What is the lowest Business class fare on NW to Asia?

I am curious because NW's web site's price is about $6,000 for WBC in December/January which of course I can not afford.

I must say, I never thought of using a consolidator before (although I have made inquiries), but now I might actually use them.

The fact is the currency is not worth as much anymore (although I have gotten some great things from Continental and other airlines—I will never forget the Concorde) and is being devalued regularly. For me the miles have not been as important as the step or two (or three) below VIP treatment I sometimes get and, of course, upgrades. Upgrades make a weekend trip fun, be it at a hotel or an airline and they encourage me to make discretionary, frequent trips that fill up seats and rooms that would in many cases otherwise be empty.

I have millions of miles "in the bank" and I guess I should just start withdrawing as the miles are like the currency of some third world country. The ironic thing is one of the reasons I have not drawn down my balances in the past is that I was constantly racking up miles to stay Platinum to get the benefits that are being devalued faster than the miles. Now that status is not only harder to achieve, but frankly not that valuable when you get there, I guess I should just try to use up my miles (although I understand that too is a hassle). A WIN (for me)-LOSE (for Continental) situation. Continental would be much better off if I bought a ticket (whether or not I used miles for an upgrade) at any price than used positive space for free.

As I said earlier, I could have suggested ways to make me spend more (but not outrageously more—not going to happen) and still kept me happy WIN-WIN.

I admit my flying patterns may be an exception, but I really do not think the recent CO changes, especially the implementation thereof, will accomplish the intended objectives or at least do so in an efficient way (i.e., increasing revenue without significant damage to customer morale).

I am not sure if Continental is still one of the best places to work, but it is going down the list of best “places” to fly. Customer morale is down (at least for many frequent flyers). Especially important, frequent flyers have more loyalty than the occasional traveler. We stay around for the benefits. Among infrequent flyers I know, domestically JetBlue is all I hear, especially in NY. Many times they do not even look at other airlines for pricing. It is like Wal-Mart, they just assume everyday low pricing, even if not always the case for JetBlue. For me, it has taken a huge difference in price to pull me away from CO to other airlines, but, alas, my marginal revenue is apparently just not important enough for CO now.

The execs in Houston are overly impressed with their “Product” and need a reality check.

I have to say that Venk isn't a devil's advocate -- he is the devil's advocate!

One of the problems with CO's changes - especially now that they are back-tracking on it in terms of allowing full benefits for fares booked on the web (which directly benefits mileage runners and leisure travellers) - is that the mid to high-fare travellers would not have seen large benefits until 2005.

If I was a Silver or Gold and knew I would not be able to renew, I'd fly CO only when I could get in First (and as a Gold, that seems to be a pretty good chance). Afterall, even if WN or B6 is cheaper, neither offers First, so why not continue to take advantage of it where possible (even if you need to spend a little more).

So the high-fare Silvers and non-elites will still not see a First Class seat, so they will question "where's the benefit?" They may not wait until 2005 to reap these "new" benefits (once all the low-fare elites are gone).

Such is the problem with mileage-based elite programs. Intelligent and savvy people will always be able to take advantage of the programs. And the airlines need the incremental revenue low-fare passengers bring in, otherwise they'd move to a revenue-based FF program. Unfortunately, there are not enough high-revenue pax to sustain six large airlines, and maybe not enough to sustain even one (which would attract low-fare flyers only on a flight-by-flight basis, resulting in wildly fluctuating loads per flight).

Actually there are enough high-revenue passengers to support hundreds of "airlines"--charter airlines and corporate jets. Many times, especially if more than one person is traveling, a charter is reasonably competitive in terms of price and beats all the scheduled airlines in terms of convenience and scheduling. That is another significant source of competition for the scheduled airlines.

I think a compliment was intended but I am not sure that is something to be proud of. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Deleted

[This message has been edited by OttoGraham (edited 09-22-2003).]

If that is indeed the case, I'd let it go without inflammatory statements like this one.

Sooner or later, references like this will attract both your friendly local moderator and the board owner, I'm quite sure.

