The problem that Alaska may find is that loyalty bought over years can be destroyed very quickly. Furthermore, when consumers gt angry with a company, they tend to patronize a different company even if all other factors are equal. So gutting your loyalty program to bring it in-line with other vendors can simply drive people to those other vendors even if they don't offer anything better.
Of course, if Alaska simply wants to compete on the lowest price and not worry about loyalty, it could just cut the loyalty program completely and join the ranks of Ryan and Spirit.
This isn't a change to the loyalty program. It's a change to the credit card that connects to the loyalty program. You don't have to have the credit card to be in the program.
So the "product" here is the credit card. Not the loyalty program or the airplane seat.
Viewed another way: I may not like, for example, the on-board meals AS sells, but I still want the airplane seat they sell. Same could apply to customers of the credit card. Both may still want to fly AS simply because it suits them, even if they don't like the other product much. I feel that way.
I can see loyalty to the credit card damaged severely (both by actions of AS and BofA). But there are a lot of people who continue to fly AS even if are not part of Mileage Plan and if they are, they may not rely on the AS VISA to earn additional miles. This change impacts the last group, not all AS passengers and not all Mileage Plan members.
Programs: Pure AS MVP Gold75K, AS BR lapsed, Maika`i Card, AGR, HH Gold, Hertz 5*, Marriott Gold, SPG, CO, 7H
Posts: 27,506
Wirelessly posted (beckoa's PWP wondrousdevice3.0: Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9810; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.11+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.0.583 Mobile Safari/534.11+)
It is however another 'chip' of a progression of modifications over the past two years. Other examples were the BR membership access reduction- yes it was a smaller subset as not everyone had a membership. But many chose to not renew or move to another product due to access restrictions.
Wirelessly posted (beckoa's PWP wondrousdevice3.0: Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9810; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.11+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.0.583 Mobile Safari/534.11+)
It is however another 'chip' of a progression of modifications over the past two years. Other examples were the BR membership access reduction- yes it was a smaller subset as not everyone had a membership. But many chose to not renew or move to another product due to access restrictions.
Let's stop with the stupid "chip" nonsense.
The reality is that we have access to more flights and are paying less for tickets - on average - then we ever have in the past. If you expect that pay less but continue receiving the same benefits, the only chip is the one on your shoulder.
Wirelessly posted (beckoa's PWP wondrousdevice3.0: Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9810; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.11+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.0.583 Mobile Safari/534.11+)
It is however another 'chip' of a progression of modifications over the past two years. Other examples were the BR membership access reduction- yes it was a smaller subset as not everyone had a membership. But many chose to not renew or move to another product due to access restrictions.
True. I definitely don't dispute the power of the additive value of all of an airline's "products" taken as a whole, especially on the fans who have an emotional bond and want to become closer to the brand by having it all. (Great. Now I'm talking like a marketer. But that is how it works.)
Those folks will most likely be most negatively affected by any change to any one of the family of products, and have a perception that proportionally is more negative than that of less fan-like customers. I mean, that's why we're here on FT, right? Fans and intense users?
The problem that Alaska may find is that loyalty bought over years can be destroyed very quickly. Furthermore, when consumers gt angry with a company, they tend to patronize a different company even if all other factors are equal. So gutting your loyalty program to bring it in-line with other vendors can simply drive people to those other vendors even if they don't offer anything better.
Of course, if Alaska simply wants to compete on the lowest price and not worry about loyalty, it could just cut the loyalty program completely and join the ranks of Ryan and Spirit.
You use the word "loyalty" quite a bit here, as do others. Let's just be real about things though. Loyalty is not "bought". That's not loyalty at all. As soon as the deal gets better somewhere else, whether it be because of a change in corporate policies or a better product becoming available, so called "loyalty" goes out the window. I'm not knocking it. Consumers (myself and everyone here) are in it for themselves. Nobody spends more at Alaska because they want the company to do better, the spend at Alaska because, at the end of the day, there's something in it for them. That could be a better shot at upgrades, better customer experience, you name it... There is no real consumer loyalty anymore. That's fine and all, I go for the best value to myself as well. I just keep hearing the word loyalty being tossed around as though their support was a one way street. Now that things have changed people are talking about taking their "loyalty" somewhere else... Until the next better thing comes along. How is that "loyalty"?
