How Will Us Fight Swa In Phl?
- Thread starter robbedagain
- Start date
U should fight SWA first by cutting their cost..one avenue not tapped is to get rid of all if not some of those excess baggage that call themselves VPs.
Next what they could do is attacking SWA a little from their BWI...running 757 or 767 from BWI to TPA and BWI to MCO three flights daily if marketted right would take some passengers away from SWA.
This might slow their growth a little bit
Next what they could do is attacking SWA a little from their BWI...running 757 or 767 from BWI to TPA and BWI to MCO three flights daily if marketted right would take some passengers away from SWA.
This might slow their growth a little bit
nycbusdriver
Veteran
...and paint them red and call them Metrojet!madders said:
nycbusdriver
Veteran
The solutions you propose are enlightened and sensible, however, this IS USAirways and rolling hubs are not in keeping with our traditions. It's just not the Allegheny/USAir way of doing things, so it must be wrong. After all, we need to remember the mantra of our former CEO: "We know how to run an airline."AM49AAA said:
If you insist on change, we can accomodate that by decimating the employees compensation levels.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2003
- Messages
- 11,125
- Reaction score
- 2,676
if there is to be a change in any pay, it'll be the crooks of ccy that get the paycuts as they rightly deserve to lose it all. they could also be farmed out to prisons around the country!
ELP_WN_Psgr
Senior
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2003
- Messages
- 419
- Reaction score
- 0
Culture change, rather than employee payroll change, is the only way to wage an effective fight against WN anywhere. The ways of doing business have to change. The employees have seen their pay eviscerated sufficiently. In many cases the WN employees, as a group, are making more than the U employees.
First post under this screen name, I used to hang out at Planebusiness.Com and, in fact, posted a lot of stuff during the WN -vs- Metrojet BWI battles that ultimately has come to pass. So I am not new to the battlefield even if I am new-and-improved to this board. (Note: I didn't get banned....I just forgot a password and my old account finally went dormant as far as I can tell)
At any rate, here's what you do.... I am not worried about anyone taking my advice, so in truth I am not really worried about WN's ultimate success in the marketplace.
1. Simplify the fare structure. It's like going into the deep end of the pool when you are 5 years old, I know.......Everyone is afraid that if you reduce the fare revenue will drop. It's sort of like the governmetn and taxes. You reduce the tax rate but tax receipts go up. Go figure. The complexities of the current fare structure and the absolute rape that U gets away with has not made U any friends. $1 a mile is obscene anywhere, anyplace, anytime....I don't care if some passengers are willing to pay it. Actually, if U wanted to be REALLY smart...they would junk advance purchase fares and implement a two tier fare structure...one for flights prior to 7 pm M-F and a lower one for flights after 7 pm and at all times on Saturday and Sunday.
2. How important is F on domestic flights? I doubt it is of much importance. Would it not be better to turn every domestic aircraft into an all coach cabin with decent legroom? If you don't have one FA dedicated to service 8-12 passengers up in F (many of whom bought their upgrade with miles) then you can rely on three FAs to provide a better level of service to the 130 or so in the "main cabin."
3. The rolling hub is something you have to do. Having planes come in and leave all the time allows you to do a lot more with less....fewer employees, fewer gates, fewer headaches. Let's say you want to run 300 flights a day thru PHL. If you look at the day as 15 hrs long (6:30 am to 9:30 pm) that averages 20 flights an hr. Staff accordingly. (PS-I know some peak hrs might go to 30 and some not-so-peak hrs will be around 15, but you get the general picture). That requires a lot less hassle than having 5 banks of 60 flights each that all arrive within a few minutes of each other....get worked by a staff designed for that many aircraft movements....and then go away, leaving a staff for 60 flights to do nothing at all until the next bank of flights 3 hrs later. This really doesn't mess up connections too much. It might reduce the frequency of flights from Syracuse to Phoenix by 1 trip per day....or it might mean they have a 1 1/2 hr layover instead of 42 minutes. Oh well...they'll get over it.
