First Class Flying: A Solution

[KCFlyer]

Bonus posting -- I've highlighted the most relevant parts.

From BBB's post-filing affadvit:
Notice that he says costs are minor in relation to revenue. That isn't an offhand comment by a internet forum poster. That's an officer of the company in a formal court filing. Regardless of what you or I may think about his competence (or lack thereof) this carries a lot more weight than opinions with no backing whatsoever.

There is some other data somewhere -- I cannot find it right now, but which I alluded to earlier, that puts some brackets around how much revenue 3rd party mileage sales bring in. It was a whole lot of money.

[post="259530"][/post]​

It's under "other income" on the balance sheet, but that includes things outside the DM program, so you really can't get a good idea of the income related to DM. They do mention in the annual report selling miles to other companies.

But I didn't see anything else in the annual report about the revenues generated by the FF plan...only the costs and potential liabilities.

 

[KCFlyer]

Bonus posting -- I've highlighted the most relevant parts.

From BBB's post-filing affadvit:
Notice that he says costs are minor in relation to revenue. That isn't an offhand comment by a internet forum poster. That's an officer of the company in a formal court filing.

[post="259530"][/post]​

Is this the same BBB that prompted THIS signature line:

Loyalty is a One Way Street at 2345 Crystal Drive!

 

[KCFlyer]

Well that does seem to be a somewhat definitive statement doesn't it?

Kinda tends to support what we've been saying doesn't it KC?

Now I suppose we'll here what a putz BBB is and how it can't possibly be true.

Thanks Tom for doing the kinda homework I am loathe to do.

[post="259539"][/post]​

Naw, he's no putz, unless one "oversteps their bounds"...right Piney?

 

[KCFlyer]

Well you are, by refusing to admit you're wrong despite overwhelming anecdotal and now hard evidence contrary to your position.

You can insult me all you want as the evidence in sworn testimony refutes your position as do the World Com BK papers an US's BK#1 paperwork.

You're just wrong and I wish you'd be abult enough to admit it

[post="259548"][/post]​

Bob -here's a deal for you...I'll admit it if you'll admit FFUCOS is all about you. Not how to make US a better airline. Not about the great employees. It's all about Y-O-U. Deal?

 

[JS]

One other thing Tom, my really big issue is that the cockroaches have never answered this - Why is the airline the one responsible for providing you perks in your job?

A cop runs the risk of getting shot every day he goes on his beat.  It's part of his job.  Should he expect Krispy Kreme to comp him donuts?  A solider runs the risk of being away from home for a long time...it's a part of his job.  Should he expect a discount at Walmart for his family for that?  YOu and the other roaches have jobs that require travel - it's a part of your job.  Why is it then that the airline is responsible for providing you the perks to make your job a little more comfortable?  Shouldn't that be something that is provided by your employer?

[post="259172"][/post]​

I used to work at a convenience store. Part of my training included this statement: "When a cop comes in the store, he gets a free beverage." This is very common, and I would not be surprised if Krispy Kreme gives donuts to cops (or at least coffee). Why do these places do that? Because they WANT cops in their stores! Not for exactly the same reason that an airline wants frequent flyers on their planes (a cop in a store virtually guarantees it won't get robbed), but the gist is precisely the same. There is no law or employment contract that requires stores to give cops free beverages, but they choose to do it anyway because it makes good business sense.

No, the soldier doesn't get a discount at Wal-Mart, but that's a very poor example (everything is rock-bottom discounted on the backs of illegal immigrant or child labor, so there's really no room for additional discounts). However, lots of places do give soldiers discounts or freebies similar to cops (like a free drink or upgrade on a plane), although that's probably more out of charity than a real business reason.

However, the solider has the LEGAL right to hold off on creditors while they are away. Lately there have been reports of unscrupulous creditors who have repossessed soldiers' cars while they are away on active duty.

 

[JS]

It's under "other income" on the balance sheet, but that includes things outside the DM program, so you really can't get a good idea of the income related to DM.    They do mention in the annual report selling miles to other companies. 

But I didn't see anything else in the annual report about the revenues generated by the FF plan...only the costs and potential liabilities.

[post="259538"][/post]​

The revenue impact of the FF program doesn't really exist. It's no different from pontificating on the cost of US Airways operating a hub-and-spoke system -- it's an economic (though not a physical) requirement for an airline its size.

The same is true for Southwest. You claim that Rapid Rewards is a drain on the bottom line, but let's get real -- if Southwest eliminated RR, their profits would decrease. It wouldn't decrease as much as the legacy carriers because the RR program is not a large part of the entire product, but I guarantee you that not having a FF program at all would put Southwest at a competitive disadvantage.

If Southwest were operating as a unregulated monopoly, then I would agree with you that RR would be a drain, because people don't choose to fly Southwest just to get a free ticket. They choose to fly Southwest rather than another airline to get a free ticket. However, in a monopoly environment, RR isn't the only revenue drain -- any fare less than full fare is a huge revenue drain. Of course, unregulated monopolies are illegal in this country, so that is just a hypothetical.

You have to understand that the economics of a business operating in a competitive environment are very, very, VERY different from the economics of a business operating as an unregulated monopoly. All of your arguments are predicated upon Southwest or US Airways operating as a monopoly, which is just useless. The competition is there, it's not going away, and it is the competition (starting with AA in 1981) that is the reason we have frequent flyer programs.

 

[mweiss]

It's about several hundred members

...insofar as US won't listen to PineyBob alone.

It's about quality customer service.

...for PineyBob.

Quality service requires quality employees, so it is about them...

...but only as much as it has to be to make things better for PineyBob.

So in order for it to be about me it also has to be about them it goes hand in hand

But that means that it's about PineyBob first and last. The employees are simply Machiavellian means to that end. Again, that makes you no different from those you lambaste in CCY.