Posted by Seth on September 29, 2011 under Flying | 
I’d love to use the 20% off any flight code I just got from Virgin America but the travel period ends a week prior to me next west coast trip. As such, I’ve got a one-time use coupon code that needs a good home. The flight must be booked by midnight pacific time on the west coast on 30 September 2011. The travel must happen by October 27, 2011.
The fine print says that the coupon is only available for non-refundable tickets in the S, L, M, U, E, H, B, or V fare buckets.
If you can use the code leave a comment as to what you’d use it on and I’ll pick one and send it via email mid-day tomorrow.
Posted by Seth on September 28, 2011 under Flying, News |
The United Kingdom has long been known for a rather brutal tax known as the Airline Passenger Duty ("APD") assessed on departing passengers. The fee is variable based on the distance of the flight and the cabin of service, with premium cabin passengers paying twice as much as folks riding down the back and the cost for travel to the USA at £120 (~$180 these days) up front. The tax is, depending on who you ask, designed to offset the environmental impact of all the flights or to simply discourage people from flying.
Apparently, however, rather than meeting either of those goals in Northern Ireland is has a different effect: It drives traffic across the border to the south. Departures from Dublin incur minimal taxes (~$5 these days) and shuttle service between Belfast and Dublin is cheap and readily available. The net effect is that passengers are simply skipping out on flights from Belfast and the British Treasury is getting none of the cash.
That’s changing now as apparently someone finally realized that it is possible to tax a product out of existence. The government has chosen to slash the long-haul APD for flights out of Belfast. Currently the only service affected is a daily flight between Newark and Belfast on Continental Airlines which was apparently in danger of disappearing. That service will remain, in part thanks to this change,
…maintaining Northern Ireland’s vital economic air link to North America, and Northern Ireland will gain a fresh opportunity to develop other long-haul routes to the rest of the world.
The APD for long-haul flights will be reduced to match the short-haul rates. That’s a difference of £48 for economy class passengers and £96 for folks up front (passengers will be charged £12 or £24).
No word yet on whether Continental will be letting customers save some money thanks to this tax cut or if they’ll be raising their fares to compensate for the cut in the taxes and pocketing the difference for themselves. I’m betting on the latter.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on September 27, 2011 under Flying, frequent flyer, News, points |
JetBlue has joined the ranks of airlines offering award redemption sales this fall, offering a limited-time 20% off sale for award travel. The deal requires booking by midnight on September 28, 2011 and there are some additional restrictions as well:
- Travel between 10/4 – 12/15/2011
- Travel not discounted on Friday or Sunday
- Blackout Dates: 11/22, 11/23, 11/26, 11/28/2011
More fine print here.
A quick check of redemption costs shows the sale rates valuing points at 1.70-ish cents each while the same route on a non-discount day has them at 1.35-ish cents, matching the 20% discount advertised. There is no indication that you’re getting a sale rate in the booking process but the pricing works out that way.
Not a bad deal at all, especially given the otherwise generally fixed value of the TrueBlue points. I might actually redeem a few myself…
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on September 27, 2011 under Flying, News |
The "3-hour rule" regarding flight delays was supposed to make things better for passengers by preventing them from being stuck on airplanes on the ground rather than actually flying. And the statistics year-over-year since the rule was implemented are pretty clear: the number of 3 hour delays dropped from 693 to 20 the year before and year after the rule was implemented. Great news, right?
Maybe not. According to a recent report from the GAO the reduced delays come with a side-effect of making flight cancellations much more likely:
GAO analysis suggests the rule is also correlated with a greater likelihood of flight cancellations. Such cancellations can lead to long overall passenger travel times. Airlines and other aviation stakeholders maintain that the tarmac delay rule has changed airline decision-making in ways that could make cancellations more likely.
The report is 111 pages of tables, statistics and generally dry reading. But there are some telling numbers that come out of it. The GAO performed two different regression analyses against the data covering 70 airports around the USA and Puerto Rico. Data was reviewed for both flights canceled before they left the gate and after they left the gate and began to taxi. Unsurprisingly, more flights are canceled at the gate than once they’ve pushed back. But the data from 2010 – after the new rule went into effect – suggests that cancelations are notably more common in both scenarios.
The number of flights cancelled in each year was incredibly small once the plane actually left the gate. Only 992 flights of the 1,846,288 scheduled flights that pushed back from the gate ended up not flying. But that number was 24% higher weighted for the total number of scheduled flights. And the chances of a cancelation are dramatically higher as the time on the tarmac grows. A plane that has been taxiing for more than 60 minutes was 88% more likely not to fly. Over 120 minutes that number was 216%. For flights that never left the gate the odds of a cancellation were also higher, to the tune of 13% year-over-year with 2010 having just over 1% of flights canceled at the gate.
