US Airways Dividend Miles - US to discontinue domestic IFE (Now confirmed by the company)

I've just heard from a very reliable source that USAirways will be removing In Flight entertainment on all domestic aircraft because it weighs too much....flight62 or Galleywench, could you confirm that this is true?

I've just heard from a very reliable source that USAirways will be removing In Flight entertainment on all domestic aircraft because it weighs too much....flight62 or Galleywench, could you confirm that this is true?

I would be very surprised (though certainly not unprecedented for me with this bunch). Given all the hawking they do on it, it has to be a profit center, the increased cost of fuel notwithstanding.

I was more expecting to see them replace the trivia with home shopping network instead.

I've just heard from a very reliable source

IIRC the last post that was "from a very reliable source" was about the 500 mile minimum. That doesn't bode well for the future of IFE. :(

Is this your source?

http://www.usaviation.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42334

Might as well let people know who so they can read/judge for themselves...

Thanks for posting vysean. It was not my source but i guess it is out in the open now.

The new slogan should be: "Fly USAir, we're just like SouthWest, except not as cheap, not as timely, and we charge for everything.".

I've just heard from a very reliable source that USAirways will be removing In Flight entertainment on all domestic aircraft because it weighs too much....flight62 or Galleywench, could you confirm that this is true?

Well, that IS the rumor. It was brought up in one of the focus groups. The argument is of course the weight issue. Also on the drawing board are the ovens and chillers on the East a/c...all wonderful to have but either not being used or necessary..well, the chillers are nice to keep my butt cool.

Short of a free movie for F/C, there is very little revenue for the company. Most customers have their own headsets and sales don't justify the money for the rights from the movie industry for the rights to show the movies. I have heard that in the future a new lighter fiber optic system will be put in. Also, the new A321's supposedly will not have an IFE. I know, which century?

The good about this is that you will not have to hear constant advertising on the videos...worth it's wait in movie sacrifice.

My suggestions?

Take off pillows and blankets, ovens, chillers:(, and IFE.

On 3 hour + flts, provide one cart to sell a pillow banket (like ones in airport) set for $10...free for F/C and rent portable IFE's WITH Bose headsets for $10. The benefit to this is that passengers would now own a quality clean and cooty free pillow and blanket. Also, I average about 10 headsets to sell on a good day. 20 portable IFE's would be less weight and provide for those wanting to see a movie. Again, F/C would be free of charge.

My DREAM GALLEY

Rip out the current galley. Make it more of a cafe look like Amtrak with a display for snacks/bevs with a counter on top. One part of the counter would flip up so the f/a could man the bar. Beverages, coffee, a sink, and ice would be on one side and snacks on the other, pillows, blankets, and IFE's on the other side., along with the display counter. One f/a mans the counter. One makes sure trash is picked up. Passengers would come to the back to purchase items. One could buy as they choose without the f/a's having carts in the way.

Better yet, put the lavs at the very back, extend the cabin another row and put the galley at exit rows and at 2LR on the 757/A321. Seats forward of the cafe not F/C on the 757/A321 would be reserved for top fliers and provide more privacy, more legroom, and complimentary pillow/blanket, sodas, coffee, and use of IFE for $5.

My DREAM GALLEY

Rip out the current galley. Make it more of a cafe look like Amtrak with a display for snacks/bevs with a counter on top. One part of the counter would flip up so the f/a could man the bar. Beverages, coffee, a sink, and ice would be on one side and snacks on the other, pillows, blankets, and IFE's on the other side., along with the display counter. One f/a mans the counter. One makes sure trash is picked up. Passengers would come to the back to purchase items. One could buy as they choose without the f/a's having carts in the way.



Couldn't vending machines accomplish much of that (minus the trash collection), with far less cost? True, the initial cost would be high, but the mainentance would be far less than an employee. I'm really surprised that airlines don't just have food, drinks, and other things like headphones, etc in vending machines.


Generally, I'd be happy to be without IFE. I usually find it distracting, as I usually have work, an iPod, a book, my own magazines, and/or other things to keep me occupied when I fly. Otherwise, I sleep, and put on my own headphones and music to try to keep out noise. When I get upgraded to F, I usually ask the FA to give my headphones to any employees flying standby; when I was an employee I always appreciated them when this happened to me.

Vending machines are heavy. The FA has to be there anyway.

Well I rely on the IFE to keep me busy since I do not own an ipod or any of those handy dandy gadgets that America has been so obsessed with. On a Transcon, I could use that movie as a time passer. I can't sleep on airplanes and I can only do Sudoku for so long before my eyes go crossed. But then again, I won't be flying revenue on US much longer so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

It occurs to me that the cafe approach would leave the aisles perpetually clogged. Granted the carts block the aisle, but only for fixed periods of time. I don't even want to think about all the potential for spillage.

It occurs to me that the cafe approach would leave the aisles perpetually clogged. Granted the carts block the aisle, but only for fixed periods of time. I don't even want to think about all the potential for spillage.

One would think, but for those of us who have traveled Amtrak to many times, you may have 8-10 people waiting, but I see your point.

The new slogan should be: "Fly USAir, we're just like SouthWest, except not as cheap, not as timely, and we charge for everything.".

I cracked up over SW's new commercial advertising their no fee approach - they show someone having to put a quarter in the slot to open the overhead or to recline the seat!

One of the reason I don't fly SW cross country, I like to watch a movie. I love Delta's individual TV's (even though many channels don't work). Add another reason not to fly US............:rolleyes:

Well, I do have the iPod, the laptop, etc.

It seems to me that if you're not on a 321, you have no power, so the laptop is out, since running the DVD player on it burns down my battery in about 1/2 hour. I try to strip down the number of running processes, but it still just eats my battery alive.

Otherwise, I have to download movies, convert them to iPod format, import them to my iPod, etc, etc, yadda yadda. Not to mention the initial cost of the movie.

Now, let's see, which works out better for me? Pay $10 / ticket more to cover cost of IFE and movie, or spend $20 of my own money (no reimbursement) to buy a movie, and 4 hours of my time to rip it to my iPod? Hmmm. Now, I don't hold a degree in advanced mathematics, but I'm pretty sure I come out ahead with US raising the ticket price a little bit.

Those sandfleas in Tempe are trying everything they can to get me to switch to another airline, aren't they?

I could live without it on domestic, but could not in any way in any cabin live without it on TA flights.

. . . Those sandfleas in Tempe . . .

The best 'term of endearment' I've heard yet! The way they keep coming at us, from every direction they can think of, taking bite after bite -- such a complete annoyance. Perfect analogy. I love it! :)

The best 'term of endearment' I've heard yet! The way they keep coming at us, from every direction they can think of, taking bite after bite -- such a complete annoyance. Perfect analogy. I love it! :)

Couldn't disagree more! Personification and resorting to hyperbole in order to save a buck or two is not a worthy pursuit. Better to keep the discussion on clearly "clinical" terms if you wish to attribute 'their' actions to somehow keeping you from saving those $$$ you worked so long for. Don't get me wrong, I'm in nearly complete disagreement with many of the new pronouncements, but I easily recognize they are made in non-emotional terms and with a goal of corporate survival - something even the US haters (Clue X 4 excluded) would probably agree is in all of our best interests.

. . . Personification and resorting to hyperbole in order to save a buck or two is not a worthy pursuit. Better to keep the discussion on clearly "clinical" terms if you wish to attribute 'their' actions to somehow keeping you from saving those $$$ you worked so long for. . .

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I didn't say anything about saving "a buck or two." There is nothing 'clinical' about this. And I didn't attribute "their actions to somehow keeping (me) from saving those $$$." :confused:

If you're going to play the company line, before you "couldn't disagree more," at least understand the point being made. :rolleyes:

I'll try it again: There have been many not-so-flattering terms assigned to this management team. Given their incessant (which means continual, repeated) erosion of the benefits which have kept me a loyal customer for so many years, the analogy of an incessant sand flea, given the location of the corporate HQ in the desert, seemed to me especially apropos. As we say here on FT, YMM (and undoubtedly will) V.

I cracked up over SW's new commercial advertising their no fee approach - they show someone having to put a quarter in the slot to open the overhead or to recline the seat!

One of the reason I don't fly SW cross country, I like to watch a movie. I love Delta's individual TV's (even though many channels don't work). Add another reason not to fly US............:rolleyes:

Forget the BUS. Fly with US!

or

Tired of the BUS? Fly with US!

Couldn't disagree more! Personification and resorting to hyperbole in order to save a buck or two is not a worthy pursuit. Better to keep the discussion on clearly "clinical" terms if you wish to attribute 'their' actions to somehow keeping you from saving those $$$ you worked so long for. Don't get me wrong, I'm in nearly complete disagreement with many of the new pronouncements, but I easily recognize they are made in non-emotional terms and with a goal of corporate survival - something even the US haters (Clue X 4 excluded) would probably agree is in all of our best interests.

Um...yeah...ok...I can see that...very refreshing...ok.

I do think flights over a certain time - say 3.5 hours - should have some sort of IFE, it's really not necessary on many flights.

AA seems to do very well with 300 plus MD-80s that have no IFE... CO does well with ERJ-XRs that fly 4.5 hour legs with no IFE... how many 737's out there don't have IFE??? Dare I mention NW and their DC-9's?

So my question is: how would this move differ US from other airlines on 80% of their flights?

Don't get me wrong, I'm in nearly complete disagreement with many of the new pronouncements, but I easily recognize they are made in non-emotional terms and with a goal of corporate survival - something even the US haters (Clue X 4 excluded) would probably agree is in all of our best interests.

Umm, none of is in "our" best interests, sport. It's in the company's best interests. Unlike yours, many of the rest of us don't conclude (in many cases, anymore) that's what good for Tempe is good for me. I'm interested in maximizing my FF benefits and amenities, not defending the Sandfleas at every turn.

But I'll take that--is removing differentiators with your competition, who is either cheaper, offers more benefits to the FF or both really a good idea? I'd argue no, but I'm not a Sandflea Keeper tm.