4. Look at what WN does that works, and emulate it. Look at what WN does that some folks gripe about, and avoid it. I read with some fascination (and a little bit of amusement) the thread on beverage service. WN really does kick U's rear end at that at the present time. Let there be no question about it. Now, in all honesty, a good chunk of people would prefer seat assignments. So......you get your FAs to serve a full beverage service on shorter flights AND you retain assigned seating. And you do it at WN prices, or something close to them. You are going to have to. The bottom line is that people are buying something of transitory value....a seat in a metal tube to move them from point A to point B. Making it hassle-free and pleasant is a good thing. Charging a decent price for it is also critical. IF you can convince the public your product is worth a few extra bucks, you might get people to pay a few extra bucks. You can't get people to pay twice the price nor can you convince people that their experience on U is superior to that on WN if, in fact, it isn't. I've ridden both. recently. Just got back from ELP-DFW on AA connecting with U from DFW to CLT to MDT, returning MDT-PIT-DFW on WN and connecting to AA back into El Paso. Right after that went WN from ELP-SAN-PHX and return. Folks, you can tell yourself all you want that U is better than WN, but saying it over and over doesn't make it true. As we speak, U doesn't offer a superior product. Telling people that you do will work for only a short period of time...sooner or later passengers end up on WN and find out that it isn't any worse, and in some cases it may even be better.
5. How much revenue do you generate from the $100 "change fee" vs how much wrath and enmity do you generate (and how much goodwill do you flush down the commode) by having it? WN doesn't have one. Their non refundable tickets are just that - non refundable - but you don't lose any money unless you don't come back and fly within the year. You might really want to look at doing that.
6. Regional Jets are not the answer. They may be quiet and they may be jets but they are in no way, shape, or form comfortable aircraft, especially for normal sized adults and double especially on longer routes. You have to price the product and set your frequencies appropriately to put 737s or Airbuses in markets. The ASM cost on the Regional Jets (aka "Barbie's Dream Jet") is nothing to brag about either.
7. If you have enough demand to where you can fly directly between two points without messign with your hub, then do it. Lots of folks want to go to LaGuardia. U is a big time player there. Then don't waste all those gates and employees and slots by flying folks from LaGuardia to PIT, CLT etc etc. Fly some from LGA to Florida, to RDU, to anyplace where you see adequate unfilled demand.
The bottom line to being successful at fighting WN is to give people what they want. U's management (and the management of most so-called major carriers) haven't a clue as to what that is. They have stated that they know how to run an airline. Now is the time to prove it.
You aren't going to prevail if you sit there and pretend that business travelers won't fly Southwest, only cheap trashy people fly them, that assigned seats and First Class are incredibly important. The way to win is not to chop fares where you go head-to-head to unsustainable levels while jacking the prices up to "Oh My God!" levels elsewhere.
What do people want? Business and Leisure travelers alike? They want value. They want some flexibility. They want simplicity. They want hassle-free. They want to go out to the airport, climb into the metal tube, sit down, and get to their destination with a minimum of frou-frou. They would like to be surrounded by reasonably pleasant folks in the process. They might want a drink - a bloody Mary to get the blood started on a morning flight, or a scotch-and-water on the return that afternoon.
Give Philadelphia passengers (and all your passengers systemwide) that and you might have a prayer. Keep buying into the Southwest=WalMart=cheap trashy customers philosophy and watch your company contibue to turn into KMart - a WalMart that can't make any money.
First post under this screen name, I used to hang out at Planebusiness.Com and, in fact, posted a lot of stuff during the WN -vs- Metrojet BWI battles that ultimately has come to pass. So I am not new to the battlefield even if I am new-and-improved to this board. (Note: I didn't get banned....I just forgot a password and my old account finally went dormant as far as I can tell)
At any rate, here's what you do.... I am not worried about anyone taking my advice, so in truth I am not really worried about WN's ultimate success in the marketplace.
1. Simplify the fare structure. It's like going into the deep end of the pool when you are 5 years old, I know.......Everyone is afraid that if you reduce the fare revenue will drop. It's sort of like the governmetn and taxes. You reduce the tax rate but tax receipts go up. Go figure. The complexities of the current fare structure and the absolute rape that U gets away with has not made U any friends. $1 a mile is obscene anywhere, anyplace, anytime....I don't care if some passengers are willing to pay it. Actually, if U wanted to be REALLY smart...they would junk advance purchase fares and implement a two tier fare structure...one for flights prior to 7 pm M-F and a lower one for flights after 7 pm and at all times on Saturday and Sunday.
2. How important is F on domestic flights? I doubt it is of much importance. Would it not be better to turn every domestic aircraft into an all coach cabin with decent legroom? If you don't have one FA dedicated to service 8-12 passengers up in F (many of whom bought their upgrade with miles) then you can rely on three FAs to provide a better level of service to the 130 or so in the "main cabin."
