VH-RMD

just who is 'we'? I understood the forum has an elected Talkboard who are empowered to make these decisions. They decided to have 4 LCC forums, not 4 LCC forums with some LCC's in and some LCC's out.

under that criteria, Fiji Airlines should also be part of the QF page...not just the occasional discussion about F lounge access.

Someone needs to tell the couple of posters in the Budget forum their Jetstar posts are in the wrong place - lest this become confusing for the unaware...

JDiver

Speaking as one of the moderators affected with the task of housecleaning and moving, it's not entirely easy to back into the subject after TB made a decision to establish the four fora, as we don't have a clear definition of a LCC; some issues for further discussion might include:

● Does it have a FFP? (Some definite Budget airlines / LCCs do, some share and some do not.)

● What if the LCC also shares a FFP with a legacy airline?

● Is it really cheaper? (Some may not be, or may vary.)

● Is it legitimately stand-alone if it has ownership - or significant investment - by a legacy airline (SQ now has three LCCs, iirc, yet they are distinctly LCCs).

(I do not agree partial or even majority ownership should be a sole, or sometimes even a primary, criterion to determine forum location - there are other criteria that I think have bearing on this issue such as shared FFP etc., but that's just my opinion.)

E.G. Fiji Airways (Air Pacific Ltd. dba Fiji Airways), BTW, neither seems a LCC nor does it seem to be appropriate in the Qantas Frequent Flyer Forum. "Fiji Airways is owned by the Fijian government (51%), the Australian flag-carrier Qantas (46.32%), and Air New Zealand and the governments of Kiribati, Tonga, Nauru and Samoa each hold minor stakes." It should remain, IMO, in the Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs, where it exists now. I suspect that pretty much reflects VH-RMD's thoughts.

Etc.

TalkBoard direction, or deferring to someone who is more of an expert on LCCs, would be helpful. In the end, we'll get it done and most will be pleased, I suspect. In the meantime, we can work on the more obvious ones - Interjet, Azul, etc.

SanDiego1K

Based on feedback from a member, the North and South American budget forum description is now:

Air Transat, Allegiant, Amaszonas, Interjet, Peruvian, Spirit, StarPeru, Sunwing, VivaAerobus, Viva Colombia, Volaris

Edited out were Gol, Tam, Avianca and Azul "....more important, no Brazilian flyer think of these airlines as budget airlines."

GUWonder

Asian "JetLite" is part of India's Jet Airways; at most (or is it all?) airports in India JetLite passengers check-in with Jet Airways.

JetLite is Jet Airways' post-merger name for what used used to Air Sahara, a carrier that was a partner airline of American Airlines and the AA FFP.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...-55470277.html

Are JetLite-related threads/posts in the Airlines of India forum to remain there, or will they get moved to one of these new budget forums?

VH-RMD

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/budge...l#post21627415


Well look at that... it seems Jetstar is a budget airline in that section, unless 'we' decide it is not....

CaptRobPhD

CRP also tried to make the case the line is blurring between ULCC/LCC/Majors/Globals/Flag carriers whether by routes, service, ownership, or frequent flyer program. The single best way to define an LCC is their cost/distance on a base fare and the cost to buy that ticket and fly the route for a passenger. Whether Jetstar or Germanwings or any other similarly "owned" airline, a separate booking engine with clearly definable schedules and routes should be a key criteria for inclusion. I am of the opinion that a shared FFP, ownership of any part, or any other element commonly associated with the Big(ger) players, are simply irrelevant considerations for categorization. If an LCC (by definition or by cost relative to other airlines in the same market [on a consistent basis]) offers FFP, lounge access, business class or the like, then those ancillary benefits actually should DECREASE the cost of using them when fares remain low/lowest/even with next cheapest alternative. You can fly r/t on Norweigian from Oslo to Dublin on 863NOK, or 780NOK on Ryanair. Factor in the incidentals and it's a push. Same goes for Jetstar or Germanwings--they still may compete on their own independent of their parent/owner while still accruing benefits to flyers. Let the fares decide, not ownership or benefits beyond a ticket...

PS: I do think there is a valid point for calling the best alternative in a given market pair a budget option when the schedule is not one-off, and fares are consistent to an LCC, even if operated by a legacy. That doesn't make the legacy an LCC nor does it mean the LCC is not a budget option. As is increasingly apparent, semantics in defining an LCC are the devil's details here...

wandering_fred

I'll admit to being late to this discussion. And to having a biased opinion on the various Jetstar entities.

Unless and until QF will seamlessly check through luggage and check in and provide boarding passes for transit passengers on a Jetstar subsidiary, the Jetstar entity belongs in the LCC forum. And in the reverse direction with respect to connecting to QF flights.

The same would apply to LH and GermanWings, about which I am totally uninformed.

Happy wandering

Fred

DownUnderFlyer

That can be a difficult thing to do. We might have to move WN to the LCC forum. Maybe even EK.

GUWonder

The cleaner break would have been airlines with -- or affiliated with airlines with -- FFPs and airlines without.

Fares don't necessarily do a good job in designating which carriers in the world are LCCs and which are not.

It's interesting how TB seems to have sort of dived into creating new forums without first figuring out the basics of definitions to create clear divisions between existing and previous forums. I doubt that this will be the last time that a lack of understanding of definitions ends up causing confusion .... rather unnecessarily IMO.

I wish these forums all the success in the world, but it would be helpful to get them started on the right foot before creating new forums.

cblaisd

It's been a long time since WN was an LCC, although their marketing brilliance has made lots of people think they are.

And the cleanest would simply be to use geography.

Sadly true.

tcook052

I would like to see TB revisit the creation of these forums as one in particular, Budget Middle East and African Airlines has been very lightly trafficked with barely a dozen threads since this motion was adopted 14 months ago.

Given the forum hasn't found an audience would propose it be merged with the more heavily used Other Middle Eastern and African Airlines and renamed the Budget and Other Middle Eastern and African Airlines so as to reduce the overall number of forums by one making navigation a fraction easier for all members.

CMK10

I think that's a good idea. Honestly, even the budget North American airlines could probably be folded into the Other North American Airlines forum without much of a ripple.

tom911

When is the Talk Board due to run its annual review of underutilized forums? Could there be some others needing attention?

lin821

It's coming up next month:
(Bolding mine)

nsx

I ran the metrics in November and posted them in this forum.

The original reasoning was to arrange the content logically, so that posters and readers would more readily locate the correct forum for their topic. The purest case of this reasoning is the Antarctica forum.

That said, I'm open to the idea of changing the arrangement. Creating the forums for the purpose of geographic consistency was a close call.