US Airways Dividend Miles - PHL-LAX rt: $398+, nonstop

I've been noticing this fare for several days. Not a bad fare, considering oil prices these days.

I've noticed too. EWR-SNA or PHL-SNA have been around $425 all in. Just hoping my upgrades clear.

<sniff sniff> I was MRing on that route constantly during the late winter of 2007...probably bought 5 or 6 of these at $208 a/i a piece. <sniff sniff>

:(

I've been noticing this fare for several days. Not a bad fare, considering oil prices these days.

Yep, I bought a PHL-SFO RT for the same price about 2 weeks ago for flights next week. It being so low, considering the cost of oil, convinced me to spend a weekend in SFO. :D

<sniff sniff> I was MRing on that route constantly during the late winter of 2007...probably bought 5 or 6 of these at $208 a/i a piece. <sniff sniff>

:(

You mean you didn't get the $158 rt fares? :)

Those were the days.

Interestingly enough, PHL-LAX (2087 nm) for $398 covers a CASM of 9.5 cents. In Q1, US reported a systemwide CASM of ~12.5 cents. (at 12.5 cents, $500 is the breakeven).

The must have some seriously light loads to be slashing fares to that level in so many markets.

I thik that is just covering the price of fuel for that flight.

I thik that is just covering the price of fuel for that flight.

That assumes every single coach seat sells at that price. As they fill it up, the subsequent buyers will face much higher prices, thereby bringing the RASM up to or beyond 12.5 cents.

I think loads are light all around for them to be charging a competitive price. I recently booked a ONE WAY nonstop PHL-LAS for $156 at exactly the 2 week window mark. The next day that same trip was $300 one way. Guess I got lucky.

The must have some seriously light loads to be slashing fares to that level in so many markets.


It's hit or miss. While I understand that seat maps are not perfect representations of loads, some of those $398 rt's are on flights that look almost full, while others are on wide-open flights. Odd.

They make up for it on the one-way fares. I checked for a random day in July and it was $587 non-refundable. Refundable fares are up around $1,200.

It's hit or miss. While I understand that seat maps are not perfect representations of loads, some of those $398 rt's are on flights that look almost full, while others are on wide-open flights. Odd.

Interesting... it just seems a little silly to sell so many loss leaders when it just means you have to get that much MORE from any BloFares you might have. I've said it before, and I continue to think that the answer is fare compression.

You mean you didn't get the $158 rt fares? :)

Those were the days.

How about the time I flew SFO-PIT-ART with cleared upgrades both ways for $31 all-in?

That really was awesome.

How about the time I flew SFO-PIT-ART with cleared upgrades both ways for $31 all-in?

That really was awesome.


That had to be some kind of a fare error, no? Still pretty sweet.

You've gotta wonder, though: At what point does it just make sense to have the seat go empty, rather than sell it to someone at below-market cost, and then have to carry that extra weight. Half-empty planes burn less fuel.

You've gotta wonder, though: At what point does it just make sense to have the seat go empty, rather than sell it to someone at below-market cost, and then have to carry that extra weight. Half-empty planes burn less fuel.

That's exactly what I was wondering.

Is it possible that it actually costs less to fly someone than we've been led to believe?

Is it possible that it actually costs less to fly someone than we've been led to believe?

Apparently it only costs ~15% more fuel to fly a fully loaded 747 compared to an empty one on a SYD-LAX route. I know I was incredibly surprised by those numbers.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=835557&highlight=fuel

Apparently it only costs ~15% more fuel to fly a fully loaded 747 compared to an empty one on a SYD-LAX route. I know I was incredibly surprised by those numbers.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=835557&highlight=fuel

So is the CASM metric being misapplied by us here?

So is the CASM metric being misapplied by us here?

Not necesarily. The $398 fare likely covers the variable costs of the person flying it (fuel, etc), but not the fixed cost of the aircraft or the fuel it takes to move it around.

Essentially, the marginal cost of flying one more passenger isn't terribly high, but the fixed cost of the flight *IS*. In other words, they're going to have a cost for flying that seat. As long as the additional revenue provided by someone sitting in it exceeds the costs of having them there, then it's not a loser. Unless the fixed costs still don't get covered.

PVD-LAS was $234 on Tuesday for travel next Thursday. Was shocked to see such a low-fare for essentially a transcon when you're less than 10 days from taking the flight.

Everyone else on the route was in the $450+ price range...

Just finished booking PHL-SJC for $198 RT + taxes ($240 total) for a long weekend trip in 2 weeks.

You've gotta wonder, though: At what point does it just make sense to have the seat go empty, rather than sell it to someone at below-market cost, and then have to carry that extra weight. Half-empty planes burn less fuel.

Even at today's high fuel prices, the marginal fuel cost of adding an additional 200 pounds of payload to a transcon flight is no more than about $30 each way. THAT's why airlines will gladly sell empty seats for less than the average cost - even insanely low fares cover the variable costs (plus a good bit of the fixed costs as well).

