Looks like GK wants to keep AT's ATL, but change schedule a bit

[Full of LUV]

This is precisely where historic great customer service and no bag fees will pay large dividends.

Worst Major Airlines

#5. Delta

AQR Score: -1.22
Delta had the highest customer complaint rate (2.00 per 100,000 passengers) of all airlines in 2010, including regional carriers. Additionally, Delta placed in the number six spot on Business Insider's "Worst Companies" list. Take note of Delta's baggage fees below, as they can get quite cumbersome if you're checking heavy or large bags.
Domestic Baggage Fees

• 1st Bag: $25 ($23 if checked online)
• 2nd Bag: $35 ($32 if checked online)
• 3rd Bag: $125

Whata,
I think the point about bag fees that you miss is that the loyal / biz flyers rarely if ever pay fees. They are allowed waivers on everything. Even you can if you get yourself a DAL AMEX. Those fees are for the expedia / kayak crowd that want a $99 round trip from stl to mco. They get to show up as low fares, but you pay for what you use. I guess time will tell if bag fees will be ruinous for the major airlines.

 

[madjack]

"And no I am not a SWA "hater". Just making an observation."

I have many friends at DAL, they like the advantages of flying international and the pay rates are ok...but you make more at SWA...that is just an observation also...

 

[Full of LUV]

"And no I am not a SWA "hater". Just making an observation."

I have many friends at DAL, they like the advantages of flying international and the pay rates are ok...but you make more at SWA...that is just an observation also...

Great for them in 2011. Wasn't the case in 2001 or 1991 or 1981. Hopefully we'll all be around to see what's the situation in 2021 and 2031.
LUV

 

[Dan Roman]

Great for them in 2011. Wasn't the case in 2001 or 1991 or 1981. Hopefully we'll all be around to see what's the situation in 2021 and 2031.
LUV

Well that's certainly true and it's pretty foolish to compare a couple years against the big picture. What's really foolish is to miss the fact that we all are making pretty good salaries at the legacy level but it's not were it should be and likely has bottomed out. Hopefully the downward trend caused by cutthroat competition will reverse itself. But to compare one against the other in some kind of ego thing is a fools game.

 

[redflyer65]

Whata,
Even you can if you get yourself a DAL AMEX. .

I was always blown away by this mentality from Delta.

It's like charging for mustard for your hotdog. It was free yesterday, but the new policy is we charge for it. Unless.. you buy a coke, then the mustard is free.

Unbelievable.

 

[Sacha]

Question. What exactly is a full service airline? Domestically I mean. Do you get a meals on China Plates? Do you get free cocktails? When my wife and I travel we almost always go full fare to avoid the non-rev thing plus the wife goes on business trips about once a month. Pleasure trips we go coach and the wife usually goes Business Class for work. Other than SWA, we go on American to Alaska and Montana and Delta for business. I just don't recall any fancy meals and free drinks for our full service tickets for many, many years. Her business class seats to ATL,LGA and MDW get her a better seat but she hasn't seen any Filet Mignon lately.

 

[Full of LUV]

Question. What exactly is a full service airline? Domestically I mean. Do you get a meals on China Plates? Do you get free cocktails? When my wife and I travel we almost always go full fare to avoid the non-rev thing plus the wife goes on business trips about once a month. Pleasure trips we go coach and the wife usually goes Business Class for work. Other than SWA, we go on American to Alaska and Montana and Delta for business. I just don't recall any fancy meals and free drinks for our full service tickets for many, many years. Her business class seats to ATL,LGA and MDW get her a better seat but she hasn't seen any Filet Mignon lately.

Full service is:
The ability to reserve a good seat ahead of takeoff.
The ability to go first class when wanted.
The ability to buy food if in coach.
The ability to use internet.
The ability to travel worldwide with one airline or loyalty program.
The ability to use a private lounge with services while waiting in airports.

Full service isn't free. But to berate airlines that offer food against an airline that offers chips and a soda for their food is a little dishonest. Full Service airlines are not for everyone, but either are Low Cost Carriers either. I think it's noteworthy how the LCC's have moved closer to the majors and the majors have been moved closer to the LCC model as well.

 

[Dan Roman]

Question. What exactly is a full service airline? Domestically I mean. Do you get a meals on China Plates? Do you get free cocktails? When my wife and I travel we almost always go full fare to avoid the non-rev thing plus the wife goes on business trips about once a month. Pleasure trips we go coach and the wife usually goes Business Class for work. Other than SWA, we go on American to Alaska and Montana and Delta for business. I just don't recall any fancy meals and free drinks for our full service tickets for many, many years. Her business class seats to ATL,LGA and MDW get her a better seat but she hasn't seen any Filet Mignon lately.

