urpius pilot
Member
- Aug 9, 2004
- 48
- 0
I think that this shows that Doug Parker was right.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/159993-sou...on?source=yahoo
http://seekingalpha.com/article/159993-sou...on?source=yahoo
Does this show that Mr. Parker & Company is right?
- Thread starter urpius pilot
- Start date
OP
urpius pilot
Member
- Aug 9, 2004
- 48
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #3
No, I think its very pertinent to an often discussed subject on the US Airways board. I think that it reflects positively on Parker and should be here.
Art at ISP
Veteran
I agree that this belongs on the Southwest board, but I could not disagree with Cordle more...as usual. Southwest up until recently was CONSISTENTLY profitable, more so than any other carrier. Their fare structure works as is...there is no need to nickel and dime customers...even now.
The old (read current) business model of the major airlines just do not work any more. But WN's does...when fuel levels off and demand comes back, they will be profitable again, and without many of the fees that the others have instituted. They have a simple fare structure--no more than 3 or 4 choices on the web site, and they have a premium Business Select product which provides some value.
Ancillary fees are an insult to an intelligent consumer. They are misleading, and they hide the true cost of a ticket. The REAL problem is that fares are still artificially too low. There is NO reason for ANY airline to offer $99 fares coast to coast any more--the airline industry is the ONLY one who prices their product without ANY regard for the costs involved in providing that product. That is a fundamental flaw of ANY business model.
If it costs X, you charge X+Y. They are in business to make money, not subsidize air travelers. Sorry, but it is not fair to business travelers who have been subsidizing the itinerant travelers for years.
Fares have to go up, but at the same time the real top end fares have to come down.
Maybe the Air Canada model is better--you choose your fare based on the level of service you want--with ony 4 or 5 fares in a market, the system would be simple, less misleading, and you know what you pay right up front.
The airlines today don't have a clue how to run a business, and the fees are their way of saying "we have no idea how to price our product so we'll just nickel and dime you to death".
Oh, and as to Doug Parker being right about something ?? Nah......not a chance.
The old (read current) business model of the major airlines just do not work any more. But WN's does...when fuel levels off and demand comes back, they will be profitable again, and without many of the fees that the others have instituted. They have a simple fare structure--no more than 3 or 4 choices on the web site, and they have a premium Business Select product which provides some value.
Ancillary fees are an insult to an intelligent consumer. They are misleading, and they hide the true cost of a ticket. The REAL problem is that fares are still artificially too low. There is NO reason for ANY airline to offer $99 fares coast to coast any more--the airline industry is the ONLY one who prices their product without ANY regard for the costs involved in providing that product. That is a fundamental flaw of ANY business model.
If it costs X, you charge X+Y. They are in business to make money, not subsidize air travelers. Sorry, but it is not fair to business travelers who have been subsidizing the itinerant travelers for years.
Fares have to go up, but at the same time the real top end fares have to come down.
Maybe the Air Canada model is better--you choose your fare based on the level of service you want--with ony 4 or 5 fares in a market, the system would be simple, less misleading, and you know what you pay right up front.
The airlines today don't have a clue how to run a business, and the fees are their way of saying "we have no idea how to price our product so we'll just nickel and dime you to death".
Oh, and as to Doug Parker being right about something ?? Nah......not a chance.
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
When Cordle stated that WN has 'trashed the pricing power of the industry' he blew the little credibility he had left in my book.
That article only regurgitates stuff I've read countless times in other publications over the past six months.
Gary Kelly has left the door open to additional fees -- next year. As he should.
Which airline business model would you rather buy (or work for) -- WN or US??
End of discussion.
That article only regurgitates stuff I've read countless times in other publications over the past six months.
Gary Kelly has left the door open to additional fees -- next year. As he should.
Which airline business model would you rather buy (or work for) -- WN or US??
End of discussion.
does this plane go to paris
Senior
There is a Fox Business video with an interview with Gary Kelly. Gary stated during one of the worst economic years, WN has been able to give Employees a raise, is opening new markets, (BOS, MSP, LGA and soon to be MKE) put a bid in for Frontier and is not ruling out a profitable year. They have not released SEP numbers but he alluded to the fact that JUL and AUG had record amounts of PAX. If that is the case then I see a profitable Q3. One so called commentator yesterday applauded WN for having a fare sale but it's not the typical $99 transcon but higher in price. Does this mean that WN realizes that Customers are willing to pay more?
Doug Parker on the other hand is leading the al a carte pricing, ran his elite business away by taking away all incentive to fly First/Envoy. When charging 2 bucks for a soda and no one else followed, Tempe had to admit that it was mistake. Eveyone keeps talking about how much extra money is being brought in by charging to check a bag, but how many people are turned off by the extra fees? Just today they announced they are selling 10 of their 25 E190's. To top it off , CAL announced today that revenue is off and that does not bode well for LCC.
