Poor parenting is obvious when you are on a plane. I had a houseful of kids and then I took care of my two oldest grandchildren until they were 5 years old and their parents decided to grow up.

I took them all across the States--but never on an airplane. One train ride was enough to teach me that flying wasn't an option--and not necessary, unlike many people in Thailand.

Kids make noise and kids do play. No problem, the airlines provides a headset. The only time I have had a problem was about a 5 year old who sat behind me and continuously kicked the seat on an 18 hour flight across the Pacific. I tried playing peek-a-boo and a number of little games. I was nice, but by the time I landed, I was so exhausted, I had to cancel my next flight and check into a hotel for a night first.

The mother paid not the slightest attention to her child's antics. I was annoyed with the kid; I was livid with anger at the mother.

The airlines are on to something good--but segregate parents with children in the rest of plane as well.

Wouldn't it be more effective if you gave the valium to the kids?

No, give the valium to the adults--then they won't mind the kids. On a long-haul flight I usually take 10 mg of valium. It makes me feel pretty relaxed. It won't put me to sleep, but if I close my eyes, I will fall asleep. Kids crying won't bother me much more than the sound of the engines--provided they aren't kicking the back of my seat, which is really annoying.

All of you complaining about kids forget one thing, you were all kids at one point in your life. Easily forgot eh?

So I guess ANYTHING someone younger does can be excused because we were that age once?

Nope. I didn't say that. The context of this discussion is about kids making a little noise on a plane, not throwing stones at the windows or mugging the trolley dolly. You're a smart cookie and you know exactly what was meant and so I can only assume that you are trying to take this in a different direction. Feel free to do so but not at the expense of dragging my comments into it. :jap:

Ah, you're also a smart cookie and you know this discussion isn't about "kids making a little noise". It's about the screaming, kicking, etc. With the pressurized air and headphones you probably wouldn't even notice a little noise. And NO, I was NOT like that as a little kid. I come from the generation - like a many of us here - where parents took responsibility for their children. Sadly, that is becoming more and more rare in the modern world.

Wouldn't it be more effective if you gave the valium to the kids?

No, give the valium to the adults--then they won't mind the kids. On a long-haul flight I usually take 10 mg of valium. It makes me feel pretty relaxed. It won't put me to sleep, but if I close my eyes, I will fall asleep. Kids crying won't bother me much more than the sound of the engines--provided they aren't kicking the back of my seat, which is really annoying.

Now you're onto something. There should be an airline regulation where they give nearby adults either valium or a few cocktails to help them endure the kids. Of course, with the drink you'd have even mor trouble if the adult was one of those who likes to cause trouble when they get drunk. Me, I'm a very happy drunk so I can get his share.

All of you complaining about kids forget one thing, you were all kids at one point in your life. Easily forgot eh?

So I guess ANYTHING someone younger does can be excused because we were that age once?

Nope. I didn't say that. The context of this discussion is about kids making a little noise on a plane, not throwing stones at the windows or mugging the trolley dolly. You're a smart cookie and you know exactly what was meant and so I can only assume that you are trying to take this in a different direction. Feel free to do so but not at the expense of dragging my comments into it. :jap:

Ah, you're also a smart cookie and you know this discussion isn't about "kids making a little noise". It's about the screaming, kicking, etc. With the pressurized air and headphones you probably wouldn't even notice a little noise. And NO, I was NOT like that as a little kid. I come from the generation - like a many of us here - where parents took responsibility for their children. Sadly, that is becoming more and more rare in the modern world.

Well I'm from the generation (if there is such a thing)where I do take responsibility for my child. In fact, the slightest whimper from her and I am paranoid what the other passengers may think. The point is, why should ALL kids have to suffer for the behaviours of a few.

If any airline stops me travelling in business with my daughter, whether I'm flying with or without her, they can wave goodbye to my money ad infinitum. They could also probably wave goodbye to my daughters business when she grows up.

Most companies look at using marketing strategies to capture future generations at an early age. IMO it's a short sighted company that alienates their future revenue streams.

Well I'm from the generation (if there is such a thing)where I do take responsibility for my child. In fact, the slightest whimper from her and I am paranoid what the other passengers may think. The point is, why should ALL kids have to suffer for the behaviours of a few.

If any airline stops me travelling in business with my daughter, whether I'm flying with or without her, they can wave goodbye to my money ad infinitum. They could also probably wave goodbye to my daughters business when she grows up.

