"Don't Sacrifice Safety for a Cheap Ticket" - AZ Republic

Wheels, dont forget I am in the medical business. It is a extremely over-saturated market, no question. Anytime I take an account from a competitor its based on a value I can provide 99% of the time. Dont get me wrong, price is an issue. But I often make the argument that something that is cheaper doesnt always cost you less. It's all about gaining efficiencies and value. The most sucessful businesses are based on this model.
 
wheelsup said:
Not always - some businesses have a monopoly and as such they can pretty much charge what they want. The medical business is like that. I just saw a report tonight that was saying how the drug companies are actually PAYING generic drug manufacturers to stay out of the market.
Click to expand...

And it's simply not true that successful businesses always sell value.

Go tell that to Coach, LMVH, Dior, etc, etc, etc.

They've got women falling all over themselves to spend a hell of a lot more money than they have to in order to buy one of those labels.

There ain't no value proposition in a $1500 purse or $1000 pair of pumps.

Guess what they're reporting?

Increasing profits.
 
meritflyer said:
Anytime I take an account from a competitor its based on a value I can provide 99% of the time.
Click to expand...

I 100% agree with you. It is why, in general, Southwest has been so successful. They provide an excellent value for their customers. They get them to where they need to go on time, safely, and quickly, and at a lower price point than their competitors. If SWA was run poorly and constantly late, lots-o-cancellations, etc. you can bet they would have a much harder problem competing against the big boys, even if their product cost less.

It's like spending $8k on a new Kia/Ford/GM that will fall apart in a year or $15k-$20k on a Toyota that will last 10. The Toyota is a better value, and why they are gaining market share left and right.
 
tonyw said:
And it's simply not true that successful businesses always sell value.

Go tell that to Coach, LMVH, Dior, etc, etc, etc.

They've got women falling all over themselves to spend a hell of a lot more money than they have to in order to buy one of those labels.

There ain't no value proposition in a $1500 purse or $1000 pair of pumps.

Guess what they're reporting?

Increasing profits.
Click to expand...

Now translating that to the airline industry, those "big name" companies would be akin to Netjets, Flexjet, etc. No way in heck would flying on Southwest vs. United be akin to owning a wal-mart purse vs. (whatever names you mentioned, I'm not very schooled on high end purses...).
 
meritflyer said:
I have family members who REFUSE to fly on turboprops. Not all that uncommon.
Click to expand...

You should see the looks on some of the passengers faces when they stroll up to my ride. My airline's airline often has higher ticket prices and when people see the 1900 they must wonder. My airline has plenty of low timers, too. So you can pay alot for an airline ticket and yet get a TP and a low time crew. I know people check when they buy tickets but if they don't check by the time their baggage is checked and they are walking to the airplane it's essentially too late to refuse as a result of peer pressure. So, they still get on. And of course I have to add that I don't think turboprops are unsafe!
 
Turbo-props are making a comeback. Like wheels said in an earlier post, take a look at the fuel costs and then do a comparison to see how much a Q400 burns an hour as opposed to a RJ

People DO NOT care about what type of plane they are on. They look at the price and the convenience of where they need to go. Some flyers are loyal to certain airlines or alliances and only book on those carriers, but in the next few years a lot more props will be ordered. When someone buys a ticket from IND-ISP, they say "Jeez, its only costing me 250.00 and I am flying into ISP rather than LGA woohoo!"

Props are a lot more versatile than the Jets. Volume and wind based ground stop delays have basically been eliminated for us into BOS. Also we can do the ILS 15R circle to 4L, when the ILS 4R is being used. This also makes us less prone to delays When we go into EWR we are going to be using special procedures that will basically make us prone free to volume based delays. We can also take intersection takeoffs, that allows us to cut the line all the time when faced with a long taxi delay in BOS. People notice this and do take note.

On a repo from BOS to LGA we beat both SouthernJets MadDog and Airways Airbus that took off in front of us down there. They landed behind us. So on the short segment legs we can actually be faster. On another repo from RFD-LGA we did it at 2:55 flight time, and that was flying slow. How long is the block from ORD-LGA? So what maybe fifty minutes slower? We have a list of thirty cities that are being considered out of Newark. Look for us to do 750-1000 mile legs in the Q down the road.