AA seems to do very well with 300 plus MD-80s that have no IFE... CO does well with ERJ-XRs that fly 4.5 hour legs with no IFE... how many 737's out there don't have IFE??? Dare I mention NW and their DC-9's?

So my question is: how would this move differ US from other airlines on 80% of their flights?

CO has IFE on most (if not all) of it's mainline fleet, AA has it on everything but the trash-80s. Northwest is not running DC-9s on very many 3.5+ hour legs.

It's far more useful to think that on the rare occasion when one scores a mainline flight on US, one of the bigger differentiators that they had going was IFE. That's now going to be gone. Again, what exactly then makes someone buy a ticket on US when all other things are as they are?

As an aside, I think Sandfleas is this year's BloFare.

CO has IFE on most (if not all) of it's mainline fleet, AA has it on everything but the trash-80s. Northwest is not running DC-9s on very many 3.5+ hour legs.

It's far more useful to think that on the rare occasion when one scores a mainline flight on US, one of the bigger differentiators that they had going was IFE. That's now going to be gone. Again, what exactly then makes someone buy a ticket on US when all other things are as they are?



Half of AA's fleet is Super 80's... and if you've been on any of their old 57's lately, the IFE never seems to be operational (well, at least not on the transcons I've taken lately.)

I don't know if CO has IFE on their old 737s, but they do run RJs on very long segments - all of which are IFE (and comfort) free zones.

I agree, US should keep IFE on planes that do longer segments, but I guess that would mean keeping a sub-fleet of IFE enabled planes.

My point is that other airlines seem to do alright with plenty of routes with no IFE. And that IFE didn't make Song any type of overwhelming success - and despite having IFE, people will fly US over B6 if the ticket is 30 bucks less.

Don't get me wrong, I'm in nearly complete disagreement with many of the new pronouncements, but I easily recognize they are made in non-emotional terms and with a goal of corporate survival - something even the US haters (Clue X 4 excluded) would probably agree is in all of our best interests.

i agree that keeping US flying is actually good for me. the extra capacity helps to keep my UA fares low. if US folds, not only will it take me 4 hours to get to LAS, but i'd guess fares would go up for nearly every city pair.

that being said, i can do without IFE on SEA-LAS. it was US's IFE on the A330s, however, which had me picking US TATL when i lived in germany.

I think most are in agreement that IFE is pretty much "required" for TATL routes. For those that can't sleep, that's a lotta hours staring at the wall or a book. A distraction is always nice plus it may reduce the occurence of people talking loudly or opening window covers and starting arguments with others who want to sleep.

Domestic routes on the other hand are a little tougher to call. I fly a lot more NW than US since last year though I'm still CP. NW metal does not have IFE for domestic routes but I get treated much better as a NW Plat than I do as a US CP. That's enough to keep me flying more on NW than US. However, I do miss being able to catch a movie (I don't have much time for movies otherwise) which is great during meals. I also think they're great when I want a short break from working on my notebook.

If IFEs really go, I hope they at least retain or put in power. Perhaps for F cabin only or F plus a few rows in coach. Still get to trim weight and save on movie royalties but also keep some of the pax happy.

I agree, US should keep IFE on planes that do longer segments, but I guess that would mean keeping a sub-fleet of IFE enabled planes.


It would also mean breaking US of its longstanding habit of using 321s on transcon flights. The 321 isn't really suited for transcons anyway--how many threads have there been on this board about fuel stops, especially after the reconfiguration?--and I'm guessing that since the IFE elimination is reportedly starting with the new 321s, aside from the convenience issue (meaning that these are the planes that haven't been delivered yet) it probably means the weight savings mean the most on the 321s. And that's part of why I'm particularly irked about this--the Sandfleas already fouled up the 321 by ripping out 3 rows of F, reducing pitch and squeezing in more Y. That couldn't have made the planes any lighter. Could US have avoided having to eliminate IFE (which will undoubtedly alienate infrequent leisure travelers) for weight/fuel savings if it hadn't reconfigured the 321 (which alienated FFs)? I'd love to know.

A distraction is always nice plus it may reduce the occurence of people talking loudly or opening window covers and starting arguments with others who want to sleep.

See, I was going to say that the only positive to eliminating IFE would be an end to the daytime-flight PA request that pax in window seats "lower the shades for better viewing." :) I'm a window-seat person, and I always keep my shade open because when I'm not looking out the window (which is often), I strongly prefer natural light for reading/working. I hate when FAs make that announcement, as it makes me much more self-conscious about looking out the window. Ah well, to each his own, I guess. :)

i agree that keeping US flying is actually good for me. the extra capacity helps to keep my UA fares low. if US folds, not only will it take me 4 hours to get to LAS, but i'd guess fares would go up for nearly every city pair.

That is the ONLY reason I'd like to see this company flying...that and the jobs that many people depend on.

Gary, you'll be pleased to know that, I believe it was me that coined the term "Sand Fleas."

In fact Gary, in my hyperbole, here's how I refer to those rock stars:

"The Sand Fleas Infesting The Sand Castle" is how I refer to them most of the time.

And I realize it "flies" in your face of pragmatic logic and reason....my apologies up front.

Back closer to the subject at hand....typical. I knew about this over the weekend. Frankly, I could care less as I gave up giving a rat's behind about US some time ago. But it speaks VOLUMES to the silliness of the decision making by The Sand Fleas Infesting The Sand Castle.

Funny, yesterday I flew GNV-CLT-PVD on the Worst Managed Aviation Product In Aviation History....The CLT-PVD portion of the ride was an ERJ190. The wife and I were upgraded and we had our niece with us….so, I took the niece's seat in 23C and let the two of them ride in Faux (me4yankees coined that one Gary...."Faux" Class....IOW, Pretend Fist Class, in case my hyperbole isn't descriptive enough). I got on early to make sure I had room for my crap….which I was VERY lucky to get back after the Worst Managed Aviation Product In The History Of Modern Aviation lost it…and then told me they didn’t care much about losing it….and I had to replace EVERYTHING last week...

Anyway, I was sitting comfy in 23C and a prego mother with a toddler, I’d say, around 2 to 3 years old, got on and asked for a blanket and a pillow. The F/A said, “I’m so sorry, we don’t have pillows or blankets on these airplanes and have not in a long time…and starting next month, we won’t have complimentary beverage service either.” The pregnant woman, in the most surprised voice said, “are you serious?” The F/A said, “yes ma’am, I am.”

It was right there, crystallized, what an AWFUL environment it’s going to be for customers and workers.

I won't be there, observing it....I've almost seen enough of the train wreck that it's totally losing interest to me....close....

And how sad is that? After being CP, legitimately, since they invented it...and Elite, going back to "Priority Gold," in 1990.

As a friendly reminder to all - this thread is about the possibility (read: rumor at this stage) of US discontinuing In-Flight Entertainment onboard its aircraft.

It is not a management debate, name-calling, or anything else.

Please keep things on-topic or this thread will find itself gone the way of the IFE, if the rumor is accurate... :)

As a friendly reminder to all - this thread is about the possibility (read: rumor at this stage) of US discontinuing In-Flight Entertainment onboard its aircraft.

It is not a management debate, name-calling, or anything else.

Please keep things on-topic or this thread will find itself gone the way of the IFE, if the rumor is accurate... :)

Uh....yvsean....

Its as real and accurate as a heart attack....employees will be informed Thursday...rationale is and will be:

-headset revenue - nill
-people use their own headset or watch their own device
-studios charge millions
-maintenance
-and finally fuel for about 600 lbs

As a result: "we can’t afford it anymore."

And as I replied to them...."I can't afford to fly US anymore from a price to value issue any longer."

There you go...put a fork in it, it's done....it will be officially released to the employees on Thursday.....it's not a rumor.

I was more expecting to see them replace the trivia with home shopping network instead. I was expecting them to replace the trivia with ads so that they can generate revenues.

I don't understand what US is doing- removing the drop-down video monitors?

So no more safety video, either?

I don't understand what US is doing- removing the drop-down video monitors?

So no more safety video, either?

For the longest time safety announcements were done by the FAs pre-flight - I guess it will go back to that.

Did anyone catch the special the other night "A Week in the Life of American Airlines"? One of the things mentioned (and this was shot when fuel was 80-90 a barrel) was about AA's obsession with reducing weight on planes - looking at lighter weight carts and seats, getting rid of pillows and blankets, carrying only partial tanks of water (or no water and just having wetnaps in the lav), all except transcon planes would lose ovens, barf bags, the magazines they used to carry for pax (remember when you could get Time or Newsweek on a plane?), everything - including having the inflight magazine justify its existence by proving that it made more money than it cost to carry it on the planes. The point being that EVERY airline is trying to cut costs where they can.

US is making some decisions that I don't like - but they aren't alone. In some cases, like IFE, they're coming back to the pack rather than setting a new low. I personally think it's short sighted - they should put in Air Canada style IFE where you pay for some of the content if you choose (like games.) However, except on very long segments and transcons, I won't miss it.

Now if only they'd add Channel 9 to make up for it...

Uh....yvsean....

Its as real and accurate as a heart attack....employees will be informed Thursday...rationale is and will be:

-headset revenue - nill
-people use their own headset or watch their own device
-studios charge millions
-maintenance
-and finally fuel for about 600 lbs

As a result: "we can’t afford it anymore."

And as I replied to them...."I can't afford to fly US anymore from a price to value issue any longer."

There you go...put a fork in it, it's done....it will be officially released to the employees on Thursday.....it's not a rumor.

Yes, I've read the same information as you, and I have no doubt it could happen. Fact is, it hasn't been officially announced as of today so it is, by definition, still a rumor.

Debate my semantics as long as you wish - it doesn't change anything.

Did anyone catch the special the other night "A Week in the Life of American Airlines"?

Now if only they'd add Channel 9 to make up for it...

Where was the special? I'd like to see if they're replaying it.