So is the CASM metric being misapplied by us here?


Sort of. On transcons, the CASM isn't quite as high as it is on 300-500 mile shorthauls, so it might dip from 12.5 cents systemwide to maybe 10.0 cents on the transcons. On those shorthauls, it might be more like 16.0 cents.

jetBlue said that at $3.50/gal, its transcons were burning about $15,000 worth of jetA. At Tuesday's spot price in NYC of $4.10/gal, filling up an A320 for a transcon would cost more like $17,500. Divide that by the passenger count for the average fuel burn per passenger. On a full flight, maybe $120 per pax. Lower loads = higher average fuel cost per pax.

Keep in mind, however, that the fuel burn for one additional mileage runner (the marginal cost) is still only perhaps $30.

One reason that even for a back of an envelope calculation you can't take the cost of full tank/# of pax is cargo. Cargo is paying part of the lead, as well as a fuel surcharge based on a formula.

The airlines (especially AA) keep saying how important cargo is. And it is. Well cargo has had a variable fuel surcharges for years. It is more than paying its weight in the calculation of breakeven or profit for a given flight.

Even at today's high fuel prices, the marginal fuel cost of adding an additional 200 pounds of payload to a transcon flight is no more than about $30 each way. THAT's why airlines will gladly sell empty seats for less than the average cost - even insanely low fares cover the variable costs (plus a good bit of the fixed costs as well).



Sort of. On transcons, the CASM isn't quite as high as it is on 300-500 mile shorthauls, so it might dip from 12.5 cents systemwide to maybe 10.0 cents on the transcons. On those shorthauls, it might be more like 16.0 cents.

jetBlue said that at $3.50/gal, its transcons were burning about $15,000 worth of jetA. At Tuesday's spot price in NYC of $4.10/gal, filling up an A320 for a transcon would cost more like $17,500. Divide that by the passenger count for the average fuel burn per passenger. On a full flight, maybe $120 per pax. Lower loads = higher average fuel cost per pax.

Keep in mind, however, that the fuel burn for one additional mileage runner (the marginal cost) is still only perhaps $30.

Even at today's high fuel prices, the marginal fuel cost of adding an additional 200 pounds of payload to a transcon flight is no more than about $30 each way. THAT's why airlines will gladly sell empty seats for less than the average cost - even insanely low fares cover the variable costs (plus a good bit of the fixed costs as well).

Keep in mind, however, that the fuel burn for one additional mileage runner (the marginal cost) is still only perhaps $30.

Excellent. On these boards, some posters have been saying that US takes a loss when a passenger flies rt PHL-LAX for, say, $250. I found that hard to believe, but some of the arguments seemed to make sense. But I suspect that you may get a differing view.

I found that hard to believe, but some of the arguments seemed to make sense.

Plus the one thing none of us know (I assume) is how many seats US is selling at those low fares. If it's relatively few - say less than 10% - then taking incremental cost instead of actual CASM is probably the way to go. However, too many of those low fare seats sold starts to make a significant impact on the overall yield, and thus the passenger RASM of the flight.

One thing I've been noticing since the 1st or 2nd quarter of last year is that despite the numerous fare increases (at least 2 dozen last year and at least a dozen so far this year) US' yield is increasing less that most/all of it's legacy peers - possibly a hint that too many seats are being sold for too little to keep load factor up.

Jim

I guess PHL-LAX fares should be going through the roof after the summer when US owns the route with UA going to seasonal.

LAX

Lets go all Biz seats. Less passengers, less weight, less fuel. Wait, didn't work out well for SilverJet.:(

I guess PHL-LAX fares should be going through the roof after the summer when US owns the route with UA going to seasonal.

LAX

I did not know that. Is UA going seasonal a new thing?

If so, maybe Southwest will come back and fill the void.

I guess PHL-LAX fares should be going through the roof after the summer when US owns the route with UA going to seasonal.

LAX

I thought UA was going to one flight a day (evening flight PHL-LAX, morning flight LAX-PHL).

If so, maybe Southwest will come back and fill the void.

Probably not appropriate for this forum but apropos to the post, but here are WN's schedule changes effective Nov 2 (http://www.swamedia.com/about_swa/press/080626_flight_changes.pdf) - no nonstop PHL-west coast but additional 1 stop through DEN.

Jim

I've been noticing this fare for several days. Not a bad fare, considering oil prices these days.

You can do better than that, tommy! I've done 4 MRs PIT-LAX leaving usually on Tues or Weds, but I think the fares are available on Sat as well for... *drumroll*... $99 o/w west and $139 o/w east. Think the total was around $250. Currently pulled some for around $298 a/i.

On a related note, make sure you also check out SNA as a cheap alternative to LAX if LAX is pricing too high.

I'm flying next week IND-DCA-SNA for $140 a/i in U class through AmericanExpress Travel. Nets me an extra 1,000 miles than if I were to take the $140 IND-PHX-SNA through US Airways.com. Interestingly enough, my ticket says DCA-SNA does stop in PHX but no plane change. Should be interesting.......

