Right. But, fortunately for all of us, airline tickets are not binary. There are more fares than $199 RT and $1,999 RT.goingboeing said:
American Matches Much Of Dl's New Fare Structure
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
goingboeing said:
You are right about above, however you are talking costs. I am talking revenues. America West and other LCC, have found you increase overall revenue by offering fewer cheap seats, fewer rape seats (which by the way alienate customers) and more middle revenue seats. WN now sells more Full Fare tickets than AA.
While reducing costs as you state above is very important, revenue has to be looked at also. And not only is your revenue competition other carriers, but the train, auto, and inflight service
777 fixer said:
AA could fly the whole route system with 3 aircraft
B-737-B757-B777 [This would AA a much more efficient airline]
Have you ever given thought to who is in F/C seats?The answer is either Non-Revs or upgrades who did not pay a full F/C fare anyway.
Today's passenger is not willing to pay fares for a coach seat that is even equal to the cost to produce the seat,much less a price to generate a profit.
Our DOMESTIC aircraft should be all coach as we competing with SWA in the domestic market.
The International routes make money so F/C is a good thing for the A/C that flies those routes.We DO NOT compete with SWA on International routes
There are lots of way to improve AA but management appears to be too timid to make the necessary changes in a timely manner.
goingboeing said:
And, the money to buy/lease sufficient 73s to replace almost 300 S80s would come from...where?
goingboeing said:
Actually, I just worked a 3-day trip on the 757 (22 F/C seats). Very few to no non-revs on any leg. The most I had was 4 non-revs on a DFW-LAS leg. On that leg, I had 18 revenue passengers--only 2 were listed on the paperwork as upgrades.
TWAnr
Veteran
The pax want the first class seats. They just are not willing to pay for them. Everyone I know, even those who holds the cheapest round trip excursion fare tickets, tries to upgrade for free.goingboeing said:
jimntx said:
We wouldn't need 300 MD 80'S if we reduced our gate turn times and utilized each a/c 1 more revenue flight per day.
Plus getting rid of the A-300'S B767's MD'80'S and the spare parts would provide a big chunk of change to purchase B-737's.Operating 3 fleet types would increase effiency and reduce operating costs to help pay for the B-737's.
The N200 tail numbers are pushing 20 years old and will have to be replaced in the next 5 years anyway.
The remaining MD's routes could be flown by AA Eagle RJ'S to reduce cost even farther.
DFW-LAS is not an average route as it is a very high demand market which makes it an exception.
I flew an MD80 a few months ago and my wife and I and 1 other person were the only people in F/C.
TWAnr said:
They are not even willing to pay the price for a coach seat that it cost to produce it.
goingboeing said:
Yeah, and they wouldn't need guns in the Middle East if all those 1st cousins could just learn to live together and get along. Now, who exactly is going to buy old A-300's, 767s, and Md80s? Is the A300 even built anymore? And, there are newer models--even brand-new--of the 767s and MD80s (B717) available at attractive prices. Why would anyone want an old one? AND, be able to generate enough cash from the sale of these a/c to buy new ones?
goingboeing said:
We have lost market share in just about every market where we moved flying from AA to AE. The typical "AA customer" does NOT want to fly on a cramped RJ.
goingboeing said:
Go back and read what I wrote. The DFW-LAS was only 1 leg of a 3-day trip. I had no non-revs and several to "full-boat" revenue passengers in F/C on almost every leg. But then, I only fly 2-4 legs/day, 15-18 days/mo. Your experience on an MD-80 months ago would, of course, be the standard for measuring what is going on in the industry.
jimntx said:
You ever heard of Fed Ex, UPS, Uncle Sam or 3rd world countries.
Fed Ex uses A-300's and would probably love to have ours because they know they have been well maintained.They are the people that bought our MD11's.
It is obvious what the industry standard is by watching what Delta and AA did with their fares recently.Follow the money and it will tell you what is happening in the airline business.THE MONEY DOES NOT LIE.
The MD80 is getting ready to be cramped again when they add seats back on the A/C.The 757 no longer has the big leg room in coach because 2 rows of seats were added back in coach in JAN-FEB 2004.[AA management told us the seats were added back in the A/C because passengers were not willing to pay for the extra leg room.]
So if the passengers are not willing to pay for more leg room in coach they sure are not willing to purchase F/C tickets.
goingboeing said:
Oh please, you can not lump the business traveler and the "mink wearers" to the great unwashed who want to fly from DFW to SFO for $99. The casual traveler who flies once or twice a year does, in fact, seem to think that it is their right to fly for free (or near to it), but those are the people not willing to pay for MRTC. I've had some frequent flyers comment recently that they are not happy with the elimination of MRTC on the S80 because those a/c are used on the routes they fly. They don't fly the routes that often where the 75 is used these days.
But, if there weren't people willing to pay (and complaining about seats not being available when they want to go), I doubt seriously that the company would be adding f/c seats on the S80. Yes, it is going to make things more cramped in coach, but as you say, people back there are not willing to pay for MRTC.
777 fixer
Veteran
- Jul 21, 2004
- 4,792
- 912
goingboeing said:
In a perfect world AA would have four fleet types, not just three. The 737, 757, 767, 777. The 777 is just to big for some of the thinner international routes like Manchester, Glasgow, Brussels or Rome. And the 757 is to small, of course there's the range issue as well. But lets be honest AA does not have the money to replace over three hundred MD-80's.
Key word is upgrade. I have a feeling that if you were to rip out first and took the opportunity to upgrade away you will lose passengers.
"Today's passenger is not willing to pay fares for a coach seat that is even equal to the cost to produce the seat,much less a price to generate a profit"
If this is the case then there's not point in going all coach since you will lose money anyway.
jimntx said:
AA better be careful, WN has more room than AA LRTC and leather seats as well. How does AA expect to have a competitive coach product with higher fares, less service, less leg room, more likely an RJ, than WN. Also note that WN now carries more business travelers than leisure, and more domestic passengers than AA, most direct without a hub stop. AA has got to produce a better coach product if it wants to compete for AA busines traveler. The only thing AA has for the coach business traveler at this point is the ability to upgrade. Note I am an AA Ex Plat and NW Plat and am flying more WN everyday
"AA better be careful, WN has more room than AA LRTC and leather seats as well. How does AA expect to have a competitive coach product with higher fares, less service, less leg room, more likely an RJ, than WN."
Couldn't have said it better. I can't tell you how many times passengers--both business and leisure--have told me that MRTC is the reason they are willing to pay a bit more to travel on AA.
Couldn't have said it better. I can't tell you how many times passengers--both business and leisure--have told me that MRTC is the reason they are willing to pay a bit more to travel on AA.