I have dealt with people for the past year and a half asking me, "Is this plane safe?" My answer, "Do you think I would be sitting in that right seat if I thought it wasn't safe?"
 
wheelsup said:
It's like spending $8k on a new Kia/Ford/GM that will fall apart in a year or $15k-$20k on a Toyota that will last 10. The Toyota is a better value, and why they are gaining market share left and right.
Click to expand...


Do you have a peer-reviewed study to validate your claim?



:sarcasm:
 
Seggy said:
People DO NOT care about what type of plane they are on.
Click to expand...

This is inaccurate.

Passengers do care 100% what kind of plane they travel on.

Continental conducted an analysis of passengers' patterns, studying markets in which jets have been replaced with turboprops and vice versa. They concluded as many as 30 percent to 50 percent of passengers shy away from turboprops, either by taking longer routes through hubs of competing carriers, driving or other means.

Canadair RJs are flying longer routes, such as Atlanta to Toronto, as well as routes as short as 63 miles.

In 2000, Comair reported traffic up 14% on routes that jets replaced TPs. Is there a correlation here? Absolutely.

Turboprops are loud, slow, and generally uncomfortable (as reported by St. Petersburg Time, Tampa, FL). [They are] "the planes people hate to fly".
 
meritflyer said:
Passengers do care 100% what kind of plane they travel on.
Click to expand...

I agree with merit - people do care what kind of plane they fly on. However, the real question would be, do they care enough about the type of plane they are flying on to pay $100 (or whatever cost) MORE to fly on a jet?

I don't know where merit got his news clip from but my guess would be it didn't look at the cost of the ticket as well. If Comair charged the same cost for the trip in a jet vs. turboprop sure it's a no brainer, people would rather take the jet.
 
wheelsup said:
No way in heck would flying on Southwest vs. United be akin to owning a wal-mart purse vs. (whatever names you mentioned, I'm not very schooled on high end purses...).
Click to expand...

It can be if United or American or Delta wants it to be.

Jack up the price and cater to the customers who are willing to pay a premium for better service. Not quite first class or business class, but better service, such as more leg room, maybe a free alcoholic beverage, etc.

I'll bet there are plenty of passengers who are willing to pay a premium for that kind of service. It will go against everything Wall Street tells people to do but if you can do it and stick to your guns, it will pay off in the long run.

Airlines may not be able to go the Neiman Marcus route but they sure as hell can go the Target route. Right now they all want to be Wal-Mart and they wonder why people hate them.
 
tonyw said:
It can be if United or American or Delta wants it to be.

Jack up the price and cater to the customers who are willing to pay a premium for better service. Not quite first class or business class, but better service, such as more leg room, maybe a free alcoholic beverage, etc.

I'll bet there are plenty of passengers who are willing to pay a premium for that kind of service. It will go against everything Wall Street tells people to do but if you can do it and stick to your guns, it will pay off in the long run.

Airlines may not be able to go the Neiman Marcus route but they sure as hell can go the Target route. Right now they all want to be Wal-Mart and they wonder why people hate them.
Click to expand...

Tony, I'm curious why you think that not one airline has tried to do what you outline?
 
SteveC said:
Tony, I'm curious why you think that not one airline has tried to do what you outline?
Click to expand...

I know people that have left UAL after years of flying because they cannot get 1st class service to LAS anymore. That and a few other locations. And yes, they pay for it, its not an upgrade or not. They do now look for the best price, but a requirement is 1st class to their destination. They also look at what the feeder plane is to hub also, because they are not going to take an RJ w/o 2 class service when going on to their destination in 1st.
 
SteveC said:
Tony, I'm curious why you think that not one airline has tried to do what you outline?
Click to expand...

ComplexHiAv8r said:
I know people that have left UAL after years of flying because they cannot get 1st class service to LAS anymore. And yes, they pay for it, its not an upgrade or not. They do now look for the best price, but a requirement is 1st class to their destination. They also look at what the feeder plane is to hub also, because they are not going to take an RJ w/o 2 class service when going on to their destination in 1st.
Click to expand...