Channel 9 would be ideal, IMO. It seems like a relatively inexpensive way to keep us FTers happy. :cool:

See, I was going to say that the only positive to eliminating IFE would be an end to the daytime-flight PA request that pax in window seats "lower the shades for better viewing." :) I'm a window-seat person, and I always keep my shade open because when I'm not looking out the window (which is often), I strongly prefer natural light for reading/working. I hate when FAs make that announcement, as it makes me much more self-conscious about looking out the window. Ah well, to each his own, I guess. :)

I much prefer natural light too but if it means it'll interfere with the comfort of other pax on a long haul, I'll gladly lower the shades. I have the option of using less intrusive lighting for what I'm doing (reading/working) but when the shades are up even the masks provided offer limited cover.

Of course, if it's short-haul (IMHO, transcon is short haul), I really don't think it should matter either way. I've seen pax get into heated arguments over this which I think is both childish and selfish but that's just me.

I should have signed up for the "free" Premier Executive level on United which expired on June 30th because as a Gold on USAirways if this is taken out, then that just might be the last straw. Enouh is enough just charge us an aircraft use fee like the resort use fees, give us an arm band and bring us back some service levels. I have liked USAirways for the past few years, but I think this might really end my flying on the carrier.

I bet they will start charging for upgrades soon too.

Global Express

Where was the special? I'd like to see if they're replaying it.

Channel 9 would be ideal, IMO. It seems like a relatively inexpensive way to keep us FTers happy. :cool:

I wish I could tell you - I caught it on TV in a hotel room (one where the hotel's TV directory didn't match the channels... that or it was on the Playboy channel :) )

Actually, it was on CNBC and it was a really good peak at the complexity of running an airline. Here's a link for it:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/18576787/

I know this as a rumor soon to be fact.

I usually fly short-haul so all I get is Travel Crap (I mean Quest) and the safety video from 199-something, but I think the flying public that are not frequent flyers have come to expect certain things, such as free non-alcoholic beverages and in-flight entertainment on long-haul flights as options, especially from a legacy carrier like US. Perhaps removing IFE is not that big of a deal for us that travel all the time and are usually prepared with our own gadgets and entertainment.

However, removing IFE is just part of a larger picture, and that is one of pay more, get less: increasing fees, charging for drinks, taking away free pretzels and Biscoffs from coach on short flights, taking away IFE, taking away 500-mile minimums, taking away elite bonuses, etc. It all began a couple of years ago with the aircraft reconfigs, removing Y/B fare PQM bonuses, etc. This is just more evidence of a business model that I no longer subscribe to, and I will try like heck to avoid it.

Vending machines are heavy. The FA has to be there anyway.

I have no idea why, but out of context this statement becomes very funny for me.

No longer a rumor now confirmed. Only domestic IFE remaining will be Hawaii.

http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2008/07/07/daily30.html?ana=yfcpc

Article says IFE is discontinued to Mexico and Caribbean.

What about the Latin America destinations? Do they qualify as Caribbean?

I assume that Canada flights will have IFE.

Article says IFE is discontinued to Mexico and Caribbean.

What about the Latin America destinations? Do they qualify as Caribbean?

I assume that Canada flights will have IFE.


I would not assume that flights to Canada will have IFE. Canadian flights are considered "domestic" operationally.

Vending machines are heavy. The FA has to be there anyway.
Actually, a credit-card based vending system designed to weigh as much or less than the galley could be more profitable than an FA attempting to "sell" products. Vending could include food/drink, entertainment systems, comfort items. The FA's would still need to police the aisles to collect trash and focus on their main safety duties. Do away with the weight in both galley areas and the systems could even be outsourced where airline retains a commission.

This airline and its management are beyond ridiculous - time to ring the Chapter 7 bells before they start charging for oxygen.

Well, I just flew home from Alaska on a NW 757 with no IFE. I flew to Alaska on a DL 737-800 with state-of-the-art IFE.

The DL experience was superior. I wish everyone had it. But at the end of the day, I chose to fly NW home based on price and convenience.

I think that's what all these "terrible" changes are about -- nothing really much influences your choice of airlines except price and convenience. US has figured this out, and it's their key to survival with fuel prices up 100% in a year.

And for all the whining on this board, I'd note that US said today that their forward bookings look strong.

So look for even more cost savings moves.

Well, I just flew home from Alaska on a NW 757 with no IFE. I flew to Alaska on a DL 737-800 with state-of-the-art IFE.

The DL experience was superior. I wish everyone had it. But at the end of the day, I chose to fly NW home based on price and convenience.

I think that's what all these "terrible" changes are about -- nothing really much influences your choice of airlines except price and convenience. US has figured this out, and it's their key to survival with fuel prices up 100% in a year.

And for all the whining on this board, I'd note that US said today that their forward bookings look strong.

So look for even more cost savings moves.

It depends on the market. If you are flying out of CLT, for example, you are still likely to end up on US Airways despite the inconveniences. But why would anybody in their right mind fly on US from PHX-Chicago, for example, when there are better alternatives unless US prices its seats at a very significant discount (>$20/seat by my calculation)? I'd rather fly WN or UA with free beverages, at least (and free checked luggage on WN or IFE on UA-take your pick). Same goes for PHX-ATL, PHX-DFW, PHL-ATL, PHL-Chicago, and dozens of other US markets. And let's not even start on paid F travel.

I heard CO are discontinuing IFE on domestic flights also. Can anyone confirm this?

I heard CO are discontinuing IFE on domestic flights also. Can anyone confirm this?

They are most certainly not. CO is expanding their IFE options, adding AVOD to the entire 752 fleet (both cabins), and introducing DirecTV and Internet to the newest 737-900s.

The 737 -300s and -500s are the only aircraft without IFE, and those fleet types are being phased out aggressively.

CO offers a competitive, appealing and cutting edge product. US offers - blech.

This airline and its management are beyond ridiculous - time to ring the Chapter 7 bells before they start charging for oxygen.

This is nothing more than hysterical ranting. Are you going to say the same thing about AA? Half their mainline fleet, which is probably 80% of its domestic mainline fleet, has never had IFE. How about CO? Maybe their mainline fleet has IFE, but their RJs don't - and they love RJs on 4-5 hour flights. NW doesn't have IFE on lots of planes. UA doesn't have it on the 737 fleet (as I recall.) Are they also going into CH 7 because they don't have IFE on those planes?

IAHPHX is right - people will take what saves them money. The family of 5 traveling will take any flight for $50 less because it's $250 total savings. The business person will take the itinerary that best meets their needs (9 times out of 10. the 10th time will be the FT person who will connect 3 times to get bonus miles :D )

US still has one of the best load factors around - 85% last month - and had very strong passenger traffic data smallest declines YOY. This is data for June - after all the announcements and pronouncements. if their traffic plummets in August and September more than the other legacies, then maybe I'll agree. But for now it seems they have figured out that people are looking at price first and everything else is a distant second.

This airline and its management are beyond ridiculous - time to ring the Chapter 7 bells before they start charging for oxygen.

And why do you write this? Because they're taking steps to limit losses and return to profitability in the face of increasing expenses? Seems like a rational business decision to me - even if I, as a passenger, dislike it.

They have stated time and time again that their customers purchase based primarily on price, with additional consideration given to convenience/schedule/reliability. So they cut costs to the bare minimum where they can offer the cheapest ticket and still make a small profit, and they focus heavily on reliability. As we've seen, that means that they don't appear to value the frequent flyer very much, and apparently they're okay with that.

Look, I don't agree with most of the decisions the management team at US has made recently. But I don't believe they're a bunch of clueless idiots either - I trust that they're making decisions based on numbers and other information that aren't available to us.

You don't have to agree with the changes they make, but to call them "ridiculous" or suggest that they should go bankrupt because they're cutting costs (as all major carriers are doing, BTW) just doesn't make much sense to me.

US still has one of the best load factors around - 85% last month -

#5 of 6 among the legacy carriers.

and had very strong passenger traffic data smallest declines YOY.

#4 of the 6 legacy carriers.

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN0740338420080707?rpc=44

Jim

This is nothing more than hysterical ranting. Are you going to say the same thing about AA? Half their mainline fleet, which is probably 80% of its domestic mainline fleet, has never had IFE. How about CO? Maybe their mainline fleet has IFE, but their RJs don't - and they love RJs on 4-5 hour flights. NW doesn't have IFE on lots of planes. UA doesn't have it on the 737 fleet (as I recall.) Are they also going into CH 7 because they don't have IFE on those planes?

IAHPHX is right - people will take what saves them money. The family of 5 traveling will take any flight for $50 less because it's $250 total savings. The business person will take the itinerary that best meets their needs (9 times out of 10. the 10th time will be the FT person who will connect 3 times to get bonus miles :D )

US still has one of the best load factors around - 85% last month - and had very strong passenger traffic data smallest declines YOY. This is data for June - after all the announcements and pronouncements. if their traffic plummets in August and September more than the other legacies, then maybe I'll agree. But for now it seems they have figured out that people are looking at price first and everything else is a distant second.

US believes everyone buys on price alone - which many studies point out is simply untrue. People buy based on a variety of factors, price and schedule included, but certainly not exclusive to other factors. The overall appeal of the product does factor in - and the US product is about the cheapest, tattered and worn in the industry today.

US wants to be all things to all people - their business strategy is flawed and their execution is breathtakingly incompetent, hence my continued derision for their management. You can be a discount carrier or you can be a network full service carrier - you cannot be both at the same time and still offer a product which is even slightly appealing to either leisure or business travelers.

Some discount carriers are either finding success with, or exploring the option of adding premium services to woo frequent fliers. They still remain discount carriers, but layer on additional product features to encourage incremental spend. US claims it's a full service carrier, but peels the product down to its basic layers, exposing incremental *cost* to the customer - check bags? It costs. Buy soda, water or coffee onboard? It costs. Where's the 'discount' in US' claim they are a low fare carrier? It's a lie.

