|
November 3, 2009 on 1:15 pm | In Airline News | No Comments
In the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Continental President Jeff Smisek was quotes as saying that Continental may re-visit the idea of merging with United Airlines in the future. The story can be read HERE.
Continental has experienced a rather rough dip in unit revenues over the past year even compared to other US legacy airlines. The airline was much more devoted to the business traveler (particularly in the international segment) and the decline in business travel has hurt it more than some other airlines. A merger with another airline could help Continental diversify its revenue sources and experience synergies much like the Delta/Northwest merger appears to be providing that mating. To date, Delta / Northwest has not been profitable but it does appear to be weathering the economic recession in the airline industry quite well and its new found flexibility with both equipment and passengers seems to have benefited the airline.
However, I didn’t like the idea of Continental merging with United in 2008 and I don’t like it now. United is saddled with a lot of debt, an angry labor pool and aging aircraft. Continental, on the other hand, is much the opposite. While Continental has a well trained management corps and their own employees are much happier, I don’t see what United brings to the table that they can’t already develop on their own over time. The Denver hub would be of little value to Continental and is already a battleground between two LCC carriers and United. United does have the better system over the Pacific but lacks the aircraft to modernize it while Continental has the better product for Pacific travel, it doesn’t have the spare equipment to spruce up those routes to compete against the likes of Delta/Northwest.
To me, it seems that Continental would benefit more from smaller, more tactical mergers that dovetail more closely with their service and aircraft fleet. Alaska Airlines is one partner that, in my opinion, would be an excellent fit for Continental. It would give them an West Coast route structure, a fleet that meshes (mostly) with Continental’s, an employee group already accustomed to be treated well and a management corps that is doing remarkably well and which could augment Continental’s own management leadership nicely. Even more important, Alaska Airlines is profitable at present.
The next best strategy for Continental is to start planning for the future. They have a number of new long haul aircraft due over the next 4 years and despite how everyone feels in the airline world, this recession will be over someday in the future. Continental could capitalize on their strengths and aircraft fleet by targeting United Airlines and its Pacific destinations for 2011 or 2012. By selectively targeting United and US Airways, Continental could fair very well without taking on all the baggage any other legacy airline has to offer it.
Joining up with United Airlines really doesn’t offer Continental much that it can’t already achieve except the Chicago hub for both domestic and international flying. Continental’s Cleveland hub is a very distant second to United’s Chicago but I wonder if having that kind of market dominance in Chicago is worth the trouble of bad labor relations, old aircraft fleets and a group of executives that have shown themselves to be mediocre in everything they execute. In fact, by joining the Star Alliance, I suspect that Continental will reap almost as much benefit with little trouble.
Continental’s new home in the Star Alliance is interesting to me in that Continental’s product seems to much more closely match that of other Star Alliance partners (Lufthansa, Singapore Airlines, Thai, Air Canada, Air New Zealand) than either existing US based Star Alliance member aka United Airlines and US Airways. I suspect that member airlines will be quite willing to book more traffic on Continental for US domestic destinations than on United or US Airways. If anything, US Airways becomes the odd man out and should begin considering finding a new home. I’d suggest OneWorld. Nonetheless, I’ll be monitoring Continental’s experiences in the Star Alliance for the next year as I do think it’ll make a positive difference in their fortunes.
Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »
April 23, 2009 on 4:58 pm | In Airline News, Airline Service | 2 Comments
USA Today’s Today in the Sky Blog is reporting that Alaska Airlines has announced that it will begin charging a 1st bag checked fee on July 7th. This announcement comes after reporting more losses for this past quarter.
I remain adamantly against the 1st bag checked fees being charged but must admit that if an airline was going to do one, it should do one in the manner of Alaska Airlines. Alaska Airlines is going to offer a guarantee that your bag will be at the carousel within 25 minutes of arrival or you receive $25 or 2500 frequent flier points.
This allows Alaska Airlines to compete better against legacy airlines by bringing their bag fees inline with the rest of them but offer greater value in the process. This is a guarantee that I suspect will net a real response for Alaska. No other bag check fee offers such a guarantee at present. To the contrary, all other airlines charging such fees continue to do so in light of rather severe delays and losses for baggage.
