MRTC vs. TV

KCFlyer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
11,180
1,420
----------------
On 5/13/2003 3:59:34 PM mga707 wrote:

The availability of TV to me would mean nothing. Probably wouldn''t even turn it on (well, maybe just to check it out, but then I''d turn it off). Guess I''m not normal...

----------------

I''ll join you in the abnormal section mga707 - if the fares are close, and I have the choice of TV or a more convenient flight, I''ll take convenience every time. I certainly wouldn''t pay extra for TV, while I would pay a little more for a better schedule.​
 
Not that it states something not already known, but thought this quote summed up the flying public:

But J.P. Morgan analyst Jamie Baker said affordable fares and convenient flight scheduling factor into airline ticket sales more than onboard food.

We are confident that the way to a business traveler''s wallet is not through his stomach, Baker said. All else being equal, we expect leg room to consistently trump food, and TV to consistently trump leg room. Food doesn''t enter the equation, nor do we expect it to.

http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030513/bizfeature_...nes_food_1.html
 
----------------
On 5/13/2003 3:56:34 PM Hatu wrote:

Not that it states something not already known, but thought this quote summed up the flying public:

But J.P. Morgan analyst Jamie Baker said affordable fares and convenient flight scheduling factor into airline ticket sales more than onboard food.

"We are confident that the way to a business traveler''s wallet is not through his stomach," Baker said. "All else being equal, we expect leg room to consistently trump food, and TV to consistently trump leg room. Food doesn''t enter the equation, nor do we expect it to."

http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030513/bizfeature_...nes_food_1.html

----------------​

The availability of TV to me would mean nothing. Probably wouldn''t even turn it on (well, maybe just to check it out, but then I''d turn it off). Guess I''m not normal...
 
I think there''s a lot of opportunity in being ahead of the curve on some of this stuff. There are a lot of people who are more worried about being bored on an airplane rather than hungry on an airplane. For one reason or another, though, airline inflight enterntainment still seems to lag society by 20 years. Think of the progression...

1. Magazines
2. Telephone
3. Radio
4. Movies

...and now TV. After that, you''ll see a proliferation in the internet and video gaming.

Why can''t we figure out that the best way to improve passenger comfort in the air is to make them feel like they are not there?
 
I don''t know any business travelers who are taller than 5'' 10" who would choose TV over a decent amount of legroom. MRTC wins every time.

TV might appeal to the vacationing families, but business people like sufficient room to open their DVD-equipped laptops to watch movies or play games without worrying about the seat in front of them.
 
----------------
On 5/13/2003 5:34:19 PM FWAAA wrote:

I don''t know any business travelers who are taller than 5'' 10" who would choose TV over a decent amount of legroom. MRTC wins every time.

TV might appeal to the vacationing families, but business people like sufficient room to open their DVD-equipped laptops to watch movies or play games without worrying about the seat in front of them.

----------------​

I carry one of the smallest laptops in the industry (PGC-R505 Vaio), and I wonder how anybody gets ANYTHING done with less than MRTC or Econ+.
 
That is the same reasoning they used when they got the TV''s in the 737? Does SWA have TV''s in their NG 737''s?

The business people also like CNN and FNN and if it is actual and not via aCBS eye on american then it might be a boost. The Gain at Jetblue is not that they offer TV, but that it is included in the cost as a nonexpected convience. Unlike AA where we charge for the stinking headset for you to watch a tape that you have no control over.

TV has its benefits and if you combine it with MRTC you might have a better product that would command a premium of 30%. Dont we offer a similar product in the 767 with the DVD players? How does that go over in first? Anyone with comments?
 
----------------
On 5/13/2003 5:34:19 PM FWAAA wrote:

I don''t know any business travelers who are taller than 5'' 10" who would choose TV over a decent amount of legroom. MRTC wins every time.


TV might appeal to the vacationing families, but business people like sufficient room to open their DVD-equipped laptops to watch movies or play games without worrying about the seat in front of them.

----------------​

I''ve said this before and I''ll say it again: the novelty of the TV (and blue chips) will eventually wear off. Then jetBlue will be just another airline. At least with MRTC AA will have something USEFULL to differentiate/market itself.
 
Let''s see...

If I want music, I bring my MP3 player and listen to my favorite stuff, and not something that I may or may not care for based on whoever did the programming.

If I want to watch TV, I bring my laptop or portable DVD player, and watch what I want to. It might not be live, but at least I can see the ending.

If I want more legroom, I can''t remove the seat in front of me very easily...
 
I agree with you there, eoleson. Of course, I also have a laptop and an ipod, and I''m 6''4". The problem is that the general public doesn''t seem to be willing to pay significantly more for that product. Would they pay $20 more? Probably. 50? Maybe. But they aren''t going to pay hundreds or thousands more than carriers who don''t charge more than $299 oneway...
 
----------------

On 5/13/2003 9:22:29 PM FrugalFlyer wrote:

I''ve said this before and I''ll say it again: the novelty of the TV (and blue chips) will eventually wear off. Then jetBlue will be just another airline. At least with MRTC AA will have something USEFULL to differentiate/market itself.

----------------​

Unfortunately, no one cares about product differentiation - air travel is about as commodotized as it gets now. No one wants to pay a premium for more room (so long as that premium is $1000 over LCC fares, of course).

And jetblue isn''t just about the TV''s. People fly them because of the price, and the service. In NY, it''s considered a hip airline - AA is all about stuffy suits. It''s a great product, with great customer service, and it''s CHEAP. Live TV is cool, but not worth paying more for. Mr. Baker left out the most important piece - price will trump more room or tv or food any day.
 
----------------
In NY, it''s considered a hip airline - AA is all about stuffy suits. ----------------​



New Yorkers are faithful to anything NY
including JetBlue.
There is hope, Aprey is a native New Yorker,
and a US citizen too.
 
----------------
On 5/13/2003 4:27:42 PM Connected1 wrote:

There are a lot of people who are more worried about being bored on an airplane rather than hungry on an airplane. ----------------​

There are these AMAZING low-tech devices out there that consist of--get this--printed words on this crinkly thin stuff called "paper". This paper stuff is fastened together, with a thicker cover on both ends. And they''re completely portable, need no batteries, and are always accessable!
Amazing concept, huh?
 
This business traveler often flies to a lot of cities (and states) not yet served by WN or B6. It will be many years (if ever) before those two airlines blanket the US anywhere near the way AA (and UA and DL and NW and CO) does. Does anyone think I'm going to interline to go LAX-GRR or LAX-PIT?

Not to mention the need to fly to Asia or Europe or SA every now and then.
1.gif

AA will be around to get business travelers where they need to go. And to cover the fixed costs, lots of vacationers will fill up the back of the bus and will get more pitch for the same money as on other discount airlines. I'll pay (sometimes thru the nose) but B6 and its TVs don't fly to all the places I sometimes need to go.

And after AA gets thru this cash crunch and gets back on its feet - I'm sure that eventually AA will consider some form of real-time connectivity - maybe the internet, maybe live TV, at least in the premium cabins. I'd much rather have access to the web than CNN or FNN on TV anyway. And I might pay more for it, provided it isn't priced like those stupid airphones (or airfones).
 
Wasn''t AA working on something dealing with inflight Internet connectivity pre-9/11? Something in cooperation with Boeing, IIRC?

To update the fleet will take a lot of cash, which AA is a little short on at the moment. Bet you will see AA work on some improvements to their inflight entertainment as their financial situation improves.

TANSTAAFL
 
Back
Top