VA-keeping competitors honest

[Flyer1015]

United wasn't suppose to increase SFO-EWR from 7 to 14 daily flights until June. Same for LAX. However, they already did it now in April, pretty much right when VX started EWR service. Before, the capacity increase could be argued as a summer increase. Now, it's obvious it is to drive VX out of their monopoly route.

 

[jonjuan]

United wasn't suppose to increase SFO-EWR from 7 to 14 daily flights until June. Same for LAX. However, they already did it now in April, pretty much right when VX started EWR service. Before, the capacity increase could be argued as a summer increase. Now, it's obvious it is to drive VX out of their monopoly route.

Branson claims his success has quite a bit to do with service. Let the customer choose which service he/she would like to pay for. Branson should love the competition as he is convinced the legacies will be back in ch 11 which is good for him.

 

[fam62c]

Why is it fair for a start-up airline to enter a market and price their service below cost (as VA has done since day one) and lose money in an attempt to win customers but when the competition responds with the same tactic it's unfair? If VA is going to price their product below cost they have no right to complain about unfair competition.

Sir Richard chose to enter one of the most competitive air travel markets in the world at the worst possible time when there was already excess capacity and somehow it's a surprise that they can't turn a profit? Sir Richard made a very bad investment, it's nobody's fault but his own. Business is business, you have to expect established players to defend their turf against upstart competitors.

If VA really offers a superior product they should be able to compete on that basis and the customers should be willing to pay extra for it and they should make money. So far it hasn't worked, I'm sure the customers love the product but that doesn't mean enough of them will choose VA and pay high enough fares for VA to make money. Everybody would like a Mercedes for the price of a Chevy but how long would Mercedes stay in business if they offered that? No premium service carrier in the US domestic market has ever survived with that model. Midwest did well for quite awhile in the 1990's but the economy and industry landscape was much different then. They had a tiny niche that they were unable to expand and their business model eventually proved to be invalid. VA is trying the same thing on a larger scale with less success.

 

[bri5150]

VA is much different than Midwest. They had every single seat as business class. We have 8 and the rest are coach. Did both concentrate on customer service? Yup, but that is about the only thing that is similar. Admittedley, I don't know where we started our fares, but this sounds like a chicken or egg argument. One thing is certain though...we added 6 routes of service, United responded by adding 14-16. Again, very different tactic.

 

[nordo_2]

VA will be ok. Or they wont. Brandson critique of US competitive fairness is empty spin.

 

[jonjuan]

It's a seat. 300 bucks for 5 hours. United frequent flyers (read: high yielding business travelers) will stay due to the massive number of greater opportunities to upgrade, drink, and eat for free, sit in the departure lounges, and fly anywhere in the world using their free miles.

By the way, how's Virgin Atlantic doing, financially?

 

[Ralph Cramden]

The west coast folks love us and understand the service. The east coast folks don't know us from Adam. I actually had a guy in PHL get on and point to the big cushy seats in first class and asked "It's sit anywhere, right, like Southwest?" Um, no, your seat is 25E, next to the lav door and the screaming brat.

The only unfair part of the UniCal response in EWR is where their extra slots came from. Word is they were "unused dormant slots". We've been trying to get into the EWR market for 5 years, and they have slots in their back pocket. Use it or loose it should be the rule in a slot restricted airport. Otherwise, bring it on, we compete in every market we serve.

 

[Andy]

The only unfair part of the UniCal response in EWR is where their extra slots came from. Word is they were "unused dormant slots". We've been trying to get into the EWR market for 5 years, and they have slots in their back pocket. Use it or loose it should be the rule in a slot restricted airport. Otherwise, bring it on, we compete in every market we serve.

Seriously?
AMR is leasing 15 takeoff and landing slots to VX.
AMR cancelled 4 takeoff and landing slot leases from Porter Airlines. The least number of flights Porter operates daily out of Newark is 8 so they were using all of their leased slots.
AMR cancelled 10 takeoff and landing slot leases from United Airlines. Those slots were used by regional partners.

As part of merger consolidation, United increased the number of hub to hub flights from EWR to LAX and SFO. Those slots were previously used to fly to other airports. United has moved connecting service to those cities from EWR to IAD.

Unused dormant slots at EWR? Sure. Just like there are unused dormant slots at DCA. And LGA. And JFK. And LHR. Seriously?

 

[Ralph Cramden]

Andy, if your info is more correct that what I was told then I have no beef with UA shifting slots from orher markets to compete. I am sure UAL management knows exactly the cost of the shift.

OTOH, if the slots came from thin air or a back pocket, my opinion doesn't change.

 

[Flyer1015]

Why is it fair for a start-up airline to enter a market and price their service below cost (as VA has done since day one) and lose money in an attempt to win customers but when the competition responds with the same tactic it's unfair? If VA is going to price their product below cost they have no right to complain about unfair competition.

Sir Richard chose to enter one of the most competitive air travel markets in the world at the worst possible time when there was already excess capacity and somehow it's a surprise that they can't turn a profit? Sir Richard made a very bad investment, it's nobody's fault but his own. Business is business, you have to expect established players to defend their turf against upstart competitors.

If VA really offers a superior product they should be able to compete on that basis and the customers should be willing to pay extra for it and they should make money. So far it hasn't worked, I'm sure the customers love the product but that doesn't mean enough of them will choose VA and pay high enough fares for VA to make money. Everybody would like a Mercedes for the price of a Chevy but how long would Mercedes stay in business if they offered that? No premium service carrier in the US domestic market has ever survived with that model. Midwest did well for quite awhile in the 1990's but the economy and industry landscape was much different then. They had a tiny niche that they were unable to expand and their business model eventually proved to be invalid. VA is trying the same thing on a larger scale with less success.

Because VX doesn't enter a market by dumping huge capacity in it. They enter with 1, 2, or at most 3 daily flights. Worst case, United could have matched the fares and kept their 7 daily flights from SFO-EWR and 6 LAX-EWR. Instead, not only did they match the fare, they doubled the daily flights to 14/15 each way!