Southwest Airlines’ flight attendant union has come to a tentative agreement on introducing the larger 737-800 into the SWA fleet.  By all I can see, this is a reasonable agreement  and reached in what has to be nearly an all time record time even for SWA.  When this originally came to light a bit over a month ago, there was rampant speculation (even on my part) that SWA made this public in order to cajole a recalcitrant union.  Now, the agreement has been reached and SWA is still working with their pilots who, if anything, should have even less of a problem agreeing to the addition.

So what was the fuss about?  Perhaps this once it was what the flight attendant union said it was.  They were contractually obligated to talk and they really saw no large obstacle to making it happen.  This just doesn’t feel like there was a real conflict brewing.  Suddenly it feels like the pilots might be hemming and hawing over this. 

Actually, I doubt even that.  Perhaps SWA and its unions will have complete agreement in a few weeks and make their order with Boeing.  No one yet has found a reason why adding the -800 is a bad idea for SWA.  Yes, there will be a slight change in the number of FA’s on these aircraft and, yes, it will add a slight level of complexity for managing scheduling.  However, the benefits are bigger and this potentially gives SWA a chance to find out if they’re ready to go to another level in the future.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

A few days ago, I was asked to help someone put together a multi-stop itinerary from Portland, OR to Chicago to NYC to Portland.  A quick check of travel sites revealed a pretty good price of $525 all in from Delta.  The problem was multiple stops at Delta hubs in Minneapolis, Detroit and/or Atlanta.  Each segment had a stop and each stop was a not too short layover, too.

So I started looking for alternatives.  Now, this person wanted to fly into Newark’s airport for the NYC part for convenience and that makes alternatives a bit more difficult.  But they were traveling into NYC on a Saturday night or Sunday morning and that makes La Guardia go from “ugh” to possible.

After a few minutes, I found flights on Southwest Airlines for PDX to Chicago Midway (MDW) that were more than reasonable.  Then I found very reasonable flights from MDW to NYC (La Guardia) on Southwest too.  Finally, Continental offered a nice one-stop to Portland via Seattle for an extremely reasonable price.  All in, those tickets added up to about $530.  Best of all, only one connection was necessary and it was an easy one in Seattle. 

The traveler would also be able to take advantage of SWA’s no bag fee policy saving them about $50 as well.  In fact, by that accounting, suddenly the fare difference was $575 plus taxes for Delta and a bunch of bad flights on bad aircraft vs $530 on SWA and Continental on good flights with nice aircraft.  Their overall travel time was shortened by hours and their convenience and price went up.  It’s good to look for alternatives and it’s very wise to remember Southwest Airlines when you’re planning your trips.

One odd note:  I discovered that Delta really dominated flights from MDW to other destinations such as NYC-LGA and NYC-EWR but only as connections to their hub cities in Minneapolis, Detroit or Atlanta.  At least by price they did.  But the connections ranged from barely OK to “what the hell are they thinking”.  And suddenly it dawned on me why ContiUnited decided to give up those slots at EWR to Southwest. 

ContiUnited doesn’t fly from EWR to MDW non-stop.  In fact, I couldn’t find a connection on either airline to that airport.  They do, however, have a strong schedule to Chicago’s O’Hare airport.  By giving those slots up, they virtually assured that SWA would fly in competition with Delta to Chicago rather than ContiUnited and do it very competitively.  In other words, they got the attack dog to go after their biggest competitor in the NYC area. 

Is there some potential for competition on ContiUnited routes?  Sure but it is pretty limited since SWA flies to secondary airports where they (ContiUnited) are (mostly) strongest.  They’ve already seen that SWA has a limited effect on their pricing under those circumstances.  And, as I’ve already said in an earlier post, they already know how to compete with SWA in the circumstances where they might directly compete.  Best of all, they made the DoT very happy to offering a big chunk of slots to SWA instead of trying to pull a Delta and parcel them out to tiny players.

And that makes me wonder why Airtran never used its EWR slots to fly to Chicago where they already had a presence.  Their business class product would have fit nicely with the value oriented, entrepreneur flier between those two cities and offered great convenience between downtown Chicago and Manhattan.

Filed under: Airline Fees, Airline Service, Airports by ajax
No Comments »

There is a reason there is a lot of focus on the near mid-west and east coast when it comes to airlines.  That’s where people are.  The population density in our eastern half far exceeds that of our western half.  Even LCC carriers “get it” and if you think otherwise, look at the focus of jetBlue, Airtran and Southwest Airlines.

