First Class Flying: A Solution

[KCFlyer]

Exactly as I thought. You can be proven wrong time and time again, but when proven wrong beyond a doubt over something as juvenile as the language on an avatar (which started as joke and a jab), you simply can not admit it.

Have a great weekend!

[post="258665"][/post]​

Wrong is in the eye of the beholder. You too have a great weekend, but ponder this....my opinions an Frequent Flyer programs in general is that they are a drain on a company...even my "beloved greyhound". But if you look at my beloved airline and your beloved airline (or most any other legacy carrier), my beloved airline is consistantly profitable. And they treat their most frequent flyers exactly the same as they treat their first time passenger - they are all "preferred customers". Perhaps that is one of the reasons for their profit.

 

[KCFlyer]

If as you theorize that FF programs are a drain then why would a company offer to buy one third of Air Canada's Aeroplan program for 168 Million CDN? When you sell assets they have to be profitable or they have no value. Witness the legacy carriers quest for funds. No value no money!

Air Canada never closed on the deal as they went the Canadian version of C-11. But the point remains. Time & time again you've been proven dead wrong. World Com's C-11 filings tell the tale. The Air Canada deal. The fact that NO ONE has cancelled their program. Quite the opposite even 36 A/C Spirit will have a FF program soon. SWA has one that is true to their philosophy. Free tickets to Amarillo don't wind my watch but hey different strokes.

The facts are against you regardless of how you may "Feel".

[post="258681"][/post]​

Hmmm - Why wouldn't Air Canada petition the BK judge to allow them to complete the sale to get funds to help them thru bankruptcy? Who was responsible for not closing - the buyer or the seller?

Address this then Bob - why is Southwest profitable when they have a "lame" frequent flyer program? Could it be that all passengers are "preferred"? You know, if Southwest were to abolish the RR program, I'd still fly them. Whether it's on my dime or the companies dime. Because they don't "owe" me anything, no matter how much I fly them. Can you say the same about your airline?

Bottom line, my point with all this is the hypocrisy of the cockroach/FFUCOS group...it's not about USAir...it never was. It's about YOU and dividend miles - nothing more.

 

[bookmdano]

Another upgrade loss that I did not see mentioned here is the $199.00 transcon tkt, that the passenger used their 20,000 mileage points and was able to upgrade months before any CP/Gold/or Silver.

 

[KCFlyer]

Another upgrade loss that I did not see mentioned here is the $199.00 transcon tkt, that the passenger used their 20,000 mileage points and was able to upgrade months before any CP/Gold/or Silver.

[post="258685"][/post]​

Not to worry bookmando....the FF program is a moneymaker...US actually MADE money on that deal.

 

[KCFlyer]

So now we've added clairvoyance to your many talents. You know NOTHING of me KC. NOT one damn thing.

No, but it's obvious from your posts that the cockroach society was strictly about you...and the DM program.

Not being an expert in Canadian BK law I've not idea one why they didn't complete the deal. It might have had something to do with a Government bailout and them keeping the Aeroplan program.

Then again, it could have been the buyer, seeing an opportunity to take over 100% of the Aeropla program for nothing, might have backed out of the deal. Guess it'll just have to remain a mystery

As for who I fly, I'll fly the airline that offers me the best value for me. When it comes to work I am the most selfish person in the world. I don't care one wit about whether the company is prosperous or not as long as I get paid and I'm an award winning performer who takes pride in what he does. But if my company terminated me Monday I wouldn't care even a little.

What about if your company didn't terminate you, but made a corporate decision that they will fly on Southwest fully refundable fares to keep travel costs minimized....is it time to quit?

To me an Envoy ticket is part of my compensation for the nights I spend away from home. Same with all the miles and hotel points.

And all I am saying is that it should be the responsiblity of your employer, and not of an airline, to provide that compensation. Or...if it's compensation, how's about including the value of that "compensation" on your tax return?

I travel/earn MORE miles and segments than any other employee in our division and my air travel costs are 30% less than my nearest co-worker who fly LESS and often on SWA out west.

Then I would submit that you aren't just losing US money...you're BLEEDING them.

