Eastbay1K

Agreed to a point, but when AS charges as much as the others for the "amazing transcon private suite service," you would expect a product that is better than it is. I'd be happy with a "VX at its best" level of service. But we don't even have that, and we don't have the best of seats. For "most routes," the industry once again seems to be embracing a race to mediocrity. But AS already has the best pitch, and will soon have better seats.

AS F is a very exclusive club. I rarely let more than 11 of my closest friends fly up there with me. Ok, sometimes I'll let 15 of them in the cabin.

channa

Of all the airlines, AS probably has more dialog through focus groups (online and in person) and other channels than its competitors. Yes, you can take business elsewhere, but you can also steer change with them directly.


In the Bay Area, AS has expressed interest in retaining the VX customers. They are sensitive to the changes, and while change is happening and VX is going away, things like updated meals and blankets have a VX-like element to them for a reason. They're not operating a hub here with practically hourly service to LAX and frequent service to NYC/BOS/WAS/etc. because they're trying to court people with vacation homes in Puerto Vallarta. While they tend to do well with the "leisure enthusiast" segment you're referring to, they're not exactly saying to hell with the road warrior either.

fly18725

Market segmentation is not mutually exclusive. Alaska can focus on leisure enthusiasts while still serving other types of travelers. The point I was trying to make is that the expectations for Alaska's F service should not be the same as the network carriers. Alaska's cost structure and business model are different. That doesn't mean that Alaska can't evolve and change the product, but it will likely never offer the same value proposition.

Said another way, if you want to keep accessible upgrades, the F product will likely remain inferior. If you want AS to have the goal of 90% F class sales (like the stock-picker's BFF DAL$), then the F product can improve.

channa

When you segment a market, you don't pull out a balance sheet, highlight some numbers, and tell customers look at our costs, reset your expectations, buddy.

You segment a market by positioning your product as materially different than your competitors and adjust your prices accordingly. Sure, business travelers can and do stay at Hampton Inn, but that's not their main target. However, Hampton Inn is positioned differently and has a materially different expectation than Hilton or another full-service property.

What AS and UA market as their domestic F offerings is nearly identical:

https://www.alaskaair.com/content/tr...nfo-firstClass

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/con...ght/first.aspx

And for coach, they're better than most (for now) since they don't have basic economy.

The markets they serve in many cases are identical. And the fares they charge are often very similar.

They may do well with these "leisure enthusiasts," and they may target them through communications and whatnot, but if AS is trying to segment themselves as a Hampton Inn in a market of full service options, I certainly haven't seen any communication that would indicate that. Nor should they. Their product and pricing is not materially different than the Big 3 legacy carriers (save for some minor differences). The only value based marketing I've seen has been the companion ticket with the credit card.

NWplatinum

danielonn

If you get a snack and drink with a refill on a 1 hour flight then that's good service but having no or miaimal service in First is not service. So if they bring the Virhin America elements we can at least hope for better features. Was it a good move buyng Virgin America maybe yes maybe no.

What if Alaska kept the Virgin A320 with the Main Cabin Extra and First Class with IFE and kept it the same and use Alaska on short routes would have this been better?

It will take some time to see the Virgin effect on Alaska. Can Alaska copy the service on Virgin America? Absolutely! Is their room.for improvement? Always!

What you can do is write inot Alaska on Alaaska Listens about good and bad service and explain to then what worked and what did not work.

Some people will not write in to the airline and instead bash them via Social.Media! What good does that do? Then the airline cant improve and some people will not fly the airlie because of reading bad reviews.

be_rettSEA

Alaska Listens is a good route for submitting feedback, but social media channels can be helpful for quick resolution when issues arise. I'm sure social media teams are also asked to submit feedback when it is received by customers, or if they are seeing trends in particular feedback, as well (or maybe I'm just being hopeful). Overall, while there's been some bumps in the post-merger service offerings (and frankly I"ve not been flying as much the last month or two), I don't think its enough to qualify as "new lows'. I've got a flight in F tomorrow to PVR, so will report back if things have really become untenable.

fly18725

I would agree that you don't pull out a balance sheet when discussing costs.