But I think the opportunity of the west and mid-west is getting ignored.  All one has to do is take a look at routes flown from the DFW, Houston, Kansas City, Salt Lake City and, yes, Las Vegas area and wonder at the possibilities.  Yes, the flights are a bit longer in length and time but they also fly in and out of airports that are far less congested and far less affected by weather. 

Southwest ignores routes from DFW while it waits to fly unrestricted from Love Field in 2014 and I think that is a mistake.  jetBlue has ignored the Dallas market despite the fact that it connects an amazing number of people to areas where it already has a strength:  the east coast and west coast.

Airtran has game in the east and even in the upper-Midwest now but it has ignored the west so far and that puzzles me.  It’s an airline that is clearly ready to go to the next level and be a real national player.  Frontier is playing some in the west via Denver but take a look at the fares it is charging on those western routes.  I think Frontier is more vulnerable than it thinks. 

More importantly, I don’t think there has been the same LCC stimulus in many western markets that we’ve seen elsewhere.  Many LCC’s operating routes in the west seem to have come to some tacit agreement with legacy airlines on competition.  With the exception of the west coast, we don’t see much LCC stimulus going on past 150 miles east of the west coast. 

There is opportunity there and the airline that figures out how to build a better network there is potentially set to earn a great deal of money.  Sure, Southwest is out there and they do have pretty good coverage but even they could stand a little competition these days.  At least outside of California and Arizona.

Filed under: Airline Service, Airports by ajax
3 Comments »

In an interview with TheStreet.Com, jetBlue CEO Dave Barger says that jetBlue has earned the right to grow.  His justification for that comes from jetBlue having positive cash flow, steady earnings and it’s contrarian nature that has lead to success at difficult airports.

Personally, I think all airlines have a “right” to grow.  I just think they have to make a busines case for it and as far as I’m concerned, have at it. 

I think this signals something else.  Here is an LCC announcing its attention to grow in almost insolent manner.  In particular, Barger declares their intentions at Washington Reagan National and fails to mention that his opportunity for growth there comes from a partnership with American Airlines that included a slot swap.

But this is somewhat classical behaviour on the part of LCC’s.  They see revenue opportunities on routes that legacy airlines are only, at best, barely managing to cling to and the LCC’s want to earn that money.  Their costs are lower and they can handle going in at a lower fare and capturing the business.  The only tool a legacy has to use to fight off that competition when that happens is adding frequency and matching prices for a sustained period.  It does work sometimes.  From time to time, a legacy airline can fight off an LCC intrusion but it’s hard and it does eat up cash and resources until it’s over.

That was easier to do when there were few LCC’s and they were focusing on peripheral airports and lesser routes.  Now we have quite a few LCC carriers and they want in on the big action.  That’s why we have Virgin American flying trans-continental routes, jetBlue flying from JFK and Southwest Airlines introducing itself at both La Guardia and now Newark airports. 

Can legacy airlines fight these attacts on many more fronts as the airline business recovers in the US?  Maybe.  At least to some degree.  But I suspect they’re going to have to be a bit more choosy on their fights and I think w’re going to see some markets where even SuperLegacy airlines concede, eventually, to LCC intrusion. 

Dave Barger and jetBlue are the first to declare their intentions but they won’t be the last.  It’s notable that all of the US LCC’s are earning good profits and increasing their revenue base (with the exception of Virgin America who has yet to earn a profit).  That makes for a warchest and with their sizes approaching a critical mass, they can afford to take on more and more legacy airlines.

Airtran did it in Atlanta.  jetBlue did it at JFK airport, Southwest did it in Denver and now it’s happening at Washington Reagan National.   It’s going to happen at more and more airports too. 

One alternative defense might be for more and more legacy airlines to strike deals with LCC carriers and offer them some success but access they can control as opposed to an all out fight that results in legacy airlines bleeding red with losses. 

Look for more airlines to declare their intentions and justify those intentions with their current earnings and revenue growth.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

As part of the deal to allow Continental and United Airlines merge, the two airlines will be required to open up some space at Newark Liberty International Airport and guess who’s leasing the take-off and landing spots?

Southwest Airlines. 

I think this is smart of ContiUnited.  They could have found any number of airlines that would be acceptable to the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation but that would mean allowing an airline with potentially even lower costs gaining a foothold.

Instead, they did a deal with an airline that, on some level, allows them to compete.  Both airlines have experience competing with Southwest in various markets and both have managed to co-exist with Southwest without being driven out of markets.   In other words, I think they realized the devil they knew was a whole lot better than the devils they don’t. 