Those are the unadjusted, raw data numbers from the DoT and FlightStats reports. The GAO also performed regression analysis to determine what other factors – weather, ATC, flight distance, time of day and others – might affect the cancelation rates to see if the rule is better or worse than other effects. The numbers do not appear all that promising for passengers. For the Tarmac-Cancellation Model (post push-back) the GAO has the following to say:
In all hour categories of tarmac time, the odds of cancellation were greater in 2010 than in 2009 because all of the odds ratios exceed 1. Moreover, the differential in the odds ratio of cancellations across the 2 years increased with the time a flight was on the tarmac. For flights that were on the tarmac for less than an hour, the odds of a cancellation were about one-third higher in 2010 than in 2009. … For flights with 61 to 120 minutes of tarmac delay, the odds ratio rose to 2.14, indicating that the odds of a cancellation more than doubled in 2010 compared with 2009, and for flights with 121 to 180 minutes of tarmac delay, the odds of cancellation more than tripled in that same time period. …[T]he inclusion of key variables to control for other factors did not have much effect on our findings related to the tarmac rule.
For the Gate-Cancellation Model the numbers are actually even more dramatic:
One significant finding is that the odds ratio for the rule change is substantially greater, when adjusted, than indicated by the simple unadjusted odds ratio shown in table 16. The model results indicate that the odds of gate cancellations rose by 24 percent after the rule went into effect, whereas the simple result indicated only a 13 percent increase in those odds.
Yes, fewer folks are sitting on the airplanes, but fewer are also actually getting where they are going. That’s not necessarily a good thing.
The report recommendations are pretty toothless, suggesting that the DoT collect more data than they do today and better analyze it for comprehensive impact against passengers. Not likely that will have much impact in the long run.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on September 26, 2011 under News, points |
A couple years ago there was perhaps no better credit card to carry than the Schwab Invest First Visa. The card was, quite frankly, superb. No foreign exchange surcharge well before all the others got on board with this benefit. A 2% cash back credit across the board. They even included a pretty solid travel insurance offering included. And no annual fee. I’m sure there are some other benefits, too, but these were the most significant for folks on the road.
Then Schwab decided to get out of the credit card business and they sold their portfolio to FIA Card Services, formerly known as MBNA. For a while the benefits continued and, with the exception of a move to a completely horrendous website for managing an account, the overall effect was pretty minimal. Keeping the card was still a reasonable thing to do.
The past couple weeks, however, have seen a number of letters sent to card holders informing them that the card is effectively dead. The Invest First card is being terminated and replaced with a Bank of America card of some sort. And the great travel benefits that come with it are no more.
- That 2% cash back benefit? Gone. If you want anything even close you’re now looking at a hefty annual fee.
- Foreign Exchange? Get ready to pay an extra ~3% on every transaction.
- ID Theft and Price Protection? No mas.
- Travel insurance? Slashed by 75% for the max payout.
The worst part of all these changes is that they are being doled out one or three at a time. I haven’t actually been notified that the f/x rate is going up, for example. I only found out when I got a letter telling me that the 2% was disappearing and I called in to ask about it. The agent insisted that by telling me little bits over time I was more likely to understand the changes. Apparently they really do think their customers are idiots.
I’ll most certainly be canceling my card. No point in using a product that provides such poor value. Doubly so when they think that by dribbling out the changes customers won’t notie the cuts. Farewell, Invest First. It was great while it lasted.
Posted by Seth on September 26, 2011 under News, TSA |
In an interview which first aired last night NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly stated that the department does, in fact, have that ability:
[i]n an extreme situation, we would have some means to take down a plane.
Zoinks!
Unsurprisingly, the Commissioner didn’t provide any additional details on the capabilities but he was quite explicit that the department has the equipment and training to do it if they determined it was necessary. No word either on the details behind who authorizes such an action or in what types of scenarios they would be considered.
I do not think I’m alone in thinking that this announcement opens up more questions than it answers regarding aviation safety.
Good times.
A hat tip to the folks at NYC Aviation for mentioning this one; they’ve got the video clip of the interview on their site, too.
Posted by Seth on September 25, 2011 under News |
ANA took delivery of the first Boeing 787 Dreamliner today, marking a major milestone in the project’s lifecycle. Boeing has been working on the Dreamliner for more than 7 years and the initial delivery today with the signing of paperwork is the first step in a three day long celebration for Boeing, ANA and the global aviation community.
After today’s contract signing there will be a ceremonial delivery of the aircraft "keys" on Monday. The airline will fly the plane back to Japan on Tuesday.