 

[hp_fa]

Then I would submit that you aren't just losing US money...you're BLEEDING them. - That's a US Airways problem not mine! I have NO CONTROL over their pricing. Afterall when I get gas I don't offer more. I go to the web site and pick the dates and times I want to go and BINGO I get a price. They wrote the fare schedule, they wrote the DM rules, just like the IRS drafted the tax code. More rules, more work arounds

[post="258699"][/post]​

Bob is absolutely right about this point. He is working within the rules and fares It isn't his fault that all the airlines are writing stupid fares and rules. Any airline writing fares that won't generate a profit on a 66% load factor are both insane and irresponsible.

 

[TomBascom]

Another upgrade loss that I did not see mentioned here is the $199.00 transcon tkt, that the passenger used their 20,000 mileage points and was able to upgrade months before any CP/Gold/or Silver.

[post="258685"][/post]​

Minor correction -- they can only upgrade ahead of CP, GP & SP on cheap tickets. They're on an even playing field with those buying Y, B & A fares.

None the less you are right that there's some potential for that being a problem since those upgrades do come out of the high fare bucket. It may be why some routes have very limited inventory of that bucket. OTOH anyone upgrading with miles is kicking in something extra... The saving grace IMHO is probably that a relatively small number of people are willing to burn that many miles for an UG -- most people seem to think that a free ticket for those miles is a better deal.

 

[TomBascom]

I doubt that KC is ever going to concede that FF programs are a net positive. He doesn't have it in him. He can only see the liabilities and refuses to acknowledge the contributions to revenue. So, naturally, it is all a loss to him and obviously a drag on the airline.

The Air Canada deal didn't close -- so he's got a point that it doesn't prove anything. But we have a point too -- it does show that someone thought that there is some sort of value there. Obviously as outsiders none of us know why it didn't close but my recollection of the press at the time is that there was an argument over price. Who knows -- maybe it was only worth $75MM or maybe it's really worth $200MM. Point is it is a net positive to somebody.

Another point -- we have some pretty good data that KC has seen before regarding the very substantial 3rd party revenue generated by Dividend Miles. You can tease it out of the quarterly and annual reports with a little bit of effort. Those same reports also cover the liabilities. Revenue far exceeds liability. KC builds his whole case on the idea that "free trips" and upgrades should be valued at, or very near to, list price. The airline's accountants clearly disagree. They may be bozos in any number of ways but this is one of those things that they could go to jail for -- I could be wrong but I don't think they're cooking these numbers.

Yet another point -- sure, US could decide to be just like WN, scrap F and turn DM into RR. At which point they have just about nothing left that distinguishes them from SWA in a positive light and a whole lot of things that differentiate them in very negative ways. Maybe I'm stupid but advocating that sort of approach sounds like something that only benefits SWA. US Airways simply cannot succeed by trying to be just like SWA, only worse.

SWA has lots of great ideas and excellent management. There's plenty to be learned from them. But that doesn't mean that the road to success can only be found by blind copying. Blind copying without true understanding is how a whole lot of this mess happened in the first place. IMHO SWA is the master at laying traps for unwary competitors -- what you see on the surface has very little to do with the true reasons for their success.

 

[mweiss]

I can't help but wonder if KC Flyer has ever done a back to back ticket to save a few bucks?

I doubt that it'd buy you anything on WN to do that...but even if it did, they explicitly say that you're free to do it. Hidden city? Fine with them. Throw-away ticketing? Be their guest. You can even apply the "thrown away" portion toward another itinerary.

Give me a rule book and a week to figure it out and I'll make it work for me.

You may find that even WN's rule book works for you.

 

[KCFlyer]

Thanks HP,

I can't help but wonder if KC Flyer has ever done a back to back ticket to save a few bucks? I NEVER have!

