Terrible Virgin America Experience
Apr 7, 2008, 6:23 pm
#76
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Miami, FL, USA
Posts: 4,052
Really? From the Daily Deal:
http://www.thedeal.com/dealscape/200...e_to_go_ba.php
Here's the relevant exerpt:
Virgin America remains a wild card. The airline only began service last August, and typical of a startup has bled money so far, losing $35 million during its first quarter of operations. The airline is attempting to ramp up while other airlines are scaling back flying. Working in its favor is Richard Branson's involvement, as the British entrepreneur who spent more than three years wrangling with U.S. regulators for permission to start service is unlikely to give up easily. But U.S. law limits Branson's ownership, and it is unclear that U.S. investors led by Black Canyon Capital and Cyrus Capital Partners who have already committed about $162 million will be willing to fund continuing losses.
They may be ahead of projections in terms of passengers boarded, and maybe even RASM, but, if they projected $100 oil in their original business plan, they would be better served shutting down the airline and focusing on speculating in the futures markets.... Somehow, I don't see how their losses are better than expected....
http://www.thedeal.com/dealscape/200...e_to_go_ba.php
Here's the relevant exerpt:
Virgin America remains a wild card. The airline only began service last August, and typical of a startup has bled money so far, losing $35 million during its first quarter of operations. The airline is attempting to ramp up while other airlines are scaling back flying. Working in its favor is Richard Branson's involvement, as the British entrepreneur who spent more than three years wrangling with U.S. regulators for permission to start service is unlikely to give up easily. But U.S. law limits Branson's ownership, and it is unclear that U.S. investors led by Black Canyon Capital and Cyrus Capital Partners who have already committed about $162 million will be willing to fund continuing losses.
They may be ahead of projections in terms of passengers boarded, and maybe even RASM, but, if they projected $100 oil in their original business plan, they would be better served shutting down the airline and focusing on speculating in the futures markets.... Somehow, I don't see how their losses are better than expected....
The investors can afford to fund the airline *and* invest in futures.
Apr 7, 2008, 8:22 pm
#78
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
Posts: 89
Not a blog. Daily Deal is an industry journal for M&A, Private Equity, Hedge Funds, etc....
Regardless, what is their cash burn rate at $100 oil? It cannot be good, and the point is fair. As Branson cannot add money to the venture without his US partners doing so, how willing will his US investors be in ponying up more cash as the bleed continues?
Regardless, what is their cash burn rate at $100 oil? It cannot be good, and the point is fair. As Branson cannot add money to the venture without his US partners doing so, how willing will his US investors be in ponying up more cash as the bleed continues?
Apr 7, 2008, 11:37 pm
#80
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney - Australia
Programs: BD, QF, QR/EY/GF & HH Gold/SPG, Hertz#1G
Posts: 11,079
Not a blog. Daily Deal is an industry journal for M&A, Private Equity, Hedge Funds, etc....
Regardless, what is their cash burn rate at $100 oil? It cannot be good, and the point is fair. As Branson cannot add money to the venture without his US partners doing so, how willing will his US investors be in ponying up more cash as the bleed continues?
Regardless, what is their cash burn rate at $100 oil? It cannot be good, and the point is fair. As Branson cannot add money to the venture without his US partners doing so, how willing will his US investors be in ponying up more cash as the bleed continues?
Is Virgin America marked as a future vulture capital, takeover target, distressed company / breakup opportunity or short-selling money maker by the industry journal?
I wonder if such stories are set up in order to destabilise companies with new ventures or are a softening up tactic by either competitors or by companies wanting to get more equity at a more advantageous cost?
Are some people here looking or wishing for VX's demise, already?
Apr 8, 2008, 12:34 am
#81
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Programs: AS MVP, Elevate, AAdvantage, Mileage Plus
Posts: 1,992
Second, we've established that the dark plane is not "scheduled" so that it is known in advance which flights will be operated by it. The aircraft is being rotated throughout the west coast routes on an as needed basis to cover flights on the schedule, rather than have schedule cancellations and reaccomodations. Therefore, VX does not knowingly sell seats and amenities it doesn't plan to provide at the point of sale. The dark plane is assigned on routes as late as the night before the flights take place and is only assigned if all other existing aircraft are either assigned a route or out for maintenance.
