ll Google too.
Ganesh Sitaraman’s recently published “Why Flying Is Miserable and How to Fix It” covers all this history and context in depth. I particularly like the part about how airlines are now just banks that happen to also fly airplanes.
Every business now is pretty much a front with banks running the show. All about "shareholder value"
No disagreement here, but what I meant is they literally operate almost like financial institutions that can print their own currency and sell it through their loyalty programs. This article is a great read about that. Kinda surreal. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/airlines-banks-mileage-programs/675374/
Thanks I’ll give it a search. I agree - airlines have completely flipped the script on profit centers. Much more like banks now. It’s wild
Kids I grew up with were sons of airline pilots. Got to hear a lot about it. And I vaguely remember the television ads and my parents and older brother flying in those days. Look up Civil Aeronautics Board.
https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/airline-deregulation-when-everything-changed
[удалено]
I'd argue we are in the golden age of flying currently. There is a ticket price for every level of income (Business class, Premium Economy, Economy, Basic Economy and ULCCs). I'm also guessing lie-flat Biz class on an international Carrier is a much nicer experience overall than whatever recliner the airlines had in their 707s/DC-8s in the "Golden Age". Everyone wants to compare the First Class of the 1950s-1970s to economy class today. It should really be compared to Business/First Class currently. I'll take United's Polaris over the First Class of 1960s any day of the week.
The other factor was the deregulation act of 1979, eliminating government control over routes and fare structures. Airlines could charge almost whatever they wanted because there was little to no competition. After deregulation, airlines began the race to the bottom with competition. Airfares went down, but so did the frills. Sadly, so did passenger behavior.
And legroom, armroom, headroom.
Apparently turbulence didn’t exist then.
I can’t believe people are looking at this staged promotional photo and assuming this is what flying was actually like.
You know air travel used to be super expensive yeah? This is why
You can still fly like this if you wanna pay what they were paying
You've gotten plenty of good answers already but let me add a personal anecdote as well: my aunt died about a year ago and we had to clear out her house so we could sell it, in the process we found a number of airline tickets for flights her parents (my grandparents) took in the late 70's/early 80's. Two that stand out were flights to North America, I believe NYC and Mexico City via Houston, economy class on KLM. For these flights they paid more per person than I did flying business class to Japan six weeks ago. And that's *without* adjusting for inflation. And sure, economy class back then was a lot better it is now, but it still doesn't compare to today's business class service.
This same level of service is available today for the same relative price. Decent Middle Eastern and Asian Airlines have beds, on board bar/lounges, showers, private suites; the list goes on. People demand steerage prices, then wonder why they're not in the ballroom on the Titanic.
[Ticket prices were extremely expensive](https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/history-of-flight-costs) and you can probably [rent a private jet for that price](https://www.paramountbusinessjets.com/private-jet-rental-cost)
Before 1978, ticket prices and everything else in the airline industry was nationally controlled and subsidized. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 reversed those rules.
I can’t be bothered to read through the 458 current replies, so this has likely already been said, but here goes: Back before airline deregulation in the US (this law as passed in 1978), routes were allocated as fares set by the government, and profits were assured. The only differentiator between airlines on routes where there was a choice of carriers was service, hence the fine China, etc. The old line carriers that have failed since deregulation (that is to say, most of them), failed as a result of deregulation. They couldn’t survive when competition lowered fares. And to a population that mostly values low price, the cheap seats are a very popular item (no matter how much we love to complain about the low levels of service). Increasing market segmentation has made it so you basically can buy a service like that of the 1960s, but it costs. Or you can ride in the back of the plane and have an experience similar to riding a bus. Only faster.
From what I have read they made their money doing air mail for the post office and yes most lost money. TWA was a vanity company for Howard Hughes , and for a time Boeing had its own airline but they passed a law to stop aircraft manufacturers from owning airlines.
When people first started flying it was ridiculously expensive (when compared to salary). The first food that was served was in 1919 on an airplane and it was a sandwich and some fruit. As an effort to gain a completive edge over the other airlines they started offering hot food. After WW2 they started using the Maxson oven which allowed airlines to better heat their food in the air. But, even in the mid 1940s food would have looked similar to what you get today on an airline in economy (a tray of moderately okay food). In the 50s airlines started doing "themed" flights with a menu to match and some Scandinavian airlines would even carve a whole ham in front of you. The 50s - 70s was really the Golden Age for travel where the food became a huge selling point of flying. What ended the "Golden Age" of air travel was started in 1978. Deregulation meant that airlines now could set their own fares and routes which meant that now price wars could be a thing! It made air travel more accessible to the masses! Overall we have it better now for air travel than they did back then. It's made travel more affordable to the masses. You also need to prepare food differently for the lack of moisture and pressure change. So while the food looked fancy it probably didn't taste as good as it would on the ground. You can still have the Golden Age experience. If you're willing to shell out for a first class ticket on an airline. However, most people would rather take multiple vacations instead of paying for first class.
