Brand announcement invitation

Old Apr 9, 2010, 8:55 am
  #46  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
Originally Posted by mke9499
+1. He's also a former employee who in my opinion has displayed a very jaded outlook for many years about his former company.


I certainly agree that there are aspects of the current dual brands which are frustrating and need to be worked through no matter what. Mastercard Mondays are wonderful, but not being able to use it on flights sold as Frontier is lousy. Stretch should be available to reserve no matter what airline is selling the flight nor what airline is operating the flight. It should be a seamless process to book FF award travel online no matter who the selling carrier nor operating carrier is. I'm sure some of these things will go away with a consolidated brand. However...I think that the issue is somewhat overplayed by the nay-sayers, too.

Sorenson says:
Its a branding buffet right now, he said. There are some planes with animals on the tail, there are some big airplanes and some small airplanes and cookies are offered on all flights. From a consumer perspective, it is so very confusing.

Nearly all major carriers...and some of the LCC's...have signfiicant product differentiation between different aircraft and markets. You buy a ticket on airline X....is there IFE onboard? It varies. Food for purchase? It varies. First class and/or premium section? It varies. Bigger overhead bins or tiny overhead bins? It varies. Served by employees of that airline, or of an alliance partner airline, or a regional airline partner, or of a third-party sub-contractor? It varies. I'm not saying this is a desirable thing, but it is a fact of life at most carriers and nothing unique to YX/F9.

Back to the tone of the story itself. I love how we've had months and months of the media saying that two brands is a horrible mess and it is playing into the hand of AirTran. And now that they are consolidating to a single brand...

Sorenson says:
Whatever Republic does is almost irrelevant
"AirTran Airways, Midwests main rival at Mitchell, is almost certain to benefit as Republic works to combine the Midwest and Frontier brands"

AirTran's Fornaro says something remarkably similar
"Them going to one brand, one way or the other, is going to be a positive for us"

So let me get this straight. Staying with multiple brands (as they are now) benefits AirTran. Combining the two brands into one benefits AirTran.

Very nice, even handed story.
knope2001 is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 9:07 am
  #47  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ORD, MDW or MKE
Programs: American and Southwest. Hilton and Marriott hotels primarily.
Posts: 6,454
Originally Posted by knope2001
Very nice, even handed story.
The deterioration of the Midwest brand has made it an albatross for Republic, Sorensen said.
lougord99 is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 9:26 am
  #48  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
LOL...might as well just park the planes and send everybody home.
knope2001 is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 9:28 am
  #49  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,800
Originally Posted by newsmanhoss
In fairness, Frontier is also on that list.
Yes, and that should be disclosed as well.

More troubling is the fact that Sorenson has done extensive consulting work for AirTran (he may still be doing so...there was an article not too long ago that made reference to this) but none of this is disclosed to the reader.

Sorenson is portrayed as just an aviation consultant who is watching what is happening in Milwaukee with interest from the sidelines. Perhaps that's true. Equally possible is that Sorenson has a financial interest in AirTran's success in Milwaukee and it benefits him (and his client) to bash the competition. Plus, Sorenson seems to have an axe to grind against Midwest (well before all of the drama with AirTran started a few years ago). To me this appears like a conflict of interest.
BlueHorseShoe2000 is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 12:14 pm
  #50  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by BlueHorseShoe2000

Sorenson is portrayed as just an aviation consultant who is watching what is happening in Milwaukee with interest from the sidelines. Perhaps that's true. Equally possible is that Sorenson has a financial interest in AirTran's success in Milwaukee and it benefits him (and his client) to bash the competition. Plus, Sorenson seems to have an axe to grind against Midwest (well before all of the drama with AirTran started a few years ago). To me this appears like a conflict of interest.

Doesn't everyone have a conflict on interest? He's just giving his opinion.

If a newspaper wants a more detailed story they need to interview people on all sides and interests. Then the reading can develope their own opinion.

I think he makes good points in general.
n735 is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 12:32 pm
  #51  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,800
Originally Posted by n735
Doesn't everyone have a conflict on interest? He's just giving his opinion.

If a newspaper wants a more detailed story they need to interview people on all sides and interests. Then the reading can develope their own opinion.

I think he makes good points in general.
No, everyone does not have a conflict of interest.

Conflicts of interest are not always bad but they do need to be disclosed. That's how a lot of people and businesses get into trouble.

Sorenson is entitled to give his opinion. However, is it really just an opinion if he is under contract with AirTran and bashes a key competitor of theirs in the media? He has no incentive to paint what Republic is doing in anything other than negative terms. Perhaps the reader would not think so highly of Sorenson's opinions if they knew he was working for AirTran.

The Business Journal could have easily found an aviation expert not connected with Republic or AirTran to provide a more unbiased take on what is occurring. For whatever reason, they chose not to.
BlueHorseShoe2000 is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 3:29 pm
  #52  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,412
Originally Posted by BlueHorseShoe2000
The Business Journal could have easily found an aviation expert not connected with Republic or AirTran to provide a more unbiased take on what is occurring. For whatever reason, they chose not to.
Absolutely right. There are plenty of other people with opinions on this. For starters, why not talk to frequent flyers to get their thoughts. There's not one quote from the flying public in this article. Could have also talked to Visit Milwaukee, since they are involved with travelers from other cities.

Heck, they could even read or post on FT to get responses if they are really desperate.
newsmanhoss is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 6:25 pm
  #53  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 83
Jay is not the only one who worked at YX. His wife was director of Revenue Management for several years until Greg Aretakis decided it was time to go in a new direction. So, I think that Jay has a huge axe to grind here.
truths88 is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 8:47 pm
  #54  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: MKE
Programs: Midwest Miles, AirTran A+ Rewards
Posts: 1,445
Originally Posted by knope2001
AirTran's Fornaro says something remarkably similar
"Them going to one brand, one way or the other, is going to be a positive for us"

So let me get this straight. Staying with multiple brands (as they are now) benefits AirTran. Combining the two brands into one benefits AirTran.

Very nice, even handed story.
We all know that AirTran secretly has their fingers crossed, eyes closed really tight and rocking back and forth saying "Please let it be Frontier" over and over again. Having the Midwest brand evaporate completely from the MKE market is a wish come true for them.
flyYX is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2010, 10:05 pm
  #55  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toledo, OH
Programs: DL GOLD
Posts: 245
Frontier makes the most sense. It actually is a great name for an Airline. A lot better than AirTran.
ToledoRocket is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.