Apr 8, 2008, 4:05 am
#82
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: WLG, New Zealand
Programs: UA LTG QF LTG/P1 NZ*E
Posts: 1,890
I'm of two minds over this issue. I flew LAS-SFO on Mar 30 on the "dark" flight in paid F
Whilst I was disappointed in not experiencing the flight as expected I still have no trouble with the value I received for the money I paid. I did find the seat comfortable, the plane in great condition, and the service excellent
I do think however that the $25 credit towards a future flight as compensation was nonsense. For me to use it I have to book a flight within 12 months and book by phone (which from New Zealand will incur additional costs). I would have been happier with drink vouchers for future flights that those in Y received (I could then at least have passed it onto a FT'er)
Bottom line is that it still provided a better experience than I could get on UA for a fairly reasonable cost (for such a short flight)
Jeff
Whilst I was disappointed in not experiencing the flight as expected I still have no trouble with the value I received for the money I paid. I did find the seat comfortable, the plane in great condition, and the service excellent
I do think however that the $25 credit towards a future flight as compensation was nonsense. For me to use it I have to book a flight within 12 months and book by phone (which from New Zealand will incur additional costs). I would have been happier with drink vouchers for future flights that those in Y received (I could then at least have passed it onto a FT'er)
Bottom line is that it still provided a better experience than I could get on UA for a fairly reasonable cost (for such a short flight)
Jeff
Apr 8, 2008, 8:41 am
#83
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Denver, CO
Programs: UA 1K 25 years/2MM, Honors LT Diamond, AVIS & Hertz Prez Club
Posts: 4,763
Actually, the "dark" plane is not a spare--VX does not currently have a full operational spare. VX does schedule the routing for the dark plane in advance. At least for the past month, the dark plane has been used on a daily basis for up to three round-trips a day. The fact that certain flights get the dark plane day-after-day (for up to two weeks at a time) certainly does not look like last-minute substitution to me! I'd have to think that VX knowingly sells seats on flights that have, at the very least, a very high probability of being operated by the dark aircraft, which is not disclosed to the customer at the time of booking. Just because VX does not send out the email to customers until about 24 hours in advance does not mean they don't know further in advance. I'm sure they'd like to create the impression of it being a last-minute sub.
I don't know what your source is, but my information comes from inside VX. So I know for a fact that it's scheduled last minute. It may be scheduled on the same flights for several days in a row, but not "in advance".
That's all I'll say on the subject, but I am working from knowledge that the average FTer doesn't have.
Apr 8, 2008, 10:11 am
#84
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Programs: AS MVP, Elevate, AAdvantage, Mileage Plus
Posts: 1,992
Ok, I'm going out on a limb here.
I don't know what your source is, but my information comes from inside VX. So I know for a fact that it's scheduled last minute. It may be scheduled on the same flights for several days in a row, but not "in advance".
That's all I'll say on the subject, but I am working from knowledge that the average FTer doesn't have.
I don't know what your source is, but my information comes from inside VX. So I know for a fact that it's scheduled last minute. It may be scheduled on the same flights for several days in a row, but not "in advance".
That's all I'll say on the subject, but I am working from knowledge that the average FTer doesn't have.
As far as the dark plane is concerned, what I do know, is that between March 22 and April 7, N524VA was used every day on VX 849, the 8:25 am SFO-LAX flight and the return LAX-SFO flight VX 848. That's 17 days in a row that this particular flight was "dark." Today, however, I'm showing an A320 for that flight (sched change most likely due to the launch of SEA-LAX). Hopefully the dark plane is back to a standby basis as of today. But, the point is, there's no way I believe that VX made a last-minute sub to the "dark" aircraft on this flight for 17 consecutive days. And the tail number info came from an accurate, publicly available source.
Apr 8, 2008, 4:55 pm
#85
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 268
524 is a sub. It is, as SFO stated, not in regular service. Even if it's used on consecutive days, it's because another plane is out, or some sort of irregular operation has occurred (also from within VX).
Now, I do agree there should be a disclaimer somewhere on VX's site/tickets that states "In rare or unusual circumstances, you may be on a plane that is not able to offer all advertised features...but we will do their best to make up for the lack of the VX experience" - ie, if you do end up on a dark plane, free bev/snack service, and voucher for maybe $50 off a future flight in Y, and $100 off in F. (Considering on a short run, Y is averaging $39-79 per segment, and F is up to $199, I think that's a good compensation - a free or almost free next segment - but any actual compensation amounts (ie, the $25 vouchers) are based on calculations from their internal departments.) Think about the fact any disclaimer has to be approved by their legal team, who could say it's more hassle than it's worth. And, think about this...if you're using a spare day-to-day, and you don't know when your regular plane will be back in, you don't want to send an e-mail or mssg to passengers saying 'sorry, we don't have the scheduled aircraft with full amenities', just to have them cancel or rebook, and then have your regular plane back and it's empty...either way you create a lack of trust in your product both if you say something in advance or say something before you board. And if you put up a flag on the site when you buy the ticket, you're potentially scaring away customers that have a very small chance of GETTING that plane, esp since it's NOT in regular rotation, and within a matter of months, this will be a moot point anyways. They're not trying to fly a dark plane or disappoint potential future customers, it's just something they have to do temporarily when they have no other option.
I think this entire issue is less about the fact that VX is flying a dark plane, as much as it's they've handled it somewhat poorly with making up for it to the people who have looked forward to the VX experience and been disappointed.