For Southwest, I think this is great.  They get enough slots to do 18 daily roundtrips from an airport that arguably is more convenient to Manhattan and they get to build on their operations in the area by operating from 2 of the 3 major airports in the NYC area.  (3 of 4 if you count Long Island’s Islip airport.)

No announcement was made on what flights SWA might operate from Newark but I have a few guesses.  They could connect to Dulles or Baltimore’s BWI for one.  I’m sure we’ll see some flights between Chicago’s Midway and Newark.  I wouldn’t be too surprised to see a flight or 3 to Houston, believe it or not. 

One thing is for sure, they won’t be flights on leisure routes.

When they’re able to, I would expect a few flights from the NYC to Dallas area and Newark would be a great airport operate those flights to and from.  In the meantime, I would not be one bit surprised to see SWA re-jigger their route system to offer a few one-stop flights between the two cities.   St. Louis or Kansas City could be choices for that.

Why do they only give up slots in Newark?  Continental and United have very little route overlap and the one airport that the two had dominance at was Newark.  Actually, Continental had overwhelming dominance at Newark but when you added in United’s flights to major markets, it crossed the line.  This is good news for ContiUnited and expect their merger to close in late November or early December pending approval from a few other agencies.

In the meantime, someone please hand Senator Oberstar from Minnesota a roll of Tums, please.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

The Southwest Airlines Flight Attendants say that they don’t want to obstruct SWA from getting a larger 737 at all in response to speculation that this internal debate at SWA went public in order to force the hands of the Flight Attendants union. 

Instead, they simply point out that adding another aircraft, according to their current agreement, opens that same agreement up to renegotiation on issues such as pay and working conditions. 

Huh?

I don’t see any reassurances that they are for or against this still.  Instead, I see language that I would interpret to mean that they see an opportunity to renegotiate their contract earlier than the first date it becomes amendable.  It would appear that this remains a potential obstruction, to me anyway.  At the least, it appears opportunistic.

One thing to come out last year during SWA’s attempt to purchase Frontier as well as during its controversy on codeshares with WestJet and Volaris was that SWA employees wanted to see more flying ( and more employment opportunities as a result of that additional flying) on their metal, not another company’s.

This addition to the fleet of the 737-800 does just that for the Flight Attendants with absolutely no change in their working conditions on a per person basis. 

That would lead me to believe that SWA Flight Attendants do, in fact, present a possible obstacle to the addition of a new 737 type to their fleet.  And until they speak more clearly on their intent, I think they continue to present the most risk to this decision.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

American Airlines is introducing a new fee.  This time, a fee from $19 to $39 can you get you a seat up front in coach including bulkhead seats and it will allow you “group 1” boarding. 

Personally, I’m all for offering more varied product on aircraft.  That’s the one development among “debundling” that I am in favor of.  However, please offer me something of real value.  Frontier gets it.  United gets it.  Airtran gets it.  Even Southwest Airlines gets it. 

AA doesn’t get it.  A seat that has no more pitch or other benefits except that it is “up front” and I can potentially board earlier (and sit in an uncomfortable seat longer before take-off) isn’t more value.  If the seat comfort isn’t going to change, do I really care if it’s up front or in the back?  Well, maybe I do if I’m on a cranky old MD-80.  Does it afford me more opportunity for overhead space?  No, not really.  Despite reports to the contrary, it’s just not that hard to find overhead space.  Sure, the bins are more crowded but you can still access them. 

If anything, it’s the jokers who put their luggage up front and then take their seat in back that annoy me.

But I’ll gladly pay for more seat pitch and a generally more comfortable seat.  I’d gladly pay $20 / segment to gain 2 more inches of pitch alone.  And I can already get that on an airline of my choice in most cases.  For the prices AA is offering for this “service” you can more often than not get an Airtran business class upgrade.  You can get more seat pitch and more service on Frontier.  You can get more seat space on jetBlue.  Southwest Airlines’ fee for priority boarding affords me a real opportunity to choose one of the best seats in a 737 for a cheaper price and you can bet I’ll have bin space on the SWA flight no matter what since they aren’t fools and charge exorbitant fees for baggage checking.

Perhaps this might have some appeal to a business traveler but I don’t think such a fee is going to be reimbursed as an expense.  That certainly wouldn’t fly at my company, a major aerospace and defense firm. 

How about a $25 fee that A) gets you a exit aisle seat and B) *guarantees* your checked luggage arrives with you?  That might be particularly attractive to AA flyers.