Most companies look at using marketing strategies to capture future generations at an early age. IMO it's a short sighted company that alienates their future revenue streams.

Smokers said the same thing when bars and restaurants started to ban smoking. "I'll take my business elsewhere". Maybe some did, but the bars and restaurants also got more business from non-smokers.

As for future customers, children don't care that they can't fly first class. But when they are adults they will appreciate airlines who don't allow kids in. When I wasn't old enough to go see R-rates movies (under 17 not allowed without an adult guardian) I didn't think that when I got older I would refuse to see R-rated movies or not go to that cinema. In fact, I was quite happy they weren't letting teenagers in to be a nuisance.

Smokers said the same thing when bars and restaurants started to ban smoking. "I'll take my business elsewhere". Maybe some did, but the bars and restaurants also got more business from non-smokers.

Youré well wide of the mark there. Albeit pubs in the UK close every year, the figure jumped enormously the year the smoking ban was introduced. Look at the table at the bottom of this article and it has got to be more than just coincidence that the figure jumped in that same year and has continued to do so afterwards. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/apr/12/general-election-labour-manifesto-pub-closures

As for future customers, children don't care that they can't fly first class. But when they are adults they will appreciate airlines who don't allow kids in. When I wasn't old enough to go see R-rates movies (under 17 not allowed without an adult guardian) I didn't think that when I got older I would refuse to see R-rated movies or not go to that cinema. In fact, I was quite happy they weren't letting teenagers in to be a nuisance.

Totally different analogy alltogether. A blanket ban doesn't single out one company on implementing a restriction, it's across the board. To use your smoking ban analogy. Why did the pubs wait until the ban to do it and not ban smoking prior? No need to wait for an answer, it was because they didn't want to be the only one to alienate customers. There were a VERY small few who did try it but they reversed their decision before they went out of business.

Particularly in the current economic climate, it's a brave or stupid company who wish to turn away business.

Why take a gamble on losing revenue like this with the below highlighted in blue, in mind?

Source:- http://atwonline.com/airline-finance-data/news/malaysia-airlines-posts-78-million-2010-profit-0227

Malaysia Airlines on Friday reported 2010 net income of MYR237.3 million ($77.6 million), down 54.6% from a MYR522.9 million profit in 2009 that benefited from a MYR1.16 billion derivative gain.

Despite the earnings drop, the carrier promised to press ahead with aggressive expansion. MAS took delivery of three Boeing 737-800s in the 2010 fourth quarter and will receive four more -800s this year. Additionally, the carrier in April will take delivery of the first of five A330-300s slated to arrive in 2011. MD and CEO Azmil Zahruddin said, "We have put in solid building blocks and are positioning ourselves to capitalize on the action in our backyard, with Asia/Pacific demonstrating strong growth."

Full-year 2010 revenue grew 14.5% year-over-year to MYR12.98 billion while expenses heightened 9% to MYR13.32 billion. Operating profit was reported at MYR263.8 million, reversed from a reported operating loss of MYR614.8 million in 2009. Full-year traffic increased 15% to 37.84 billion RPKs on a 3.7% rise in capacity to 49.62 billion ASKs, producing a load factor of 76.2%, up 7.4 points.

MAS said its fourth-quarter yield improved 6% compared to the 2009 December period as RASK heightened 6%to MYR0.188 and CASK decreased 7% to MYR0.175.

Looking at 2011, Zahruddin remained cautious, citing already high fuel prices that are rising even further owing to Middle East unrest, as well weak economies in Europe and North America. "Competition is also expected to intensify. In a challenging and unpredictable industry such as this, we are vulnerable to many things beyond our control which can quickly have an impact on the business."

Well mrboj...a touchy subject I see but most of us were having a laugh as I'm sure you know. The last flight I had where it was an issue I was sat in biz class next to an eight year old laddie who had a set of playing cards with him. Well sorted!....we played every game he knew and I taught him some decent poker and a few tricks as well.

His parents chose to sit opposite on this Hogmanay flight and get plastered together on champagne while this was going on and barely spoke to the child for hours. Not sure what to make of that really.....

I guess we were all happy in the end....I'd just finished a Nick Hornby book in departures...

If any airline stops me travelling in business with my daughter, whether I'm flying with or without her, they can wave goodbye to my money ad infinitum. They could also probably wave goodbye to my daughters business when she grows up.

