[thedragon4453]

I disagree. I think that there are probably no more than 5 kids flying by themselves on any given flight. I'm not even expecting a 1:1 ratio - I expect that for those 5 kids, there is maybe 1 person in charge of them. Those 5 kids are generating $750 in revenue. The expense for a chaperon is whatever a seat costs, plus that employee's expenses. I'm going to guess that they make a profit on the service (not to mention I'm doubting there is a special "kid rate" for a seat).

Now the problem comes when they start cutting costs. The flight attendant, who used to probably be a well paid, skilled employee who was serving 50 seats is probably a paid less, shorter term employee now serving 75 seats.

And instead of having a dedicated chaperon, it's probably now just one of those flight attendants.

That they can't deliver for the price they charge doesn't mean the price is wrong. If you buy a car and drive it off the lot and the wheels fall off, you don't say "well, I guess they should have charged me more."

Granted, there is a "too good to be true" factor, but I don't think that $150 to make sure that a kid makes their connection and picks up the baggage is more than enough. Honestly, I'd expect that as part of the ticket price.

[pavel_lishin]

I don't know how chaperone services work, to be honest, but if I were paying for it, I'd want the chaperone around in the airport, not on the plane itself. A kid can wander off and get lost, or get kidnapped, or hurt themselves at an airport, they're not exactly going to get off the airplane halfway through the flight.

> If you buy a car and drive it off the lot and the wheels fall off, you don't say "well, I guess they should have charged me more."

But the company should say, "We should have spent more money building this car, and thereafter charged more for it."