At the end of the day, for any traveler except the most extravagant, it’s money that can be better spent elsewhere.  And if you are that extravagant, you’re probably getting an upgrade to first class anyway.

Filed under: Airline Fees, Airline News, Airline Seating by ajax
No Comments »

Southwest Airlines admits it is considering adding a bigger 737 to its fleet and its the 737-800 that it is interested in.  The 737-800 would give the airline more revenue opportunity used in and out of airports that have slot restrictions such as La Guardia or on routes with ever increasing density but where frequency isn’t justified.

Current SWA aircraft, the 737-300 and 737-700 carry 137 passengers and a 737-800 would probably carry about 175 people in a Southwest configuration.  That’s an additional a potential increase of 38 passengers for those critical routes with costs that wouldn’t be all that much more than their current costs.  A little bit more fuel and an additional flight attendant is all that is really required.  That spells more profit.

And I like the idea.  Frankly, I think Southwest could stand to add all 3 models of 737 to their fleet and I think they ought to seriously examine the potential of Hawaii and trans-continental flights.  But, then, I also think they could stand to look at smaller aircraft for regional routes with high frequency too.  It’s going to be the only way they can continue growth in the future.

However, don’t go thinking you’re going to see a 737-800 in SWA colours next year either.  Southwest likes to mull decisions like this for quite a while and it would require negotiating amendments to their union contracts with the pilots and flight attendants at minimum. 

Take note here, SWA pilots and FA’s, here is your chance to be industry game changers again.  Pilots, you shouldn’t ask for a dime more to fly these aircraft.  They require no extra effort on your part and it keeps the flying in your house, not SWA codeshare partners’.  Flight Attendants, the same goes for you.  The passenger count per flight attendant actually *drops* by two passengers with these aircraft.  Be game players and make this happen.  It costs neither union anything to make this work and most likely will add profitability to the company as well as future stability to your jobs. 

This really is win-win.  Get greedy and it is the beginning of a long end to SWA.

If SWA does adopt this idea, expect aircraft in the fleet 12 to 24 months after the decision is announced.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

Southwest Airlines’ CEO, Gary Kelly, claims they have managed to shift $1billion in revenue away from the rest of the industry as a result of their bag fee policy, often from leisure travelers.  Their Q2 results show revenue up by $1billion compared to the previous year and while not all of that is from a shift in choice by customers, that’s a powerful number. 

It does prove that people are paying attention to those fees and I think over time people will become more and more sophisticated in making a choice based on those fees.  It really offers SWA three advantages.  First, it makes them more competitive against legacy carriers in many instances.  Second, SWA doesn’t incur the ill will of customers by charging those fees.  Third, it is getting people to try Southwest and discover that it really isn’t the “bus” it used to be when it comes to air travel.

Even my own mother had certain long standing prejudices against them based on experiences more than two decades old.  Recently, she’s tried them again and discovered that not only is the service product pleasant, Southwest has some of the most generous economy seating available today.  That discovery has found her searching out SWA fares to destinations more and more instead of her general choice (Delta Airlines.)  How many other people are making that discovery and changing buying habits?

Yes, people remain angry over these charges but they’re also becoming smarter about their choices and that doesn’t bode well for legacy airlines.

Yes, Southwest may be capturing more of the least profitable passengers to fill their aircraft.  In fact, one look at Southwest’s load factors tells us they’re doing just that.  Given a choice between retaining a business class traveler and a leisure traveler, most legacy airlines are going to try to preserve the former.  However, when their load factors begin to drop and SWA’s doesn’t, there will be yet another new signal for these carriers that the bag fees may be doing more long term damage than is worth the near term gain.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

The Arizona Daily Star has THIS story about Southwest Airlines modifying their contract of carriage to state that mechanicals causing delays are now acts of God.  Southwest now says that mechanicals causing delays are beyond their control. 

Yeah, I don’t think so.  And I don’t think a court would either. 

Southwest says they made the change to limit their liability and fall more within industry standards of practice.  The problem is, a review by the Daily Star of the contracts of carriage for the 4 other major airlines (American Airlines, Delta Airlines, Continental Airlines and United  Airlines), none have such a clause.

Further, Southwest also says they don’t intend to change their current practices.

When Southwest was consulted again, it said this revised contract of carriage section was to cover “airport” mechanicals and such that were beyond their control.  The problem is, that limitation isn’t in the contract and its vague wording seems to cover all mechanicals.  Regardless, an airport mechanical (jetway failing, etc) isn’t an act of God either.   Southwest has made a post on their own blog clarifying this issue.  You can read it HERE.

