$110 Companion Ticket Valid for COACH class only - Effective August 1st, 2012
Jul 19, 2012, 7:11 am
#346
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 5,992
I'll challenge your math:
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, 1% cashback card:
$800 total spent, $8 cashback - net expense of $792.
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, AS Visa AFTER changes:
$400 spent on first ticket
$150 ($99 companion cert + realistic taxes) spent on companion certificate.
$75 annual fee
-----
$625 spent
1650 bonus miles earned based on $550 total charge at 3x miles
So...yes...on a $400 r/t coach ticket, you come out $167 AHEAD (+1650 miles) by using the new and devalued AS Visa over a 1% cb card. AFTER one pays the annual fee...and EVEN if they never use the card for anything else.
Not a big deal? It is to some...if it means one's SO gets to come along to that conference or meeting and wouldn't have otherwise been able to come.
Apparently most FTers sneeze out hundreds of dollars at a time, so clearly this isn't valuable to your average FTer...but for the rest of us who work for our money, I REALLY don't think that a significant guaranteed annual savings is so bad.
Yes...all of the changes are upsetting to everyone, and a sign of where we all fear AS is going.
Yes...for anyone who will fly with at least one other person at least once a year on an itinerary that costs more than $225 this card is still a good value...make that significantly more than a $225 ticket, and you may save quite a lot more than that.
ETA: PS...I don't want it to sound like I am 100% defending AS and the multitude of changes - quite the contrary. I just think it is absolutely silly that people are making WILD claims that with this change this card is now a bad deal for everyone. I simply maintain that the math tells us that this is still a good and possibly great deal for many people - those that ever fly coach on an AS itin with a companion.
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, 1% cashback card:
$800 total spent, $8 cashback - net expense of $792.
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, AS Visa AFTER changes:
$400 spent on first ticket
$150 ($99 companion cert + realistic taxes) spent on companion certificate.
$75 annual fee
-----
$625 spent
1650 bonus miles earned based on $550 total charge at 3x miles
So...yes...on a $400 r/t coach ticket, you come out $167 AHEAD (+1650 miles) by using the new and devalued AS Visa over a 1% cb card. AFTER one pays the annual fee...and EVEN if they never use the card for anything else.
Not a big deal? It is to some...if it means one's SO gets to come along to that conference or meeting and wouldn't have otherwise been able to come.
Apparently most FTers sneeze out hundreds of dollars at a time, so clearly this isn't valuable to your average FTer...but for the rest of us who work for our money, I REALLY don't think that a significant guaranteed annual savings is so bad.
Yes...all of the changes are upsetting to everyone, and a sign of where we all fear AS is going.
Yes...for anyone who will fly with at least one other person at least once a year on an itinerary that costs more than $225 this card is still a good value...make that significantly more than a $225 ticket, and you may save quite a lot more than that.
ETA: PS...I don't want it to sound like I am 100% defending AS and the multitude of changes - quite the contrary. I just think it is absolutely silly that people are making WILD claims that with this change this card is now a bad deal for everyone. I simply maintain that the math tells us that this is still a good and possibly great deal for many people - those that ever fly coach on an AS itin with a companion.
For those here that know me I fly a lot most on AS when ever possible. For business I use my AMEX for all the right reasons ( security for a international traveler) charging on average 400K a year.
Having said this while I am not real happy that I can not get a companion FC fare which by the way I use twice a year, one personal card and one business card still it is a nice benefit as a card holder.
For those that are "moving" their business to other carriers I wish you well. I too had looked at this seriously several years ago given that I average 125 K a year in the air, but at the end of the day AS still is my main carrier. The others FF program was akin to full contact flying ! all the work that some have to jump through to get an upgrade, seats etc is way too much work for me.
On AS, I buy the Gold fare, get my seat and I am a happy camper.
this is not a paid announcement!