US mistakenly believes that customers appreciate the option of spending less to get less - only buying what they need. The fatal flaw in this approach is the competition who is offering a better product for the same overall cost, or in the case of WN, a better coach product without any of the additional fees, and thus a lower overall cost.

A basic premise in the practice of marketing are the concepts of 'search' and 'differentiation'. Customers have a very easy way to search for alternatives, and are savvy enough to understand the differentiation between airline products, especially when there is a broad difference, as there is between US and CO, for example.

No longer a rumor now confirmed. Only domestic IFE remaining will be Hawaii.

http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2008/07/07/daily30.html?ana=yfcpc

This is a pretty poorly-written article. Light on details, spelling errors, and housed in the "Real Estate - Residential" section of the website. :confused:

So we know that they plan to remove "movies on some domestic flights". We further know that "the targeted airplanes fly U.S. domestic routes and flights to Mexico and the Caribbean."

Is it some domestic flights or all?
If some, could we cite specific aircraft type(s)?
Can we confirm that Canada, Alaska, and Central America are included or not?

#5 of 6 among the legacy carriers.

#4 of the 6 legacy carriers.

Now Jim, don't let facts get in the way of a good argument. ;)

I can't reveal the source (which I guess leaves it as a rumor) but.....

Is it some domestic flights or all?
All
If some, could we cite specific aircraft type(s)?
Only A330, B767, and B757 ETOPS will have the IFE still installed
Can we confirm that Canada, Alaska, and Central America are included or not?
While some F/A's may still show a movie if the aircraft is IFE equipped, the policy will be IFE only on HI and TA flights.

It will be announced to employees Thursday. The reasoning is that not enough people purchase the headsets (they use their own), cost of the movies, and weight.

Jim

I can't reveal the source (which I guess leaves it as a rumor) but.....


All

Only A330, B767, and B757 ETOPS will have the IFE still installed

While some F/A's may still show a movie if the aircraft is IFE equipped, the policy will be IFE only on HI and TA flights.

It will be announced to employees Thursday. The reasoning is that not enough people purchase the headsets (they use their own), cost of the movies, and weight.

Jim

Thanks for the info Jim ^ - What about TATL aircraft operating non-TATL flights? For example US1024/1071 to SJU, or the multitude of 757ETOPS/767 flights to the Caribbean in the winter? Since they have the equipment, will they use it?

And in case the differentiation needs to be made - what about the 333 where the IFE is fixed and not a portable player? Seems all they have to do on that one is literally flip a switch, whereas with the 757 and 767 they'd have to hand out players in F.

As I stated somewhat clumsily, when IFE is available on a non-IFE route some F/As may still use it. However, that will not be policy since US pays per showing for the movies and the payment is based on scheduled showing.

Jim

They are most certainly not. CO is expanding their IFE options, adding AVOD to the entire 752 fleet (both cabins), and introducing DirecTV and Internet to the newest 737-900s.

They'll be charging for the DirecTV unlike their other IFE options and unlike B6. They're expanding their revenue streams...not the value that customers get for the fare.


CO offers a competitive, appealing and cutting edge product. US offers - blech.

CO--Cutting edge? Perhaps in comparison to US, but certainly not overall.

They'll be charging for the DirecTV unlike their other IFE options and unlike B6. They're expanding their revenue streams...not the value that customers get for the fare.


Right, that's what I understand CO's policy to be, too (with DirecTV free in FC).

At first glance, it seems like a superior strategy to US', in that it keeps a service (IFE), but shifts the cost from the airline to those pax who want to pay for it. That said, I'm sure US considered this option, but decided that eliminating IFE completely from domestic routes made more financial sense. It may be a judgment call, it may be that they couldn't negotiate as good a deal as CO, or it may be that they're less focused on offering a "superior product" (aka "a more expensive product") than CO.

Whatever the reasons, I'm glad to see that at least some other posters recognize that US' decisions to reduce amenities is not necessarily "stupid." It may be bad for frequent flyers, but it may be fiscally wise for the airline. And God knows, they need all the cost-savings they can generate with fuel prices doubling in a year.

The only move that I consider beyond the pale is charging for water. Sodas, fine, but potable water should be free. And I continue to believe that the gov't will require it to be free if the airlines don't do it themselves.

Right, that's what I understand CO's policy to be, too (with DirecTV free in FC).

At first glance, it seems like a superior strategy to US', in that it keeps a service (IFE), but shifts the cost from the airline to those pax who want to pay for it. That said, I'm sure US considered this option, but decided that eliminating IFE completely from domestic routes made more financial sense. It may be a judgment call, it may be that they couldn't negotiate as good a deal as CO, or it may be that they're less focused on offering a "superior product" (aka "a more expensive product") than CO.

Whatever the reasons, I'm glad to see that at least some other posters recognize that US' decisions to reduce amenities is not necessarily "stupid." It may be bad for frequent flyers, but it may be fiscally wise for the airline. And God knows, they need all the cost-savings they can generate with fuel prices doubling in a year.

The only move that I consider beyond the pale is charging for water. Sodas, fine, but potable water should be free. And I continue to believe that the gov't will require it to be free if the airlines don't do it themselves.

100% agree with this post. And most especially the last paragraph - I should hope the government steps in and slaps them for what is an impossibly dumb idea.

Although I don't think it's ever actually been spelled out (and perhaps they haven't decided in Tempe), I would hope that water is provided for free from a large bottle, and pax can choose to purchase their own 1 litre (or whatever size) personal water bottle. So pax can still get water for free but just have to wait on refills, or get the same water in a "US Airways comemorative keepsake collectible bottle" for a charge... Collect all 42 designs... (we are, afterall, all about new revenue channel creation). :D

As I stated somewhat clumsily, when IFE is available on a non-IFE route some F/As may still use it. However, that will not be policy since US pays per showing for the movies and the payment is based on scheduled showing.

Jim

Sorry, I read your post thinking only of 319/320/321/737/757 - should've re-read it to include TATL aircraft.

So from the sounds of it, no IFE at all, even on the big boys to the eastern islands. Glad I didn't buy my F ticket to SJU yet...

Out of curiosity, is this all on the "honor system" with the F/A choosing to play a movie and then reporting back to HQ, or does the act of stocking the tapes on the plane count as a "showing" in the eyes of the MPAA or whomever handles licensing and fees for movies? And with AVOD, does the computer keep a tally and report back? If so, any idea to whom? With US IT folks not too busy with much else (or so it seems), perhaps they could hack the AVOD computer to mis-report movies played. That would save them maybe $1 million a year. :cool:

Too bad they don't have moving map - at least I could stay somewhat entertained on a domestic 333 run without it costing US anything... ;)

They'll be charging for the DirecTV unlike their other IFE options and unlike B6. They're expanding their revenue streams...not the value that customers get for the fare.

Actually very little of the money will be going to CO. LiveTV/JetBlue is taking on the financial risk for the installation of the systems and will be keeping the lion's share of the revenue generated. This decision could backfire on CO significantly if the direct revenue is low and they are stuck flying around that extra weight on their on gas bill.

100% agree with this post. And most especially the last paragraph - I should hope the government steps in and slaps them for what is an impossibly dumb idea.

:D

We all drank tap water on the a/c for years before everybody bought into the foolish bottled water industry which, by the way, provides 0 chloride. Need to take a pill? TAP WATER! Just ran from the other flight and need a glass of water? TAP WATER! Back to the good old days! TAP WATER! Didn't hurt you then..won't hurt you now!

BTW, in the event of ground holds or closed ramp due to storms, there is bottled water and biscoffs yes free.

US still has one of the best load factors around - 85% last month - and had very strong passenger traffic data smallest declines YOY. This is data for June - after all the announcements and pronouncements. if their traffic plummets in August and September more than the other legacies, then maybe I'll agree. But for now it seems they have figured out that people are looking at price first and everything else is a distant second.

Load factors are meaningless. Let's look at unit revenue increases instead.

In May, US reported that April RASM was " flat to down 2 percent when compared to the same period last year."

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=196799&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1139894&highlight=

In June, US reported that May RASM "increased between two and four percent when compared to the same period last year."

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=196799&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1162581&highlight=

Yesterday, US reported that June RASM "increased between two and four percent versus the same period last year."

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080707/20080707005344.html?.v=1

Fuel is up 100% year over year and yet US has only managed to secure increases in unit revenue of probably less than 2% (and certainly less than 4%) for the second quarter? And instead of addressing that failure, some genius in Tempe has convinced Parker that removing IFE (saving a whopping $10 million a year) is the ticket?

Is US headed for Ch 7? Probably not. Ch 11? Before November.

Out of curiosity, is this all on the "honor system"

Where's Galley Wench when needed.....

It's my understanding that playing the movie/music audio channels is strictly on the "honor system" and that no reports are sent back to the company. Of course, it's different for headset sales.

The company publishes the schedule of when the movie/audio is to be used and fees are paid based on that schedule. A problem could arise if someone from one of the studios became aware that the movie/audio was being played without the fee being paid (also applies to showing the wrong movie - the fee may go to the wrong studio). You might be surprised to learn that one or more of US' frequent fliers are in such a position, though again I can't reveal names.

Jim

We all drank tap water on the a/c for years before everybody bought into the foolish bottled water industry which, by the way, provides 0 chloride. Need to take a pill? TAP WATER! Just ran from the other flight and need a glass of water? TAP WATER! Back to the good old days! TAP WATER! Didn't hurt you then..won't hurt you now!

BTW, in the event of ground holds or closed ramp due to storms, there is bottled water and biscoffs yes free.

Fair enough, I just recall those 48 Hours-esque reports about how nasty the water on an airplane was. Figured that they didn't encourage people to drink it because of the potential risk of nasties crawling around inside you and related lawsuits.

Of course, I happily brush my teeth on airplanes and use the lav's tap water to do so, so point taken... :)

Half their mainline fleet, which is probably 80% of its domestic mainline fleet, has never had IFE. How about CO? Maybe their mainline fleet has IFE, but their RJs don't - and they love RJs on 4-5 hour flights.

