$10 fares, it could get ugly this summer:
http://www.skybus.com/
http://www.skybus.com/
BRACE, BRACE, BRACE!
- Thread starter X-U
- Start date
Don Smith
Veteran
Why would anyone even try to match the $10 fares? Let them sell their 10 seats for $10 Woohoo $100 for 10 people. I dont see CMH as a hotbed for a carrier like this. Even HP couldnt make CMH work as a hub and they were flying to the "real" airports. One or two problems with delays/cancellations and no one taking the $10 tickets endorsed and we'll see what happens. Don't see this one lasting too long.
citrus jock
Advanced
I remember Vanguard, possibly during their start-up phase, selling seats for $1 each between DEN and MCI during the weekend of a Broncos/Chiefs game (fall of 94?). It didn't work then and I don't think this will work now. The cheap tickets gimmick is designed to attract customers enmass and show them what you've got. The problem with this approach comes when "what you've got" is unattractive.
Leaders of business models like this one erroneously think that the cheap ticket price will overcome the operational shortcomings long enough, while the shortcomings are corrected. IOW, they think people will pay for crap, over and over, while things are fixed that should have been fixed before start-up. By the time things are fixed, two things have happened: (1) Most who have flown on them have had such a bad experience(s), they'll never patronize them again; (2) They've told everyone they know about their bad experience(s), and those they've told won't patronize them. At this point, the operation might be a good one. But it can't overcome the image of the product that was, intentionally, put out there for consumption.
One "red flag" for me, that I haven't seen discussed much, is outsourcing all ramp operations. According to the bean counters, this saves $. If SkyBus' plan is like most, it will always want the plane in the air ("It's not making $ when it's on the ground"). What incentive does a contract worker, who's working for the only company that does contract ground handling at the airport you're flying to, have to bust his arse to keep you on schedule or get you back on schedule? What incentive is there for this guy to bust his arse to make sure that late-arriving bag makes the flight? None. He gets paid regardless. So the "leaders" of this airline put into place a system that, by design, has a high probability of not delivering what it promises. If I have a choice between a $10 ticket and a $100 ticket, I'll try the former, until I discover that it doesn't deliver; then I'll go back to the latter.
I don't wish SkyBus any ill will. The airline I work for won't be successful because of someone else's failure. But this just smells bad; it's been done before, and all it does (besides pissing off pax) is cause some airline employees to leave a stable job and home for some "pie in the sky".
Leaders of business models like this one erroneously think that the cheap ticket price will overcome the operational shortcomings long enough, while the shortcomings are corrected. IOW, they think people will pay for crap, over and over, while things are fixed that should have been fixed before start-up. By the time things are fixed, two things have happened: (1) Most who have flown on them have had such a bad experience(s), they'll never patronize them again; (2) They've told everyone they know about their bad experience(s), and those they've told won't patronize them. At this point, the operation might be a good one. But it can't overcome the image of the product that was, intentionally, put out there for consumption.
One "red flag" for me, that I haven't seen discussed much, is outsourcing all ramp operations. According to the bean counters, this saves $. If SkyBus' plan is like most, it will always want the plane in the air ("It's not making $ when it's on the ground"). What incentive does a contract worker, who's working for the only company that does contract ground handling at the airport you're flying to, have to bust his arse to keep you on schedule or get you back on schedule? What incentive is there for this guy to bust his arse to make sure that late-arriving bag makes the flight? None. He gets paid regardless. So the "leaders" of this airline put into place a system that, by design, has a high probability of not delivering what it promises. If I have a choice between a $10 ticket and a $100 ticket, I'll try the former, until I discover that it doesn't deliver; then I'll go back to the latter.
I don't wish SkyBus any ill will. The airline I work for won't be successful because of someone else's failure. But this just smells bad; it's been done before, and all it does (besides pissing off pax) is cause some airline employees to leave a stable job and home for some "pie in the sky".