This addition also finds Southwest Airlines, last of the real majors and borderline legacy airline, the lone standout for baggage fees. Gary Kelly, CEO of SWA, was even badgered by financial analysts during a recent conference call to discuss the most recent quarterly reports to consider adding such fees. Kelly has steadfastly refused so far claiming that Southwest sees this move as being a strong negative among its customer base. I actually agree since their customers remain some of the most price sensitive in the market.
It also stands in contrast to Delta Airlines’ recent announcement of a $50 first bag checked fee for international flights. A move that I predict will ultimately be rescinded due to competition from both US and foreign based international carriers.
The question is whether or not other airlines currently charging such fees will be willing to offer similar guarantees. Since so few compete with Alaska Airlines right now, I suspect it will be resisted as competition. However, I also believe that one or more legacy airlines in the US will now begin considering the introduction of such a guarantee in order to bolster their position against their competitors. My pick? Delta Airlines or Continental Airlines.
Delta has an executive team that is well aware that the a la carte pricing model is successful but they are also the most cognizant of presenting real value for their product. Continental Airlines could steal a lot of press and thunder by making such a guarantee and it would also align them more close to Alaska Airlines, an existing Continental code share partner.
Filed under: Airline News, Airline Service by ajax
2 Comments »
February 7, 2009 on 12:32 pm | In Airline News, Airline Service | 1 Comment
USA Today’s Today in the Sky Blog is reporting that Richard Branson, billionaire backer of V Australia (Virgin Blue) as well as Virgina Atlantic, Virgin America and Virgin Nigera has pronounced that one of the new or future competitors on the US – Australia routes will have to drop out. I myself predicted someone would have to fall out in this post HERE. The difference is that I predicted it would be United or V Australia.
I agree that United Airlines is probably the most vulnerable on this route system but even United has something that V Australia doesn’t and that’s a network feed. United can route its considerable network to flights departing for final destinations in Australia and that’s tapping a country (the United States) with a population of over 300 million.
V Australia, on the other hand, does have the network feed from Virgin Blue but it pales in comparison to QANTAS and it has no firm partners in the United States at present. (I don’t count a very weak agreement to sell seats on Alaska Airlines from Los Angeles to Seattle.) Even if V Australia entered into an agreement with its US cousin, Virgin America, it still isn’t tapping into a major network. Virgin America can feed some traffic from major cities and that’s good but those major cities (New York, Bostin, San Francisco) are exactly where their competitor may be strongest. United has the San Francisco market, QANTAS and Delta has both NYC and Boston covered.
QANTAS also has the powerful OneWorld alliance to help as well. Airlines such as American Airlines help feed it traffic from their networks to destinations in Australia. V Australia has no such alliance or even a single dominant partner. Delta, on the other hand, has never flown to Australia but has a huge network in the United States, modern equipment to fly to Australia and a will to do so.
After 2 to 5 years, I would expect QANTAS and Delta to be the dominant airlines on these routes and potentially the only airlines. I agree that United may well be the first to go but I don’t think V Australia has that much greater a chance of sticking out to success.
Filed under: Airline News, Airline Service by ajax
1 Comment »
January 9, 2009 on 10:00 am | In Airline News, Travel Hints | No Comments
Maybe. News media yesterday and today have been full of stories about various airline fare sales. A friend of mine managed to book a business class fare from Raleigh/Durham to NYC for just over $100. He also booked two round trip tickets on Airtran to Las Vegas (for travel in May) for just $198 / ticket. American Airlines has sent me not one but two emails in the last 24 hours advertising fares as low as $39 / each way.
Reading over the AA email, that low price of $39 each way is to fly from DFW to Tulsa. I’m pretty sure that is a fairly small market but let’s give them credit for drawing us in to read the email. Here is a sample of some of there other teasers:
- Chicago to Detroit: $43
- San Jose to San Diego: $49
- Boston to NYC (LGA): $59
- Chicago to Kansas City: $63
- Dallas to New Orleans: $64
- Chicago to Orlando: $78
- Washington D.C. to Miami: $101
- Atlanta to Dallas: $104
Now, all of these fares are one-way based on round-trip purchase. I’m sure that most of the other airlines are advertising similar fares on similar routes with similar restrictions. The part that interests me is that some of those fares AA is advertising are primarily business routes (DFW to TUL, ORD to DET, ORD to MCI) and those aren’t customarily the routes you discount that much. Some of the others are to leisure destinations and that makes a bit more sense.
