FTers seem to be split in two camps.
#1- The airlines are hurting, low fare FFers aren't important.

#2- Take care of your FFers, they are your survival.

Having read thousands of posts since 1998, I still don't understand Group #1. I am a Certifed Financial Planner and do understand business and marketing. I comprehend #1s arguments, but I don't see it.


In the next month, I will fly MIA or FLL to NYC, MIA or FLL to JAX, and MIA or FLL to TPA or MCO. Currently AA is my choice carrier and I am PLAT. (NYC trip has ISP and closest airport.)

Without the FF program, there is no way I would be looking at AA for any of these trips. WN flies to ISP for much less.

AA refuses to believe that they compete with WN, since WN does not fly out of FLL. However, I am almost equidistant between the two airports. WN FLL - JAX can be had for UNDER $100 while AA MIA-JAX is over $300.

My question to FTers in Group #1. If I can't get any benefits for flying AA when it is not convenient and more expensive, then why should I even look.

(BTW- it does not matter of it is AA, UA etc.
FF programs for elite are loyalty programs. "Give us $$ we would not normally get, and we will reward with with perks".)

Everyone of us is looking at some dilution of benefits. When the benefits no longer warrant, we will stop being loyal.

And, before someone takes a hit at us MRs, remember, if the airlines were selling all of the NYC-LAX seats for $500, they would not be offering $198 RTs. We can only take advantage of MRs because the planes are not full.

And how quickly we forget. Many of us Fters, were the first people back in the air after 9/11, because we suppport the airlines and America. When War breaks out, the FFers will be the ones still flying. I hope the airlines remember that.

I am also aware that a number airlines that you may defend, may not be around in another 18 months.

I agree I think airlines have really got it wrong when they do not value customers on cheap tickets.

I fly about 90% of the time on cheap tickets but I also do travel 3 or 4 times a year in a premium cabin. I used to fly BA most of th time but I would only get 25% of the miles and no status at all on the cheap flights which meant earning any status was virtually impossible for me. I have now moved over to LH M&M and get full miles and status on all flights no matter how cheap (unfortunately M&M have just announced changes to this but currently it only affects the domestic German market).

As a result of ignoring their low fare customers BA have lost my premium fares as well.

Guys... Im sorry but you have it wrong with some of us that argue close to what you describe at #1. The issue there is, yes, chepo priced tickets do help the carriers in their overall scheme of things... but, do carriers need to shower those chepo buying customers with the same perks, attention, care and pampering as the high fare & highly profitable customer...???

Gaucho, you make a great point. That being said, I don't think that FF programs are loyalty programs really, they are rebate or discount programs. They give you rebates and perks for flying so many miles or buying a certain fare or whatever.
We the flying public choose which carrier based on how there pricing, schedule, plane layout and comfort, personnel, and FF program effect us. No one part alone usually drives us. We are only "loyal" as long as it benefits us. See many threads as to the effects of changes on anyone of the above mentioned items, and how we the flying public react to any loss of benefit. On the other hand the Air Carrier provides services, perks, and rebates or benefits in order to induce us to fly them. We can change if we find better benefits on another carrier and the carrier can change if it does not like the finacial results of the benefits it offers. What is best for each carrier is certainly debatable. For me UA has reduced enough benefits that I may not continue to use them, I will use AA and look for another carrier that may give me better benefits than UA is now offering. My "loyalty" only goes as far as the benefits currently provided by the carrier. The carriers understand this, I am not sure that many on FT do. It is really that simple.

------------------
dallasflyer

Isn't that basically true with any business we patronize, whether it entails value, cost and quality, amongst other factors?

I'm the Trans-Pacific International traveller, therefore a FF program benefits me. In this case the OWA program with AAdavantage. It is a different world and a different arrangement of travel. Completely different than "the static and crackle" of the United States air-travel system. For me, I get all those perks and award travel much faster. All lounges are complimentary (with food, water, liquor), bonus miles, and more!

But if I was strictly a US domestic traveller, I'd seriously be considering other alternatives. Lounges are a fee, rude staff, ridiculous TSA security policies (unlocked checked bags.....silly and stupid) no food, CNN Airport Network (disgusting....if I her the sounds of another Sprint PSC commercial...), uncomfortable flights.....need I say more?

However, I did fly SW to RDU from PVD and had a delightful flight (2 segments via BWI). The best part was our aircraft maneuvered around a US Airways jet that was "parked" loaded with PAX, waiting for authorization to proceed. Everyone laughed! Great fare, great service, no frills. This is SW, that is the fare, seat on first come first serve, here is your drink and peanuts, smile, family atmosphere, an 'Adam's Family' song, and we land. RIGHT!