I can see other major airlines adopting this practice very quickly.  It’s attractive and certainly has possibilities when it comes to refusing responsibility to customers that they already enjoy with weather events. 

But is it right?  If I’m driving to the airport and suffer a flat tire that makes me late and I miss my flight, I’m pretty sure the airline isn’t going to see that as an act of God.   They may or may not choose to help me out but they aren’t going to see this as a contractual obligation to accomodate me. 

It is wrong for airlines to continue down this path of treating customers as an inconvenience to their business.  Regardless of the fare paid, there are obligations on the part of the airline and one of them is to keep their equipment in good working order and be capable of making repairs when something does go wrong in a timely manner.  Mechanicals aren’t an act of God and shame on Southwest for doing this particularly in light of their run-ins with the FAA over their maintenance practices over the past 3 years.

Is a flight that crashes because a mechanic didn’t perform the proper maintenance on a hydraulics system an act of God?  No.  And no court will see it that way either.

But you know what, folks?  This abuse will not be reigned in until you voice your objections.  I get to do so here (and based on the various domains referring traffic to this site, I can count at least 7 major airlines that have readers) but you need to do so with both your voice and wallet. 

Just to make it a little bit easier for you, here is Southwest’s customer service phone number and email:

Phone:  1-800-I-FLY-SWA
email: Go Here.

Just to put my money where my mouth is, I’ve made a complaint via the email form myself.  Go ahead, it took me 2 minutes to fill out it out and express dissatisfaction and it’s worth making your opinion known.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

One thing coming out of the 2nd Quarter financials from several airlines is, once again, just how much baggage fees are adding to revenues and, more importantly, profit.  United President John Tague is expecting that this kind of ancillary fee could soon be adding a billion dollars more to revenue and that is from its current levels of $350 to $400 million.

Like them or not, those numbers are hard to ignore. 

It does make me wonder how Southwest Airlines will continue to defend its no baggage fees approach going forward.  Load factors on airlines are at astonishingly high levels and that means that Southwest isn’t necessarily siphoning off customers from airlines with those fees.

Filed under: Airline Fees, Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

and I don’t care.  The customer was flying standby and even if you’ve boarded, you are subject to the whims of anything when you fly standby.  Don’t want to be subject to that?  Don’t fly standby.

Here is the STORY on the Consumerist blog. 

I don’t care if it was a 14 year old fat kid or a 44 year old giant of a man.  Southwest shouldn’t be apologizing for removing a standby passenger from their flight regardless of their frequent flier status or “normal” procedures.  My opinion would be different if this person wasn’t flying standby, yes, but that isn’t the case here.  In fact, this strikes me as one more spoiled frequent flier lashing out because they didn’t get what they want.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

I like to watch the fare prices on various routes that I fly from time to time but none more so than the Dallas to Milwaukee run.  To me, it’s an example of what real competition can do and I’ve written about it before.  You can read my earlier post HERE.

Well, I took some time to see what was going on with that route now by sample fares and flights for mid-week departures between the two cities in August.  First, the good news:  Fares are holding steady at or about $170 for advance purchase tickets. 

Second, the better news:  Airtran is using the Boeing 717 on that route already.  No SkyWest CRJ-200 regional jets, we get the real Airtran on a real aircraft that is really pretty comfortable.  I figured Airtran would move in with the larger aircraft if only to put pressure on Midwest Express.

Now some bad news:  Airtran is only flying an early morning and late afternoon flight on the DFW to MKE run.  It’s worse on the MKE to DFW segment with a plain morning departure and late evening departure.  I’m guessing it’s the best they can do for now but they’re going to need at least one more flight to make that really work.  Their current offering via Atlanta is *not* what I meant by needing another flight either.

Midwest  aka Frontier aka Republic is hanging in there.  They have 3 flights using the E-170 Embraer jets and that’s really not a bad aircraft for that route.  With 2×2 seating and a bit bigger cabin, it works for what is essentially a long and thin domestic route.  Well, long-ish anyway.  The bad news is that Midwest  aka Frontier aka Republic has its first flight on the DFW-MKE run after 10am in the morning.  That’s about 2 hours later than necessary.

American Eagle is hanging in there.  This is a route that used to often cost as much as $300 round trip just 3 years ago and that was the best fare you could get.  Often the only tickets to be had were in excess of $500 and the only choice you had was to fly to Chicago and take the bus if you wanted to save money.   But here is the interesting part:  American Eagle has its 5 flights a day and I will say they’re well laid out in terms of departure and arrival times.  However, American Eagle is now using the CRJ700 on 3 of those five flights (the remaining two use the clapped out ERJ-140)  and their fares are as competive as anyone’s. 