When there is a fare sale, I like to price DFW to PDX (Portland) because American Airlines dominates this route with non-stops and has exceptionally high fares for those flights. If those prices have dropped, then I know they’re hurting. I did so today and AA is proud to offer me a $278 roundtrip (with taxes, $320) which is actually pretty good. A year ago that fare was being offered for over $400. But there is a catch. AA wants me to fly from DFW to LAX, change planes to either Alaska Airlines or Horizon Airlines, and fly to Portland. Transit times range from 7 hours to more than 9 hours. Would I do it for the fare? Perhaps. I’d certainly think about it.
A quick check with Travelocity.Com shows fares for that route at $327 and up and AA advertises the non-stop routing for $378. The $327 fares on Travelocity are those same AA fares I found at AA.Com so the next non-American Airlines best price is actually Continental Airlines for $356 changing planes in Houston and with approximately the same transit times that AA has through LAX.
Would I go? Probably not. Why? Because the cost to me in vacation time, actual flight costs (more than $40 more than the advertised price once I pay taxes) and the sheer agony of spending about 8 hours making the trip just isn’t worth it. What would be worth it? A fare of about $200 to $250 (taxes included) I suspect.
The point of my analysis is that while those fare teasers are interesting and very attractive, they really aren’t all that good for where most of us want to fly in the next 3 to 4 months. If you want to fly from DFW to TUL, you’re set. If you want to fly from DFW to just about anywhere else, the prices really haven’t come down much if at all. These sales are, I suspect, airlines scrambling around and yelling “Look At Me” but without much substance. If I were going to shop for a mid to late spring flight, I’d probably wait a few weeks. The reality of spring / early summer bookings will be more clear to the airlines and then I think you’ll see some real discounting.
Filed under: Airline News, Travel Hints by ajax
No Comments »
January 2, 2009 on 11:57 am | In Airline Fleets, Airline Service, Airports, Death Watch | 2 Comments
It’s always fun to make predictions about the coming year, right? Of course, I may well review my predictions in December of 2009 and decide against doing it again.
Boeing 787:
This aircraft will finally experience its first flight and I believe it will occur on or about its new scheduled time (early April). For Boeing, credibility is now at stake and they really do have to begin meeting deadlines. Financial analysts are becoming too skeptical of the company for comfort and airlines want their airliners. Boeing does have a reputation for being able to pull itself together and get something done in a crisis and that should serve them here.
I also believe we’ll see both static airframes begin their tests and new build airframes begin to flow from Boeing in about 6 months. My prediction? The 787 will prove to be a very capable aircraft and will meet or exceed its performance promises.
Airbus A380:
Airbus met its revised schedule of delivering 12 A380 airliners in 2008 . . . barely. Originally it was scheduled to deliver 13 in 2008 and 25 in 2009. Now Airbus says it will deliver 21 in 2009. However, it is becoming clear that Airbus is now quickly learning how to build these aircraft and turn them out. I predict they’ll exceed their 21 goal in 2009 by at least one aircraft.
Boeing and Airbus:
Both aircraft makers will begin to speak about the future of short to medium haul aircraft again. With milestones for the 787 and A380 being met, I suspect they’ll become more comfortable in speaking of the future of their aircraft lines. Look for discussions on both the 737 and A320 aircraft families and what interim technologies might be employed to improve their performance. I suspect we’ll hear about both weight saving materials being adopted as well as the potential of new incremental improvements on existing engines. Particularly the CFM-56 engines used by both makers.
US Airlines:
First, let’s take a look at my deathwatch candidates. The sudden and precipitous drop of oil prices allowed each of them to take a breather. Midwest Airlines, however, continues to speak little, fly only a little and its investors have got to be running out of patience. I still believe that they’ll ultimately go away. How they do it is the question. Rather than bankruptcy, I believe it will either be a sale or as a subsidiary airline of Delta/Northwest with the latter being most unlikely. Who will they be sold to? Good question. Perhaps Airtran will get what they wished for and develop indigestion.