3. The rolling hub is something you have to do. Having planes come in and leave all the time allows you to do a lot more with less....fewer employees, fewer gates, fewer headaches. Let's say you want to run 300 flights a day thru PHL. If you look at the day as 15 hrs long (6:30 am to 9:30 pm) that averages 20 flights an hr. Staff accordingly. (PS-I know some peak hrs might go to 30 and some not-so-peak hrs will be around 15, but you get the general picture). That requires a lot less hassle than having 5 banks of 60 flights each that all arrive within a few minutes of each other....get worked by a staff designed for that many aircraft movements....and then go away, leaving a staff for 60 flights to do nothing at all until the next bank of flights 3 hrs later. This really doesn't mess up connections too much. It might reduce the frequency of flights from Syracuse to Phoenix by 1 trip per day....or it might mean they have a 1 1/2 hr layover instead of 42 minutes. Oh well...they'll get over it.
4. Look at what WN does that works, and emulate it. Look at what WN does that some folks gripe about, and avoid it. I read with some fascination (and a little bit of amusement) the thread on beverage service. WN really does kick U's rear end at that at the present time. Let there be no question about it. Now, in all honesty, a good chunk of people would prefer seat assignments. So......you get your FAs to serve a full beverage service on shorter flights AND you retain assigned seating. And you do it at WN prices, or something close to them. You are going to have to. The bottom line is that people are buying something of transitory value....a seat in a metal tube to move them from point A to point B. Making it hassle-free and pleasant is a good thing. Charging a decent price for it is also critical. IF you can convince the public your product is worth a few extra bucks, you might get people to pay a few extra bucks. You can't get people to pay twice the price nor can you convince people that their experience on U is superior to that on WN if, in fact, it isn't. I've ridden both. recently. Just got back from ELP-DFW on AA connecting with U from DFW to CLT to MDT, returning MDT-PIT-DFW on WN and connecting to AA back into El Paso. Right after that went WN from ELP-SAN-PHX and return. Folks, you can tell yourself all you want that U is better than WN, but saying it over and over doesn't make it true. As we speak, U doesn't offer a superior product. Telling people that you do will work for only a short period of time...sooner or later passengers end up on WN and find out that it isn't any worse, and in some cases it may even be better.
5. How much revenue do you generate from the $100 "change fee" vs how much wrath and enmity do you generate (and how much goodwill do you flush down the commode) by having it? WN doesn't have one. Their non refundable tickets are just that - non refundable - but you don't lose any money unless you don't come back and fly within the year. You might really want to look at doing that.
6. Regional Jets are not the answer. They may be quiet and they may be jets but they are in no way, shape, or form comfortable aircraft, especially for normal sized adults and double especially on longer routes. You have to price the product and set your frequencies appropriately to put 737s or Airbuses in markets. The ASM cost on the Regional Jets (aka "Barbie's Dream Jet") is nothing to brag about either.
7. If you have enough demand to where you can fly directly between two points without messign with your hub, then do it. Lots of folks want to go to LaGuardia. U is a big time player there. Then don't waste all those gates and employees and slots by flying folks from LaGuardia to PIT, CLT etc etc. Fly some from LGA to Florida, to RDU, to anyplace where you see adequate unfilled demand.
The bottom line to being successful at fighting WN is to give people what they want. U's management (and the management of most so-called major carriers) haven't a clue as to what that is. They have stated that they know how to run an airline. Now is the time to prove it.
You aren't going to prevail if you sit there and pretend that business travelers won't fly Southwest, only cheap trashy people fly them, that assigned seats and First Class are incredibly important. The way to win is not to chop fares where you go head-to-head to unsustainable levels while jacking the prices up to "Oh My God!" levels elsewhere.
What do people want? Business and Leisure travelers alike? They want value. They want some flexibility. They want simplicity. They want hassle-free. They want to go out to the airport, climb into the metal tube, sit down, and get to their destination with a minimum of frou-frou. They would like to be surrounded by reasonably pleasant folks in the process. They might want a drink - a bloody Mary to get the blood started on a morning flight, or a scotch-and-water on the return that afternoon.
Give Philadelphia passengers (and all your passengers systemwide) that and you might have a prayer. Keep buying into the Southwest=WalMart=cheap trashy customers philosophy and watch your company contibue to turn into KMart - a WalMart that can't make any money.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
WN pasgr,
You first need to change "management culture".
You've convinced us, only problem is, you can't convince this management. They have a big fear of LCC competition, in fact, they have a fear of any competition. The only way they believe you can compete is by FIRST lowering employee costs AGAIN and AGAIN, until they basically come to work for free. Then this managment will be fearless.
They don't know how to do it any other way
You first need to change "management culture".
