More Outrage Us Fares From Nyc Area

[LongIsland2004]

With Jetblue and Southwest charging no more than $ 400.00 walk-up fare on the NY-Orlando route, with large non-stop jet aircraft. Why is US charging $900.00. from Long Island to Orlando. Who do they really think is going to pay for a connection involving a prop plane? US must fix there price problems fast or it will not matter.

Requested Flight
Itinerary Total - US$ 946.40 Flight Fare Rules 1 adult at US$ 946.40
7:50am Depart Long Island Macarthu (ISP)

12:25pm Arrive Orlando, FL (MCO) Jul. 27
US Airways flight 3929 operated by US AIRWAYS EXPRESS-PIEDMONT AIRLINES/ 359 Connection in Philadelphia, PA View rules
4:55pm Depart Orlando, FL (MCO)

11:37pm Arrive Long Island Macarthu (ISP) Jul. 29
US Airways flight 992 / 3936 operated by US AIRWAYS EXPRESS-PIEDMONT AIRLINES Connection in Philadelphia, PA

 

[Art at ISP]

LI 2004,

This is the same thing I have been saying ad nauseum for a very long time. It is not necessary for us to match the low end, but we should be close on the high end. We are literally giving the business away.

If the bottom fares are raised just a little, but the top fares are lowered significantly, you will see higher AVERAGE fares, therefore better yield. Those who might otherwise book on an LCC would consider US. Most people fail to consider one major limitation of the LCC's--INTERLINING.

When a problem occurs on a LCC (just watch Airlline), there is no option but to take another flight on the same carrier--if all are sold out, you might be stranded for days. With US, or other majors, you can be sent to another airport (ie. to LGA from ISP), or rebooked on another carrier. This cannot happen with WN or B6.

The old addage is you get what you pay for--and this is true. One of the reasons for the success of the LCC's (as well as a problem for US), is the fact that with LCC's you have lowered expectations, and those lowered expectations are met satisfactorily. In US' case, most customers have higher expectations, which are not being met. I recently flew Jet Blue for the first time, and while it was not US' level of service, it was exactly as advertised.

Another thing I am seeing is they have adjusted the timing of ISP-PHL flights, making most connections difficult if not impossible. While I understand te concept of depeaking a hub, moving the 7:10AM to 7:50, and the 11:30 to 12:15 is a mistake--these flights could have been moved 30-45 minutes EARLIER rather than later--making more connections possible, rather than eliminating them. If the intent is to make PHL more point to point rather than a hub, one has to wonder when (or IF) ISP will stay in the system at all, or flights will be moved to CLT (I wish).

Unfortunately it is getting worse rather than better at ISP, and I fear US is sending us a message--go fly someone else because ISP is not important to us.

Sad---really sad......

My Best to you all.....

 

[cavalier]

LI 2004,

This is the same thing I have been saying ad nauseum for a very long time. It is not necessary for us to match the low end, but we should be close on the high end. We are literally giving the business away.

Dave Siegel said his employees that make these decisions are the BEST in the industry, he also said they MUST give them bonuses to stay.


Well seems they are paying a premium price to assure absolute failure, and then I read where some people are having second thoughts as to whether they should leave this airline, short of being hit over the head with a frying pan what other signs do they require!?

I always said given they fact this company still breaths with the incompetence running it, placing REAL leaders at the helm would make LUV envy U.

Ignorance is bliss and sometimes one is better off in bliss, like an U employee who can only look upon total incompetence everywhere only to respond by shaking their head.

 

[WestCoastGuy]

VERY WELL SAID. Just my opinion, but it seems the company would do much better to go to the top Business Schools and recruit some of the brightest graduates by offering them something similiar to the Trump style on the Intern. Most of our management is stuck in their small box left over from the days of regulation, and can not think outside of it. It's the same "good ole boy" network of by gone days. We obviously have the bottom of the barrel setting in all the exec offices. Not sure why the Board would offer them all "retention bonus's" to stay on...who the hell would want any of them at another company??????