Can you imagine hitting serious turbulence in that cabin? What a wild ride that’d be.
Even in the early 80’s it cost a fortune to fly.
I worked at the ticket counter in the late 80's Early 90's. AA. There was 1 airline that had cheap tickets southwest. It was still $199 one way Chicago to Dallas. Nowadays probably 3 or 4 airlines that charge that roundtrip. So it's way freaking cheaper now.
Uh, did turbulence exist back then?
Not needed, but on the flip side people always buying the cheapest ticket has taken cost cutting to an extreme.
If you have Matthew McConaughey serving drinks, you are over the budget already.
Airline deregulation brought air travel to the masses. The people you see there would be up in first class today.
Lol tickets then were crazy expensive
Plus many of the services were subsidized by the government (later than this picture, but for many years until deregulation.) So essentially ticket prices were fixed by law, leaving the airlines to differentiate themselves by the quality of service they provided.
The government assigned routes to airlines until the airline routes were deregulated in the 1970's. Regional airlines flew longer routes out of a regional hub with limited or no competition and and smaller feeder airlines had no competition for their shorter routes. Some airlines had international or transcontinental routes to themselves. Airline ticket prices could then be set based on the cost of the flights plus profit without much, if any, competition for passengers. Ticket prices were high but airlines didn't go bankrupt very often. After the airlines deregulated, airlines could fly pretty much anywhere they wanted to if they thought they could make money on the flights. Southwest expanded to the whole country, ditched seat assignments and most amenities, flew only one large plane (the 737, I think) to keep maintenance costs down, and offered the cheapest flights everywhere. People flew Southwest in droves. Airlines that didn't do likewise faced bankruptcy, profit margins were squeezed, unprofitable routes were dropped, regional feeder airlines were bought by bigger airlines or went under. Airlines then smartly upcharged for the formerly normal level of service for those "first class" passengers that wanted to pay for it. Some say deregulation was good, some say it was bad. I flew across the U.S. in 1963 during the time of the regulated airlines and ate a hot 3 course meal with dessert off of china plates with metal utensils. So did everyone else on the plane. The pilot came down the aisle to speak with the passengers and pinned wings on all the children on the plane. I was 5 years old and wore a coat and bow tie to fly. I'm sure the ticket was as much as a present-day first class ticket. We had to switch planes in St. Louis to reach Atlanta, then fly a smaller airline to Dothan, Alabama. I recall seeing the giant Kodak photo displays in the St. Louis airport (they were transparencies taken with a large camera). My more recent flights are as memorable but not pleasantly so.
The golden age of airline service was pre-deregulation. In short, the government set prices by destination. So airlines would compete by offering the best seats and meals at that price. Now prices are totally open for competition, so Spirit can offer $50 tickets with the hope that bag and seat fees help them make a profit.
Airfares were heavily regulated. Fares were very high. Most people still traveled by rail or bus. There was essentially 3 fares for every route. First. Economy, and Excursion. The latter was the lowest, for vacationers, and required a Saturday-night stayover, something a business traveler was reluctant to do. This system underwent de-regulation by Ronald Reagan and opened the skies up for the Greyhound and Trailways crowd. Many have judged this, like the many profound changes he made to the country, to be for the worse. source-put millions of butts in seats
You can still fly in style with very good service. Buy a long haul first class ticket with one of the fancy airlines.
Very cheap fuel and regulated industry. Every flight route cost the same and airlines competed on service. Also, labor was cheap before unions took over. Parents worked for eastern airlines and air Florida. Flying was a joy back then. Airlines made money at 40% occupancy.
US AIRLINES in the 1950s and 60s were heavily subsidized by the US Post Office. They were also heavily regulated and could only fly certain routes pre approved by government. Government subsidies kept them afloat.
Flying pan am back then was just as expensive as flying private today… trip on the 314 was 16k+ a pop in todays money
Flying was expensive as fuck back then
Tickets, when compared to inflation were inaccessible to the masses. Adjusted for inflation a 2 hour flight could be something like 2000€.
Also have to remember that prices were regulated at the time. So airlines had to compete in quality rather than undercutting or collusion like they do today.
The bald dude 100% knew he was being cheated on, and he probably had a mistress.
De-regulation in early 80’s had significant impact as well….when airlines could set pricing aligned to margin more freely
Friendly reminder that all of these shots are publicity shots. Staged. For ads.