Sunday, April 30, 2006
Skype hits 100 million users
Flip seats may cut risk of DVT for airline passengers
This is great fresh thinking about the increasingly limited space on-board. Airlines dodged the bullet on DVT. But the issue has not gone away. Flights are getting longer. Indeed, in our interview with leading California cardiologist Dennis Goodman, we learned that DVT becomes an issue on any flight over four hours. (visit www.iagportal.com to hear the interview).
----------
Telegraph -- Cinema-style "flip seats" could be introduced on aircraft to speed boarding and help cut the risk of Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT).
New composites are leading to thinner seat backs, but the flip seats are seen as an even better way of increasing the space available. According to Aida, the German manufacturers, passengers will have three times as much room as on a conventional seat.
Boarding will be quicker, because passengers will be able to move swiftly into their seats having stowed their luggage, which in turn means that other passengers will not be backed up the aisle.
One of the biggest advantages will be the ability it gives passengers to stretch their legs. By just standing up they will be able to do a range of exercises which could reduce the risk of DVT, which affects more than 8,000 British passengers a year.
Friday, April 28, 2006
Airline Branding - Much Ado About Nothing
Fliers would use iTunes if available
Fresh thinking from Boyd Group
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Le Google
Olympic & Dr Kevorkian
Podcast interviews
Is the 757 making a comback?
The mysterious Taiwan 747-8 order
The Southwest Blog
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
What is Delta up to?
Those Standing Room "Seats"
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
787 sales help the 350
Monday, April 24, 2006
What does one make of this?
Connexion Interview
Airbus 340 gets a lift
Sunday, April 23, 2006
BAE & British angst
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Extremists May Target Private US Planes - TSA
Friday, April 21, 2006
New Mobile Travel Tool
A finger in the dike
Euroland/Italian chaos
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Southwest & ATA - we told you so
BA's new pricing
Dummy of the Week #11 - TSA again!
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
MAXjet flying higher
Monday, April 17, 2006
Today's non-story - Boeing & Whistleblowers
Boeing to Lay Off About 900 Kansas Workers
IFE hardware prices start to fall
Webaroo
Here's the story; Webaroo is an Internet startup that had a great idea - how can we help all those folks who have no Internet connection or have laptop or Smart phone and are mobile - say, on an airplane or train. No problem, simply log on to Webaroo and download the client to your PC or laptop then select from the various "packs" available. Right now they are building a library that is free online and updated daily. You send the pack to your portable devise and thousands of compressed HTML pages are transferred to the device. Let the surfing begin! Webaroo has a cadre of technologists in California and India who have developed an algorithm that picks a targeted subject (like San Francisco, or Wikipedia), and the client downloads the pack off the Webaroo server. Webaroo told us that they can drill down one link on their whole collection of websites but plan to develop more link depth later... all for less than a megabyte per pack. Think of it as a cached Internet that is updated by the client the next time you log on. Hey, this service was made for travelers. Webaroo told IFExpress that airlines and vendors have free access to the service and we could see a time when an airline would place the client on their intranet server and update whenever they landed. Phones, laptops and portables that are surf capable can use Webaroo. Expect to see web packs in the future that provide news, destinations, weather, or whatever. You pick your pack and you are good to go. The Webaroo model will, no doubt, be driven by a paid search model (Oops, Google territory), and we expect other search providers to up the ante if this idea takes off. We hear that Acer portable laptops will soon ship with this feature. Check out Webaroo.com and surf with or without an Internet connection.
Dummy of the week #10
OFCOM on in-flight phones
Tanker RFP out soon
A350 redesign?
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
ElAl sneaking up to Airbus?
ALPA goes mad
US market share of international tourism at all-time low?
This chart shows how much the top ten US states spend on their tourism marketing. Clearly at the federal level the US "under spends" on its marketing the country as a destination.
Moreover, the Travel Industry Association (TIA and quoted below) maintains the US international tourism is at an all time low. Beware what you read. The official source of international travelers to the US is not TIA. The official source is the OTTI. Their website offers some very different perspectives on inbound tourism. Use this link .
Bottom line? The US has increased its share of overseas tourism in the past two years. The US is third in the world after France and Spain as a destination. The US has a commanding lead in tourism spending.
So the sky is not falling. The US is a hot destination and US taxpayers are getting this job done on a pittance. An interesting statistic would show how much spending each country is putting into its tourism marketing efforts and divide that by the number of tourists. We bet the US is in a league of its own.