Frontier continues to muddle along but faces rather intense labor strife still. I think their situation improved not only because oil prices dropped but because United continues to offer some of the worst product in the industry and because Southwest slowed its growth and took a breather. While I firmly believe United will do nothing to improve its product, I do think Southwest will return to its goal of killing Frontier as a Denver competitor some time in the late spring. I suspect Frontier will emerge from bankruptcy this year but I also firmly expect them to be out of business or acquired by December of 2009. Who buys them? I’ll bet on Jet Blue. The aircraft fleets are compatible and Jet Blue has to start building a hub somewhere else in order to continue to experience strong growth. Frontier gives them that chance. The long shot? American Airlines. Why? Because Frontier is working with AMR’s Sabre Reservations system now.
United Airlines, my favorite airline to hate. The Cranky Flier loves to rag on Alitalia and I love to rag on United. United has lost a tremendous amount of value over the last year and continues to have some of the highest hourly costs of any US airline. They’ve done nothing to improve labor relations, their service product or their fleet efficiency. Glenn Tilton is hated by airline pilots but I predict he is goint to be hated by investors before the end of summer. What happens? I’m really not sure. The best thing that could happen is for them to liquidate. However, I think some airline will see some value there and attempt to buy United and make use of its assets. Who? The logical choice is Continental but I believe they’ll hold on to their independent streak. So my next guess is a US Air / United V 2.0 merger will come about. Could it work? I doubt it but Doug Parker (CEO of US Air) wants another merger and United offers hubs he doesn’t have and some aircraft fleet compatibility. I’ll go “all in” and bet that we see a US Air / United Airlines merger announcement by December of 2009.
Moving on from the death watch, let’s look at other US Airlines for a few minutes.
American Airlines will maintain its status quo but will begin to feel pressure to conclude some union contract negotiations this year as financial analysts begin to view their lack of progress less and less favorably. CEO Gerard Arpey will begin to feel the heat but barring a large mistake on his part, will retain his position as CEO. One possibility, however, will be bringing on a potential successor as President of the airline.
Southwest Airlines will also mostly maintain its status quo but I will predict that by late summer its new CEO Gary Kelly will be under fire from both employees and investors for his shotgun approach to growth. It is beginning to look like it is unplanned and what people most value in Southwest is its ability to form and execute a coherent plan. There will be no mergers, no real growth and a sinking stock price by December but I think Mr. Kelly will hold onto his position until 2010 barring a major unforeseen development.
Continental, the best kept secret. Continental will maintain its status quo with, perhaps, very moderate growth in the international sector while it waits to see what happens domestically. They’ll enter the Star Alliance (exiting from SkyTeam) but discover it offers little value to them as well. I don’t think they’ll seek to merge with anyone in the next year but if they did, I’d pick them for going after someone like Alaska Airlines rather than United or US Air.
Stay tuned for Part II.
Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline Service, Airports, Death Watch by ajax
2 Comments »
July 29, 2008 on 2:02 pm | In Airline Fleets | No Comments
The Runway Girl blog just posted this report on SAAB, Embaer and China with respect to the growing demand for turboprops.
It’s *very* interesting to me that Embraer has begun studies on a new family of turboprop aircraft. This is an industry they cut their teeth on and many may still remember their small commuter aircraft from the 80’s and early 90’s.
The report takes note that most demand for turboprop aircraft is currently in Europe and Asia. However, it seems like there will be rising demand here in the US over the next 2 years. Horizon Airlines, the commuter feeder for Alaska Airlines is phasing out its older DH-8-200 aircraft in favor of an all Q400 (really a DH-8-400 Quiet) fleet. Also, Continental now owns several Q400 aircraft (and has orders for more) that are operating out of Newark with great success.
The real demand will begin when legacy airlines who contract with regionals (Mesa, Pinnacle, ASA, ExpressJet, Air Wisconsin, etc) ask for turboprops and better revenue. My guess is that Delta/Northwest will lead here but it might be Continental. American Airlines and United will be followers, not leaders in this if I’m guessing right.
The economics of operating these aircraft on short hops and commuter routes is just too good to ignore and even if oil does drop below $100, it will never be $30 a barrel again.
Filed under: Airline Fleets by ajax
No Comments »
|
|
|