I don't even think the airlines have a real good grasp on the incremental cost. I was watching the AE show "A Week at American Airlines" it was made in 2006. They were already concerned about fuel prices then, but when asked about the incremental cost of giving out a DM seat the Marketing VP said $10. Obvisouly that wasn't even close in 2006.

but when asked about the incremental cost of giving out a DM seat the Marketing VP said $10. Obvisouly that wasn't even close in 2006.

With the caveat that it's a coach seat on AA, that's probably a pretty fair estimate. The airlines go thru the exercise of calculating the incremental cost every quarter as part of the process of determining the liability of all those outstanding miles - anticipated on-line awards are carried at the incremental cost while anticipated awards on OAL are carried at the average cost of providing the award.

For a single online-line coach award ticket, the incremental cost is really just extra fuel burn (~1.5 gal/hour of flight for 200# including baggage) plus non-alcoholic beverage consumed (~$0.25 each). Everything else - agents, baggage handlers, F/A's, catering equipment/personnel, etc - is already being paid for whether that single award ticket is issued or not.

Jim

I thought UA was going to one flight a day (evening flight PHL-LAX, morning flight LAX-PHL).

I knew UA was cutting flights, but didn't realized it is discontinuing the nonstop until it was discussed over in the UA forum. I then checked for flights on ual.com and various other booking engines and found no nonstops on UA in November and beyond.

LAX

You can do better than that, tommy! I've done 4 MRs PIT-LAX leaving usually on Tues or Weds, but I think the fares are available on Sat as well for... *drumroll*... $99 o/w west and $139 o/w east. Think the total was around $250. Currently pulled some for around $298 a/i.

On a related note, make sure you also check out SNA as a cheap alternative to LAX if LAX is pricing too high.

But I live in PHL, not PIT. :(

As for SNA, you're right. The flights to SNA are often cheaper than flights to LAX. Anyone know why? (Must be some competition to SNA.)

But I live in PHL, not PIT. :(

As for SNA, you're right. The flights to SNA are often cheaper than flights to LAX. Anyone know why? (Must be some competition to SNA.)

I wish I knew. I'm in the middle of a six month project and SNA is about HALF the cost of LAX. For these trips, I can buy F. US wants ~2700 PHL-LAX r/t. The tickets, in paid F, out of SNA on CO and DL are ~800 all in. Much less for coach. US runs ~1100 in paid F from SNA.

The downside of SNA is that if you're in the 1230-1300 departure time and things go south there are very, very few options. LAX has plenty. I'm not willing to pay a 3x premium for that.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; PalmSource/Palm-D062; Blazer/4.5) 16;320x320)

But I live in PHL, not PIT. :(

As for SNA, you're right. The flights to SNA are often cheaper than flights to LAX. Anyone know why? (Must be some competition to SNA.)

I wish I knew. I'm in the middle of a six month project and SNA is about HALF the cost of LAX. For these trips, I can buy F. US wants ~2700 PHL-LAX r/t. The tickets, in paid F, out of SNA on CO and DL are ~800 all in. Much less for coach. US runs ~1100 in paid F from SNA.

The downside of SNA is that if you're in the 1230-1300 departure time and things go south there are very, very few options. LAX has plenty. I'm not willing to pay a 3x premium for that.

I can't figure it out either.

sna is much cheaper than san, too. on my trips to san diego, the $200 saved into sna easily makes up for the 20$ in gas. plus, rental cars in sna are dirt cheap too.

no idea why given the small size of sna. makes no sense to me at all.

The flights to SNA are often cheaper than flights to LAX. Anyone know why? (Must be some competition to SNA.)

Probably has something to do with a little airline called Southwest.....

Jim

Probably has something to do with a little airline called Southwest.....

WN serves both SNA and LAX. They hit you with a $5-10 premium for LAX on their top end fares PHL-SNA. Reasonable, and I'd pay that.

Interestingly, CO (booked in R) F is the same price (perhaps a little less after fees) as WN's "Business Select". Both requiring a connection out of SNA.

But I live in PHL, not PIT. :(

As for SNA, you're right. The flights to SNA are often cheaper than flights to LAX. Anyone know why? (Must be some competition to SNA.)

I remember being told by a very learned man in F once that SNA's cheapness ultimately derived from its narrow runway. Since its runway is so ungawdly short, this affects the size of planes that can land there, usually by carrying less fuel on board.

This might explain why my DCA-SNA flight stops in PHX... top off just enough fuel fumes to get to SNA and keep the flight cheap, plus the bonus benefit of dropping off pax at PHX.

Then again, finding a rationale in anything these days is amazing.

I've been perusing pretty heavily the Christmas-time flights from LAX/SNA to either IND, PIT, or CLT and I've found quite a few LAX-PHL with stops in PIT! Works great for the flight out, but then I have to take the Turnpike in late December to fly out of PHL?! No thanks!!!!!! Last time I did that, took me over 7+ hours and more gallons of washer fluid than I can remember.