Not all kids travel in Business class. Not all kids have beds to sleep on during a flight.

Smokers said the same thing when bars and restaurants started to ban smoking. "I'll take my business elsewhere". Maybe some did, but the bars and restaurants also got more business from non-smokers.

Youré well wide of the mark there. Albeit pubs in the UK close every year, the figure jumped enormously the year the smoking ban was introduced. Look at the table at the bottom of this article and it has got to be more than just coincidence that the figure jumped in that same year and has continued to do so afterwards. http://www.guardian....to-pub-closures

As for future customers, children don't care that they can't fly first class. But when they are adults they will appreciate airlines who don't allow kids in. When I wasn't old enough to go see R-rates movies (under 17 not allowed without an adult guardian) I didn't think that when I got older I would refuse to see R-rated movies or not go to that cinema. In fact, I was quite happy they weren't letting teenagers in to be a nuisance.

Totally different analogy alltogether. A blanket ban doesn't single out one company on implementing a restriction, it's across the board. To use your smoking ban analogy. Why did the pubs wait until the ban to do it and not ban smoking prior? No need to wait for an answer, it was because they didn't want to be the only one to alienate customers. There were a VERY small few who did try it but they reversed their decision before they went out of business.

Particularly in the current economic climate, it's a brave or stupid company who wish to turn away business.

1) Didn't the pub closings start around the time they started cracking down on hooliganism? I didn't see anything in the link that mentions smoking as the culprit for closings. It could just as well be the "new immigrants" forcing them to close since they are so offended by drinking or the fact that there are lot more people out of work since 2008.

2) Maybe it's a diff analogy but it is still a fact that small childern couldn't care less about not getting to sit in first class and won't remember the "insult" when they themselves are adult consumers.

@ koheesti....

If any airline stops me travelling in business with my daughter, whether I'm flying with or without her, they can wave goodbye to my money ad infinitum. They could also probably wave goodbye to my daughters business when she grows up.

Not all kids travel in Business class. Not all kids have beds to sleep on during a flight.

Not all adults travel in business class either Endure. What's your point? As this thread is about Malaysian banning kids from Business.

Well mrboj...a touchy subject I see

No buddy. Just passing time time until the season starts. It's been too long this year

@ koheesti....

I would like to rescind my post above declaring him a smart cookie

If any airline stops me travelling in business with my daughter, whether I'm flying with or without her, they can wave goodbye to my money ad infinitum. They could also probably wave goodbye to my daughters business when she grows up.

Not all kids travel in Business class. Not all kids have beds to sleep on during a flight.

Not all adults travel in business class either Endure. What's your point? As this thread is about Malaysian banning kids from Business.

According to the article MAS are banning sprogs from 1st class.

@ koheesti....

I would like to rescind my post above declaring him a smart cookie

I'm smart enough to read a link and see that it doesn't at all back up the claim made by the person who posted the link.

1) Didn't the pub closings start around the time they started cracking down on hooliganism?

If you're going to post koheesti then don't post uninformed nonsense like this. Friendly advice mate.

I'm smart enough to read a link and see that it doesn't at all back up the claim made by the person who posted the link.

OK, let's look at "my claim" again.

Smokers said the same thing when bars and restaurants started to ban smoking. "I'll take my business elsewhere". Maybe some did, but the bars and restaurants also got more business from non-smokers.

Youré well wide of the mark there. Albeit pubs in the UK close every year, the figure jumped enormously the year the smoking ban was introduced. Look at the table at the bottom of this article and it has got to be more than just coincidence that the figure jumped in that same year and has continued to do so afterwards. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/apr/12/general-election-labour-manifesto-pub-closures

I said that although pubs close every year, the figured jumped enormously year-on-year after the smoking ban was introduced and it has to be more than just coincidence. I'm not saying that all the pubs closing are a direct result of the smoking ban but you don't have to be Sherlock to deduce that there is a link. Unlike your hooliganism theory

I guess we were all happy in the end....I'd just finished a Nick Hornby book in departures...

Stealing toy trains at Christmas? Shame on you!!

I guess we were all happy in the end....I'd just finished a Nick Hornby book in departures...

Stealing toy trains at Christmas? Shame on you!!

Ah yes first class on the train used to be great when I was a lad....proper pullman coaches....our own cabin.....and the sandwiches....ohohoho....I suppose its just not done to take a packed lunch in first.....