Name one CO Express flight that is 4-5 hours.:rolleyes:

Now Jim, don't let facts get in the way of a good argument. ;)

Here's the facts:
DL and NW had increases in RPMs, then US was third with a small drop.
Compare traffic vs. capacity and you'll see that US was second best
US drop in LF was also second "best" among the legacies.

The fact is you can make facts pretty much say anything you want...

The fact is you can make facts pretty much say anything you want...

A "fact" I can agree with... ;)

Real verification of the removal of IFE....

Arizona Republic Article (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/0709biz-talker07091.html)

Jim

Fair enough, I just recall those 48 Hours-esque reports about how nasty the water on an airplane was. Figured that they didn't encourage people to drink it because of the potential risk of nasties crawling around inside you and related lawsuits.

Of course, I happily brush my teeth on airplanes and use the lav's tap water to do so, so point taken... :)

Well, either the water is safe to drink or it's not. If the galley water is safe, US needs to tell the public so and stand by it. That would be an acceptable solution.

If it's not a good idea to drink galley water, US should make bottled water available free to its customers (in the manner vysean suggests). This isn't an "amenity" issue -- it's a health and safety issue. It's a path US should not be going down, IMHO.

Name one CO Express flight that is 4-5 hours.:rolleyes:

well, at around 3:45 you could try IAH-YYZ-IAH - that's RJ x 4 times daily. I've done that flight where it's been over 4 hours. CO has a bunch of ERJ-XRs - they fly them long distances. Forget 4 hours - anything over 2 hours on an RJ with or without IFE is torture.

US believes everyone buys on price alone - which many studies point out is simply untrue. People buy based on a variety of factors, price and schedule included, but certainly not exclusive to other factors. The overall appeal of the product does factor in - and the US product is about the cheapest, tattered and worn in the industry today.


I agree with this but also disagree to the point that my agreement translates to only a minority of flyers. Just read this thread, this forum or most of the other forums and you will find people who jump carriers for a $20 price differential. There was some unreasonable person in this very forum several months back complaining that it costs more to fly from Phoenix to Tucson than what it does to drive. There are countless other examples and those of us who are willng to pay $20 MORE for a good product (or more than that even) are certainly in the minority.

Air travel today is a commodity and made so by a combination of the Southwest types of carriers and a large number of passengers who believe it to be a right to have a low cost flying option...it may very well be given a right given the success of Southwest.

US and the other carriers are simply responding to what the market is telling them to do: let me fly where I want to for as little as possible and I don't care about the overall experience while I get there. Again, that's not everyone but look at the people boarding with you next time or even read this forum with that in mind and it is the significant majority of people today.

It is a product of the economy, of the industry and the attitude of the consumer.

Granted, the management of this company has taken some steps that are very drastic but the precarious position this company has been in for so many years must drive them to try unorthodox things.

Will they go belly up? That seems to be more likely each day. I for one, however, am glad that I did not burn 100% of my miles and change carriers five years ago when things looked just as bad for them. That doesn't mean I'm not burning (have burned 480,000 this year alone) but it does mean that I've not dramatically changed my patterns. I view each day that www.usair.com comes up as a blessing and am really hoping they make it through the end of the year with at least their trans-atlantic routes in tact so I can get something for the miles I burned.

Well, that IS the rumor. It was brought up in one of the focus groups. The argument is of course the weight issue. Also on the drawing board are the ovens and chillers on the East a/c...all wonderful to have but either not being used or necessary..well, the chillers are nice to keep my butt cool.

Short of a free movie for F/C, there is very little revenue for the company. Most customers have their own headsets and sales don't justify the money for the rights from the movie industry for the rights to show the movies. I have heard that in the future a new lighter fiber optic system will be put in. Also, the new A321's supposedly will not have an IFE. I know, which century?

The good about this is that you will not have to hear constant advertising on the videos...worth it's wait in movie sacrifice.

My suggestions?

Take off pillows and blankets, ovens, chillers:(, and IFE.

On 3 hour + flts, provide one cart to sell a pillow banket (like ones in airport) set for $10...free for F/C and rent portable IFE's WITH Bose headsets for $10. The benefit to this is that passengers would now own a quality clean and cooty free pillow and blanket. Also, I average about 10 headsets to sell on a good day. 20 portable IFE's would be less weight and provide for those wanting to see a movie. Again, F/C would be free of charge.

My DREAM GALLEY

Rip out the current galley. Make it more of a cafe look like Amtrak with a display for snacks/bevs with a counter on top. One part of the counter would flip up so the f/a could man the bar. Beverages, coffee, a sink, and ice would be on one side and snacks on the other, pillows, blankets, and IFE's on the other side., along with the display counter. One f/a mans the counter. One makes sure trash is picked up. Passengers would come to the back to purchase items. One could buy as they choose without the f/a's having carts in the way.

Better yet, put the lavs at the very back, extend the cabin another row and put the galley at exit rows and at 2LR on the 757/A321. Seats forward of the cafe not F/C on the 757/A321 would be reserved for top fliers and provide more privacy, more legroom, and complimentary pillow/blanket, sodas, coffee, and use of IFE for $5.

sounds horrific. the last thing anyone needs is more aisle traffic, especially since the aisle is only wide enough for one person. everyone will try to squeeze through and all aisle passengers will get stepped on and have butts and crotches shoved in their faces.

ick.

Granted, the management of this company has taken some steps that are very drastic but the precarious position this company has been in for so many years must drive them to try unorthodox things.

You make the mistake of thinking that management's actions somehow relate to the "old" US Airways. This isn't US Airways -- it's America West with a name change. America West doesn't care about what old US Airways did -- they have their own way of looking at the world. One of those ways is to be proactive and doing what they think is necessary to position the company for the future. They have no intention of going broke (which isn't to say it's impossible -- if fuel costs keep rising everyone but WN seems destined to go broke absent federal intervention).

There is a reason America West didn't go Chapter 11 after 9/11 while most larger (and better funded) carriers did. You are now seeing how they intend to avoid bankruptcy this time.

They'll be charging for the DirecTV unlike their other IFE options and unlike B6. They're expanding their revenue streams...not the value that customers get for the fare. True, but it's still a value-added enhancement, not a fee for basic services. Also, CO is not really charging for the service - DirecTV is the one collecting the lion's share of the cash in exchange for their free installation, maintenance and use of the system and channels. This deal was seen by CO management as a way to enhance the inflight product without having to spend a dime to do it. It's certainly a big contrast to the US approach - rip out anything they don't get money from, and charge the customer for everything except the air they breath, at least for now. I'm sure oxygen charges are coming next.

CO--Cutting edge? Perhaps in comparison to US, but certainly not overall.[/QUOTE] How is CO not cutting edge when compared to the other American legacy airlines? I can't think of any other American legacy carrier who comes to close to providing the consistent quality product that CO offers.

You make the mistake of thinking that management's actions somehow relate to the "old" US Airways. This isn't US Airways -- it's America West with a name change. America West doesn't care about what old US Airways did -- they have their own way of looking at the world. One of those ways is to be proactive and doing what they think is necessary to position the company for the future. They have no intention of going broke (which isn't to say it's impossible -- if fuel costs keep rising everyone but WN seems destined to go broke absent federal intervention).

There is a reason America West didn't go Chapter 11 after 9/11 while most larger (and better funded) carriers did. You are now seeing how they intend to avoid bankruptcy this time.

Then US should stop pretending it is something it's not. Knock off the 'full service for a discounted price' crap and start claiming what they really are - another discount airline with a crap product and poor service who just happens to offer a domestic F cabin, an international J cabin and a few international routes.

End the ridiculous charade that US offers a competitive full service product and complete the message that premium customers should look elsewhere for a usable airline.

Air travel today is a commodity and made so by a combination of the Southwest types of carriers and a large number of passengers who believe it to be a right to have a low cost flying option...it may very well be given a right given the success of Southwest.

US and the other carriers are simply responding to what the market is telling them to do: let me fly where I want to for as little as possible and I don't care about the overall experience while I get there. Again, that's not everyone but look at the people boarding with you next time or even read this forum with that in mind and it is the significant majority of people today.

It is a product of the economy, of the industry and the attitude of the consumer.


It may be that price and convenience are the most important factors in the choice of airlines. (I'd add reliability and comfort for those of us who travel often.) The problem with how Tempe has positioned the product, though, is that there are no other reasons to choose US anymore other than price and convenience. Does US have any other positive differentiators (i.e., when there are other options that are comparable in price and convenience, are there any reasons to fly with US)? Other airlines have a positioning that differentiates them from the competition (CO -- meals at mealtimes, UA -- economy plus, DL -- improved IFE, AA -- a (declining) reputation for reliability and customer service, NW -- no idea, WN -- efficient, friendly service at "low fares").

Now, it may be that the decisions made by management will help save money for the airline (or even generate revenue) at little cost in bookings. But I can't see any reason why I would want to book US over, say, WN other than accumulation of EQM on UA.


End the ridiculous charade that US offers a competitive full service product and complete the message that premium customers should look elsewhere for a usable airline.

Anybody who has been paying attention knows this already. With a few notable exceptions -- and I envy their optimism and patience -- you are preaching to the choir.

sounds horrific. the last thing anyone needs is more aisle traffic, especially since the aisle is only wide enough for one person. everyone will try to squeeze through and all aisle passengers will get stepped on and have butts and crotches shoved in their faces.

ick.

On second thought...:D You got me there and see your point. Can you say Fabreze?

There's no doubt it because of the production costs of splicing four or five iterations of Safety Video. So it's easier to remove them, right? Some of the press releases say that they will be coming out with a new state of the art IFE, some sort of fibre optic system next year. Seeing how they are pretty good at holding a time line for new products and services, we are looking at what maybe 5-7 months without IFE, with hopes of a new safety video? To be honest, watching a movie on a Zune isn't that bad and I can set it right next to my salad.

