Originally Posted by
meFIRST
- a premium transcon product ( any serious airline that wants to make money in the NYC area needs to have this). DL recently jumped on this bandwagon.The 737-900/800's are a joke. I would like to see Business First service between LAX/SFO-EWR. CO could make good use of the old BF seats and reconfigure a dedicated 757
A couple of issues there: A dedicated 757 subfleet with premium cabin setups for transcons, a la UA p.s., is a fine idea in theory, but where do they get the aircraft for this? Currently, they would have to drop several European destinations to generate the aircraft required for this type of transcon service. I'm not 100% sure but I believe UA has eight or nine aircraft dedicated specifically to p.s. service. All the while, EWR - LAX/SFO segments are some of the most difficult to upgrade on in the CO system because they are filling the, "subpar" 737-800/900 premium cabins with paying passengers.
So then, the question is this: Does CO really need to pull 757 aircraft off of lucrative international routes so that a premium transcon domestic subfleet can be created? I don't think so, and I'm willing to bet that Larry Kellner and Jeff Smisek don't either. They fill the aircraft they have now with revenue generating pax, so why detract from the international offerings to be more like UA? I believe your analysis is coming from the point of view of what you want to fly on, not what makes sense for the business, a question I think Mr. Kellner would ask regularly. I would love a premium transcon offering as much as the next guy, but not at the expense of being able to get to a host of secondary European cities.
Originally Posted by
meFIRST
- More expensive fares on certain routes. Sometimes I think continental fares are too cheap (especially in the premium cabins). It seems that continental's fare structure lacks guts - Really? - you could charge more. $2700 to London in business, when everyone else wants more? Sometimes I think CO is selling themselves short.
Fare buckets and pricing are made with a host of information neither you nor I have access to. Maybe $2700 seems inexpensive to you, but if every other airline in the market is charging that and CO raises it, they lose revenue. I learned long ago to not question fare prices; they are what they are, and there is a reason for it, even if it isn't apparent to you and I. To be clear, that isn't to say that CO isn't capable of making a mistake, most assuredly they are and do, but I would again be willing to wager that they get it right in most markets most of the time, just like every other airline on the planet. Because it doesn't make sense to us doesn't make it wrong. But it's a moot point as we have no idea why routes and fare buckets are priced the way they are.
I don't really have an opinion about Mr. Kellner's tenure as the CEO of CO except to say that not a whole lot was done to stem the tide of service losses. CO may have been the last to cut services, but it was still cut. And they do have customer service issues, much like every other major airline. I think it might be a wash, given the external forces at play on the industry as a whole.