__________________ My thoughts here are mine alone. I do not represent Alaska Airlines on this forum or speak on behalf of the company.
Programs: alaska, united, air france, lufthansa,delta, starwood
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxf24
Let's stop with the stupid "chip" nonsense.
The reality is that we have access to more flights and are paying less for tickets - on average - then we ever have in the past. If you expect that pay less but continue receiving the same benefits, the only chip is the one on your shoulder.
Thank Alfred Kahn and the deregulation of the Airlines in 1978 for "more flights and paying less" but the reality is that: the airport experience is demeaning, you get nickled and dimed for everything including but not limited to checked luggage; Alaska's 737 is not a comfortable aircraft for a flight of any duration; the constantly oversold airplanes leads to problems with sufficient overhead space (aggravated by the charges associated w/checking luggage); Alaska-like all airlines pad their schedules to be able to show on time arrivals expecting delays one way or another. All in all, travel today stinks. I have no expectation to pay less for the same or more. I expect to get what I paid for. Alaska sold a product and then stripped it of its value. I actually prefer to use the word "strip" to "chip" because chip infers incremental changes for the worse. "Strip" says the whole panoply of changes have made the card worthless to me.
Programs: Pure AS MVP Gold75K, AS BR lapsed, Maika`i Card, AGR, HH Gold, Hertz 5*, Marriott Gold, SPG, CO, 7H
Posts: 27,506
Wirelessly posted (beckoa's PWP wondrousdevice3.0: Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9810; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.11+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.0.583 Mobile Safari/534.11+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxf24
Quote:
Originally Posted by beckoa
Wirelessly posted (beckoa's PWP wondrousdevice3.0: Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9810; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.11+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.0.583 Mobile Safari/534.11+)
It is however another 'chip' of a progression of modifications over the past two years. Other examples were the BR membership access reduction- yes it was a smaller subset as not everyone had a membership. But many chose to not renew or move to another product due to access restrictions.
Let's stop with the stupid "chip" nonsense.
The reality is that we have access to more flights and are paying less for tickets - on average - then we ever have in the past. If you expect that pay less but continue receiving the same benefits, the only chip is the one on your shoulder.
For those based in Alaska fares have not gone down...we don't have the same market conditions as the lower 48...and other then AS taking over a charter route flown by Hawaiian Airlines for Hawaiian Vacations- we've been fairly stagnent with flights to/from Alaska- and even losing some including ANC-SFO/YVR and winter ANC-ORD. Yes the lower 48 and Hawaii have seen massive expansion, but from my home market not as much. I haven't bought a F companion cert but have had family members purchase... But its more I'm concerned what will happen next
Thank Alfred Kahn and the deregulation of the Airlines in 1978 for "more flights and paying less" but the reality is that: the airport experience is demeaning, you get nickled and dimed for everything including but not limited to checked luggage; Alaska's 737 is not a comfortable aircraft for a flight of any duration; the constantly oversold airplanes leads to problems with sufficient overhead space (aggravated by the charges associated w/checking luggage); Alaska-like all airlines pad their schedules to be able to show on time arrivals expecting delays one way or another. All in all, travel today stinks. I have no expectation to pay less for the same or more. I expect to get what I paid for. Alaska sold a product and then stripped it of its value. I actually prefer to use the word "strip" to "chip" because chip infers incremental changes for the worse. "Strip" says the whole panoply of changes have made the card worthless to me.
I don't follow the logic of your position. AS never sold you a product and then stripped it of its value: you buy tickets at most 360 days in advance, and the "value" of what you purchase changes very little, if at all, during that time period. Yes, the air travel experience has deteriorated over time and we comparatively fewer benefits than we have in the past. However, the "value" equation is not just how much you receive, but also how much you pay. Almost everyone seems to conveniently forget that while we get less, we're also paying less.
P.S. If you don't find the 737 to be comfortable, I don't know why you're even in this forum or how you've ever tolerated flying any airline in the past.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beckoa
For those based in Alaska fares have not gone down...we don't have the same market conditions as the lower 48...and other then AS taking over a charter route flown by Hawaiian Airlines for Hawaiian Vacations- we've been fairly stagnent with flights to/from Alaska- and even losing some including ANC-SFO/YVR and winter ANC-ORD. Yes the lower 48 and Hawaii have seen massive expansion, but from my home market not as much. I haven't bought a F companion cert but have had family members purchase... But its more I'm concerned what will happen next
On an inflation adjusted basis, I am relatively confident all fares - on average - have gone done. You could cherry pick various points in the past when fares were lower, but the sustained trend over the past 10, 20, or 30 years is a decline in fares and access to more routes and options.
