Not so sure about that Kev.

The majors got themselves into trouble because they all lined up like penguins waddling along in their traditional legacy mindset repeating and reenforcing each other's misguided visions. Turns out that they weren't even penguins, but instead lemmings heading over the cliff. After several BKs, the legacy folks are undertaking traditional fixes as well as trying to innovate. Sounds like a good move to me.

Why not argue that too strong a dependecy upon FFer elites is akin to being overly depenent upon foreign oil? There's a logic to realizing that FFers are not the Holly Grail of aviation while acknowledging that an airline does indeed need to inculcate a relationship with FFers who provide an important revenue stream. The number of true FF revenue producing elites is finite. So why not design a hybrid product which angles for some of these flyers as well as those "carpin" Ma & Pa Kettles.

Afterall, the finish line is about revenue which keeps a carrier aloft. The problem with all of this is how to determine the sort of revenue mix & product mix required to stay profitable in an industry in which loyalty is fleeting and the mob is generally price-driven. Then again, Parker and his legacy brethren are trying to compete in a market with too many players so how can one innovate successfully in such a situation?

I've always felt that a hybrid approach if properly conceived and managed is not such a bad idea. US is not wrong, but what US has rolled out is not an innovative product as much as it's a wet fart. Parker simply needs to change his pants and try again.

Barry