The whole train used to stink of cigarette smoke though people seemed a lot more polite....oh hang on....I only ever take the footie trains nowadays!

I wouldn't travel standard class on a train really....who might I end up sitting next to? At least first class kids don't have nits.....I hope.

I'm smart enough to read a link and see that it doesn't at all back up the claim made by the person who posted the link.

OK, let's look at "my claim" again.

Smokers said the same thing when bars and restaurants started to ban smoking. "I'll take my business elsewhere". Maybe some did, but the bars and restaurants also got more business from non-smokers.

Youré well wide of the mark there. Albeit pubs in the UK close every year, the figure jumped enormously the year the smoking ban was introduced. Look at the table at the bottom of this article and it has got to be more than just coincidence that the figure jumped in that same year and has continued to do so afterwards. http://www.guardian....to-pub-closures

I said that although pubs close every year, the figured jumped enormously year-on-year after the smoking ban was introduced and it has to be more than just coincidence. I'm not saying that all the pubs closing are a direct result of the smoking ban but you don't have to be Sherlock to deduce that there is a link. Unlike your hooliganism theory

I have a much better theory that few English would disagree with...

The English go to pubs to drink and watch football. In 2007-2008 England sucked so badly that they didn't even qualify for the Euro 2008 tournament. Three months later the country was thrown into the world economic crisis. Little money + a team that sucks = stay at home.

Maybe you're right though. Maybe the people of the UK just haven't figured out what everyone else has - you just step outside for your smoke.

I have a much better theory that few English would disagree with...

The English go to pubs to drink and watch football. In 2007-2008 England sucked so badly that they didn't even qualify for the Euro 2008 tournament. Three months later the country was thrown into the world economic crisis. Little money + a team that sucks = stay at home.

Maybe you're right though. Maybe the people of the UK just haven't figured out what everyone else has - you just step outside for your smoke.

There I was thinking "He's nailed it!" until I remembered there was no crisis in the UK in 2008.

Do your research first mate like I told you before.

Carry on bashing the England team at leisure too....

I have a much better theory that few English would disagree with...

The English go to pubs to drink and watch football. In 2007-2008 England sucked so badly that they didn't even qualify for the Euro 2008 tournament. Three months later the country was thrown into the world economic crisis. Little money + a team that sucks = stay at home.

Maybe you're right though. Maybe the people of the UK just haven't figured out what everyone else has - you just step outside for your smoke.

There I was thinking "He's nailed it!" until I remembered there was no crisis in the UK in 2008.

Do your research first mate like I told you before.

Carry on bashing the England team at leisure too....

I took your adivce, I researched it and I'm still right except it didn't happen exactly 3 months later. It was happening in 2008 though.

http://en.wikipedia....#United_Kingdom

I have a much better theory that few English would disagree with...

The English go to pubs to drink and watch football. In 2007-2008 England sucked so badly that they didn't even qualify for the Euro 2008 tournament. Three months later the country was thrown into the world economic crisis. Little money + a team that sucks = stay at home.

Maybe you're right though. Maybe the people of the UK just haven't figured out what everyone else has - you just step outside for your smoke.

There I was thinking "He's nailed it!" until I remembered there was no crisis in the UK in 2008.

Do your research first mate like I told you before.

Carry on bashing the England team at leisure too....

I took your adivce, I researched it and I'm still right except it didn't happen exactly 3 months later. It was happening in 2008 though.

http://en.wikipedia....#United_Kingdom

As I was living in the UK in 2008 I feel I'm better placed to judge. There was no crisis...a slowing of the economy yes. Anyway this had little effect on pubs...in fact we tend to drink more in lean times...

Truth is its the smoking ban combined with cheap supermarket drinks that's killing off the traditional pub. Places with sky TV and big screens however continue to flourish....the pub trade aint dead just on the ropes a bit.

People's drinking habits have changed....CCTV has played its part too....the drug taking activity has moved away from the pub scene as well as a result.

This is moving a little too far off-topic.

1) Didn't the pub closings start around the time they started cracking down on hooliganism?

If you're going to post koheesti then don't post uninformed nonsense like this. Friendly advice mate.

If that were a qualification to post then this forum would be empty.

Speaking of, I'm still waiting for that link showing that the demise of pubs in the UK is linked to smoking. Or is that an example of uninformed nonsense? Like small children not flying giving an airline their business when they become adults because they will remember not being allowed in first class when they were 3 years old?