And then there is Southwest.  Southwest’s cheapest fares are competitive with everyone else’s and continue to be one-stop flights with no plane changes.   Those flights are now running about 3 hours, 25 minutes however and that’s a bit longer than they were taking earlier this year.   The non-stop flights of the other airlines are doing it in 2 hours, 20 minutes.   Still, they are the bargain choice for 2 reasons.  First, Love Field is cheaper to fly from for more people in the DFW area in that its taxes and fees are slightly cheaper and the travel to Love Field and parking at Love Field is cheaper too.  Second, Southwest still isn’t charging for baggage.  That means for someone checking a bag, the savings could range from $35 to nearly $80 and that’s real savings. 

In practical terms, for me as a passenger to that destination, I probably could save as much as $50 each way in “real” savings by using Southwest.  And I’d do it in the aircraft that had the *most* seat pitch of those serving the routes.  That’s worth the extra hour of transit time on a leisure flight and might just be worth it on a business flight too. Why?  Because my door to door time in the Dallas area is likely to be about the same using Love Field or DFW.  I don’t have to drive as far to Love Field airport, take as long to park and/or transit into the terminal, check in quite as early or frenetically and that amounts to probably as much as an hour gained making the trip from the door of my house to the door of my family’s homes in the MKE area about the same no matter which airport and airline I take. 

But I can save about $100 round trip if I’m flying with checked baggage and that’s a deal. 

If Airtran wants to win Miwaukee, this is an important route for them to succeed on.  They’ve got the right equipment for the route now but they’re going to have to work on their frequencies and departure times a bit to really win.  Right now, their schedule looks like a compromise.

Midwest is probably continuing to do well but let’s see how they do when the brand changes to Frontier.  I’m not saying they’re out of the game.  To the contrary, this whole competition thing on this route could end up being Midwest/Frontier and American Eagle again in a year or two.  Midwest has good frequencies, good flight times (mostly) and good service.   However, Southwest will win this route, I think, when they can start flying it non-stop But that opportunity is still 3 1/2 years away.

Filed under: Airline Fees, Airline Fleets, Airline Service by ajax
No Comments »

As an owner of an iPhone, I’ve become very interested in web sites developed specifically for the smart phone users and even more interested in travel related apps as well as travel specific mobile websites.  As much as social networking is becoming important for airlines, I think having a mobile website is even more important.  

It’s kind of cool to be able to complain by Twitter or some other social networking media but the busy traveler is even better served by being able to access his airline of choice via a mobile website.  I may be wrong but I believe that Continental Airlines had one of the first mobile websites available and that comes as little surprise to me given their popularity with the business traveler.  

I wrote about that Continental website more than a year ago.  Since then, a number of airlines and travel related websites have now also gone mobile.  Now that we have a quorum of companies participating, I’ve added a new section of links titled, oddly enough, Mobile Sites. 

It isn’t comprehensive but it is a good slice of what we in the United States would use.  Interestingly enough, I think many of these sites were rolled out with little or no fanfare and that seems strange to me. 

Midwest Airlines has a site but Frontier, it’s sister airline under Republic Airways, does not.  That doesn’t surprise me as I think Midwest Airlines was doing a much better job than many when it comes to technology and social networking.  I do hope that that feature will be adopted over to Frontier in the near future. 

Virgin America doesn’t have one either and I think I know why.  Those folks have used an excessive amount of Flash programming on their sites and that won’t fly on many mobiles including the iPhone.  For a company that has positioned itself in the way Virgin America has, I think this is bad for the airline.  (Just like I think opening new routes to leisure destinations is bad, too.)  Virgin was an early adopter of GoGo Wireless and has its “Red” system onboard for entertainment and food/beverage ordering.  They don’t, however, appear to be embracing social networking or mobile apps yet.   It is an area that a young, agile airline should be leading in.

Are you listening Mr. Cush?  You need someone working on this as of last year!

The various sites available are robust in some cases and some offer pretty limited capability.  I expect that that playing field will level out over time and result in a reasonably consistent group of offerings. 

Quite a few airlines have offered iPhone apps and I do hope to talk about those in the future sometimes but they’re only relevant to the iPhone and while it is an amazingly popular phone, the Blackberry is the businesman’s mobile phone still. 

