MJMLBBtoCPH

I'm not sure the hysterical vitriol toward Alaska's product/service from a few VX flyers on this thread (who are upset about it's impending disappearance) is warranted.

I fly almost every week from a Texas BFE city to PDX.

I left American last year as a platinum member when they began their devaluation and I status-matched to Alaska. The difference in treatment and service is like night and day.

As a Texas-born/raised kid, I grew up on American, Continental, Southwest, Muse Air/Transtar airlines, Delta (when they were still in Dallas). I can tell you that aside from perhaps the Southwest service attitude from 20 years ago (which you only see now in fleeting instances), I have never experienced such super nice service as I have on Alaska. For a middling traveler like me who wants value for my money (because I am paying for the flights out of my own pocket), Alaska blows all of those guys away.

Maybe Alaska was even better 5 years ago, I have no idea, but as it stands right now, I am SO happy I switched to Alaska. I continue to be amazed at how nice the people are (probably because they are from the Northwest, perhaps that will change with VX merger). VX people - oh, I have had alright service, but nothing like the crazy super nice I get from Alaska. Power every mainline flight I've been on. Internet that actually works on Alaska (far cry from my experiences on Southwest and American, where internet only works about 50 percent of the time).

American flight attendants are hit or miss in terms of their rudeness or service. (I have yet to encounter a rude Alaska flight attendant). The American elite phone agents are super rude. I dread having to call the gold desk (now I'm only AA gold, and will have no status on AA next year, and will transfer almost all my business to Alaska in combination with Southwest). On the flip side, talking to the Alaska phone agents in Boise and elsewhere is something like out of the 1950s... like I've walked into a store in my grandparents small town and had a nice chat. I can just tell by the convo that they are treated well by their company.

Product.... On American, If you are in coach and someone reclines, forget about opening your laptop to work. No free alcohol for me in coach on American as a Platinum member. No automatic upgrades to First (you have to use those stupid upgrade certificates). Yes, the food in first is marginally better on American, but the free house wine American serves (both in first and its lounges) is awful and sour. Yes the Alaska lounge in PDX is small, but the staff is super friendly and the free house wine is awesome and local, and their are healthier food options compared to the boring AA lounges. Let's talk about the gate agents.

Service... Just last week, I had a delayed mechanical out of PDX to Austin. I was connecting to WN in Austin (Alaska's competitor) to get to a BFE Texas city. The gate agents were super nice and helpful about considering other options in trying to help me get to my final destination city. They wrote my name down and called me later to keep me personally updated about the status. As it turned out, the plane got out with not much delay and I made my connection in Austin, but I thought to myself how this scenario would play out with AA agents - would they be so helpful and concerned? HAH! In another example, I was on a flight last month sitting in coach, and after we took off, an Alaska flight attendant came up and asked if I wanted to sit in premium, because she noticed I was gold and there was an open seat. I declined the offer because it was a middle seat, but I was so amazed at the gesture and appreciated the pro-active service. I mean, the two above examples are not one-offs; rather, this is my typical experience since I started flying Alaska last fall 2016. American Airlines workers could care less about me (and if you get a US Air worker, be lucky if you are not stepped on). Southwest is probably the next best thing to Alaska for me (much better than AA coach), but gosh, for long mid-con flights and no upgrades and spotty internet, and no food options to even purchase on the plane... it's not very appealing. And Southwest service, while pretty good, is a shadow of its former self. And United, forget it. I don't know why the Continental management became monsters after they took over United, but that airline is awful in terms of service out of Texas BFE cities. I stopped flying them if I could help it after the merger. Crummy time offerings and crummy old planes by UA make QX seem like heaven.