On the LCC forum, the hot topic, besides the pilot and f/a situation has been the merger topic. Every poster keeps hoping for a merger with UAUA as if they are embarrassed by the company they work for. Check out the UA forum and the only mention of a merger is with CO and that weeks ago.
Q3 results for both LCC, WN and for the rest of the inudstry will show who is ready for the winter and if they can survive the long winter with 10% unemployment.
does this plane go to paris
Senior
I'm sooooo tired of flying in those Canadian & Brazillian beer cans and I'm sorry but you can't convince me that cramming people into those beer cans leaves the customer with a positive impression of their legacy carrier when compared to the pristine 737's of WN.
Bob, relief might be in sight.
Mike Boyd is reporting that he see's a decline of capacity through 2010. He is estimating a 10% decline from 2008 levels into 2010. He also stated that airlines are finding the regional agreements to be unproductive and predicts that when airlines make further cuts that smaller cities will be affected.
In MHO, I don't care for the size of most RJ's either but do like the speed of the jet service. I find it a shame that different companies have turned over long haul routes to their feeder system, look at Skywest, their route map out of SLC reminds me of what WA looked liked before they merged with DL.
My final .02 is the marketing aspect. Every tom, dick and harry airline wants to advertise how they fly to 350 different destinations and they can get you from DSM to ATH. Lets say you have a flight problem, ie mechanical, crew, etc and miss your connection, these airlines, that are supposedly one airline in the public/advertising world all of a sudden become 2 different airlines. If you bought a ticket on US Airways from DSM to connect to PHL (just an expample, don't know if they fly the route) and you find a problem, the customer can get yo-yoed around. Just for fun, go to untied.com and read some of the complaints. Customers complain that they buy a ticket on United, fly on Skywest and when problems arise, the Customer Service Departments point the finger at each other.
The DOT adds to problem when they publish their monthly reports. I think that if any mainline carrier wants to advertise they are the best on time out of the big six legacy (which is a stretch to begin with) they should also have to include their so called feeder systems to give a truth in advertising.
Bob, relief might be in sight.
Mike Boyd is reporting that he see's a decline of capacity through 2010. He is estimating a 10% decline from 2008 levels into 2010. He also stated that airlines are finding the regional agreements to be unproductive and predicts that when airlines make further cuts that smaller cities will be affected.
In MHO, I don't care for the size of most RJ's either but do like the speed of the jet service. I find it a shame that different companies have turned over long haul routes to their feeder system, look at Skywest, their route map out of SLC reminds me of what WA looked liked before they merged with DL.
My final .02 is the marketing aspect. Every tom, dick and harry airline wants to advertise how they fly to 350 different destinations and they can get you from DSM to ATH. Lets say you have a flight problem, ie mechanical, crew, etc and miss your connection, these airlines, that are supposedly one airline in the public/advertising world all of a sudden become 2 different airlines. If you bought a ticket on US Airways from DSM to connect to PHL (just an expample, don't know if they fly the route) and you find a problem, the customer can get yo-yoed around. Just for fun, go to untied.com and read some of the complaints. Customers complain that they buy a ticket on United, fly on Skywest and when problems arise, the Customer Service Departments point the finger at each other.
The DOT adds to problem when they publish their monthly reports. I think that if any mainline carrier wants to advertise they are the best on time out of the big six legacy (which is a stretch to begin with) they should also have to include their so called feeder systems to give a truth in advertising.
does this plane go to paris
Senior
Latest NOV data shows LUV increased their traffic the most at an amazing rate of 11.1%. AirTran was close behind at 10.5%. LUV has decreased their capaity by 7.7% and AAI increased capacity by 9.2% All airlines saw an increase in load factor as they have been adjusting capacity and demand, except LCC, they saw flat traffic at -.04%. LUV's load factor increased double figures, 13.3%. I don't put much into LF just because we don't know the average price paid, but LUV also announced that they saw an increase of 12% in revenue.
Contrary to the OP a few months ago, where it was stated that LCC and Parker were right, to the contrary, LUV's latest Q3 results, the"BAGS FLY FREE" campaign and today's results compared to the rest of the industy show once again that LUV has it right in choosing the correct path. Fair fare's, good customer service, no hidden charges. Good job
Contrary to the OP a few months ago, where it was stated that LCC and Parker were right, to the contrary, LUV's latest Q3 results, the"BAGS FLY FREE" campaign and today's results compared to the rest of the industy show once again that LUV has it right in choosing the correct path. Fair fare's, good customer service, no hidden charges. Good job
