Thanks for posting the Cranky link, eponymous_coward. He argues that VX has consciously shifted from a load factor-based strategy (fill the planes at whatever ticket price) to a yield-based strategy (charge more, accept lower load factors)... with notably better results. But I don't think it's so black and white. In the past year I've seen VX incite stupid fare wars in the west coast corridor (like, $89 SEA-SFO), but simultaneously try to get $1000+ for SEA-SFO-IAD while competitors charge less than half that. It's always been schizophrenic pricing, in my experience, and it's rarely made much sense. This is why my college kid, a low-value customer if ever there was one, loves VX for weekends in San Francisco, but I never book them. And I'm so sick of UA, I'm always shopping nowadays, and pretty fishable.

VX has a premium product compared to UA/AA/DL. They should go out and get what they're worth and charge a modest, not crazy, premium for it... and have the courage to stick to a yield strategy, not fall off the wagon whenever they think they need a cheap revenue shot. If Mercedes-Benz sold their cars for $20,000 they'd have more market share, but fail to cover their cost basis and lose big money, and demean their brand in the process. Why can't VX take that lesson to heart? If there is an IPO that would be my first question. Why are you idiots giving it away at a loss all the time?