--------------
FT -- US market share of international tourism is at an all-time low, dropping 35 per cent between 1992 and 2004, which translates into $286bn in lost revenue, according to the Travel Industry Association of America (TIA).
While about 20 US states have overseas marketing campaigns, there has not been a unified US-themed one in 15 years. The issue has become urgent as countries such as Australia and Ireland market themselves aggressively and capture greater share of global tourism.
Mr Rasulo blamed the slow response from the US on lack of cohesiveness from the diverse travel industry, which broadly includes hotels, airlines, restaurants, car rental agencies, cruise lines and related businesses.
"The travel industry has not spoken with a single voice," said Mr Rasulo. "We hope we're changing the channel."
Airbus rumor
US carriers start to turn around
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
MRO - On the Brink of Structural Change
Credit Card Fees - the next cost cutting item among airlines
'Babyboomers' have highest look-to-book ratio
| The piece below confirms what Richard Eastman said to us late last month. Baby Boomers have the money and are a very significant part of the online travel buying public. Note the piece mentions only 10% actually book online although they are voracious readers of content. This is the generation that is used to working to find information as opposed to younger generations would have less patience and endurance for "work". The younger you are, the less brand loyalty you have and conversely the older you are the more you value a brand you know and trust. --------------------- A VC-backed research group has issued a US-focused study which looks at how different age groups book travel online. | |
| Boston MA-based Compete found that babyboomers – people aged 45-64 - are most likely to book online. It says that ‘10% of the 17m babyboomers who research travel online will also book online...’ Babyboomers are also the most voracious researchers, looking at an average of 36 pages of content when researching. Other headline findings from the study show that ‘young travellers’ – the 18-24 age group – are most likely to book at price-focused online travel agencies, visiting an average of 1.7 OTAs when researching. Only one in five will book travel without visiting an agency site. At the other end of the demographic scale, seniors – 65+ - are the most likely to go supplier direct. Airline sites account for 80% of all seats bought by seniors, compared with 72% for the 25-34 age group. And 68% of seniors’ hotel bookings are made at the hotel site. Gregory Saks, a senior associate at Compete, said: ‘Travel marketers that develop content, services and promotions targeted as different age groups will be ideally positioned to more effectively manage their online distribution strategies.’ The VCs behind Compete are Charles River Ventures, William Blair Capital | |
A Pilot's life - yo ho, yo ho, a pilot's life for me
Its not all Boeing
Monday, April 10, 2006
Apple talks to IFE developers to bring iTunes to seatbacks
SAA joins Star Alliance
Star Alliance is welcoming South African Airways (SAA) as its 18th member into the alliance. Star Alliance is the first aviation alliance to include an African airline and SAA is the first airline from Africa to have joined such an alliance.
BTC weights in on Wright Amendment
New business class airline to launch
Dummy of the week #9
DFW & Love Field
Thursday, April 06, 2006
A Delta strike
Are these pilots or lemmings?
Washington Post -- Nearly 95 percent of the Air Line Pilots Association's members voted in favor of walking off their jobs if their contract is thrown out. "Today's outcome will not disrupt Delta service," Delta spokesman Bruce Hicks said.
---------
Not disrupt service? What is this man smoking?
We would like to see when Delta's managers will take their 18% + 32% pay cuts. To think the airline can survive a strike is silly. Unfortunately we don't see Delta's management leading from the front.
Whatever you do, don't book on Delta until the dust settles. When it settles there may only be a hole in the ground.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
US Travel Booking Season starts early
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Aboulafia, ILFC & Airbus
Southwest Airlines requests rates at Dulles
"We are celebrating 35 years of Legendary Service in 2006. Still, the opportunities to grow our famous Southwest Low Fare leadership within the United States are abundant," said Gary Kelly, Southwest's Chief Executive Officer. "The sheer size and scope of the Washington, D.C. metro area makes Washington Dulles International Airport an exceptional market opportunity. Located in northern Virginia, Dulles will be a terrific complement to our Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport (BWI) operation located near Baltimore, Maryland."
"The population and business growth in northern Virginia means a great opportunity is rapidly getting even better," Kelly said. "As the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area continues to expand, the need to serve our Customers in northern Virginia becomes more urgent."
"The Baltimore/Washington market and Maryland's BWI airport are very important to Southwest Airlines," Kelly said. "We are very excited to grow our Baltimore/Washington presence and welcome new Virginia Customers at Dulles with our Low Fares and Legendary Customer Service."