Perhaps the Alaska product has slid in recent years, I wouldn't know. And luckily I wasn't hit hard at all with the QX issues, because I fly mostly direct out of PDX to my destinations on mainline aircraft. It would be great if Alaska brought service back to SLM, but that is perhaps asking too much. Could Alaska do better in light of the merger (lack of same benefits on VX, etc)? Sure, I guess so. But when I look at my options out there, I don't like to pay money to airlines that greet me with a snarl. Service is very important to me. And given my perspective of what I have experienced in airline service since 9/11, I am so happy I found an airline in Alaska where there is at least a company-wide effort to treat customers with a modicum of respect.

jrl767

c'mon, this is FlyerTalk (that said, I pretty much agree that a lot of folks seem to regard it as FlyerRant, and that indeed gets tiresome after not too very long)
yep, other than in places like Alaska and Hawaii, where there's simply no other option, a ~50-mile flight to a hub airport simply isn't economically viable for any airline operating anything bigger than maybe 35 seats, and even that's probably marginal ... SLE<-->SEA might siphon off a bit of PDX<-->SEA connecting traffic, but I doubt AS/QX could justify reallocating a plane from a more robust market to do those two or three daily round-trips
no argument at all ... and to sort of circle back to the first point, taking a few minutes to give expectations an objective reality check can go a long way toward keeping a civil tone in these conversations

sfozrhfco

@MJMLBBtoCPH you are missing the point completely. AS needs to be a strong competitor coming from a point of relative weakness in California if you want them to succeed. The point is that management is still living in the past and has not stepped up to the plate to give people in California reasons to choose them over other airlines. They have no clear initiatives for increasing profitable revenue. Without being a strong competitor, we all know what will happen. Carriers like WN will keep prices artificially low until AS gives in and then raise the price and we all end up with a WN level product at a much higher price.

Yes, everybody knows that many aspects of the US3 and WN product/service have been abysmal for decades. Being happy that a flight attendant doesn’t bite your head off is not exactly what we should strive for in terms of good customer service.

It is important that AS keep their product and service as strong as possible in the face of very strong headwinds. If management is surprised about the competition they are facing when there are many short term reasons to not take AS now, they need to wake up and develop a strategy to compete.

sfozrhfco

From my own perspective, I don’t see AS as a clear choice and am not willing to pay more to fly VX or AS at this point. I just went to ABQ. WN was more expensive than AS one way and about the same on the return but WN had a better schedule which saved an extra night at a hotel so I chose WN both ways. Going to SAN, some type of situation, VX was $40 more than UA regular economy so I just went UA. Going to NYC for the holiday, I got a great fare in MINT both ways on JetBlue and thus VX/AS was not even in the equation. When there is no clear differentiation of product in people’s mind which is the case at SFO-given AS’s weak position pre-acquisition, combined with the fact that the better known brand is going away, AS becomes an option only when the schedule is better and the price is cheaper. That is not a good position to be in when you are the weakest player to start. Smaller airlines need to be in the forefront of people’s minds—as AS often is in Alaska or SEA. Otherwise, as an afterthought, it is way more difficult to compete against much larger airlines with a ton of cash on hand.

SF1K

100% agree. We had switched our Bay Area to Hawaii flights to Alaska a few years ago, but I was still chasing the 3MM on United (I've since decided not to pursue it and if happens organically fine, but if not also ok I'll stick to 2MM). When I'm booked to fly Alaska (either personal or business) I actually look forward to the flight as I've never really had a bad experience. When I fly United in First as a 1K I still dread it - as I know it will be a horrible boarding experience followed by mediocre service if lucky.

Buster

I agree. I am currently a very unhappy camper, feeling like I'm bearing the brunt of AS stretching itself too thin. My BUR-PDX flight today is delayed by over 2 hours...not good on a 2 hour flight, and it's resulting in me cancelling the whole trip, because the return on Sunday is earlier than normal (3:30 pm) thanks to the AS schedule changes.

I did a bit of digging, and it turns out the E175 that is flying my flight started its day flying from MSP-SFO, where it was delayed. The next flight out of SFO was even more delayed, and the delays have just built and built and built all day long. I am starting to feel like I can't ever rely on AS to get me where I need to go without major delays or inconvenience...and that's a problem. I'm a longtime AS fan, but I'm pretty turned off right now. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Looking at the flight board for PDX today, I count 10 cancelled flights, and a TON of delayed flights.

AS isn't competitive enough on price or schedule/convenience to compete with the big boys, and they're not cutting it right now for service & reliability, so where does that leave them?

diver858

The airline industry has changed significantly since 2008, when WN was able to use their fuel hedge lottery winnings to chase off big 3 competition, who were all headed to chapter 11.