------------------
Don't feed the trolls.

venk I commend you for giving us the "other side" to the equation. Given that Larry, Mark and I'm sure even Gordo know that FT exists... why wouldnt one go to a good test audience (moderators of said forum) and get an idea/consensus of the proposed reforms. I've had conversations with Russ Hinckley, Julia Moore, William Sanders, etc. that have been constructive criticism toward their programs. One of my suggestions made it as a perk, whether it was me or my reinforcement, they listened. Had Continental floated some of the ideas to the moderators of this forum for example, I think they might have realized that yes... changes need to be made to the program, but their initial concept had flaws. Personally I don't see a problem with an EUA being Plat > Y-Fare Pax > Gold > Silver. Hey, might tork off a few Golds, but you have still kept the integrity of the program for your top tier elites and have provided for those who have paid the high walk-up fare. Wow! I just offered a suggestion that might have negated 12 pages of angst had they just asked! CO OP needs to utilize the members of FT. We may not have all the solutions, but can provide an endless number of suggestions.

I totally disagree with your argument here. There are a few hundred of these folks on flyertalk. If NW/CO have several thousand platinums each, I don't think milage runners are the typical elite flyer....

Geez, I take a few days off to study for the LSAT and the rumor mill goes wild!

Anyways, I appreciate venk's elquent arguments explaining why CO has taken the actions that it did. Like DL, CO has developed a new definition of what a "best customer" really is - it's not necessarily the person who FLIES the most, but rather the customer who SPENDS the most that is CO's bread-and-butter.

The text of the Larry Kellner email (I forget who posted it) suggests that unlike DL, CO is projecting a DECREASE in the overall number of Elites due to the changes. This is a good thing, as it means that CO can more consistently offer benefits to its true best customers. The big spenders will have an easier time receiving upgrades and priority treatment because the throng of riff-raff Elites will either drop down in status or otherwise receive benefits commensurate with the revenue that they are giving to the airline.

DL and CO might have been the first US airlines to make wholesale changes to Elite qualification, but they will bertainly NOt be the last. The other major airlines will eventually follow the lead of DL/CO and the other major world airlines by more closely correlating revenue to benefits -- they have no choice, unless they want to get swamped with unprofitable low-yield Elites.

------------------
Continental Airlines - An airline people acutally PAY to fly with...

[This message has been edited by avek00 (edited 09-22-2003).]

You'll make a good lawyer. You never let facts stand in your way. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Delta's passenger counts are dropping, and the airline, the nation's third largest, continues to suffer losses of hundreds of millions of dollars each quarter

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum20/HTML/009089.html


If, as avek00 says:
they will also follow them to less passengers, less revenue, and eventually, chapter 7. As AA and UA are getting tons of calls this week from defecting CO elites, I doubt they'll ever pull such a stupid move.

[This message has been edited by NJDavid (edited 09-22-2003).]

Deleted because it ain't worth it.

[This message has been edited by OttoGraham (edited 09-22-2003).]

ru·mor ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rmr)
noun.

A piece of unverified information of uncertain origin usually spread by word of mouth.

Unverified information received from another; hearsay.

I do not believe you understand the Dictionary definition of "RUMOR" avek00.

For your possible interest I have typed it here for you above.

Perhaps try looking up the dictionary definition of "FACT".

I am led to believe that concise Facts are what were reported above ... or are you happy to deny that here?

Continuing with my temporary assignment...

While we appreciate attempts by individuals to support CO's changes, we cannot allow statements such as the above that misrepresent us go by. It is irresponsible statements such as above that has led to a negative opinion on CO and its management and serve only to incite parts of our customer base.

The phrase "best customer" makes no sense to us or any airline given the large customer base we have and the large variety of customers we have all of whom we need. Within each category of customers such as premium business travelers, leisure travelers, etc., there are certainly some relationships that are more valuable than others but no metric can exist across such categories to compare what is essentially apples and oranges.

Any customer that occupies a seat that would have gone unsold otherwise is a good customer. There is no advantage to labeling customers to our own detriment.

As we have explained above, the philosophy we are using is that the benefits accrued for each transaction are commensurate with the past relationship and the current value of the transaction. The past relationship may happen for a number of reasons including frequency of flying and the types of fares paid.

Just as some of our customers will see an increase in benefits, some will see a decrease in the benefits as a result of our changes as opposed to a rather homegeneous treatment that existed earlier. This has no reflection on the value we place on that relationship but is rather an attempt to rationalize the level of products/service provided to the price incurred for ANY of our customers.