Originally Posted by sbm12

I do not think that the relationship is on the skids. If that were really the case and CO wanted gogo now why wouldn't they just do it? I know that the contract with LiveTV was structured to permit any WiFi to be added, either from a LiveTV product or another one. (It was actually Jeff who told me that before someone asks me for a cite.) The LiveTV solution simply doesn't exist, but that didn't mean CO had to pull the plug on the gogo trial they had scheduled, right? Something else came into play - likely costs - to put that on ice.

I do agree that CO will eventually have a solution that covers the domestic fleet and I wouldn't be surprised if there is one that covers international as well. The Ka-band satellite solution that is LiveTV's next plan should be able to meet both needs and do it at a better price-point per megabit than either terrestrial or Ku-band solutions available today can offer. Of course, that solution is still 18+ months out.

Originally Posted by ijgordon

This seems very counter-intuitive to me, but I'm in finance. I have to wonder what percent of those companies would reimburse hotel internet costs and how that compares to the 34% (+7%) who will reimburse in-flight internet. If it's meaningfully more, then it has to make you wonder about the logic of corporate T&E policies.

Originally Posted by raehl311

There are a couple issues with in-flight WiFi.

The competing option is I stay up later or get up earlier and sleep on the plane. This is free. And, I then get to work on my home desktop with elbow room and no snooping.

Also, I really need to know, in advance, that my flight WILL have WiFi. That hasn't always been the case. If I don't KNOW I'll have it, I'll probably have already stayed up late or gotten up early and will be sleeping regardless.

The last issue is pricing; I don't think the airlines are flexible enough with this yet. Part of it is the not knowing if you'll have it on your next flight (if ALL flights have it, things like monthly plans become a lot more attractive), part of it is not having enough adjustment in pricing due to flight length and time of day.

Looking at sbm12's links, for example, Oman air charges $1 per MB for internet access - a ridiculous charge, and not surprisingly their uptake is slow. Conversely, Virgin reports pretty good uptake, and seems to have the most flexible pricing.


One thing I think no one has hit on yet is internet access while still in the airport. I have an air card that gets most of its use at the airport. If someone were to pair the inflight internet access with in-airport and even in-hotel access, that might be a more compelling product - or even an add-on to a mobile broadband plan.

But, I still think a big problem is it's very difficult to sell a product that you can't offer consistently. Even having it on all mainline flights isn't great when I might get stuck on that 2.5 hour CRJ flight without WiFi.


If I'm going to use in-flight WiFi, I'm going to have to change my habits to incorporate in-flight wifi, and I can't change my habits when it's only available on 50% or less of my flights.

Originally Posted by ijgordon

This seems very counter-intuitive to me, but I'm in finance. I have to wonder what percent of those companies would reimburse hotel internet costs and how that compares to the 34% (+7%) who will reimburse in-flight internet. If it's meaningfully more, then it has to make you wonder about the logic of corporate T&E policies.