----------------
To assume that the folks at BWI are furious and those at MWAA are jubilant is an understatement. Dulles needed a replacement for Flyi and they got the big mama here. United must be feeling ill - its bad enough Southwest came to Denver. Recall that MaxJet is looking for feed, so no doubt they are delighted. Consumers in the region should be elated. Those people who have flown into BWI to get to DC are also thrilled. No more the extra $75 each way in car service. This move by Southwest is big news.
French strikers are 'lazy frogs'
JetBlue partners with Travelport
Dean Sivley, chief operating officer and general manager, Travelport I Orbitz for Business, said that Travelport is now one of only two online booking tools to which JetBlue distributes its content.
Referring to JetBlue’s decision to agreeing upon extending its distribution to corporations through the “ground-breaking agreement” with Travelport, he said, the company will provide its clients with “simplicity, convenience and great service” that JetBlue is known for.
“This agreement in particular, underscores the value and efficiency of our corporate marketplace to suppliers worldwide and puts our Travelport customers in an extremely competitive position,” said Sivley.
As per the information available, by booking all their travel in one place and within corporate policy, corporate travelers save time, eliminate hassles, and stretch their travel spend.
--------------------
So JetBlue continues to evolve and become more the rest of the airline crowd that its has poked fun at. Note that each new sales channel means the airline is giving up some revenue somewhere. Also recall JetBlue's CEO wants to see an extra $10 per leg this year. Makes us wonder if JetBlue is as strong as everyone thinks.
Air France to fly world’s first aircraft with inflight mobile phone system
Monday, April 03, 2006
American 767s to carry IMS Inflight handhelds
In-flight internet gets bumper repeat business
Atlanta is latest city to sue sites over hotel taxes
Virgin America - Less desirability than the name suggests?
The tag line on their web site suggests that they are, ‘an airline we hope you’ll love.’
Clever and witty double-entendres aside, that is probably the safest, most plausible thing they can hope for. After all, love defies logic. It makes you buy incredibly expensive gifts for a woman who makes more than you do. It makes you do illogical things like hire skywriters to print her name in the clouds. It makes you go on romantic vacations to places that don’t have big-screen TVs or SportsCenter, and claim that you enjoy it. In short, it makes you do things you would not do in your right mind, because, in fact, you are not in your right mind.
And no one in their right mind could think Virgin America will work, at least in its present form.
It’s a nice looking website, at least.
This is starting to look like Virgin Express all over again. I am sure that there are those who believe that just slapping the Virgin brand on a carrier in the US will mean something and be worth passengers from day one. However, without a plan, a product, or a strategy, it isn't going to be worth anything. It still has to be an airline, with a product, and a route structure, and a strategy. Preferably something unique. As a new carrier, there has to be something to differentiate it from the millions of excess ASMs that are running around the industry already. This is especially true in the California Corridor, were Southwest has taken a lead role. JetBlue has done marginally well from Long Beach, and that is a market that they, basically have to themselves due to slot restrictions.
I see no plausible unique draw for Virgin America. Sure, there is only so much you disclose during startup, before you have an operating plan, even before you have planes or an operating certificate. But eventually something has to be disclosed. And they are fast losing any form of momentum they had. We know of Skybus in Columbus, Ohio, that they plan to be a ultra-discounter. Even though that is still somewhat vague from a product standpoint, we can be sure they will not have a front cabin and we can be sure they will not be a domestic Maxjet. We know nothing similar about Virgin America. Will there be a front cabin? Will they focus on long-haul or short haul? Will this be a domestic Virgin Atlantic, with a high level of frills and good service? Major airports or secondary? Primarily transcon? A year from startup we knew that JetBlue would have service to Upstate New York and to Florida.
What is in a name? How much is 'Virgin Atlantic' worth in the domestic US market from a brand identification perspective these days? And how many of the people who they will be appealing to have even heard of, or much less flown on, Virgin Atlantic? Will people automatically make the connection? It has been made clear that this is a franchise operation. This is NOT Richard Branson running the company. This is a new airline that happens to be wearing the Virgin name. That said, how much of what Virgin Atlantic does, and does well, will this carrier be able to mimic, or even want to replicate in the domestic market?
Very, very few people choose an airline based solely on a name, a brand. It is not a brand we seek. It is a good fare, a good schedule, frequency, or, especially being the only nonstop operator in a market. Sometimes it does help to have a reputation of serving edible food, but not much. Think of how many bad meals you’ve endured on an airline and still flown with them again. Without something in one of these categories, there is no reason to select a given airline. Very few people will go fly an airline just to fly them, though I had intended to do that with Independence Air – just to hear the pre-flight announcements given by celebrities. I didn’t move fast enough on that one.