Travel Safe to all
Jul 19, 2012, 8:13 am
#347
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SEA
Programs: AS Million Miler since 2011, Lifetime MVPG
Posts: 853
That says it all for me. There was a time, I would guess 10 years ago maybe more, where I thought it was so cool to fly AS so much that I actually bought, out of my own pocket, an Alaska Airlines pullover fleece and a ballcap. Wore them around like I worked for the place. Nerdy I know, but I was proud to fly them. That was then. Oh well, can't live in the past. But I sure as #@$% won't be buying any free advertising for them anymore. And no, I would no longer say I was 'proud' to fly AS. I like them well enough but it's a business relationship now, not a friendship.
Jul 19, 2012, 8:25 am
#348
Ambassador: Alaska Airlines
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BWI
Posts: 7,390
Glad this works for you, but do you fly transcons a lot? Or just mostly on the west coast?
Like I always say, if the airline offers a route network that fits one's travel pattern then that airline is the best choice. Seems like that is what AS is for you and I am glad you are happy with AS.
Like I always say, if the airline offers a route network that fits one's travel pattern then that airline is the best choice. Seems like that is what AS is for you and I am glad you are happy with AS.
Jul 19, 2012, 9:08 am
#349
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: DL Plat, Hyatt Glob, AA 1MM. Former UA 1K, AA Exec Plat
Posts: 311
That said, some of us (against all modern business sense--don't bother loving the brick, as the brick does not love you back) do still retain a special place in our hearts for the carrier that AS was. We are finding it sad--very sad--to see the carrier taken over by a shortsighted beancounter who is changing the company into something we barely recognize. It was a great carrier, one we were all proud to fly and patronize. Now, my relationship with AS is strictly business, and I've already shifted a good chunk of my business elsewhere. Some who share my views contribute a significantly higher amount of revenue to AS than I do, and AS is foolish to alienate them and will suffer when they actually make the decision to leave. We would really like to see AS reform itself before that happens, since we'd all like to forgive AS for its mistakes and go back to loving it for the great carrier it was, but if it doesn't, then it will end up suffering and either change out of necessity or face the consequences of not responding to the market.
Jul 19, 2012, 9:26 am
#350
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: JNU
Programs: HH D, AS MM/MVPG for life/AL, Awesome Wipes VIP Club, NEXUS, Hertz 5-Star Gold
Posts: 2,893
That said, behold the nascent stirrings of a conversation to consider altering that reality here in Juneau. Scroll down to the bottom third of the article.
Jul 19, 2012, 10:59 am
#351
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
Besides, as a for-profit company, AS has an obligation to generate the largest profits possible.
You're correct: there's no reason why it shouldn't. Except that at the full-steam-ahead rate at which elite flyers are being alienated, it may not be long before Alaska loses their edge in profitability as people begin only flying AS when they have to, not because they want to.
Jul 19, 2012, 11:36 am
#352
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,654
This appears to me a calculated risk of short term gain v. long term alienation of the customer base. AS has the benefit of a monopoly or near monopoly on many routes (which are likely its most profitable routes). For the rest of us, fortunately, we have a choice of airline. And, for the first time, we're actually choosing.
Jul 19, 2012, 11:38 am
#353
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SGF
Programs: AS, AA, UA, AGR S (former 75K, GLD, 1K, and S+, now an elite peon)
Posts: 23,195
That says it all for me. There was a time, I would guess 10 years ago maybe more, where I thought it was so cool to fly AS so much that I actually bought, out of my own pocket, an Alaska Airlines pullover fleece and a ballcap. Wore them around like I worked for the place. Nerdy I know, but I was proud to fly them.
Jul 19, 2012, 12:19 pm
#355
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 5,992
Glad this works for you, but do you fly transcons a lot? Or just mostly on the west coast?
Like I always say, if the airline offers a route network that fits one's travel pattern then that airline is the best choice. Seems like that is what AS is for you and I am glad you are happy with AS.
Like I always say, if the airline offers a route network that fits one's travel pattern then that airline is the best choice. Seems like that is what AS is for you and I am glad you are happy with AS.