For the business traveller, I doubt this is much of inconvenience, the movies aren't new releases and after one TransCon, you're done watching it. TATL have the same movies just on-demand. The trivia was interesting on short hops, but after three trips, you new all the answers. The only time it was beneficial was during a meal were you didn't have room for a laptop or to move.

I'm sure Hr. 62 or most CSA will attest that most people have some sort of music device, as they have the on when they are on the ground or when they are talking to someone and they don't think it's rude to have the headphones in their ears or swear it's not on.

If anything this should be the hinge pin for people who don't have an mp3 player to get one. Most are very inexpensive and take up very little room. Maybe you can stick to US by using their headphones on your player because they are such a high quality product. Sure.

Then US should stop pretending it is something it's not. Knock off the 'full service for a discounted price' crap and start claiming what they really are - another discount airline with a crap product and poor service who just happens to offer a domestic F cabin, an international J cabin and a few international routes.

End the ridiculous charade that US offers a competitive full service product and complete the message that premium customers should look elsewhere for a usable airline.

But what's in it for them to acknowledge this reality?

BTW, I suspect every surviving US airline will eventually stoop to US' service levels (with the possible exception of CO). DL will try to offer more but will bleed cash.

Welcome to the world of $4 jet fuel.

Welcome to the world of $4 jet fuel.

Which is a temporary world..$4.00 per gallon, based on current production and consumption is not a long term reality.

You simply can not have, long term, prices rise by 100%+ without having a rise in consumption or major cutbacks in production, or a combination of the two.

In the world of money and investing, there are "bubbles" where people with means toss their money into investments....we had the dot.com bubble in the '90s...then when the Bush Administration had a major plank on their platform "we want everyone to own a home," investors put their liquid into the sub-prime mortgage investment vehicles...and pulled out when they knew real estate was over heated....

Where did that money go? Into energy...and the investory and hedge fund owners have (successfully) used fear in rising consumption (emerging economies like China and India) and supply problems (war and political instability) to drive prices.

The fat lady (and Millie Vanillie) are warming up....because these prices, in addition to not being sustainable, are a threat to the world economy.

REAL businesses are "proactive," not "reactive," with a long term approach. Thats why we're not seeing Continental, Delta, etc making rash decisions...

Which leads us to US....there is a real opportunity for them here. Many thought DP was so cool to invest a year's salary into US stock....Doug's not an idiot...and he's betting more on the fall of oil then the performance of his own company....he can't say that publicly of course.

I truly believe the direction US is heading in was in the cards from day one...I believe this was the "turn on the mountain" they were waiting for.

If you believe otherwise, then you believe the management at US is...a bunch of idiots. No matter HOW frustrated with them and the product I get, I don't believe they are stupid people...just VERY misguided....and not resourceful in the least....

And here's another clue this "rally" on oil is starting to sputter out...

Iran launches rockets...the media hypes up "the world is concerned," oil prices rise $4.50 on the opening bell...and now oil is only "up" $0.36 a barrel.

This rally is getting ready to end...can prices stay there for the time being? Only time will tell. But historical averages would pin the ocst of oil at $50-$70 a barrel...if the dollar were to gain strength, we could see $40 a barrel.

OT, but part of the bizjournals.com (http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2008/07/07/daily30.html?ana=yfcpc) article:


The carrier has also expanded the number of coach seats it designates as “choice seats” for which it will charge as much as $30 to reserve.

Some of the press releases say that they will be coming out with a new state of the art IFE, some sort of fibre optic system next year. Seeing how they are pretty good at holding a time line for new products and services, we are looking at what maybe 5-7 months without IFE, with hopes of a new safety video?

Want to put money on that happening? I place it along side the F seat on the E70, the expanded and improved meal selections and the myriad other "promised, future improvements" that somehow never seem to materialize.

And here's another clue this "rally" on oil is starting to sputter out...

Iran launches rockets...the media hypes up "the world is concerned," oil prices rise $4.50 on the opening bell...and now oil is only "up" $0.36 a barrel.

This rally is getting ready to end...can prices stay there for the time being? Only time will tell. But historical averages would pin the ocst of oil at $50-$70 a barrel...if the dollar were to gain strength, we could see $40 a barrel.

Yes, I have been carefully following the oil market for more than a decade and I believe that this is a huge financial bubble. It will end. Hopefully, it ends before it drives the major US carriers bankrupt.

But that said, the airline business is still a terrible business. Parker is a businessman. He has the shocking idea that airlines should actually make money all the time. He plans to do this (whether he can remains to be seen).

So when oil prices fall, look for SOME revisions in these service cuts. But I expect them to be modest. For example, I don't think the first bag fee is going away (NW matched it today, too). I also think US hopes that other carriers match the "no free beverages" policy. Parker will simply pocket the money and make US profitable. It's exactly what I would do if I were in his situation.

You make the mistake of thinking that management's actions somehow relate to the "old" US Airways. This isn't US Airways -- it's America West with a name change. America West doesn't care about what old US Airways did -- they have their own way of looking at the world.


You have summed up why I wish we would had kept the AWA name. At least it would be the reputation of AWA that would had gone down the crapper. How nice! Keep the already horrible US Airways name, make those tough decisions and everyone can blame it on US Airways and the AWA name retires clean. Brilliant!!:rolleyes:

There is a reason America West didn't go Chapter 11 after 9/11 while most larger (and better funded) carriers did.

Sure. The ATSB.

Wow.. Just when I thought they were done slashing US/AWA just got even more craptastic.. And I did not even think that was possible.

No movie on a 4+ hr flight.. If they were not removing the TPA/LAS direct flights I sure as hell would not be flying them now. The stop in IAH is well worth it when you add up all the crap US/AWA is pulling.

In the end US tickets better be cheaper then Even the budget carriers or they will for sure be chapter 7.. They will skip past Chapter 11.

There is a reason America West didn't go Chapter 11 after 9/11 while most larger (and better funded) carriers did. You are now seeing how they intend to avoid bankruptcy this time.

Yes, that reason is a $380 million loan from the Air Transportation Stabilization Board, after amendments to its first application.

Looks to me like these guys are burning the furniture to stay warm. I don't pretend to understand the airline biz, but US seems to have gone a bit overboard on the cost savings and charges. It smells like panic mode to me. It scares me into thinking that they won't be around.
US does not define itself well in the market. They claim to be a LCC, but the reality is they only follow that model when there is competition. Example, my recent PHF to ATL flight was $400. Not a barn burning fare, but very reasonable considering the cost of fuel these days. I drove 35 miles PAST ORF (5 miles from my house) because that fare was $1050. Why? FL runs ATL out of PHF but no LCC runs it from ORF.
My feeling is if US is going to charge for everything because they are LCC, then at least be a LCC all the time.
All that being said, I hope they make it. I like the folks I have come to know here in ORF and I would hate for them to be out of work. Also, they go places I need to go at times I need to go. I used to fly them pretty much exclusively because of the loyalty program. With that gutted, I am now "free" to look around for the best fares and schedules. It was sad for me, but I just booked my first DL flight yesterday. A more convienent time and a better fare. I can honestly say that I would not have looked in January.
Perhaps I am better off. Still, it is bittersweet for me.

PT

US Airways to end in-flight movies on domestic flights
Comments66 | Recommend6
Buzz up!Like this story? Share it with Yahoo! Buzz
US Airways will stop showing in-flight movies on its domestic flights, a move that the carrier says will save it "about $10 million a year in fuel and other costs," according to Bloomberg News. "The video systems add about 500 pounds to a plane's weight, increasing fuel use," Bloomberg says. That, coupled with a drop in the number of customers willing to pay $5 for headsets, led to the airline's decision, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer (free registration). "We simply can't afford to do it anymore," Travis Christ, US Airways vice president for sales and marketing, tells Bloomberg. The movie systems will be turned off Nov. 1. Movies will remain for Hawaii and trans-Atlantic flights.

The Inquirer notes "US Airways had been evaluating replacing the old system with new technology: light-weight fiber optics or Wi-Fi. The idea was that passengers would be able to swipe a credit card and have entertainment choices on a TV and touch screen at their seats." But Christ says soaring fuel costs have forced the carrier to hold off on new plans. "We're frozen in time right now," Christ tells the paper. However, he tells the Inquirer that US Airways does plan to test a new fiber-optics entertainment system on one airplane this October.

This is just another reason why this PHX UGS member chooses to fly on UA (TED) out of PHX rather than the much more convenient (won't have to connect as often) USAir.

By no means is UA perfect, but I agree with one of the previous posters who sees US turning into a WN like airline.

This airline is desperate. Trying to be Southwest with much higher costs, less of a marketable brand and lousier employees. Circling the drain for sure.

If this is only for domestic flights, I don't think the decision will cause significant lost of loyal customers. Honestly, US isn't really providing much IFE on their domestic flights anyway, do they?

Going...Going....Gone ! (well, soon anyway...)

Load factors are meaningless. Let's look at unit revenue increases instead.

In May, US reported that April RASM was " flat to down 2 percent when compared to the same period last year."

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=196799&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1139894&highlight=

In June, US reported that May RASM "increased between two and four percent when compared to the same period last year."

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=196799&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1162581&highlight=

Yesterday, US reported that June RASM "increased between two and four percent versus the same period last year."

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080707/20080707005344.html?.v=1

Fuel is up 100% year over year and yet US has only managed to secure increases in unit revenue of probably less than 2% (and certainly less than 4%) for the second quarter? And instead of addressing that failure, some genius in Tempe has convinced Parker that removing IFE (saving a whopping $10 million a year) is the ticket?

Is US headed for Ch 7? Probably not. Ch 11? Before November.

I tend to agree. Companies who pursue a cost leadership strategy often fail because their product do not acheive quality parity vs. competitors. That is if customers perceive the US products as singificantly inferior than other airlines, this race to the bottom approach will fail. What's more troubling is US actually doesn't charge less for airfares than its competitors. In most routes I can see, other airlines easily match US's published fares. In other words, the removal of sodas, IFE and nickel & dime reputation that US is building up could seriously hurt it in the eyes of customers if this airline does not provide significantly cheaper fares.