Does anyone really choose an airline based on it being trendy, hip, cool, or snazzy? I don’t think so. If that were the case, wouldn’t Delta be re-doing the entire airline as Song, as opposed to taking some aspects of Song and putting them into Delta? JetBlue may be all those things above, but they were also an airline serving quantifiable demand. Sure, you will question, the original Virgin Atlantic made its name being those things when it started service. Massages onboard and all that. True, but they were also an operator from Heathrow, which has value over-and-above everything else. Route structure first, frills later. If you’re not flying somewhere people need to go, the other stuff doesn’t matter.
For everyone that says a US operation could be as successful as Virgin Blue, I say it could be as much of a failure as Virgin Express.
Pessimistic? Absolutely. One can do very well being pessimistic in this industry.
Anyone had a can of Virgin Cola recently? No?
Virgin Express was questionable leadership, an excess of optimism, an incoherent route strategy, a lack of a unique market position, and bad marketing. It had a name and not much else. Virgin Blue entered the market at the same time Ansett exited the market. Perfect timing.
There is no slot, no unique position for this carrier to fall into in the US domestic market. While I have been critical of JetBlue, I am downright pessimistic about Virgin America. JetBlue found routes from New York that needed a discounter presence, or just needed additional capacity. For all my previous criticisms of JetBlue, their initial route strategy was sound. They may be suffering now from excessive optimism, but initially, they got things right. And it didn’t hurt that TWA basically exited the New York market after the merger with American, and USAirways basically left the NY-Florida market soon after the JetBlue entrance into the market. And let’s be honest, USAirways had been gouging passengers going from NYC to upstate NY. I hardly see any of the West Coast participants being so willing to cede territory to Virgin America, especially given the JetBlue example I just noted. There is plenty of capacity on the West Coast, and plenty of discount capacity on the West Coast.
Of course, when you have a new carrier, the traditional approach is to bring in a successful industry veteran to lend credibility to the new enterprise. Preferably, someone who has a track record of moderate success. If he/she had a STRONG record of industry success, you wouldn’t expect for him to be available to be lured away to a new entrant. So moderate success is acceptable.
MODERATE SUCCESS!
I love the way Fred Reid basically throws all of Delta under the bus as an explanation of why Song didn't work.
"But ultimately what happened with Song was that the distress of the parent (Delta) overcame the ability of the parent to really run two brands and a different business model."
That is only the same dichotomy that has existed with EVERY SINGLE AIRLINE-WITHIN-AN-AIRLINE SCHEME EVER CREATED! There are so many problems with airline-within-an-airline - too many for no one to have noticed that this should be a non-starter. And they still keep trying it. I will talk about that in a future installment.
But at least we see where he is going with this. It could read something like, “You saw what I tried to do at Song! Think that, but across a WHOLE AIRLINE. And without all the baggage of being a legacy carrier! That's what we MIGHT do. Maybe. Unless it doesn't turn out to be a good idea, then we will take whatever the next great idea is! Because whatever we do, it will be great.” And the idea of it failing was not the fault of those running it, but the fault of the entire model being flawed. Amazing that the people who created this didn’t realize the inherent problems.
In reality, I think, in the case of Virgin America, we are looking at a replication of the JetBlue strategy on several fronts. First, being a discounter at a major hub. Second, a discounter with a primary hub on a coast. Third, though, is the concept of waiting for a major competitor to fail. I think United coming out of bankruptcy has seriously jolted Virgin America. Let's be honest, how much room is there for additional carriers in the Bay Area? You already have Southwest and United. JetBlue is doing the discount transcon thing. Alaska has a presence, as does everyone else. Virgin America will not be entering a single market without at least 2 competitors on it, frankly because those are the only markets with any hope of attracting passengers.
Just being the one discounter who operates from SFO is not enough to hang an airline on – there are plenty of other carriers running around who will lower their fares to match you. Just serving the markets the other discounters don’t serve will not allow one to build a coherent route strategy – ask Vanguard Airlines about that. But at least they realized that being a discounter in Southwest markets didn’t allow them to bring much more to the party.
I do not think Virgin America can play the discounter game, and that has its own downside. First, there is simply no room for another discounter in the Bay area. You cannot ‘out-Southwest’ Southwest. Southwest owns the short haul, California-Corridor market, and United has a presence which means there are already a lot of seats in the market. A third carrier simply offering cheap seats and a name bring nothing to the market. Remember also that United and Southwest fly from multiple Bay Area airports to multiple Los Angeles Basin airports, and I believe that choice is important. Being able to offer that choice is expensive.
