Low Cost Carrier Perks

[usairwaysfan]

LCCs can and do receive perks from airports or counties or states to serve airports where they wouldn't normally come.

How can a legacy carrier possibly compete with such perks?

Some LCCs get reduced landing fees or gate fees, allowing them to to price other carriers out of certain markets.

Some LCCs get free advertising from the airport they serve.

Of course these perks are paid for by local taxpayers to entice and hang onto LCCs.

I say...let's level the playing field and see what happens then.

 

[wwtraveler99]

LCCs can and do receive perks from airports or counties or states to serve airports where they wouldn't normally come.

How can a legacy carrier possibly compete with such perks?

Some LCCs get reduced landing fees or gate fees, allowing them to to price other carriers out of certain markets.

Some LCCs get free advertising from the airport they serve.

Of course these perks are paid for by local taxpayers to entice and hang onto LCCs.

I say...let's level the playing field and see what happens then.

Oh now that these so called legecy carriers are getting killed you ask for a level playing field. Well what about when some of these carriers had all the slots at slot controlled airports. Was it fair then? It took many years and a lot of politics to get a hand full of slots. How about the carriers who try and put a LCC out of business by adding many flights and match prices in thier hubs. Just by thier size they have equipment available to move airplanes off some route where they have no competition to fight the LCC.

How about a few years back when the big three wanted to make the LCC pay more in flight segment fees. This was directed squarely at WN. There have been many things unfair, or an uneven playing field. What is fair about declaring chapter 11 and then getting rid of the gate leases. There are lots of things legacy carriers do to make it unfair to the LCC.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Yes, there are perks, incentives, etc. However, there have always been winners & losers when the "goodies" get handed out.

At the beginning of commercial aviation (carrying the mail), the Postmaster General decided who got what. And that often decided who survived and who didn't. Under regulation, the CAB decided who flew what route - who got bigger & who didn't. When Piedmont started the hub in Dayton, they were able to get landing fees on a declining scale - I vaguely remember that over 75 or so flights a day there was no landing fee. When PIT built the new terminal primarily at U's urging, all carriers had to move into it and pay higher rents. It goes on and on.

The LCC's are today's favorites. There isn't a medium-sized or larger city in the country that doesn't want them to come in. ORF pays for advertising for LUV. RIC spends thousands wining and dining LUV & JBLU.

I can think of but one item that isn't "level" and probably should be. The government has been collecting money for aviation security (TSA) based on what each airline paid for security services prior to 9/11. Since then the network carriers have gotten smaller and the LCC's have gotten larger. Yet the charge to each airline has remained the same. So U's security cost per passenger has gone up about 1/3, while JBLU's has dropped by 75% or so.

Jim

 

[RowUnderDCA]

LCCs can and do receive perks from airports or counties or states to serve airports where they wouldn't normally come.

How can a legacy carrier possibly compete with such perks?

Some LCCs get reduced landing fees or gate fees, allowing them to to price other carriers out of certain markets.

Some LCCs get free advertising from the airport they serve.

Of course these perks are paid for by local taxpayers to entice and hang onto LCCs.

I say...let's level the playing field and see what happens then.

ufan-

Any airport that provides a fee waiver to an airline for new service, must make the fee waiver program available to all carriers whether or not they are LCC's. Well, at least those airports that have received Federal grants, which would be all of them.