 

[USFlyer]

VERY WELL SAID. Just my opinion, but it seems the company would do much better to go to the top Business Schools and recruit some of the brightest graduates by offering them something similiar to the Trump style on the Intern. Most of our management is stuck in their small box left over from the days of regulation, and can not think outside of it. It's the same "good ole boy" network of by gone days. We obviously have the bottom of the barrel setting in all the exec offices. Not sure why the Board would offer them all "retention bonus's" to stay on...who the hell would want any of them at another company??????

Well, to recruit top talent requires top pay. I know some recent MBA grads who received offers from US. To be blunt, their starting salaries were less than my existing salary, and I only have a B.S. degree. All of them went elsewhere.

 

[mweiss]

I know of zero MBA grads who would have taken a job at US if they had an offer from nearly anyone else. Nobody in this economy wants to take a job that they think is only going to last six months.

 

[JS]

If the bottom fares are raised just a little, but the top fares are lowered significantly, you will see higher AVERAGE fares, therefore better yield. Those who might otherwise book on an LCC would consider US. Most people fail to consider one major limitation of the LCC's--INTERLINING.

When a problem occurs on a LCC (just watch Airlline), there is no option but to take another flight on the same carrier--if all are sold out, you might be stranded for days. With US, or other majors, you can be sent to another airport (ie. to LGA from ISP), or rebooked on another carrier. This cannot happen with WN or B6.

Higher average fare is the same thing as higher yield. Yield is defined as revenue per revenue seat mile ("average fare").

However, yield is not the only goal. Multiply yield by load factor, and you get RASM which must be higher than CASM to produce a profit.

If you charge more on the low end, your load factor will drop, and the higher yield may result in a lower RASM.

In the case of New York to Orlando, charging more than Southwest or JetBlue is ludicruous. Most people will choose the non-stop if the fares are the same, and even more will choose the LCC if USAirways is higher.

If you're flying a LCC non-stop, who cares about interlining? The chances you will need it are pretty slim.

 

[mweiss]

JS is on target there. The goal for each and every flight should be to maximize not yield nor even RASM, but rather profit. RASM's a close approximation, but it assumes that the marginal cost of an additional passenger is zero, which is in fact quite false once you get down to the weight-restricted aircraft.

Financially speaking, the best thing to do is calculate the profit of a flight without a particular passenger, and then compare it to that same flight with that passenger. At a minimum, the passenger's presence consumes fuel and maybe beverages and nuts. But the cost side of the ledger is more complex.

For example, if the A/C is weight restricted, and the passenger flies but two people's luggage don't, the cost goes up substantially. Might the cost of shipping the bags separately later be greater than the marginal profit the customer otherwise would have produced? And that's not even counting the loss of customer goodwill.

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

Your analysis is correct - if any airline could sell each ticket or take each reservation just before departure time.

Unfortunately, most tickets/reservations are made in advance, and there is no way to determine at the time of sale/reservation how many bags each passenger will have, what the wx will be at the time of the flight (which causes a good number of the weight restrictions), etc.

Therefore, booking levels become a game of averages. Hence yield, RASM, CASM, etc become the defacto standard.

Jim

 

[tadjr]

For example, if the A/C is weight restricted, and the passenger flies but two people's luggage don't, the cost goes up substantially. Might the cost of shipping the bags separately later be greater than the marginal profit the customer otherwise would have produced? And that's not even counting the loss of customer goodwill.

Now why cant the Express people at Air Midwest figure this one out?

 

[mweiss]

Your analysis is correct - if any airline could sell each ticket or take each reservation just before departure time...booking levels become a game of averages. Hence yield, RASM, CASM, etc become the defacto standard.

True to a certain extent. However, one doesn't have to be a brain surgeon to figure out that pax carry more luggage on average in June than in October. My point is that a finer level of analysis produces better results.