Flew the first PHL and booked on the first DCA
Jul 19, 2012, 12:32 pm
#356
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
And part of that analysis is keeping your loyal, $ spending customers, happy. And part of that analysis, historically, is being a good corporate "citizen." Otherwise, why would for-profit companies sponsor charitable events and do other "good" for the community?
This appears to me a calculated risk of short term gain v. long term alienation of the customer base. AS has the benefit of a monopoly or near monopoly on many routes (which are likely its most profitable routes). For the rest of us, fortunately, we have a choice of airline. And, for the first time, we're actually choosing.
This appears to me a calculated risk of short term gain v. long term alienation of the customer base. AS has the benefit of a monopoly or near monopoly on many routes (which are likely its most profitable routes). For the rest of us, fortunately, we have a choice of airline. And, for the first time, we're actually choosing.
Ultimately, domestic air travel is a commodity product with network and schedule driving the preponderance of purchasing decisions. I would actually argue that trying to obtain or retain customer patronage through other avenues - i.e. generous loyalty programs - is short sighted.
Jul 19, 2012, 1:05 pm
#357
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 392
I'll challenge your math:
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, 1% cashback card:
$800 total spent, $8 cashback - net expense of $792.
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, AS Visa AFTER changes:
$400 spent on first ticket
$150 ($99 companion cert + realistic taxes) spent on companion certificate.
$75 annual fee
-----
$625 spent
1650 bonus miles earned based on $550 total charge at 3x miles
So...yes...on a $400 r/t coach ticket, you come out $167 AHEAD (+1650 miles) by using the new and devalued AS Visa over a 1% cb card. AFTER one pays the annual fee...and EVEN if they never use the card for anything else.
Not a big deal? It is to some...if it means one's SO gets to come along to that conference or meeting and wouldn't have otherwise been able to come.
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, 1% cashback card:
$800 total spent, $8 cashback - net expense of $792.
$400 r/t ticket, 2 travelers, AS Visa AFTER changes:
$400 spent on first ticket
$150 ($99 companion cert + realistic taxes) spent on companion certificate.
$75 annual fee
-----
$625 spent
1650 bonus miles earned based on $550 total charge at 3x miles
So...yes...on a $400 r/t coach ticket, you come out $167 AHEAD (+1650 miles) by using the new and devalued AS Visa over a 1% cb card. AFTER one pays the annual fee...and EVEN if they never use the card for anything else.
Not a big deal? It is to some...if it means one's SO gets to come along to that conference or meeting and wouldn't have otherwise been able to come.
That assumes that Alaska is the cheapest carrier to where you want to travel, which isn't the case for a lot of us. I've found this year that Alaska has been especially uncompetitive to where I fly. Here's an example of one of the trips I was looking at using my certificate for:
United: $440x2=880- 1.5% cashback (which I get w/ my card)= 866.80
Alaska: $656+149 (companion cert and actual fees)=$805+$75=$880.
Obviously the price disparity isn't going to be that great for every trip, but you can see how if you aren't loyal to Alaska metal the BofA card becomes worth much less unless you're fortunate enough to take a route where Alaska is the cheapest or nearly the cheapest option.
Jul 19, 2012, 3:44 pm
#358
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Anchorage, AK
Programs: AS MVPG, SPG Gold, ICH P Club Plat, Hertz#1 5Star, Marriott Gold
Posts: 227
How far do you go in trying to buy loyalty?
Ultimately, domestic air travel is a commodity product with network and schedule driving the preponderance of purchasing decisions. I would actually argue that trying to obtain or retain customer patronage through other avenues - i.e. generous loyalty programs - is short sighted.
Ultimately, domestic air travel is a commodity product with network and schedule driving the preponderance of purchasing decisions. I would actually argue that trying to obtain or retain customer patronage through other avenues - i.e. generous loyalty programs - is short sighted.