Nor have I. Perhaps you mean the "two step", which I HAVE done to circumvent some rules. See, from KC I can't fly Southwest to Dallas. When my mom had emergency surgery, it was $820 from KC to DFW on AA, so I bought TWO roundtrips on SWA - MCI-TUL and TUL-DAL. Saved about $400, and you know, if SWA weren't handcuffed by the Wright Ammendment, I could have most likely flown for half of THAT amount. Remember....I'm not the cheap one...you are...you fly for 30% less than your coworker on the west coast who flies Southwest. Is the airline stupid for allowing that, yes. But if the airline adapts, that'd be great. If the airline adapts at the expense of DM - hello CO. Hence the hypocrisy of the roach.

 

[KCFlyer]

I doubt that KC is ever going to concede that FF programs are a net positive. He doesn't have it in him. He can only see the liabilities and refuses to acknowledge the contributions to revenue. So, naturally, it is all a loss to him and obviously a drag on the airline.

The Air Canada deal didn't close -- so he's got a point that it doesn't prove anything. But we have a point too -- it does show that someone thought that there is some sort of value there.

[post="258713"][/post]​

American thought that there was a value in buying TWA. I've yet to see what value was added on that deal either.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Not being an expert in Canadian BK law I've not idea one why they didn't complete the deal. It might have had something to do with a Government bailout and them keeping the Aeroplan program.

[post="258691"][/post]​

There were no ATSB-type loans for any Canadian carriers (no government bailout).

I think AC did eventually sell a portion of Aeroplan - but not to the initial bidder. Onex made the first offer (remember them, Onex + AMR tried to buy CP and AC a few years back). Onex was offerring $245 million (thats ~$180 million US) for a 35% stake. However, I don't think this deal was completed. Instead, American Express came into the picture and made Aeroplan a partner in American Express’s membership rewards points program.

Amex / AC press release here. link

Here is a link to the Onex offer. link

Here's an interesting quote from the above article: "Started in 1984, Aeroplan has over six million members and is a significant income generator for Air Canada. A wholly-owned subsidiary of the carrier since January 2002, Aeroplan generated cash revenue in excess of $600 million last year."

 

[KCFlyer]

Here's an interesting quote from the above article: "Started in 1984, Aeroplan has over six million members and is a significant income generator for Air Canada. A wholly-owned subsidiary of the carrier since January 2002, Aeroplan generated cash revenue in excess of $600 million last year."

[post="258758"][/post]​

And here's the part y'all aren't getting. Yes...I have no doubt it generated revenues. Yes, I have no doubt that this revenue was income(isn't all revenue income?) But....and here's the word that seems to be missed - did it generate a PROFIT? With the "parent carrier" in bankruptcy, one has to wonder. And with all the airlines operating like they are selling silver dollars for fifty cents a piece, how much volume does it take to make a profit? Notice that this particular plan was started in 1984...20 years ago. Hasn't the airline industry changed just a bit over the past 20 years?

 

[whlinder]

Cute. I have to say I laughed out loud at that.

I'm glad I can provide a source of amusement occasionally.

By the way did Washington play last night?

[post="258420"][/post]​

I was out of town for a couple days, but I think the answer is yes based on when you posted it, although whether we actually 'played' is debatable.

 

[TomBascom]

And here's the part y'all aren't getting. Yes...I have no doubt it generated revenues. Yes, I have no doubt that this revenue was income(isn't all revenue income?) But....and here's the word that seems to be missed - did it generate a PROFIT? With the "parent carrier" in bankruptcy, one has to wonder. And with all the airlines operating like they are selling silver dollars for fifty cents a piece, how much volume does it take to make a profit? Notice that this particular plan was started in 1984...20 years ago. Hasn't the airline industry changed just a bit over the past 20 years?

[post="258765"][/post]​

Check their annual report. The cost side of the FF plan is all there. It's way less than the revenue. Not that you'll ever acknowledge that...

Here's a question for you -- given that the airlines, in your estimation, sell seats for gobs less than it costs them to fly them why is it that their loss is just a small % of overall cash flow? There must be something offsetting the huge losses in actually flying planes.

If FF programs are such a drag then ditching them ought to make the airlines instantly profitable -- yet nobody has done that... "But the cockroaches will complain" doesn't hold water -- if it really would make them profitable all the complaining in the world wouldn't stop them.