Yes they do! and here is why! I fly mostly cockroach fares on US, to the point of earning Cockroach Preferred. About 8 to 10 of those 104 segments last year were full fare coach tickets bought at the last minute. Also I switched jobs and now do more long haul flying. So my situation changed but my loyalty didn't. Why? because US Airways treated me the same regardless of fare class. The purpose of a "Loyalty Program" is to reward loyalty is it not?

I think PineyBob has an excellent point. FF programs have the effect of building a relationship with a person, not a situation.

Maybe a person's current situation is that they work for a company whose policy it is to pay discount fare for travel (I work for a company of three people and a cat - I know what it's like). But all sorts of things can happen. People change jobs. The economy changes. New business interests far away. All sorts of things. I suspect that for many it is cyclical. They trade their loyalty to me (in the cheap times) for my loyalty to them (in the good times). If they were only loyal to me when times were good, I'd go somewhere else as soon as times were bad (and probably stay with them). People don't like to be slighted and will go somewhere better if they are.

- cheapo

I agree with PineyBob. Yes, the carriers should be providing benefits for the frequent traveler regardless of fare class precisely for the reasons he cites. For the frequent traveler, each airline ticket purchase decision is NOT mutually exclusive. If I only traveled a few times a year, I might be only be concerned about one thing...price. I would select the lowest price regardless of FF benefits. But as frequent travelers we are concerned with more than that and the FF program benefits are a big factor in our purchasing decision. Cut those and you now give me one less reason to fly your airline, for both my full-fare as well as my discount fare travel. Thus, FF programs and the perks they provide give me incentive to book ALL my travel (full and discount fare) with a single airline.

I don't control what the airlines charge for tickets. If the airlines don't like that I'm paying cheapo fares for my travel or they aren't making money on those fares, why are they offering them? Clearly, the airlines are trying to move to a system where they will provide benefits/perks if I buy a high cost ticket, and no benefits/perks if I buy a cheapo fare, i.e., the mutually exclusive purchase decision model. That model might work fine if I'm buying a new big-screen TV every 8-10 years, but airline travel purchased weekly or monthly is not that way for FFs. I, and I imagine most other FFs, view value in travel across a spectrum of transactions. We will evaluate each transaction in the larger scheme of things (FF benefits such as elite status, upgrades, and overall mileage accumulation) and decide where to drop our dollar based on that, not necessarily based solely on what benefits/perks we can drive out of tomorrow's purchase. And isn't that what FF programs were created for anyway? Seems simple enough to me.

Well said! Here is a supporting example: I go to DTW semi regularly. My "home" airport is ACY. DL, US and Spirit fly from there. So here is the math for 14 day advanced purchase. Let's assume i am Cockroach Preferred on US & Plat Medallion on DL, Spirit of course has no program.

Fares are as follows
Spirit = $191.00 w/no FF program
Delta = $310.00 1/2 mileage credit
US Air = $325.00 full CP benefits

If the buying criteria is price alone Spirit wins going away. Spirit is also Non-stop, DL & US are connecting flights.

By maintaining their current DM program US Airways ensures that I will remain a loyal traveler. Why would I use Delta? less miles, no upgrade opportunity because it is all RJ's. US is ACY-PHL-DTW and an upgrade to FC is almost guaranteed. If the airlines eliminate the segment qualifier as DL has, plus the credit for low fare tickets shown above. This situation is akin to the "Domino theory" of the cold war on the advance of communism. Once I start moving away from the big six what is left to keep me from total defecton? What compelling business reason do I have to fly with anyone BUT Spiritin this case?? Perhaps one of the airline lurkers can tell me as I have yet to figure it out. Besides Spirit serves Mountain Dew on their flights which is my favorite.

The customer (any customer) is not the enemy!

The customer (any customer) is not some line item like wages or vendor costs that is to be expected to be slashed!

We (all of us) are the income source fer cryin' out loud. And if it takes benefits to all classes to keep all classes, you'd better do it or you'd better plan to operate without one (or more) of those classes.

And personally, I think they need them all. Every single penny-pinching one of them!

I know many folks say the hi-revs subsidizes the low-revs. I think they have it wrong. I think it's more a symbiotic relationship that helps both. And perhaps the low-revs are actually subsidizing the hi-revs to a large degree, by creating market situations that offer more frequency and capacity for all.

Could someone notify the majors of this! They seem to have missed it.

PineyBob:
"Could someone notify the the managment of the majors of this! They seem to have missed it."

Amen, Brother Roach.

My words in italics.

[This message has been edited by BillMorrow (edited 03-09-2003).]

As soneone in the USAirways forum stated:

"They penalize us for buying the fares that they offer..."