The Hammering You Hear....

"nobody" wrote in message
...
AJC wrote:
Apparently Southwest even give you a free
drink, and don't they have
some sort of FF program as well, and allow
on-line connections?

Some think that WN's FF program is the most
generous in the industry. WN used to have a
slogan "the company plane" which emphasized their
goal of moderate walkup fares and good frequency
to attract business fliers.

Yes. They are low cost but not bare bones low
cost. I don't think that they
offer ridiculously low fares as do Ryannair.

WN is not always the lowest lowest price carrier.
But they seem to be eating the legacy carriers'
lunch with their moderate walkup fares and
no-Saturday-night-stay rules. Delta has just
given in and is adopting WN's "formula". Will
it work for DL or will they just be foregoing the
few high-priced tickets which are slowing down the
rate at which they are sinking?

Ryanair - do they have an extra charge for
seatbacks that recline? Or are all their seats
fixed-back these days?

"interlining" means that the airlienes move bags between themselves and
you can do one check in. It doesn't have to mean a through fare from
origin to destination. I wonder how much it costs in a negotiated
contract? $5.00 per pax? And it goes both ways. I agree that the low
cost carriers would win by interlining bags.

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 15:36:23 -0500, nobody wrote:

AJC wrote:
Apparently Southwest even give you a free drink, and don't they have
some sort of FF program as well, and allow on-line connections?

Yes. They are low cost but not bare bones low cost. I don't think that they
offer ridiculously low fares as do Ryannair.

Then Westjet is not a true 'Next Generation' low cost carrier.

Not a bare bones one. But consider Westjet, when it expand beyond its original
small playing field in the Alberta/BC, started to have much longer duration
flights. Montreal Vancouver is 5 hours. Does Ryannair have 5 hour flights ?


I don't think Ryanair (one n!) have 5 hour flights, I seem to remember
reading that 1-3 hour sectors fit their business model better. Because
they are a purely point to point carrier they are not interested in
serving the whole market, having blanket coverage, they only choose to
serve the individual routes they can make money on. I see Westjet as
being like Virgin Blue in Australia. DJ has put itself in the position
of Ansett(rip) as a direct competitor to QF, I guess Westjet does the
same with AC. The European lowcosts tend to provide their own
products, yes, attracting customers from other airlines, but just as
much getting people out of trains, cars, and people who wouldn't
otherwise have travelled at all.




Entering in to an interline agreement with another carrier immediately
brings restrictions to your operations that wouldn't otherwise be
there.

You are thinking about conventional interlining. Some sort of interlining
agreement between low cost carriers would not necessarily bring in restrictions.


By definition, any agreement that Ryanair makes with another carrier
will in some way restrict Ryanair's operations.


Luggage transfers are Stanstead is not needed due to the need to go through
customers anyways.
So interlining might just mean Southwest acting as a sales agent to Easyjet
and possibly issuing Easyjet boading passes. This would actually reduce costs
at Easyjet who wouldn't have to process those pax at the check-in counters.


Again the business model of airlines like EZY and FR has check-in
starting 2 hours before departure. If they allow passengers to
check-in 12 hours in advance, then those passengers get delayed,
diveted, held up in immigration, arrested by customs, that will create
an issue at the boarding gate. Not to mention when Southwest forgets
to apply FR's baggage allowances. That issue at the boarding gate will
delay the flight, and the 7 subsequent flights that day. Why would FR
want that hassle? What is the benefit to them? As for costs of
processing at check-in, at East Midlands last year EZY had the first
flight in the world that was checked in with 100% utilization of
self-service check-in machines. It was a publicity stunt, but it won't
be long before that is the norm.




And interlining between 2 low cost carriers does not necessarily require any
responsability to pay hotels etc should a connection be missed. It woudl
essentially be justy a way for each carriers to publish fares that combine
multiple tickets, just as they currently do when they sell you connecting flights.


But these carriers don't publish fares, other than an indication of
'from' prices, they make you an offer when you go to their website and
type in your dates. You accept the offer, or go back the next day and
see what they offer then. If Southwest were to start selling Ryanair
tickets, who is going to pay the costs? Costs involved in accounting
processes, the costs of dealing in foreign currencies. Ryanair will
want the same income from that seat as they would generate getting a
credit card number direct from a customer, so who is going to pay the
difference?

--==++AJC++==--

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 15:36:23 -0500, nobody wrote:

AJC wrote:
Apparently Southwest even give you a free drink, and don't they have
some sort of FF program as well, and allow on-line connections?

Yes. They are low cost but not bare bones low cost. I don't think that they
offer ridiculously low fares as do Ryannair.

Then Westjet is not a true 'Next Generation' low cost carrier.

Not a bare bones one. But consider Westjet, when it expand beyond its original
small playing field in the Alberta/BC, started to have much longer duration
flights. Montreal Vancouver is 5 hours. Does Ryannair have 5 hour flights ?


I don't think Ryanair (one n!) have 5 hour flights, I seem to remember
reading that 1-3 hour sectors fit their business model better. Because
they are a purely point to point carrier they are not interested in
serving the whole market, having blanket coverage, they only choose to
serve the individual routes they can make money on. I see Westjet as
being like Virgin Blue in Australia. DJ has put itself in the position
of Ansett(rip) as a direct competitor to QF, I guess Westjet does the
same with AC. The European lowcosts tend to provide their own
products, yes, attracting customers from other airlines, but just as
much getting people out of trains, cars, and people who wouldn't
otherwise have travelled at all.




Entering in to an interline agreement with another carrier immediately
brings restrictions to your operations that wouldn't otherwise be
there.