WN now has labor costs comparable to the big 3, fuel costs for the entire industry are near all time lows. More importantly, much of the new AS intra-California service is on OO E175's, which have a MUCH lower cost structure than WN 737's, allowing AS to stand toe-to-toe in any fare war. This may explain why WN is doing things like giving away a companion pass to any new California credit card applicants, getting more aggressive, creative with its promotional efforts (recent Hawaii "announcement").

ucdtim17

Get used to it, as they cycle more and more planes through SFO. Today is the first real stormy-ish day of the season.

sfozrhfco

And don’t forget SEA which has the most cancels and delays today. A few clouds at either SEA which is overscheduled or SFO which always has delays on cloudy/rainy days and the whole schedule goes out of wack. We will see if they learned lessons from last year or continue to operate as if the delays were a one time problem
from the 1st Quarter of the year.

sfozrhfco

Airlines have made boat loads of money in the last few years and are in a much better financial position to compete. WN also does not have a network that is 100% focused on the West Coast. They can offer low fares in California and higher fares elsewhere and still do fine.

Airlines that are flying mainline planes also have a far greater capacity to sell lower priced fares. AS can’t fill up their small planes with people paying $49 or they will lose a ton of money. WN can sell more seats at a lower price and thus put pricing pressure on AS. This is what the AS management team just “discovered.”

AS can fill their planes but they are getting junk fares on transcons and Intra-California flights. Their position is a very weak and getting weaker every week as more competitors take advantage of their superior positions.

channa

You're missing the point completely. Nearly all of the AS advantages you pointed out were regarding caring, friendly service. That's great (and most would agree that AS does well here), but that's not enough for the Bay Area clientele. Product is important too.

There are flatbeds on a handful of markets in J. Free food in Y on some. The airlines are not competing on who smiles the most.

The last couple visits I made to the UA Club (BOS) and DL SkyClub (JFK), had much better offerings. In both, there were waiters walking around with hors d'oeuvres. The ratty AS lounges with no-name liquor (capped at 3 drinks) and soup from a bag don't compete with that.

Little things like not offering a pre-departure beverage when all the competition does, and you're paying for F, now makes AS stand out (and not in a good way). If you're on a comp upgrade, not as huge of a deal. Paid F rates are much higher here, though. Pay for what? A worse product than the competition? A worse seat and fewer amenities? I think people are watching to see how they're going to price this.

You can say that we're being picky, and we'll survive. You're right, but there's ample competition in the market that we can afford to be picky. The Bay Area market is like this. Good luck telling someone in SF that Applebee's is good enough. There's only one Applebee's in all of SF -- and it's in a tourist area. Why? Locals won't touch it.

ucdtim17

Well that's not just because locals are all too hoity-toity for Applebee's. Anti-chain zoning keeps chains out of many neighborhoods where they might otherwise locate (and do fine). Also chains like Applebee's prefer exurban strip mall locations and there aren't that many of those in SF. If they wanted to open up new locations in the city they'd generally have a big expensive fight with the neighborhood and many businesses don't want to bother with that. And of course all real estate is incredibly expensive.

channa

LOL. Starbucks, Peets, etc., are all over. There's Target, Trader Joes, Chipotle, etc. etc. etc. in SF.

tphuang

I think you missed the product. Nobody is saying that AS is a bad airline or that it's service is bad. If you read the posts, you'd see the question is always whether or not inheriting VX network with more expensive cost structure is profitable or not. Especially since B6 which has much better product than legacy VX aircraft in first class is charging less for those seats. On routes out of SFO/LAX that faces lie flat competition, AS decision to go with lower cost option will only end up having a lot of complimentary upgrades to FC on these competitive routes and the yields are really low just based on Y prices.

Operating routes like DCA/LGA-DAL are huge money losers because they are against the WN's fortress hub at DAL along with sizable operation at DCA/LGA along with the even stronger AA's hub to hub operations in both location.

AS with no name recognition of any sort and very little name recognition at Dallas can only fill its cabins with lower yielding traffic. And if you look at prices that AS/VX get on these routes, it's terrible. Even the walk up prices are low on a high CASM aircraft in E75.

That's the reality of AS taking over VX route map that operate in very competitive environment. And it's only getting more competitive.

ucdtim17

And they all mostly do fine (where they’re allowed) because most San Franciscans are not above patronizing chains