Web sites that are mobile capable are the way to go both because it serves the busy person with a smart phone but also because it delivers a consistent look and feel to customers who may move from, say, a Blackberry to an iPhone or an Android based smartphone to a Blackberry.   Apps, on the other hand, are either phone or phone OS specific and that means maintaining a growing collection of software. 

I’ve added a couple of flight services mobile sites as well.  Each works from OK to good and, again, I think these will be updated to offer more functionality over time.  They’re all linked on the FlyingColors blog but fair warning:  a few don’t launch to the mobile site unless you’re browsing from a mobile smartphone. 

Got an app you like or another mobile site I haven’t found?  Offer it up in the comments section and I’ll add it along with the others.

Update:  Virgin America has dumped Flash from its site and is apparently working on a mobile site to be rolled out this year.  See this PC World story.  That’s good but they’re still behind the curve on mobile sites and, from what I can tell, social networking as well.  So much for being a hip airline.

Filed under: Airline Service, Travel Hints by ajax
1 Comment »

And, no, jetBlue isn’t buying the 737.  I’ve found three interesting items to comment on involving the 737 and jetBlue and New York city separately.

First, Southwest Airlines COO and Exec VP Mike Van de Ven has made a statement that re-engined aircraft whether they are a 737 or A320 won’t offer enough improved performance to be attractive to Southwest.   And I think there is a message here, particularly to Boeing, about what SWA wants and may be willing to buy.  Southwest is a huge customer  for Boeing on the 737 and Southwest is just the kind of customer Boeing wants to kick-off with.  

I think Southwest wants a new 737 replacement from Boeing and I think they’re signaling that they would be willing to become the launch customer for the right aircraft.  COO Van de Ven said: 

“I believe that a new narrowbody aircraft will produce one of the single most significant steps toward meeting our economic challenges.”

If nothing else, it’s a message to Boeing saying “please don’t re-warm the 737 again, we need you to work on a new replacement and deliver that as soon as possible.”

The Fort Worth Star Telegram Sky Talk blog has THIS story about the DFW Airport Board and its recent retreat.  It’s notable that they mention that they’re trying to use incentives to get jetBlue to start service between DFW and Boston.  Currently, American Airlines is the only non-stop airline on that route and, no, the fares are not cheap.  Frankly, I don’t think jetBlue will cooperate given their recently announced interline agreement and slot swap with AA.

However, this points up my chief rant about my home town area.  We do not have enough competition at DFW airport and I believe that AA is challengeable on both  fares and service.   Delta has begun challenging American on the Chicago – NYC (La Guardia) route and American is responding, currently, with triple air miles awards to retain its customers. 

More significant is that Delta has decided to go head to head with American on a route that American has *owned* for decades.  The big worry is about mergers and reduced competition they might create in the US market.  To the contrary, I think the latest round of mergers is going to lead to 4 legacy carriers who are going to start looking at each other’s dominance at various airports and, in particular, who isn’t making money and cannot afford to indefinitely “buy” routes with low fares.

That would be American Airlines.  US Airways is a bit weak in its route system but they earn profits.  AA doesn’t and hasn’t in a long time.  Delta’s incursion on the NYC-Chicago route is novel and it may or may not work but Delta has enough financial staying power to sit on that effort for a long time in hopes of building the business.   What happens when someone like ContiUnited comes along decides that AA shouldn’t own DFW-LAX?  I think we’re going to see plenty of competition in the airline world.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

Southwest Airlines discovered dozens of human heads being shipped by someone at their Little Rock, Arkansas operation and seized them.  Southwest contacted local authorities, including the county coroner who are investigating.  The heads were being shipped to a local firm in the DFW area.  You can read the MSNBC.Com story HERE. 

I can only imagine the reaction of the cargo handlers when they discovered what was in the package(s).

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

CEO David Cush of Virgin America made statements this week saying that he was the latest wave of consolidation as an opportunity to preserve and even extend competition on the government’s part.  Cush noted that the obstacles to a new airline entering a market are A) gate space B) landing and take-off slots and C) frequent flier programs. 

It is notable that Virgin America has been essentially shut out of routes that it not only wants to fly but which it was designed to fly.  These are trans-continental routes to destinations such as Chicago and Newark. 

He states that VA’s position is that those landing slots are public assets and greater access to them is good for everyone.

I couldn’t agree more and I’ve said so before.  Allowing dominance at gateway and/or hub cities is a bad idea.  There should always be a mechanism for a new airline to enter a market if only to offer a toehold opportunity.   I’ve supported seaonal auctions for those slots at slot controlled airports and I believe airports could do a far better job of allocating assets such as gate space too.