If capacity out of Alaska has been stagnant, it is because demand is stagnant. Expecting AS to operate non-EAS routes on a charity basis for Alaska residents is idiotic.
Programs: AS MVP, AS Club 49, Miles & More, Dollar Express, Marriott Rewards, Hilton Honors
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by beckoa
Wirelessly posted (beckoa's PWP wondrousdevice3.0: Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9810; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.11+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.0.583 Mobile Safari/534.11+)
For those based in Alaska fares have not gone down...we don't have the same market conditions as the lower 48...and other then AS taking over a charter route flown by Hawaiian Airlines for Hawaiian Vacations- we've been fairly stagnent with flights to/from Alaska- and even losing some including ANC-SFO/YVR and winter ANC-ORD. Yes the lower 48 and Hawaii have seen massive expansion, but from my home market not as much. I haven't bought a F companion cert but have had family members purchase... But its more I'm concerned what will happen next
Agreed. Seattle Airlines, I mean Alaska Airlines seems to more or less pretend we don't exist. Sure, they introduced Club 49 (which basically is worthless), but other than that, we have been ignored. Fares are sky high as always, routes are being either demoted to seasonal or ended alltogether. We have gotten one new route in the last 3 to 4 years (ANC to KOA). They had to slash ANC to OGG frequency to get it though.
Programs: alaska, united, air france, lufthansa,delta, starwood
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxf24
Let's stop with the stupid "chip" nonsense.
The reality is that we have access to more flights and are paying less for tickets - on average - then we ever have in the past. If you expect that pay less but continue receiving the same benefits, the only chip is the one on your shoulder.
The "chip" remark goes to the diminution in value associated with the Alaska VISA card. SXF24's remarks go to the "cost" of a ticket. You folks are talking in parallel lines about very different topics.
Programs: AS MVP, AS Club 49, Miles & More, Dollar Express, Marriott Rewards, Hilton Honors
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwright
Why do you feel Club 49™ is worthless?
- 2 free bags, I get them anyways for being MVP and flying in F
- 30% one way full fare discount if you book 4 days in advance, I usually book F so this doesn't help me
- the weekly fare sales are a joke
- 2 free bags, I get them anyways for being MVP and flying in F
- 30% one way full fare discount if you book 4 days in advance, I usually book F so this doesn't help me
- the weekly fare sales are a joke
So then what you really meant is that it is worthless to YOU.
The reality is that we have access to more flights and are paying less for tickets - on average - then we ever have in the past. If you expect that pay less but continue receiving the same benefits, the only chip is the one on your shoulder.
The reality is that the "chip" is very real and is being discussed in other threads in this forum. Apparently you don't think they are real. Others do and will disagree with you completely.
You do not state what your status is, so I can't speak to that, but if you have been MVPG or 75K for several years, you would see how different this company is today than it was not so long ago AND how the treatment of the elite tiers has fallen off badly in the last 3-4 years.
The number of airlines flying into and out of Alaska has not changed much for several years. Yes, you can throw out the once per day JetBlue and Frontier flights, the once or twice a day US and DL flights, and whatever the H##L United may or may not be doing this week, but they have absolutely no impact on the travel experience or cost for the vast majority of travelers. Their fares closely match AS. None appears ready to increase service into or out of Alaska.
__________________
Their ain't no reins on this horse
Programs: TubWorld, Bar Alliance, Borratxo Legendarium
Posts: 14,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKLifetimeFlyer
Agreed. Seattle Airlines, I mean Alaska Airlines seems to more or less pretend we don't exist. Sure, they introduced Club 49 (which basically is worthless), but other than that, we have been ignored. Fares are sky high as always, routes are being either demoted to seasonal or ended alltogether. We have gotten one new route in the last 3 to 4 years (ANC to KOA). They had to slash ANC to OGG frequency to get it though.
Isn't that characterization a little unfair? Do you really think that the airline wouldn't increase routes if they were sustainable?
The fact is that population of the state of Alaska is about equivalent to that of North Dakota, and they are spread out over a lot more land space. I'm guessing AK has a heck of a lot more jet service than ND does.