You've convinced us, only problem is, you can't convince this management. They have a big fear of LCC competition, in fact, they have a fear of any competition. The only way they believe you can compete is by FIRST lowering employee costs AGAIN and AGAIN, until they basically come to work for free. Then this managment will be fearless.
They don't know how to do it any other way
Recently I've only seen one or two people with this mindset after all the cuts that have happened in service and staffing. Unfortunately, they are only the top two in charge of the operation. :down:ELP_WN_Psgr said:
ELP_WN_Psgr
Senior
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2003
- Messages
- 419
- Reaction score
- 0
diogenes Posted on Nov 29 2003, 05:03 PM
OK, ELP WN Psgr, you sold me.
Wanna try with the two daves?
LOL. I don't think it would do any good. Airline management, for the most part, tries to avoid doing things that entail risk.
To do what I suggested would involve betting the entire company.
If it succeeded, U would probably be the strongest major carrier in the U.S. Certainly, it would be set up for long term survival.
If it failed, there would be a lot of people looking for work, including a President/CEO who would have a much more difficult time finding employment that would match his current salary.
I look at the whole thing sort of like a patient who shows up at the doctor's office with a brain tumor in a pretty nasty location. The first option is to leave the tumor alone and let the patient live out the rest of his or her days in relative comfort....and who knows, it may go away......or maybe the patient will get run over by a truck before the tumor kills him or her. The other option is to go in with aggressive surgery and dig that sucker out.....it might kill the patient in the process, but if it didn't, the patient would recover fully and have a normal life.
The airline industry in the U.S. has gotten to that decision point.....radical surgery or palliatives? Radical surgery is indicated, but the risks of side effects or failure are definitely present. A rebounding economy promises to be sort of like "palliative chemo or radiation therapy"....prolong the patient's life for a while....til the next economic downturn puts them in the E.R. in critical/guarded condition.
OK, ELP WN Psgr, you sold me.
Wanna try with the two daves?
LOL. I don't think it would do any good. Airline management, for the most part, tries to avoid doing things that entail risk.
To do what I suggested would involve betting the entire company.
If it succeeded, U would probably be the strongest major carrier in the U.S. Certainly, it would be set up for long term survival.
If it failed, there would be a lot of people looking for work, including a President/CEO who would have a much more difficult time finding employment that would match his current salary.
I look at the whole thing sort of like a patient who shows up at the doctor's office with a brain tumor in a pretty nasty location. The first option is to leave the tumor alone and let the patient live out the rest of his or her days in relative comfort....and who knows, it may go away......or maybe the patient will get run over by a truck before the tumor kills him or her. The other option is to go in with aggressive surgery and dig that sucker out.....it might kill the patient in the process, but if it didn't, the patient would recover fully and have a normal life.
The airline industry in the U.S. has gotten to that decision point.....radical surgery or palliatives? Radical surgery is indicated, but the risks of side effects or failure are definitely present. A rebounding economy promises to be sort of like "palliative chemo or radiation therapy"....prolong the patient's life for a while....til the next economic downturn puts them in the E.R. in critical/guarded condition.
To CCY,
Take a good look at ELP WN Psgr's plan. This is something employees would put their shoulders behind.
Get over your 'we didn't think of it, so it can't be right' attitude. Here's the real deal, in simple terms, so even we 'simple' folk can understand it.
And best of all, you don't have to pay out a few hundred $$$ for consultants - ELP gave it away.
Take a good look at ELP WN Psgr's plan. This is something employees would put their shoulders behind.
Get over your 'we didn't think of it, so it can't be right' attitude. Here's the real deal, in simple terms, so even we 'simple' folk can understand it.
And best of all, you don't have to pay out a few hundred $$$ for consultants - ELP gave it away.
Went walkabout on the system this week, and spend some time in CLT E Con, home of U's future.
Guess what the predominant announcement was? "Due to weight restrictions, we need x passengers to volunteer to give up their seats. If we don't get enough volunteers, we must leave some bags behind."
1. How often does WN make these announcements?
2. How safe does this make the public feel?
3. Who absorbs these costs?
4. How..............Oh, !@$^*^*&@! it, why ask why? Time to break out the dark likker!
Guess what the predominant announcement was? "Due to weight restrictions, we need x passengers to volunteer to give up their seats. If we don't get enough volunteers, we must leave some bags behind."
1. How often does WN make these announcements?
2. How safe does this make the public feel?
3. Who absorbs these costs?
4. How..............Oh, !@$^*^*&@! it, why ask why? Time to break out the dark likker!
