AA ends food service on ALL domestic flights (incl. Hawaii)

A Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:12:07 -0600, (Miguel
Cruz) escribió:
*bicker* wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) escribió:
My suggestion was to identify a good vendor and outsource it.
Yes, I know. However, what you implied is just because
there was a way it could work, then they should do it.
That's where you went wrong in your logic.
I'm still enamored of my logic on this one. If it "works" then they're
making a profit. And that's free money.

Except for the opportunity cost.


--
bicker®

*bicker* wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) escribió:
*bicker* wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) escribió:
My suggestion was to identify a good vendor and outsource it.

Yes, I know. However, what you implied is just because
there was a way it could work, then they should do it.
That's where you went wrong in your logic.

I'm still enamored of my logic on this one. If it "works" then they're
making a profit. And that's free money.

Except for the opportunity cost.

Where does that come in? The time it takes the lawyers to ink the deal with
the vendor? Having the flight attendants sell food onboard when they could
be in the galley making shoes?

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

A Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:39:31 -0600, (Miguel
Cruz) escribió:
I'm still enamored of my logic on this one. If it "works" then they're
making a profit. And that's free money.
Except for the opportunity cost.
Where does that come in? The time it takes the lawyers to ink the deal with
the vendor?

Among other things. One of the scarcest resources in a
company is the time and energy of its leaders. The whole
point of outsourcing in the first place was to protect that
resource, so that leaders could focus their attentions on
their own business, that which they knew best, and leave
ancillary services to subcontractors who could effect the
ancillary service better because it was what they knew best.
However, outsourcing only reduces the resource-drain on a
company by 90%... it still takes some resources to manage
the integration of the ancillary service with the core
service. Often, that's a great trade off: 10% drain for
100% service. However, 10% plus 10% plus 10% .... it adds
up, representing a significant consideration. The managing
of a partner portfolio is a relatively new management
science, but critical to keeping a tight operation tight.


--
bicker®

*bicker* wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) escribió:
Except for the opportunity cost.

Where does that come in? The time it takes the lawyers to ink the deal with
the vendor?

Among other things. One of the scarcest resources in a company is the
time and energy of its leaders. The whole point of outsourcing in the
first place was to protect that resource, so that leaders could focus
their attentions on their own business, that which they knew best, and
leave ancillary services to subcontractors who could effect the ancillary
service better because it was what they knew best. However, outsourcing
only reduces the resource-drain on a company by 90%... it still takes some
resources to manage the integration of the ancillary service with the core
service. Often, that's a great trade off: 10% drain for 100% service.
However, 10% plus 10% plus 10% .... it adds up, representing a significant
consideration. The managing of a partner portfolio is a relatively new
management science, but critical to keeping a tight operation tight.

Ok, I'll buy that.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

*bicker* wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) escribió:
Except for the opportunity cost.

Where does that come in? The time it takes the lawyers to ink the deal with
the vendor?

Among other things. One of the scarcest resources in a company is the
time and energy of its leaders. The whole point of outsourcing in the
first place was to protect that resource, so that leaders could focus
their attentions on their own business, that which they knew best, and
leave ancillary services to subcontractors who could effect the ancillary
service better because it was what they knew best. However, outsourcing
only reduces the resource-drain on a company by 90%... it still takes some
resources to manage the integration of the ancillary service with the core
service. Often, that's a great trade off: 10% drain for 100% service.
However, 10% plus 10% plus 10% .... it adds up, representing a significant
consideration. The managing of a partner portfolio is a relatively new
management science, but critical to keeping a tight operation tight.

Ok, I'll buy that.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

Service Tech wrote:

I won't be as blunt as Rod on this. Not many people will boycott an airline
because of the food issue. Eat before the flight, or take it with you. I
just have to get from point A to point B. I can eat anytime before, during
or after.

They won't boycott it, but with the mainline carriers descending to the
level of the low-fare carriers, there is very little reason to pay more
for a flight on American versus Southwest. American is eliminating the
extra legroom, eliminating meals, cutting long-haul non-stops, and has
worsened their FF program. This is all fine, but they'd better be
prepared to compete directly against Southwest, AirTran, JetBlue, etc.,
in price. I don't think anyone would choose American over JetBlue.

Service Tech wrote:

I won't be as blunt as Rod on this. Not many people will boycott an airline
because of the food issue. Eat before the flight, or take it with you. I
just have to get from point A to point B. I can eat anytime before, during
or after.

They won't boycott it, but with the mainline carriers descending to the
level of the low-fare carriers, there is very little reason to pay more
for a flight on American versus Southwest. American is eliminating the
extra legroom, eliminating meals, cutting long-haul non-stops, and has
worsened their FF program. This is all fine, but they'd better be
prepared to compete directly against Southwest, AirTran, JetBlue, etc.,
in price. I don't think anyone would choose American over JetBlue.

Service Tech wrote:

I won't be as blunt as Rod on this. Not many people will boycott an airline
because of the food issue. Eat before the flight, or take it with you. I
just have to get from point A to point B. I can eat anytime before, during
or after.

They won't boycott it, but with the mainline carriers descending to the
level of the low-fare carriers, there is very little reason to pay more
for a flight on American versus Southwest. American is eliminating the
extra legroom, eliminating meals, cutting long-haul non-stops, and has
worsened their FF program. This is all fine, but they'd better be
prepared to compete directly against Southwest, AirTran, JetBlue, etc.,
in price. I don't think anyone would choose American over JetBlue.