1) Didn't the pub closings start around the time they started cracking down on hooliganism?

If you're going to post koheesti then don't post uninformed nonsense like this. Friendly advice mate.

If that were a qualification to post then this forum would be empty.

Speaking of, I'm still waiting for that link showing that the demise of pubs in the UK is linked to smoking. Or is that an example of uninformed nonsense? Like small children not flying giving an airline their business when they become adults because they will remember not being allowed in first class when they were 3 years old?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23964004-700-pubs-closed-by-smoke-ban-supermarket-beer-and-tax-rises.do

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1366720/Last-orders-Twenty-pubs-close-week-loss-thousands-jobs.html

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Pubs-Closing-Down-Over-Poor-Beer-Sales-And-Smoking-Ban/Article/20080311307985

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/2376693.thousands_of_pubs_expected_to_close_due_to_smoking_ban/

http://www.amendthesmokingban.com/

And the party line....

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?storycode=66476

Happy reading.

Cheers smokes but I doubt even with all that he'll get it.

Sorry about going off topic Scott but it's all in relation to why a company would adopt this kind of strategy.

Like small children not flying giving an airline their business when they become adults because they will remember not being allowed in first class when they were 3 years old?

To bring it back on track WRT to an Airline's strategy to ban children.

Koheesti, if you really believe this is about a 3 year old remembering or not if it was not allowed to fly first class when it was 3 years old, then I am honestly in shock at your understanding of marketing and customer retention vs gaining new customers.

I think we can agree that many published papers state that on average it costs 5 times more to gain new customers, than it does to retain existing ones. Yes? So when most companies are using incentives to actually trap youngsters at a very early age and then keep them, why are Malaysian Airlines doing the opposite and actually alienating their future potential revenue streams?

In the case of Airlines, the incentive consists of things like Air Miles and membership levels. As long as the prices don't vary too much and the route is available, we fly Etihad the majority of the time due to my air miles and membership status. And because I was a member, when I married, the wife started flying Etihad and now she has her own air miles and membership status. And because we fly with them, my daughter got her own membership at 2 years old and has her own miles and status. Therefore, unlike Malaysian, Etihad have already reeled her in and unless they mess up big style, when she gets to be an adult she will probably carry on using them.

It will have nothing to do with whether she remembered something at 3, it will all be down to the fact that she has been flying with them for years and can use the business lounge etc even if she is flying economy.

Cheers smokes but I doubt even with all that he'll get it.

Sorry about going off topic Scott but it's all in relation to why a company would adopt this kind of strategy.

Like small children not flying giving an airline their business when they become adults because they will remember not being allowed in first class when they were 3 years old?

To bring it back on track WRT to an Airline's strategy to ban children.

Koheesti, if you really believe this is about a 3 year old remembering or not if it was not allowed to fly first class when it was 3 years old, then I am honestly in shock at your understanding of marketing and customer retention vs gaining new customers.

I think we can agree that many published papers state that on average it costs 5 times more to gain new customers, than it does to retain existing ones. Yes? So when most companies are using incentives to actually trap youngsters at a very early age and then keep them, why are Malaysian Airlines doing the opposite and actually alienating their future potential revenue streams?

In the case of Airlines, the incentive consists of things like Air Miles and membership levels. As long as the prices don't vary too much and the route is available, we fly Etihad the majority of the time due to my air miles and membership status. And because I was a member, when I married, the wife started flying Etihad and now she has her own air miles and membership status. And because we fly with them, my daughter got her own membership at 2 years old and has her own miles and status. Therefore, unlike Malaysian, Etihad have already reeled her in and unless they mess up big style, when she gets to be an adult she will probably carry on using them.

It will have nothing to do with whether she remembered something at 3, it will all be down to the fact that she has been flying with them for years and can use the business lounge etc even if she is flying economy.

No, I'm not going to going to read all those links. Last time I did, I wasted my time because they had nothing to do with the claim at hand. BTW - I'm in Estonia now where there is no smoking in bars and I'd pray to any god if I thought it would keep the English lager louts from flooding the bars and singing at the top of their lungs. Maybe that's why the pubs in the UK are closing - the drunks have been invading European capitals for over a decade instead.

And...2-3 yr olds WILL NOT use what happened to them at that age to determine who they give their business to when they are adults. Full stop.