Now, I do agree there should be a disclaimer somewhere on VX's site/tickets that states "In rare or unusual circumstances, you may be on a plane that is not able to offer all advertised features...but we will do their best to make up for the lack of the VX experience" - ie, if you do end up on a dark plane, free bev/snack service, and voucher for maybe $50 off a future flight in Y, and $100 off in F. (Considering on a short run, Y is averaging $39-79 per segment, and F is up to $199, I think that's a good compensation - a free or almost free next segment - but any actual compensation amounts (ie, the $25 vouchers) are based on calculations from their internal departments.) Think about the fact any disclaimer has to be approved by their legal team, who could say it's more hassle than it's worth. And, think about this...if you're using a spare day-to-day, and you don't know when your regular plane will be back in, you don't want to send an e-mail or mssg to passengers saying 'sorry, we don't have the scheduled aircraft with full amenities', just to have them cancel or rebook, and then have your regular plane back and it's empty...either way you create a lack of trust in your product both if you say something in advance or say something before you board. And if you put up a flag on the site when you buy the ticket, you're potentially scaring away customers that have a very small chance of GETTING that plane, esp since it's NOT in regular rotation, and within a matter of months, this will be a moot point anyways. They're not trying to fly a dark plane or disappoint potential future customers, it's just something they have to do temporarily when they have no other option.
I think this entire issue is less about the fact that VX is flying a dark plane, as much as it's they've handled it somewhat poorly with making up for it to the people who have looked forward to the VX experience and been disappointed.
Last edited by articos; Apr 8, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Apr 8, 2008, 7:55 pm
#86
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
Posts: 89
For me, it was about both. Though, had they made me whole when I called to complain (heck, had they offered me a $100 voucher), I would have given them a pass. Instead, they created a detractor. They certainly have some smart marketing folks....
Apr 9, 2008, 6:58 am
#87
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Programs: AA - EXP 1.5 Million Miles, SPG Gold, hertz 5 star
Posts: 498
Rexly didn't get their free F ticket, I'm not clear what else they want from their post. VX doubled their credit from $25 to $50. They paid for a seat and got it, food, drink and transportation. They didn't get IFE or a massage. That doesn't entitle you to a free ticket. So what else should one expect?
And let's get off the whole "advertising something and getting something else" bandwagon as it relates to THIS complaint. You bought a ticket to Las Vegas, you got flown to Las Vegas... therefore you don't get a FREE ticket. $50 compensation for lack of IFE seems pretty generous.
And let's get off the whole "advertising something and getting something else" bandwagon as it relates to THIS complaint. You bought a ticket to Las Vegas, you got flown to Las Vegas... therefore you don't get a FREE ticket. $50 compensation for lack of IFE seems pretty generous.
one would think that a refund of the difference (even via voucher) between the fare paid for F and Y at time of booking. IF there were $49 seats available and the OP chose to book in F and pay an extra $100 to experience the product they marketed, VX should issue a $100 voucher. Plain and simple. It's smarter business, and it's the right thing to do. ($75 if you want to be stingy about it since the OP did get some services). OP shouldn't have to fight that hard. VX needs to realize they need all the customer support they can get.
I plan to fly SFO-LAS in a few days and only learned of the dark plane AFTER I booked my tkt. Since my entire purpose for flying VX is to sample the product as marketed, I hope I get to do just that.
Apr 9, 2008, 8:46 am
#88
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Denver, CO
Programs: UA 1K 25 years/2MM, Honors LT Diamond, AVIS & Hertz Prez Club
Posts: 4,763
one would think that a refund of the difference (even via voucher) between the fare paid for F and Y at time of booking. IF there were $49 seats available and the OP chose to book in F and pay an extra $100 to experience the product they marketed, VX should issue a $100 voucher. Plain and simple. It's smarter business, and it's the right thing to do. ($75 if you want to be stingy about it since the OP did get some services). OP shouldn't have to fight that hard. VX needs to realize they need all the customer support they can get.
Just yesterday I booked an F ticket where the price of Y was $129 and the price of F was $149. This for more than a week out, for SFO-LAX. The cheap seats were gone, but for $20 more - why not fly F? That $50 credit could go a long way depending on the flight it might be used for in the future.
Apr 9, 2008, 6:23 pm
#89
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium, UA Silver, Hilton Gold, Hertz Pres Circle
Posts: 1,509
Folks, I'd like to try and steer the thread for a moment. Say that this dark 319is an operational reality for the moment (obviously choice number one is to not fly it period!). Would you rather:
a. Have it fly a scheduled line, in which it would be scheduled to fly specific flights every day, and receive notification a couple of days in advance that you are scheduled to be on the dark 319
or
b. See it used a sub, where it would probably fly fewer flights but often on little notice, so that you would be informed about being on it no earlier than check in or at the gate.
a. Have it fly a scheduled line, in which it would be scheduled to fly specific flights every day, and receive notification a couple of days in advance that you are scheduled to be on the dark 319
or
b. See it used a sub, where it would probably fly fewer flights but often on little notice, so that you would be informed about being on it no earlier than check in or at the gate.
Apr 9, 2008, 6:28 pm
#90
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Denver, CO
Programs: UA 1K 25 years/2MM, Honors LT Diamond, AVIS & Hertz Prez Club
Posts: 4,763
If we're voting, I choose option B. If you go with option A, and book around the dark plane, but then because another flight has a mech, it is brought into service on your flight, you'll be angry anyway. There's no way to satisfy everyone, but if it makes fewer trips by only being a sub, then that's my preference.