One thing I've learned about games is that, with the exception of novices, they are won or lost in the margins. That is, it's not about the "killer play;" it's about making a whole lot of subtly better plays. The same applies to business. In a competitive market, the winners are those who know how to make the subtly better plays.

 

[AirplaneFan]

LI 2004,

...

If the bottom fares are raised just a little, but the top fares are lowered significantly, you will see higher AVERAGE fares, therefore better yield. Those who might otherwise book on an LCC would consider US. Most people fail to consider one major limitation of the LCC's--INTERLINING.

When a problem occurs on a LCC (just watch Airlline), there is no option but to take another flight on the same carrier--if all are sold out, you might be stranded for days. With US, or other majors, you can be sent to another airport (ie. to LGA from ISP), or rebooked on another carrier. This cannot happen with WN or B6.

The old addage is you get what you pay for--and this is true. One of the reasons for the success of the LCC's (as well as a problem for US), is the fact that with LCC's you have lowered expectations, and those lowered expectations are met satisfactorily. In US' case, most customers have higher expectations, which are not being met. I recently flew Jet Blue for the first time, and while it was not US' level of service, it was exactly as advertised.

Another thing I am seeing is they have adjusted the timing of ISP-PHL flights, making most connections difficult if not impossible. While I understand te concept of depeaking a hub, moving the 7:10AM to 7:50, and the 11:30 to 12:15 is a mistake--these flights could have been moved 30-45 minutes EARLIER rather than later--making more connections possible, rather than eliminating them. If the intent is to make PHL more point to point rather than a hub, one has to wonder when (or IF) ISP will stay in the system at all, or flights will be moved to CLT (I wish).

Unfortunately it is getting worse rather than better at ISP, and I fear US is sending us a message--go fly someone else because ISP is not important to us.

Sad---really sad......

My Best to you all.....

This attitude is why U is currently headed for failure.

Lets look at your "arguments"

1) Interlining - This is such a non-factor. JetBlue must fly 40 flights a day from NYC to Florida. SW flies 10 nonstops a day to Florida, plus many more connection opportunities thru BWI and BNA. I hardly doubt that there are many passengers that are stranded at airports. Plus the "majors" have 6 hours to rebook a passenger on a subsequent flight before having to turn them over to an interline partner. So if your flight gets cancelled the chances of getting to Florida sooner are much better if you book on a LCC than on a "major".

2) Does U not have the same problems that SW? How do you handle the drunks? The beliggerent passengers? I see SW personnel handle customers with the highest level of professionalism.

3) "You get what you pay for". That is where you are way off base. You don't get what you pay for when you pay U's outrageous fares. A fancy restaurant does not panic when McDonald's move into the neighborhood. They deliver a superior product and so they can charge a premium price. U does not deliver a premium product, just an arrogant attitude. When customers have had the chance to choose SW or another carrier the customers increasingly choose SW. AA got run over by SW in Texas and California. Why do U's customers continue to flock to SW and JBLU? Because passenger are tired of being abused by U's pricing policy.

I know you are an ardent supporter of U and if you had to get to Baltimore you would choose to connect thru PHL instead of flying nonstop on SW. You are in

 

[Finish or Ignore]

By now you should be familiar with with the USairways:

Don't Go Fares

 

[Art at ISP]

My position is the same as Piney's--no assigned seat, no Art.

You are correct that US no longer offers superior service to WN, but if there is a problem, there are more choices. You are also correct that U is driving people away with the ridiculous fares.

You are wrong to say a business traveler wouldn't pay 10 to 30 dollars more to avoid WN however, as most people I know would. They won't however spend $100 or more to do the same.

I recently had to be in ROC-my choices were US on a buzz bucket for $400 or B6 on a new A320 for $190--I took B6, but I really had no choice. I had an assigned seat, and the flight met my expectations (which were lowered in the first place).

I am not going to debate my reasons for not flying WN--it just isn't going to happen. If I have to be in Baltimore, it is actually more time and cost effective for me to drive.

My best to you all.......