Additionally, it would be a mistake to underestimate the power of Alaska Airlines in terms of customer loyalty in the medium-haul market to the Pacific Northwest. Making any headway against them will require a mix of low fares and good service, which Alaska provides. Again, just putting the seats out there and charging a cheap fare does not pull passengers to a new carrier. Southwest has a presence here too, as does United. Medium haul to the south, Phoenix, Tucson, Albuquerque, etcetera, is basically controlled by Southwest and USAirways. Not a lot of room here either.
JetBlue owns the long-haul discount market, with American and United are slugging it out for the premium long-haul market, with Continental also taking a piece of that. The Delta/Song product firmly occupies the narrow area between premium and less-than-premium. (This is not a bad area, it means some amenities, but a definitely second-tier front cabin product – and long haul is where that front cabin matters.) So, in summary, the discount market out of the Bay Area is locked up. But so is the premium.
What I like to call the Mid-Continent routes may be the most promising area, in terms of the level of competition, but this is by no means a guarantee either. Most of the fortress hubs (Chicago, Minneapolis, Detroit, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Atlanta, Kansas City, St. Louis, Houston, and Milwaukee) have only one carrier operating nonstop service, but usually at very high frequency, or at least enough frequency to effectively serve the market. Some of these markets, however, are highly seasonal. Great for a use between April and October, but what do you do with the plane for the other 5 months of the year?
And honestly, one cannot really have a successful carrier just operating these Mid-Continent markets. These aren’t the most dense markets from San Francisco, which is obvious because of the lack of heated competition on them. So just being in these markets without offering the rest of the markets that Bay Area travelers consider important makes you a niche carrier. Could be profitable, but it definitely means limited growth. Frontier has done the job right – even if it hurts a little, you have to operate the most important destinations for you home markets. Frontier, I believe, serves 20 of the top 25 business markets from Denver.
And in the California Corridor, there are 3 things you need to compete; frequency, fare, and scope. In short, a lot of flights, with cheap fares, to a varied group of destinations. Mr. Reid points out in his recent interview that San Francisco is a cosmopolitan city, with links to many cities, countries and companies. And to be valid and valuable to the market, a carrier should offer a varied route structure. This is Airline 101 – offer a service suited to your market. There are simply not enough markets that beg for service, that have room to enter or that have a weak competitor on them, to build an airline on.
Let me make this clear. Without a failure by a carrier operating in the Bay Area, there are not enough markets for Virgin America to piece together into a successful, viable, valuable route structure.
Being a coastal carrier, as JetBlue is about to find out, can have disadvantages. Circuity will be key among them. Sure, taking a connecting a flight from Portland, Oregon to San Diego via San Francisco is conceivable (except for the dozen or so nonstops in the market already, but let’s not get to that) but how about Denver to Portland via San Francisco? How about from Dallas to Calgary via San Francisco? Once you’re basically east of Salt Lake City, the number of destinations to which you have to substantially ‘go out of your way’ in order to get to increases. And there are very few product enhancements you can offer that will make a trip with a substantially higher elapsed time appeal to passengers willing to pay decent fares. North-South connections work via SFO; east-west connections do not.
This is a market that can eat airplanes. An hourly pattern to LAX from SFO requires at least 5 aircraft alone. To fly the transcon market, each aircraft at best gets you two round trips, and more likely, at best, one – how many red-eyes can you operate? And as I noted earlier, operating one or two trips in a market is not the way to compete in this area.
As if all of that were not enough, there’s more. Utilization. Discounters, Southwest the chief among them, live by keeping planes in the air. Tight schedules are key. Southwest doesn’t like operating into mega hubs due to the chances of planes getting stuck through waves of delays. In fact, Southwest, when they discontinued service to SFO, noted that flights operating from SFO tended to be delayed, which would then cascade through the system to all flights tied to that SFO trip. And knowing how Southwest schedules, ONE SFO leg might be tied to 6 other trips at least. 24 SFO departures could lead to at least 144 other possible delays around the system.
Enter Virgin America. A discounter, who thinks they will be able to keep planes in the air constantly and keep costs reasonable (notice I did not say low).
I’m not saying this venture cannot work. The history of this industry is full if improbable success, imponderable gambles gone right, and miracles. And the investors involved have deep pockets and will not give up on this experiment quickly. But the odds are not in their favor.
PT

