Lear70
JAFFO
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2003
- Posts
- 7,487
I want to know who moved this chat into "non-aviation".
We're talking about the biggest, single change in the face of commercial aviation history since deregulations and 9/11 and you think it's NOT about aviation?
Longhorn, if this was you, I'm going to recommend a reasonable-suspicion drug test to your employer.
If it was someone else, you might want to redefine your definition of what is "non-aviation" versus what is "aviation" oriented.
Genius. Now... back to the AVIATION ISSUE
The article smacks of pre-conditioning the American public for upcoming fare increases, giving a lot of good reasons why they have to increase, but it also is alarmist in predicting how much loads are going to fall off without giving a price point at which that will happen.
I can't believe the entire day has gone by and no one has even briefly commented on the USA today front page article regarding oil prices, imminent fare increases and capacity pull-downs, and the result on leisure travel and related travel industry segments (cruises, hotels, etc).
While I think they are being alarmist at just how many people will quit flying, they did make it blatantly obvious that fare increases are coming. The question is, at what price point do you think people will stop flying?
For the leisure traveler? Certainly $10 a piece wouldn't stop them, but would $50? $100? With a family of 4 or 5 going to see the grandparents or going on a Disney Cruise, add $500 plus taxes to the bill and you just blew your spending cash for a couple days once you get to your vacation destination.
For the business traveler? Most of them expense it, but at what point will the manager say the cutoff is for viability of a face-to-face meeting or convention is worth it? $100 increase? $500 increase?
It's an important distinction because the LCC segment that relies so heavily on the leisure traveler and small-business executive, that breaking point becomes life or death for the carrier.
The legacies have, in all likelihood, a different breaking price point, but I can't imagine it's THAT much higher than the LCC's break point.
Although the article did a pi*s-poor job of spelling this out, where do YOU guys think the breaking point is and at what point will we suffer major passenger fall-out?
We're talking about the biggest, single change in the face of commercial aviation history since deregulations and 9/11 and you think it's NOT about aviation?
Longhorn, if this was you, I'm going to recommend a reasonable-suspicion drug test to your employer.
If it was someone else, you might want to redefine your definition of what is "non-aviation" versus what is "aviation" oriented.Genius. Now... back to the AVIATION ISSUE
The article smacks of pre-conditioning the American public for upcoming fare increases, giving a lot of good reasons why they have to increase, but it also is alarmist in predicting how much loads are going to fall off without giving a price point at which that will happen.
I can't believe the entire day has gone by and no one has even briefly commented on the USA today front page article regarding oil prices, imminent fare increases and capacity pull-downs, and the result on leisure travel and related travel industry segments (cruises, hotels, etc).
While I think they are being alarmist at just how many people will quit flying, they did make it blatantly obvious that fare increases are coming. The question is, at what price point do you think people will stop flying?
For the leisure traveler? Certainly $10 a piece wouldn't stop them, but would $50? $100? With a family of 4 or 5 going to see the grandparents or going on a Disney Cruise, add $500 plus taxes to the bill and you just blew your spending cash for a couple days once you get to your vacation destination.
For the business traveler? Most of them expense it, but at what point will the manager say the cutoff is for viability of a face-to-face meeting or convention is worth it? $100 increase? $500 increase?
It's an important distinction because the LCC segment that relies so heavily on the leisure traveler and small-business executive, that breaking point becomes life or death for the carrier.
The legacies have, in all likelihood, a different breaking price point, but I can't imagine it's THAT much higher than the LCC's break point.
Although the article did a pi*s-poor job of spelling this out, where do YOU guys think the breaking point is and at what point will we suffer major passenger fall-out?