...What's more troubling is US actually doesn't charge less for airfares than its competitors. In most routes I can see, other airlines easily match US's published fares. In other words, the removal of sodas, IFE and nickel & dime reputation that US is building up could seriously hurt it in the eyes of customers if this airline does not provide significantly cheaper fares.

Actually, air fares have to increase these days...the bills are mounting :)

US is betting that, going forward, they'd get enough traffic from both business and leisure pax who choose based on any combination of Cost, Convenience, Reliability...and not from the lack of in-flight services. It may not be a strategy that we FFs like, but it takes guts to be unconventional.

From my small home airport of TRI and the other airports I fly from, AVL, ROA, and TYS, there is usually very little difference between cost, convenience, or reliability. So I select air travel based on customer service and in-flight service/value and so far this year, in my PERSONAL experiences, US has fallen short of CO, DL, and NW.

And for the record, of my last eight US flights taken in June 2008, four had operational delays ranging from over one hour to two hours 45 minutes, three of which were aircraft maintenance delays. One aircraft took two maintenance delays. The first caused me to miss my first connection and the second caused me to almost miss the second, which subsequently took a maintenance delay on the runway--we aborted takeoff and maintenance had to come to the tarmac to fix the problem. And Customer Relations has still not replied to my e-mail.

That, my friends, is why I do not see the excessive fees, charges, and takeaways through rose-colored glasses.

I am flying US again this weekend (voucher redemption!) and I will let everyone know how it goes.

They have stated time and time again that their customers purchase based primarily on price, with additional consideration given to convenience/schedule/reliability. So they cut costs to the bare minimum where they can offer the cheapest ticket and still make a small profit, and they focus heavily on reliability. As we've seen, that means that they don't appear to value the frequent flyer very much, and apparently they're okay with that.

PHL?

TRI DIVA ;)

On the other hand I am based in CLT. So my choices for direct flights with other carriers (or one stops) are limited :(

I tend to agree. Companies who pursue a cost leadership strategy often fail because their product do not acheive quality parity vs. competitors. That is if customers perceive the US products as singificantly inferior than other airlines, this race to the bottom approach will fail. What's more troubling is US actually doesn't charge less for airfares than its competitors. In most routes I can see, other airlines easily match US's published fares. In other words, the removal of sodas, IFE and nickel & dime reputation that US is building up could seriously hurt it in the eyes of customers if this airline does not provide significantly cheaper fares.

You can't save your way to profitability, especially if the product suffers. You have to create an environment where there is close attention to costs, but at the same time attention to product quality. Often the only way to create that kind of product is to start ground-up (e.g. WN, B6).... then as others try and match your cost structure and raise fees/prices, tout the difference. US has nothing to differentiate itself from the rest, except on the negative side.

PHL?

Yes! PHL doesn't even make the Top 10 for the Worst Big Airports for Delays, according to Flightstats.

Neither does ATL, according to a report just released (posted somewhere), which is great for such a large airport!

You can't save your way to profitability, especially if the product suffers. You have to create an environment where there is close attention to costs, but at the same time attention to product quality. Often the only way to create that kind of product is to start ground-up (e.g. WN, B6).... then as others try and match your cost structure and raise fees/prices, tout the difference. US has nothing to differentiate itself from the rest, except on the negative side.

Exactly, this is why I think the US management team is making a big mistake. They are now stuck in the middle. I think the chance of US going bankrupt within 6 months to a year will be pretty high because they can't compete with the like of Southwest and yet, their products are now materialy inferior to the legacy airlines. There is little reason to fly the U.S. except convenience and that means its customer base will be limited to to its hubs. You can't survive on just that.

Besides the $10 million saving for removing IFE / year really is not worth the reputational damage to the airline, IMO. When I fly US, I don't watch their movies since I had to pay for the headsets so I don't bother. But it's good to know the option is there. If they scrap it, I definitely perceive the product as inferior. Given that I fly US only occasionally and only as UA codeshares, I will make sure I avoid US whenever possible going forward.

PHL?

Huh?

Huh?
If you look back at your message that I quoted, it was a dig at "reliability". From what I understand, PHL has improved of late. However, given the severe PHL meltdowns in the somewhat recent past, coupled with continuing baggage woes, that operation has an unenviable reputation which is very hard to get rid of.

Exactly, this is why I think the US management team is making a big mistake. They are now stuck in the middle. I think the chance of US going bankrupt within 6 months to a year will be pretty high because they can't compete with the like of Southwest and yet, their products are now materialy inferior to the legacy airlines. There is little reason to fly the U.S. except convenience and that means its customer base will be limited to to its hubs. You can't survive on just that.


US is materially inferior to the legacies in terms of service and product, and materially inferior to WN in terms of policies and service. Unless you live in a market where US is 1) the only option, or 2) hubbed (offering non-stops to a lot of places), it is more painful to fly US than another option.

US can't play both sides at once. They either need to go all the way over to a LCC, including WN's customer-friendly policies, or it needs to go all the way back to a legacy and offer services that the others don't. There is, simply, no market differentiation and brand confusion... and that's bad for the customer.

Anyone catch Meredith Viero and Matt Lauer poking fun of US this morning on the Today Show over their decision to remove IFE?

Do you think in this case they would have been better off not having an announcement and slowly removing it plane by plane. I bet most people wouldn't even notice, and if asking a FA they could just say that it's not offered on this plane. It would have created a lot less stir in the media. I still point back to an earlier post that says in this day and age of iPods, PSP's, Nintendo DS, Laptops, etc., how many people are even bothering watching the movie (don't even bring up the stupid two prong plug).

Anyone catch Meredith Viero and Matt Lauer poking fun of US this morning on the Today Show over their decision to remove IFE?

I did...and Meredith said they were adding straps and pulling seats next! :) She also said she likes having IFE.

Do you think in this case they would have been better off not having an announcement and slowly removing it plane by plane.

I'm sure the original plan was to keep it under wraps until after the IFE systems started disappearing from planes. I'll bet it never occurred to them that somebody on the inside would leak the news on USAviation. ;) Ah....the power of the internet!!!

Did any genius figure out the added cost of people having to bring laptops and extra batteries was going to use more fuel. On to of that... why would I fly transcon on US, when B6 gives me more legroom, free soda and IFE?

Someone should get fired for this no brainer...

It should be interesting when Continental comes on board...

As a regular flyer on BOS - PHX flights, I have long lamented why traveling 6 hours domestically does not warrant the same amenities as say BOS to London, etc.

On US this has been especially so. And now, no IFE??? Physically, we've been incapacitated...don't get up, try not to get a blood clot, squeeze into a cramped, nerve impinging seat, try not to swat at the bozo who's decided to plant his head in your lap by reclining, keep your arms folded around your body because your seatmate (somewhat justifiably) feels that a seat should have 2 arm rests, (you know the drill...,) and now we're going to be mentally incapacitated as well?

Everyone is already on edge after the nerves jarring security, check-in, and parking experiences. We then have to find water, food, boredom ameliorating resources, after we've passed through security. Then we have to unpack our carry on and squeeze all the basic cross country supplies we need into our carry on followed by trying to squeeze said carry on into the old, minimal overhead space available. Which we want to use instead of the space under the seat in front of us because we do feel that humans tend to have legs which require a space for the flight.

And then after all the rushing, sweating, waiting, etc. we are to remain inert, and secured into our body torturing seats looking at the dirty tray table in front of us for 6 hours???

US management says no IFE? So now everyone is supposed to bring on their own DVD players, etc.? And they'll store that where? And that won't add poundage to the flight?

And, what? Not everyone can AFFORD to purchase the equivalent of items needed to stop feeling the aftereffects of an air flight travel lobotomy?

And as an elite flyer, I have the possibility of a first class upgrade??? Not! The 12 seats are ALWAYS full and there's never even a remote possibility.

And my ticket now costs 3 times more than it did last year at this time. And in return, I guess I'm supposed to be basically embalmed during my transcontinental journey.

Let's try this: stop paying bonuses to Doug Parker and the gang during these trying years as the airlines sort themselves out. Take those monies and put them back into the aged fleet carrying America's best and brightest (and of course all global citizens.)

If these characters owned these companies, they would be expected to pare down their compensation, but as publically traded company honchos their performance is based on annual bottom line performance.

The public should be OUTRAGED.

US employees seem to have recently undergone training in how to show utter contempt for anything close to respect for their customers. Telling a customer the airlines are bleeding money and we should shut up, pay their salaries, and be crammed into a virtual tomb is no way to secure a company's financial future.

If Doug Parker has been searching for the straw that will break the camel's back, then most likely he has found it. The kids on these flights are already having a tough enough time sitting still and so they will be louder, crankier, and more rambunctious. Parents and surrounding passengers will be more frustrated, hungrier, and defeated. Attendants will be more overwhelmed, tired, and as a result ....tchier!

And even though I have my noise cancelling headphones, etc. I will now take my elite status and fly european carriers domestically, when possible,
and will explore the other options available to me. I will take my hard earned money and put it to use in a company that treats its customers and employees with respect.

Because in the long run, these are the very tactics employed by the CEO's and management teams who drink too much and drive drunk after attending FBR opens, rape companies they don't own by playing games with annual profit/loss statements, and will walk away with golden parachutes leaving behind an industry in tatters.

It's not easy being the boss, but the buck does stop there. Unfortunately treating customers with dignity has been lost; and aviation's future is left in turmoil. :(

Addendum:

Apparently Air New Zealand is looking in the right direction:

Airline freezes bosses pay
Jul 10, 2008

Air New Zealand has frozen salaries of senior executives, halted bonus payments and is considering slashing jobs to compensate for soaring fuel costs and sliding passenger demand, according to an internal memo leaked to the media.

Pay increases for managers will be achieved only through staff reductions or increased productivity, chief executive Rob Fyfe said in the document seen by The Associated Press news agency.

