Could Frontier be the final piece of the puzzle to the US Airways/America West merger?
See Article
😀 😀 😀
See Article
USA320Pilot said:
😀 😀 😀
USAirways/America West Merger Talks -WSJ
- Thread starter phillyguy
- Start date
Bluestreak
Advanced
- Joined
- May 20, 2003
- Messages
- 184
- Reaction score
- 0
Add Frontier too?? I like that idea. Does GECAS have any exposure at Frontier?
Add AWA, add Frontier, dump Mesa, and build up US Airways wholly owneds from the planes MESA leases from GECAS. Air Wisky could stay in Denver and we could compete head to head with United in the west. Delta would be in a heap of trouble also. The only thing Delta has better than U right now is their east/west network. With the addition of AWA and Frontier Delta would have nothing on us.
I am really dreaming now.
Add AWA, add Frontier, dump Mesa, and build up US Airways wholly owneds from the planes MESA leases from GECAS. Air Wisky could stay in Denver and we could compete head to head with United in the west. Delta would be in a heap of trouble also. The only thing Delta has better than U right now is their east/west network. With the addition of AWA and Frontier Delta would have nothing on us.
I am really dreaming now.
the turtle
Advanced
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2003
- Messages
- 224
- Reaction score
- 0
Bluestreak said:
You got that right, Brother!
We haven't seen nor heard from JO in about six weeks....
A quiet JO is a very scary thing.
US Airways Marriage Might Not Be Made in Heaven: Doron Levin
April 25 (Bloomberg) -- US Airways Group Inc., in bankruptcy for the second time, hasn't completely lost its attractiveness, as the latest merger talks with America West Holdings Corp. signify.
Among its remaining assets, Arlington, Virginia-based US Airways owns airport gates and landing slots and has well- developed routes on the East Coast of the U.S., especially at LaGuardia in New York, Logan in Boston and Ronald Reagan in Washington.
Bloomberg Article
April 25 (Bloomberg) -- US Airways Group Inc., in bankruptcy for the second time, hasn't completely lost its attractiveness, as the latest merger talks with America West Holdings Corp. signify.
Among its remaining assets, Arlington, Virginia-based US Airways owns airport gates and landing slots and has well- developed routes on the East Coast of the U.S., especially at LaGuardia in New York, Logan in Boston and Ronald Reagan in Washington.
Bloomberg Article
wash post link
Airlines' Merger Could Benefit Frequent Fliers
By Keith L. Alexander
Tuesday, April 26, 2005; Page E01
If America West and US Airways merge and create a large low-cost carrier, the deal could be a victory for frequent fliers.
The new airline could present travelers with one of the largest and far-reaching frequent flier programs of any budget carrier, including Southwest, JetBlue and AirTran. It could even have a program that rivals those of some of the largest international carriers, including American, United and Delta Air Lines.
America West's frequent fliers would gain access to US Airways' routes to the Caribbean and numerous East Coast cities. US Airways' business travelers would get opportunities to fly on America West's routes to Mexico and the West Coast.
and...
But Randy Petersen, publisher of Inside Flyer, said the biggest advantage US Airways' frequent fliers would get from a merger would be peace of mind. The airline has been plunged into bankruptcy twice in the past two years, raising questions not only about the future of the airline but of frequent flier's accounts.
"These two airlines would do well together, and it's good for members in both programs. But those US Airways frequent fliers would finally be able to stop worrying about the future of their miles," Petersen said.
Airlines' Merger Could Benefit Frequent Fliers
By Keith L. Alexander
Tuesday, April 26, 2005; Page E01
If America West and US Airways merge and create a large low-cost carrier, the deal could be a victory for frequent fliers.
The new airline could present travelers with one of the largest and far-reaching frequent flier programs of any budget carrier, including Southwest, JetBlue and AirTran. It could even have a program that rivals those of some of the largest international carriers, including American, United and Delta Air Lines.
America West's frequent fliers would gain access to US Airways' routes to the Caribbean and numerous East Coast cities. US Airways' business travelers would get opportunities to fly on America West's routes to Mexico and the West Coast.
and...