1) With all of the domestic Legacy carriers ...the FF programs as built are unsustainable in an industry with such low margins. The only thing that makes sense going forward is a revenue based model (aka WN/VX). There is no longer much relation between customer value and miles flown given the huge variances on fares on comparable routes. The only exceptions I can see are corporate contract based and marketing partner (aka credit card) based.
2) With AS in particular, the "high value" target seems to be shifting. The two growth areas for AS are point to point West Coast-Hawaii flights, which will be largely filled by leisure travelers, and midcons and transcons where the fact that AS is either the only N/S option, or is in effect providing a code share for DL (MSP/ATL). In both cases, they have no need to give away F seats or make it easier to avoid paying bag fees. There are enough Kettles who will buy the F for their once a year trip to HI and the difference between a flexibly Y fare and F on the mid and transcons is small enough that most FF types will pay it.
Jul 19, 2012, 4:04 pm
#359
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: PRG/ Ester, AK
Programs: AS MVPG75k
Posts: 451
just to elaborate my contrary views on the supposed unsustainability of companion fare F:
AS only loses money by selling companion fare F if the last F seat on that itinerary can be sold for more than ~60% of the F fare by selling full F or by selling the plane out and filling F with higher fare coach UGs. AS has steered all traffic generated by these certs towards lower yielding economy fares, despite most routes not being limited by F capacity.
Routes where F consistently sells out include SEA-HI/East Coast/ANC(certain times of day), a few ex-PDX flights, and not much else. It's only this minority of AS' ASM that were being discounted with F companion certs.
Much of the network was probably getting more RASM, assuming (F fare + $150)/2 was greater than the cheapest coach fare available, by people saying what the heck and buying up to F with the cert. Apparently accountants determined that the lost revenue from discounting F seats on routes where F could otherwise sell out exceeded the extra revenue certs garnered from other parts of the network by people buying up to F that otherwise spoils. If that was the case, I agree it's in AS' best financial interest to do this. At least in the short term.
I doubt that, on balance, AS will see much addl revenue. Maybe a little. And it has come at some cost.
I've never used the cert for F as I do pretty well getting UG'd and even at 60% of the price, it doesn't seem a particularly good value to me.
AS only loses money by selling companion fare F if the last F seat on that itinerary can be sold for more than ~60% of the F fare by selling full F or by selling the plane out and filling F with higher fare coach UGs. AS has steered all traffic generated by these certs towards lower yielding economy fares, despite most routes not being limited by F capacity.
Routes where F consistently sells out include SEA-HI/East Coast/ANC(certain times of day), a few ex-PDX flights, and not much else. It's only this minority of AS' ASM that were being discounted with F companion certs.
Much of the network was probably getting more RASM, assuming (F fare + $150)/2 was greater than the cheapest coach fare available, by people saying what the heck and buying up to F with the cert. Apparently accountants determined that the lost revenue from discounting F seats on routes where F could otherwise sell out exceeded the extra revenue certs garnered from other parts of the network by people buying up to F that otherwise spoils. If that was the case, I agree it's in AS' best financial interest to do this. At least in the short term.
I doubt that, on balance, AS will see much addl revenue. Maybe a little. And it has come at some cost.
I've never used the cert for F as I do pretty well getting UG'd and even at 60% of the price, it doesn't seem a particularly good value to me.
Jul 19, 2012, 4:19 pm
#360
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: PRG/ Ester, AK
Programs: AS MVPG75k
Posts: 451
Ultimately, domestic air travel is a commodity product with network and schedule driving the preponderance of purchasing decisions. I would actually argue that trying to obtain or retain customer patronage through other avenues - i.e. generous loyalty programs - is short sighted.
NK has done OK and is growing while offering customers nothing more than a seat but is still just a niche airline.
legacies may be appropriate in squeezing lemons harder and trimming loyalty program fat, but a significant volume of valuable customers gravitate towards carriers that offer them more. Wouldn't low yield leisure pax probably be the most indifferent to the perks?