Mr Fyfe said he and senior management would be the first to feel the squeeze with their salaries frozen for a year. Other managers will earn less through the loss of short-term incentive bonuses. Another measure is the reviewing of “non-essential” activities that may lead to job cuts, the memo said. It was not immediately clear how many of the airline’s 11,000 staff could be lost.

walesonline.co.uk

US is materially inferior to the legacies in terms of service and product, and materially inferior to WN in terms of policies and service. Unless you live in a market where US is 1) the only option, or 2) hubbed (offering non-stops to a lot of places), it is more painful to fly US than another option.

US can't play both sides at once. They either need to go all the way over to a LCC, including WN's customer-friendly policies, or it needs to go all the way back to a legacy and offer services that the others don't. There is, simply, no market differentiation and brand confusion... and that's bad for the customer.

I usually use WN for my personal trips, along with most of the people I know. If the price goes down, you get a credit on file, no hassle. If you need to change your flight, no change fee. If you need to cancel, you get a credit on file, no fee. No bag fees, drinks are free, snacks are free. Despite the "cattle call" boarding, I've never had a problem getting a good seat. I flew them a couple of weeks ago (PIT/MCO), my friend & I got on at the beginning of B and got the 2 seat exit row both ways. We paid $245 - $58 in future credits for reduced prices (each). US was well over $300. One thing I gave US consideration for was movies and short clips on long flights (to west coast), WN does not have that. Now US takes that away. With WN as an option for leisure travelers, I don't know why anyone would fly US.

For the sake of argument...

NW does not offer any IFE in domestic and AA only offers it on select aircraft (none of their MD-80s have IFE and this is the bread & butter of their operations).

I agree that US cannot save its way to profitability. It's basically prolonging the inevitable. My guess is their next revenue generating idea will be the following:

- install pay toilets on all domestic aircraft - cost $1


Seriously though...how far away do you think Tempe is from charging for elite upgrades again?

For the sake of argument...

NW does not offer any IFE in domestic and AA only offers it on select aircraft (none of their MD-80s have IFE and this is the bread & butter of their operations).

I agree that US cannot save its way to profitability. It's basically prolonging the inevitable. My guess is their next revenue generating idea will be the following:

- install pay toilets on all domestic aircraft - cost $1


Seriously though...how far away do you think Tempe is from charging for elite upgrades again?
NW runs very few trans-cons (thanks to hubs in the midwest), and the MD80s don't at all.

Between this and the water fee....

NW does not offer any IFE in domestic and AA only offers it on select aircraft (none of their MD-80s have IFE and this is the bread & butter of their operations).


I'm not sure of the relevance of AA's non-IFE equipped MD-80s. Sure, half of AA's mainline fleet (the MD-80s) doesn't feature IFE. Never have.

OTOH, the other half of AA's mainline fleet is slowly but surely getting IFE upgrades - AA isn't about to turn it off and rip it out.

Even better, AA has at least 70 new 738s coming online in 2009-10, all with IFE. At the same time, over 100 of the MD-80s will be grounded.

I certainly agree, however, that it's impossible for US to save its way to profitablility, especially when this cheapskate move is expected to save a whopping $10 million a year. $10 million won't make a difference to a $12 billion company facing a 50% fuel cost increase in 2008 over 2007.

[FONT="Arial Black"]
And even though I have my noise cancelling headphones, etc. I will now take my elite status and fly european carriers domestically, when possible,
and will explore the other options available to me.

I don't think you can fly any foreign carrier domesticly unless they have changed the rules. For example if they have a flight that lands at NY and then continues on to LAX you cannot buy a NY to LAX ticket.

...I certainly agree, however, that it's impossible for US to save its way to profitablility, especially when this cheapskate move is expected to save a whopping $10 million a year. $10 million won't make a difference to a $12 billion company facing a 50% fuel cost increase in 2008 over 2007.

I wouldn't be far off by suggesting this move, when coupled with the loss of Elite bonus miles and 500 minimums, will cost the company far more than the 10M or so it thinks it can save - my guess is we will see a loss of at least 15M in seat mile revenue (assuming we can compare the ASM now to a future period equally) by the end of Q4. The loss will be directly attributable to elite/premium customer migration and the loss of non-hub corporate contracts.

They seem to be looking for the person who HAS to get from point "A" to "B" and wants to spend the least amount of money to do so and will deal with inconveniences to do it.

Part of the problem is that while a lot of people are saying they are not cheap I have taken them several times this year because they were the lowest price by more then $50. On a ~$400 to $450 ticket that is a large percentage. We are talking less money then B6, DL, AA and whatever else I looked at. Even tacking on the $15 bag fee they are still coming out a winner on my next 2 trips. (Well, a 3rd trip is a free ticket on Jet Blue so lets not count that)

Will I miss the IFE. Between my Zune and Kindle not at all. Do I like a bit of extra coin in my pocket. Yes I do. Will I jump ship if a less expensive carrier comes along? Yes I would. Would I go back if they get cheaper again. Yes I would. From coast to cost it's 6 1/2 hours. Big deal find something to do. People flying Southwest have been doing it for years.

-Dave

because they were the lowest price by more then $50. On a ~$400 to $450 ticket that is a large percentage. We are talking less money then B6, DL, AA and whatever else I looked at.

The $64 million question is why does a carrier with higher costs than any of the three you mentioned charge less then complain about not being able to raise fares?

Jim

The $64 million question is why does a carrier with higher costs than any of the three you mentioned charge less then complain about not being able to raise fares?

Jim

Because of people like me. I have no real loyalty to any 1 carrier. And I believe most other people don't. I have a friend who LOVES B6 and would never fly anything but them. Till I pointed out Southwest out of ISP was 30% less money to get where he wanted and to get to ISP from his house was 1/2 the time to get to JFK.

Then there is my mom, who believes that Delta is the only airline worth flying. Till I saved her over $2000 on 4 TATL's by taking USAir. She saw that there was a difference in product but $2k is $2k.

I could go on. There are the people who travel a lot who want the CO level of service. And there are people who travel very little who want to be pampered in a quality 1st class cabin. However, I think what we loose site on here is that most people want to get on at point "A" off at point "B" and think they are going to be miserable no matter what so they want to be miserable for the least amount of money. That is why US (and others) are cutting expences but not raising ticket prices. The USA has become somewhat used to "fees" so $15 for luggage and $2 for a coke is grumbled about but accepted.

Just my POV

-Dave

Because of people like me.

Sorry, maybe it's just me. I don't see how a higher cost carrier (US) can charge less than lower cost carriers (B6, AA, DL) and 1 - expect to make money or 2 - complain about not being able to raise fares (at least to match the lower cost competition).

Only 2 possibilities come to mind -

1 - management feels that the product offered by US won't attract enough passengers if they increase fares to match lower cost competitors, or

2 - management is using lower prices to "buy" load factor.

Jim

Sorry, maybe it's just me. I don't see how a higher cost carrier (US) can charge less than lower cost carriers (B6, AA, DL) and 1 - expect to make money or 2 - complain about not being able to raise fares (at least to match the lower cost competition).

Only 2 possibilities come to mind -

1 - management feels that the product offered by US won't attract enough passengers if they increase fares to match lower cost competitors, or

2 - management is using lower prices to "buy" load factor.

Jim

I don't think AA or DL are a lot lower cost then US. Other then that I agree with you. But, with your 2 points.

1) It's not quality of product as I said in my previous post. It's all about price, price and price. I know it a lot of ways US is not as good as B6, I know a US A319/320 going JFK->LAS is not as nice as the 737 or 757 that DL flies. I also know that on the dates / times I wanted it was $125 less round trip then the next closest competitor. (Not counting Southwest) Now, would I have taken JB if the difference was say $25? Tough call, but I would say most likely not. $20 then it becomes a possibility. But, I do spend just shy a 3 hours a day round trip on the LIRR / NYC Subway so 5:15 in a less then perfect cabin (Once again with Zune & Kindle in hand) does not bother me that much.

2) Other then making themselves look better for investors what does a good load factor get them?

-Dave

I don't think AA or DL are a lot lower cost then US.

You're right, just slightly lower.

1) It's not quality of product

I agree - I don't think Parker/Kirby believe that US offers an inferior product.

2) Other then making themselves look better for investors what does a good load factor get them?

Incremental revenue is a possibility. It's just mind-boggling that US, with costs somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 higher than either B6 or WN, would be selling tickets at lower fares than those two while complaining about not being able to raise fares. I know that US (and other legacies) feel that they must offer bottom end fares comparable to B6 and WN on competing routes or lose traffic. But if it were me, as soon as the low cost competition sold out of the low fare buckets I'd stop selling that fare also so as not to undercut them - it's a losing proposition trying to undercut a competitor who has significantly lower costs.

Jim

100% off the subject of where we started, but somewhat relevant to the fare bucket comment. It is 13-July-08 @ 8:45 EST or 5:45 in LAS I just looked @ US, DL and B6 for a non stop 1 way coming back from LAS to JFK later tonight.

B6: $189. for a 9:10 flight w/ at least 5 seats left at that price and a 10:30 at $379 not sure how many empty seats.

US: $369 for a 11:45 flight and looking at the seat map about 10 free seats

DL: $629 and booked to only having preferred seats left and it's a 757 as compared to the A319's of the other 2 carriers.

The 2:30 PM Southwest nonstop tomorrow is $349

So, looking at the above, it's not price driven otherwise B6 would be sold out. It's not service or Southwest would have a lower rate. I think that people have no idea what they want and the airlines have no idea of what to do.

-Dave

Because of people like me. I have no real loyalty to any 1 carrier. And I believe most other people don't.

I agree. And this is why US is charging for beverages and ripping out their IFE systems. They believe that the majority of flyers will not book away if they are the cheapest ticket.

The only flaw in that thinking is that the business travelers who tend to book at the last minute and pay the highest fares will just book other carriers. And that is where US is really going to start hurting, because they need that 10% of the customer base to make up 50% of the revenue.

I just don't think that removing the IFE systems will solve US's problems.