But Randy Petersen, publisher of Inside Flyer, said the biggest advantage US Airways' frequent fliers would get from a merger would be peace of mind. The airline has been plunged into bankruptcy twice in the past two years, raising questions not only about the future of the airline but of frequent flier's accounts.
"These two airlines would do well together, and it's good for members in both programs. But those US Airways frequent fliers would finally be able to stop worrying about the future of their miles," Petersen said.
Trip Confirmed
Advanced
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2002
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 0
America West has announced that effective May 1, ALL reservations will require ticketing within 24 hours, or will be cancelled. Not non-refundable tickets, ALL fares.
We do no leisure, just corporate.
This is suicide.
If there is a merger, will US demand the same?
Northwest/KLM on 15April changed their rules. Cancelled non-refundable tickets with all airlines have always been good for exchange for one year. NW/KL now have 90 days, then the tkt is forfeited. Worthless, gone.lost.. There are non refundable BUSINESS class fares in many markets these days.
Someone is going to lose 3 grand because the meeting won't be rescheduled within 90 days????
The drop in sales has been astounding in my office. Little sticky notes on computers all over the place agents have put there to remind themselves not to offer these these flights to callers.
Not a corporate decision, an individual decision by each travel agent.
Your opinion?
We do no leisure, just corporate.
This is suicide.
If there is a merger, will US demand the same?
Northwest/KLM on 15April changed their rules. Cancelled non-refundable tickets with all airlines have always been good for exchange for one year. NW/KL now have 90 days, then the tkt is forfeited. Worthless, gone.lost.. There are non refundable BUSINESS class fares in many markets these days.
Someone is going to lose 3 grand because the meeting won't be rescheduled within 90 days????
The drop in sales has been astounding in my office. Little sticky notes on computers all over the place agents have put there to remind themselves not to offer these these flights to callers.
Not a corporate decision, an individual decision by each travel agent.
Your opinion?
TripConfirmed:
You seem to be talking two different issues.
HP Requiring ticketing within 24 hours probably isn't a big deal for refundable fares... Ticket it, then refund it 48 hours later... No big deal. I think most non-refundable fares already carry this type of restriction. If its non-refundable, you have to use it within whatever their policy is - I would guess one year since it seems to be a standard.
This seems very different from the 90 Day use-it-or-lose-it NW policy. You are right... this policy is rather restrictive vs. the prior 1 year policy. But this might be the "wave of the future". I learned the hard way with jetBlue. I bought a non-refundable ticket, but when my plans changed I said, ok I'll just use it later, and decided to "no-show" because, well, thats how it works on other airlines.. Well, jetBlue's policy is that if you don't cancel in advance (i.e. no-show) you forfiet your ticket. Period. If you cancel in advance, you can use that towards another purchase I believe up to one year out, with a rebooking fee (I think its one-year don't quote me, as remember I no-showed). I was rather annoyed, but the long and short of it was this: I didn't read the fine print, and I did not purchase on the basis of the fine print. I think a lot of folks (perhaps Corp Biz customers aside) will fall into the same boat I did.
You seem to be talking two different issues.
HP Requiring ticketing within 24 hours probably isn't a big deal for refundable fares... Ticket it, then refund it 48 hours later... No big deal. I think most non-refundable fares already carry this type of restriction. If its non-refundable, you have to use it within whatever their policy is - I would guess one year since it seems to be a standard.
This seems very different from the 90 Day use-it-or-lose-it NW policy. You are right... this policy is rather restrictive vs. the prior 1 year policy. But this might be the "wave of the future". I learned the hard way with jetBlue. I bought a non-refundable ticket, but when my plans changed I said, ok I'll just use it later, and decided to "no-show" because, well, thats how it works on other airlines.. Well, jetBlue's policy is that if you don't cancel in advance (i.e. no-show) you forfiet your ticket. Period. If you cancel in advance, you can use that towards another purchase I believe up to one year out, with a rebooking fee (I think its one-year don't quote me, as remember I no-showed). I was rather annoyed, but the long and short of it was this: I didn't read the fine print, and I did not purchase on the basis of the fine print. I think a lot of folks (perhaps Corp Biz customers aside) will fall into the same boat I did.
Trip Confirmed
Advanced
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2002
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes, I was throwing two different issues into the mix.