You are thinking about conventional interlining. Some sort of interlining
agreement between low cost carriers would not necessarily bring in restrictions.


By definition, any agreement that Ryanair makes with another carrier
will in some way restrict Ryanair's operations.


Luggage transfers are Stanstead is not needed due to the need to go through
customers anyways.
So interlining might just mean Southwest acting as a sales agent to Easyjet
and possibly issuing Easyjet boading passes. This would actually reduce costs
at Easyjet who wouldn't have to process those pax at the check-in counters.


Again the business model of airlines like EZY and FR has check-in
starting 2 hours before departure. If they allow passengers to
check-in 12 hours in advance, then those passengers get delayed,
diveted, held up in immigration, arrested by customs, that will create
an issue at the boarding gate. Not to mention when Southwest forgets
to apply FR's baggage allowances. That issue at the boarding gate will
delay the flight, and the 7 subsequent flights that day. Why would FR
want that hassle? What is the benefit to them? As for costs of
processing at check-in, at East Midlands last year EZY had the first
flight in the world that was checked in with 100% utilization of
self-service check-in machines. It was a publicity stunt, but it won't
be long before that is the norm.




And interlining between 2 low cost carriers does not necessarily require any
responsability to pay hotels etc should a connection be missed. It woudl
essentially be justy a way for each carriers to publish fares that combine
multiple tickets, just as they currently do when they sell you connecting flights.


But these carriers don't publish fares, other than an indication of
'from' prices, they make you an offer when you go to their website and
type in your dates. You accept the offer, or go back the next day and
see what they offer then. If Southwest were to start selling Ryanair
tickets, who is going to pay the costs? Costs involved in accounting
processes, the costs of dealing in foreign currencies. Ryanair will
want the same income from that seat as they would generate getting a
credit card number direct from a customer, so who is going to pay the
difference?

--==++AJC++==--

AJC wrote:
serve the individual routes they can make money on. I see Westjet as
being like Virgin Blue in Australia. DJ has put itself in the position
of Ansett(rip) as a direct competitor to QF, I guess Westjet does the
same with AC.

Correct. And one has to consider that bus and trains are not cheap in canada,
so Westjet doesn't need to offer $25 fares.

much getting people out of trains, cars, and people who wouldn't
otherwise have travelled at all.

Doesn't Ryanair cater to football hooligans who can now travel to see games
instead of watching them on the tele ? (and for the price of a case of beer).

By definition, any agreement that Ryanair makes with another carrier
will in some way restrict Ryanair's operations.

Why should it ?

Again the business model of airlines like EZY and FR has check-in
starting 2 hours before departure. If they allow passengers to
check-in 12 hours in advance, then those passengers get delayed,
diveted, held up in immigration, arrested by customs, that will create
an issue at the boarding gate.

Simple: flight leaves without them, period. If you're not there on time they
don't wait for you.
As long as passengers are aware of this when they buy a $50 transtlantic
ticket, then there is no issue.

Not to mention when Southwest forgets
to apply FR's baggage allowances.

Ok, this is an issue.


What is the benefit to them?

More passengers. If some low cost carrier were to somehow connect the domestic
Southwest and domestic Easyjet networks (however loosely the connection would
be), it would be great marketing and may openb new markets for transatlantic
traffic, just as Ryanair opened new markets by carrying football fans to games.

You know, it could be as simple as Southwest just linking to Easyjet's web
site to show all the locations they can fly to from Stanstead, and vice versa.
You'd have 2 separate tickets. But by "hubbing" at a common airport to make
transfers palatable, the low cost carriers could feed each other.

Rioght now, if you fly Air Canada to London, connecting to Easyjet at
Stanstead or Gatwick isn't so great.

Ryanair will
want the same income from that seat as they would generate getting a
credit card number direct from a customer, so who is going to pay the
difference?


Is Southwest is going to sell a Dallas-Bari (italy) ticket, then the
transatlantic portion could be priced to include all the overhead needed to
pay easyjet their full fare to carry the pax from London to Bari. Or you
simply don't sell ticket to Bari, you sell tickets to London and let the pax
buy a separate ticket to Bari.

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 11:45:05 -0500, nobody
mangled uncounted electrons thus:

snip

More passengers. If some low cost carrier were to somehow connect the domestic
Southwest and domestic Easyjet networks (however loosely the connection would
be), it would be great marketing and may openb new markets for transatlantic
traffic, just as Ryanair opened new markets by carrying football fans to games.

You know, it could be as simple as Southwest just linking to Easyjet's web
site to show all the locations they can fly to from Stanstead, and vice versa.
You'd have 2 separate tickets. But by "hubbing" at a common airport to make
transfers palatable, the low cost carriers could feed each other.

That actually makes a lot of sense...

And it would be nice to have a transatlantic option out of
Stansted... ^_-

Martin D. Pay
Yes, I live much close to Stansted than to the other airports
that serve London ... ^_^

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 11:45:05 -0500, nobody
mangled uncounted electrons thus:

snip

More passengers. If some low cost carrier were to somehow connect the domestic
Southwest and domestic Easyjet networks (however loosely the connection would
be), it would be great marketing and may openb new markets for transatlantic
traffic, just as Ryanair opened new markets by carrying football fans to games.

You know, it could be as simple as Southwest just linking to Easyjet's web
site to show all the locations they can fly to from Stanstead, and vice versa.
You'd have 2 separate tickets. But by "hubbing" at a common airport to make
transfers palatable, the low cost carriers could feed each other.

That actually makes a lot of sense...

And it would be nice to have a transatlantic option out of
Stansted... ^_-

Martin D. Pay
Yes, I live much close to Stansted than to the other airports
that serve London ... ^_^