I'm going to take a step back and make my point again, since it appears to be lost in haggling over trivial details: If customers expect Alaska F to be equal to or better than AA, DL, or UA may be disappointed. Alaska is focused on maintaining a lower cost structure, providing better upgrade access to the F cabin, and catering to a leisure enthusiast target market. All of these factors indicate a lower level of investment in the F product than carriers with higher costs, yields, and a different target customer base.

If customers expect Alaska to have a leading F product, they may be disappointed. Customers may be happier if their expectations are reasonable. For some, if expectations can't be met, customers may be best served by another airline.

BW Flyer

Eastbay1K

Exacto. And often, AS is a lot more. Well, sort of. Most often, the fare buckets are identical, but with the smaller AS cabin, and lesser frequencies, there just aren't any or many of them to go around. So while you might get a $699 or $899 SFO/JFK on DL/AA/B6, the one seat on AS that sells for that price is long gone, and the rest might be $1299 or $1899. So not only is it difficult to pay the same price, often, it is a lot higher. This is why of my last 10+ SFO/JFK segments, only one has been on AS/VX.

I'm editing this to add the following, as to avoid any confusion. AS has several fare bases all within the P seat bucket. The others typically have different seat buckets to correspond to the different fare bases, i,e, J/C/D/I/Z. So, the $699/$1299 etc. may all be P fares on AS.

fly18725

You make a good point and raise an interesting question: is there a correlation between pricing and product quality?

In many other industries, there is (or at least a correlation between pricing and perceived quality). I think the correlation is weaker or non-existent for domestic US air travel when purchase decisions are primarily driven by convenience and availability and pricing transparency drives nearly-instant competitive matching. I would agree there can be a disconnect for passengers, primarily on premium transcon markets where Alaska is selling F for the same or higher prices as lie-flat C/J on other carriers. I would point out this plays into Alaska's strategy of enabling more access with complimentary upgrades. If AS set F lower, it would likely sell out the cabin, eliminating the possibility of upgrades. At the same time, if AS is setting F prices at a level that is noncompetitive due to a weak value proposition, it won't sell any F seats. Ultimately, the market will determine if F pricing is right.

Ultimately, I still think customers need to understand Alaska's strategy when setting their expectations on the quality of the F product. If you need PDBs or pillows or amenity kits or in-seat IFE or Mint-style tapas, you will be disappointed on Alaska. You will also need to be willing to purchase F to get these benefits on other carriers.

WrightHI

Important to note that even if the F or P fare is similar, AS MVPGs and 75Ks can often get either a confirmed upgrade or a very high likelihood of an upgrade with a B (MVPG) or H (75K) fare that's materially cheaper.

channa

You can say the same thing as many times as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that AS's pricing and positioning is nearly identical to its competitors. I posted the UA and AS F product pages. Practically the same -- big seat, better, food, free bags, free drinks, blah blah.

Unless you watched their investor presentation and caught the "leisure enthuisasts" slide, nobody else knows about it. It's a segment they do well with. It's not clear it's their target, because they appear to be targeting the same people as their competitors.

Having reasonable expectations is important. The airline sets those expectations through marketing. Not code words buried in an investor presentation.

fly18725

I thought a premise of this community was to empower an informed and better educated consumer. If you'd prefer to focus on limited marketing information posted on a website, that's cool. I thought it would be value added if current/potential purchasers of Alaska F understand that the product will be constrained by AS' a) goal of having maintaining a lower cost structure, b) stated focus on a specific market segment, and c) willingness to make the F cabin more accessible by having a consistent and generous upgrade policy across the entire network and selling fewer seats.

You are free to have higher expectations for Alaska F based on a comparison of the AS and UA website. Based on your post pattern, it appears Alaska has failed to meet your expectations on more than one occasion. You're certainly free to argue that your expectations are correct. I will continue to reiterate the same points that Alaska's management has made on multiple occasions.

Eastbay1K

I'm not playing that lottery for a "high likelihood of an upgrade" when I am prepared to buy a reasonably-priced premium fare, and someone else has one available when I want to travel.

Back to the premise of the OP, AS has actually had worse service and morale - comparatively a lot worse, 20-some years ago, when the show was run by this guy