But the "just refund it 48 hours later" doesn't wash with passengers, here's why.
You buy a tkt at $647.96.
The meeting is cancelled. The average time for the refund to hit his credit card is 6-8 weeks. Were you aware of that?
This meeting gets changed again.You're looking at a third tkt on this poor sap's card.
I've seen clients screaming in Jan-Feb because refunds sent though around Christmas or Thanksgiving went 3 months. Around holidays, this is common.
If they will allow the original tkt to sit, and be exchanged at no fee for the later date,that might help, but not much.
They haven't said, so I take that as a no. Still, the pax has to pay the credit card company for a fully refundable flight he did not fly on.
I realize HP is domestic, but this scenario is not unusual. I had a 9 leg Asian business traveler who had to change a June trip for the EIGHTH time today. It was not his choice.
They won't go this route as long as there is another option. Trust me.
As far as NW/KLM , they are nuts, IMHO. Just plain nuts.
Our passengers don't have to read the rules, we quote them as we book them.
But is common opinion in our industry that this will drive more people away from self-booking sites into live travel agents. I believe that opinion is correct .
Have you ever read the rules ? The general public cannot understand them, and won't try. Hell, 10% of the the time I can't even make sense out of them, and when I call the carrier, their res agents don't have a clue either.
By the way, back to my original question. Do you think USAIR would follow the HP tkt ddln rule?
But the "just refund it 48 hours later" doesn't wash with passengers, here's why.
You buy a tkt at $647.96.
The meeting is cancelled. The average time for the refund to hit his credit card is 6-8 weeks. Were you aware of that?
This meeting gets changed again.You're looking at a third tkt on this poor sap's card.
I've seen clients screaming in Jan-Feb because refunds sent though around Christmas or Thanksgiving went 3 months. Around holidays, this is common.
If they will allow the original tkt to sit, and be exchanged at no fee for the later date,that might help, but not much.
They haven't said, so I take that as a no. Still, the pax has to pay the credit card company for a fully refundable flight he did not fly on.
I realize HP is domestic, but this scenario is not unusual. I had a 9 leg Asian business traveler who had to change a June trip for the EIGHTH time today. It was not his choice.
They won't go this route as long as there is another option. Trust me.
As far as NW/KLM , they are nuts, IMHO. Just plain nuts.
Our passengers don't have to read the rules, we quote them as we book them.
But is common opinion in our industry that this will drive more people away from self-booking sites into live travel agents. I believe that opinion is correct .
Have you ever read the rules ? The general public cannot understand them, and won't try. Hell, 10% of the the time I can't even make sense out of them, and when I call the carrier, their res agents don't have a clue either.
By the way, back to my original question. Do you think USAIR would follow the HP tkt ddln rule?
Trip Confirmed
Advanced
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2002
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 0
funguy2 said:
FYI, most airlines (I think all, with the exception of Southwest) now have the rule that if the plane takes off without you and you haven't cancelled, you lose the ticket. A few allow you to cancel if done by midnight the day of scheduled flight.
I know the midnight rule makes no sense, after all, the plane left without you. Dumb huh?
Anywhoooo, in ALL cases with the exception of NW/KLM , if you cancel, that tkt is good for one year for exchange with the penalty (usually $100.00 domestic or 200-up for intl.
New NW/KLM employee policy, get gun, shoot self in foot. If foot is not available, head is okay.
I think the ticket within 24 or it cancels is a good idea. I dont know how many seats I've seen (especially around the holidays) that are last minute bookings booked in F,Y,B. I've seen quite a few large parties holding seats for whatever reason (maybe they are on another carrier that has problems and they want protection) and then they dont cancel. It could potentially open up quite a few seats to offer for real last minute sales. At least if the group wants to hold the seats its going to tie up their credit card. Also a lot of times I've seen fares booked for medical, bereavement that are no shows no cancels. I dont know if they find someone else or decide not to go, but since its got a TL30 on it, the seats sit there when someone else could be using them.
I'm not sure I like the 90 day rule though. I think 1 year is a much more appropriate time for an unused ticket to sit.
I'm not sure I like the 90 day rule though. I think 1 year is a much more appropriate time for an unused ticket to sit.