Oh, I know that there are people out there that pay extra for convenience and quality of service. My job depends on it. :)

My question was concerning Tony's comments implying that all an airline has to do is charge more and increase the quality of the customer's experience and they will reap the rewards. I'm wondering why they haven't, or more correctly, why Tony thinks they haven't done so (I have my own ideas on that). If it really were that easy I would think that someone would be trying it, wouldn't they???
 
meritflyer said:
This is inaccurate.

Passengers do care 100% what kind of plane they travel on.

Continental conducted an analysis of passengers' patterns, studying markets in which jets have been replaced with turboprops and vice versa. They concluded as many as 30 percent to 50 percent of passengers shy away from turboprops, either by taking longer routes through hubs of competing carriers, driving or other means.

Canadair RJs are flying longer routes, such as Atlanta to Toronto, as well as routes as short as 63 miles.

In 2000, Comair reported traffic up 14% on routes that jets replaced TPs. Is there a correlation here? Absolutely.

Turboprops are loud, slow, and generally uncomfortable (as reported by St. Petersburg Time, Tampa, FL). [They are] "the planes people hate to fly".
Click to expand...


As a travel agent with a very busy agency here in the Bay Area, I have to chime in here with my unscientific observation. I would say that a good chunk of frequent flyers, especially business flyers, often request that we not put them on "one of those rinky-dink jets" (Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger) While it seems that it's mostly the occasional leisure traveler that doesn't seem to mind the RJ's etc. My observations could be somewhat skewed however since my clientele is mostly affluent.
 
tonyw said:
It can be if United or American or Delta wants it to be.

Jack up the price and cater to the customers who are willing to pay a premium for better service. Not quite first class or business class, but better service, such as more leg room, maybe a free alcoholic beverage, etc.

I'll bet there are plenty of passengers who are willing to pay a premium for that kind of service. It will go against everything Wall Street tells people to do but if you can do it and stick to your guns, it will pay off in the long run.

Airlines may not be able to go the Neiman Marcus route but they sure as hell can go the Target route. Right now they all want to be Wal-Mart and they wonder why people hate them.
Click to expand...


Almost all of United's Premium service flights between SFO/LAX and JFK go out full. I have a captain friend who flies them and he tells me his plane is always fully booked.
 
SkyCougar said:
As a travel agent with a very busy agency here in the Bay Area, I have to chime in here with my unscientific observation. I would say that a good chunk of frequent flyers, especially business flyers, often request that we not put them on "one of those rinky-dink jets" (Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger) While it seems that it's mostly the occasional leisure traveler that doesn't seem to mind the RJ's etc. My observations could be somewhat skewed however since my clientele is mostly affluent.
Click to expand...

No question about it that given a choice, people will choose a NB jet as opposed to a RJ/TP. But if a larger jet isnt available, people choose the RJ over the TP any day of the week. Companies know this which is why you've seen RJs steadily increase in numbers while TPs have decreased.
 
tonyw said:
It can be if United or American or Delta wants it to be.

Jack up the price and cater to the customers who are willing to pay a premium for better service. Not quite first class or business class, but better service, such as more leg room, maybe a free alcoholic beverage, etc.

I'll bet there are plenty of passengers who are willing to pay a premium for that kind of service. It will go against everything Wall Street tells people to do but if you can do it and stick to your guns, it will pay off in the long run.

Airlines may not be able to go the Neiman Marcus route but they sure as hell can go the Target route. Right now they all want to be Wal-Mart and they wonder why people hate them.
Click to expand...

Midwest. It does work for the people who are willing to pay for premium service. Primarily business travelers
 
Merit Flyer when you say 'loud, slow, uncomfortable', are you talking about the new Q300/Q400? Are you talking about the new ATR42/72s that are rolling off the line?
 
From Airways Magazine - August 2006 - Article titled "Bombardier and the Jetprop Renaissance"

"Jeff Pinneo, president and CEO of US West Coast-based Horizon Air, says that "there was no negative reaction from passengers when we switched some routes from jets to the Q400."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top