I would say full service means the ability to go more places and the option to have more choices. You can get a cheap seat in coach or you can purchase a business class seat or you can go first class overseas. You can earn miles to go anywhere in the world you want, you can sit in a private lounge while you wait etc etc. The more options one has the more full service an airline is.

 

[Dan Roman]

To funny, we posted that at the same time. I should have waited as the answer was pretty obvious.

 

[Dornier 335]

some easy reading for the armchair experts

source


The New Airline & Air Service Strategy Metrics


American Airlines is dropping SFO-Honolulu this fall. Earlier this year, the carrier dropped Boston-SFO.
The good-ole-boys network on Wall Street attributed this to AA being driven out by low-fare competition.
"AA can't compete with those low-cost guys, like Southwest." they'll pontificate, not having a clue about the subject matter. Not a clue about data like pay rates for an American Airlines 777 captain are less than for a Southwest 737 captain. Or, that in the SFO-BOS market, comparing LCC jetBlue and American, AA was the strongest of the two carriers carrier in the game.
It's yet another example proving that a Ouija Board is often a better source of aviation investment advice than what comes from some of the gurus on the 'Street. They tend to be consensus-dwellers. Looking at hard data is not their M.O.
Whole New Metrics. The fact is that both of these markets pushed 80% load factors for American in 2010. Boston was 84.1% and they had almost 20% of the total market, the largest single share between the two carriers (AA & B6). Not only that, but AA commanded a $40 fare premium over jetBlue.
So, why yank flights when they were essentially full?
Because in today's airline business, it's not "more passengers" or "market share" that are on the scoreboard anymore. It's maximizing return on resources - i.e., putting planes where they leverage the airline's brand and alliance power to the maximum. American gets nearly zip on-line feed at Boston or SFO. So, if the system contribution is less than in other applications of the same aircraft. it's bye-bye for the service. If that means ceding traffic territory to other airlines in order to get higher returns, so be it.
All Carriers Are Moving Away From Just Market Share. It's across the entire airline industry. The traditional strategy of operating some markets just to maintain brand presence in a metro area is a luxury that airlines can no longer afford.
For examples, Southwest is dropping out of two major commuter markets - Spokane-Seattle and Philadelphia-Pittsburgh. In both markets WN underperformed vs. "legacy" carriers. In PHL-PIT, Southwest clocked in at a 54.5% load factor v US Airways' 75.%. While Southwest carried slightly more passengers than US Airways (due to aircraft gauge), its paper-thin market edge (40% of the market v US Airways 37%) came at an expensive 11% yield disadvantage.
When go-juice is costing $3+ per gallon, that's not affordable any more. It's great to tell the city that the airline has a "commitment" - but that doesn't include losing money just to show the colors on an important route.
The GEG-SEA market, Southwest had a tough go against Alaska Airlines, which kept 78.0% of its seats full in the year ending 1Q 2011. Southwest? 54.4%. Yup, the route is an important market for building consumer loyalty in both SEA and GEG, but it's one where Southwest has found it can make more $$ by moving its lift elsewhere.
Next to watch: PHL-BOS. It's a big half-million O&D market. Southwest is getting a 48.1% load factor. US Airways is at 76.9%. Not only that, but US Airways - which still captures almost two-thirds of the traffic - has a whopping 40% yield premium on the route compared to WN. That's not a typo: it's 48.9 cents for US Airways v Southwest's 34.3 cents. (Just in passing, this is the type of analysis subscribers to Aviation DataMiner can do in a snap, and get a real indication of what air service direction airlines may be taking in specific markets.)
Point: Southwest is the best at what it does, but its product fits in some markets and not as well in others. So, like other carriers, it will take its airplane marbles out of games where it can't win. Or where it can't win as much as in other places. It's the new planning dynamic for American and every other US carrier, too.
Air Service Planning: It's Knowing The Carrier's Strategy First. What this means for airports trying to build - or just keep - air service is that the #1 issue is knowing what the airline's overall market strategy will be in the future.
Wasting money on surveys, doing gee-look-at-all-the-lost-traffic leakage studies, and inflicting gigantic 50-slide presentation decks on glazed-over airline planners won't do diddly in the future to move the airline decision-needle. It's knowing what the target carrier's future revenue strategies will be, and matching the community's opportunities (if they actually exist) to them.
It also renders useless the oft-pushed schemes at small cities to chase after "that low fare carrier we deserve." The fact is that without an A-380 load of cash - like millions that small communities can't afford - it is not going to happen. Look at it this way: if Southwest can't make a go of Philly-Pitt, it has zero chance of considering a small town in Montana. It would violate Southwest's non-compete with Mother Theresa. She agreed not to go into the airline business, and Southwest agreed not to do charity work.