However, I also take note that Virgin America has so far avoided any opportunities at destinations that are dominated by one airline and, in particular, dominated by American Airlines.  (Cush is a former AA executive.)  I would point out that VA could be flying routes from California to Dallas, for instance and they have so far studiously avoided that and instead chose to explore options like California – Florida (a notoriously low yield set of routes). 

An Dallas isn’t the only place.  VA has had opportunity to fly to Chicago but has refused to enter the market because the gate space that is available is less than perfect.   Another opportunity might be California – St. Louis:  there are huge aerospace and defense industries with ties to each other in both locations.  It’s also notable that, again, St. Louis is an AA and SWA city. 

I would love to see middle America experience an airline like Virgin America or jetBlue.  I think it contains some greatly overlooked opportunities.  There couldn’t be a better time to explore those opportunities while legacy airlines are otherwise occupied in managing cash and stemming losses. 

Yes, let’s open the markets up.  However, if you’re going to talk to the talk, please walk the walk.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

On Tuesday of this past week, several aircraft had to divert to the local airport in Pueblo, Colorado because of weather over Denver.  On one flight, the Southwest crew decided to order pizza for their passengers who ultimately had a 4 hour wait in the aircraft.  You can read more HERE.  Not only was it a smart thing to do to defuse any passenger tensions (food keeps people calmer), it was worth it for the news exposure alone.   It’s nice to see an airline’s crew just do good.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

Southwest Airlines reports that it flew slightly less passengers than this time last year but managed to earn 18 to 19% more in revenue for each mile a passenger flew.  In other words, Southwest is doing better due to higher fares and fees. 

But wait, Southwest doesn’t charge bag fees, right?  Well, it charges $50 for the third bag and it does have additional fees for extra services such as priority boarding. 

Southwest saw just a 0.6% decrease in the number of passengers which is way less than most airlines.  It saw a considerably higher amount of revenue which is way better than most airlines.   It would appear that their strategy of no bag fees may in fact be working very well for them.  It’s time for legacy airlines to quit saying they see no evidence that their passenger counts are eroding.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

One story coming out this week is about comments from WestJet executive John McCleod stating that WestJet would still like to get a deal done with Southwest on codesharing.  Southwest terminated their original agreement a few weeks ago after WestJet supposedly asked for modifications that were untenable to Southwest and after WestJet’s new CEO, Greg Saretsky, indicated his preference for doing a codeshare with Delta.   What muddied the waters even more was a comment last week from Richard Andersen of Delta during a financial analyst call about how they had executed a codeshare agreement with WestJet which was then “clarified” by Delta PR people.  Delta PR people said they did not, in fact, have an agreement in place.

This sounds like a romance drama my 15 year old daughter would get caught up in.

I never thought WestJet’s moves over the past month made sense.  It felt like WestJet considered itself bigger than it was and more of a player than it was.  Let’s remember that WestJet is a Canadian airline operating in the Southwest LCC model.  And even though it is Canada’s second largest airline, that ain’t saying much when you consider the population of Canada and the size of Air Canada as compared to airlines in the US.   Canada is a country of 34 million people or roughly 1/10th of the population of the United States. 

Southwest’s home state of Texas has a population of 24 million people. 

Southwest, on the other hand, would be considered a major player on any continent.  They carry a lot of people every day and they do it with high marks for service, reliability and value.  And they’ve done it for nearly 40 years.  They are also not complete strangers to codeshares and we have already seen what a life-giving experience it is for Southwest to participate in a codeshare with an airline.  As an airline, they are definitely not participating in their first rodeo.  They make their mistakes but they are definitely a world class competitor too.

I can only imagine that Delta (and the rest of SkyTeam) look at WestJet and wonder when it will grow up enough to have the training wheels removed from its bicycle.  They play Texas Hold ‘Em poker for high stakes in the airline world and it’s kind of hard to believe that WestJet really thought they would be taken seriously by the likes of Delta, the world’s largest airline by any metric.

Could Southwest do a deal with them still?  Yes, I think so.  Southwest is friendly, a great place to work and it treats its staff well.  It doesn’t like to be taken advantage of but the people running Southwest are businessmen and businesswomen at the end of the day.  A deal still provides both partners with something good.  But WestJet is going to have to decide who it wants to be a bride to and stick with it.  I’d say the signal was sent but it wasn’t exactly loud enough or specific enough.  I expect another overture by WestJet before Southwest turns its attention back to WestJet.

Filed under: Airline News, Airlines Alliances by ajax
No Comments »