Today’s events come a few years after the original predictions. While this delivery is a huge event and most folks are excited there are still a number of folks not so ecstatic about the delivery. According to some sources the project horribly over budget and unlikely to ever be a profitable aircraft for the manufacturer. Plus there are concerns that the plane actually is not ready for service but it was delivered anyways. The article published in today’s Seattle Times is pretty brutal on the overall project, detailing cost overruns, project delays and other issues that have plagued the development and construction of the new airframe.
Boeing spokeswoman Lori Gunter said the 787 team is "on track" to make the delivery.
But an experienced mechanic working on No. 8 believes that jet simply isn’t ready for service. The engineer who flew test flights fears it won’t immediately meet the standard of reliability required by ANA.
The senior engineer, however, dismissed such "bugs" as normal in any new program. "They won’t be nearly as bad as they were for the original 747."
The good news for me is that ANA has the aircraft now. I just hope the reliability issues are not such that I miss my opportunity to fly on it in a few weeks during the first week of scheduled operations.
Related Posts:
Photo from the Boeing Company flickr stream
Posted by Seth on September 24, 2011 under frequent flyer, News, points |
The proposed merger of South America’s two largest carriers, LAN and TAM, precipitated many questions. Perhaps the most significant from frequent fliers was the future of the loyalty program. LAN is a member of the oneworld alliance while TAM recently joined Star Alliance. A merged program will have to pick one of those with the decision having great significance in the South American travel market.
Thanks to the Chilean government it appears that the decision has been made and that the carrier will be remaining in oneworld.
The Chilean Tribunal de Defensa de la Libre Competencia (Court of Defense of Free Trade) handed down their approval for the two carriers to merge this week with a laundry list of conditions attached. Here are details on a few of the most significant conditions:
Numbers 1 & 4 require that LATAM give up 4 landing slots in Sao Paulo to allow another carrier to establish service on the Sao Paulo – Santiago route in order to maintain a competitive fare environment on that route. Additionally, LATAM is prohibited from dumping inventory onto that route within 15 minutes of the newly scheduled service once the new entrant has declared their interest in operating the service. Rule 13 also prohibits the new carrier from raising fares on the route versus their aggregate historical averages for one year.
Number 9 requires that LATAM not oppose any foreign carrier’s application to operate with additional freedoms on domestic Chilean routes or to provide service that would otherwise be seen as cabotage. This would effectively allow tag-on flights for long-haul carriers or regional flights within Chile for other airlines in South America. LATAM is required to endorse such requests without demanding reciprocity.
And then there is number 6:
Latam deberá renunciar, dentro de un plazo que no exceda 24 meses contados desde la fecha en que se materialice la Operación consultada, al menos a una de las dos alianzas globales en que a esa fecha participan sus partes, LAN y TAM. En ningún caso podrá pertenecer a aquélla en la que también el grupo Avianca/Taca sea miembro o asociado, o se encuentre en proceso de ingresar.
Within 24 months of realizing the merger the airline is required to resign from at least one of the two global alliances in which is currently participates. Moreover, the carrier must not be in the same alliance as Avianca/Taca, the other powerhouse merging carrier in South America. With Avianca/Taca moving rather quickly down the path of joining Star Alliance this clause leaves oneworld the only rational result.
The other options are to go independent, a tough move to make in that region, or to try for SkyTeam. But with Aerolineas Argentinas set to join SkyTeam it doesn’t seem likely that the competition courts would be too happy to see such a move. They could also try to thwart the entrance of TACA/Avianca from Star Alliance if they want to stay with the group. That would be a most interesting political move and a most unlikely one as well.
The court ruling lays out a pretty clear framework for the carriers to work within and a reasonable timeline through which the changes must be made. Unless the Brazilian government comes up with a major surprise on their conditions for the merger it looks like this one is ready to happen in early 2012 with all the details finally falling into place.
Related Posts
Posted by Seth on September 22, 2011 under News |
Most discussions of airline compensation have to do with what any particular passenger is due for a delayed or canceled flight, bump, broken equipment, lost luggage or other, similar, event. But those aren’t the only compensation discussions going on out there. What happens, for example, when your airplane is late?
And I’m talking about years late, not hours.
Boeing and Cargolux, are engaged in this discussion right now, with a rather interesting genesis to the situation. Cargolux is the launch customer for the new 747-8F freighter aircraft. The first was supposed to be delivered from Boeing to the carrier last week. Boeing was all set to host a party as part of the delivery of the first aircraft of the new line when things quickly fell apart. Cargolux has refused to accept the aircraft.
The spat is apparently linked to the presence of a new member of the Cargolux Board of Directors, a representative from Qatar Airways which now owns a third of the cargo company. Qatar is frustrated with the delay in delivery of their 787 Dreamliner airplanes. With those planes now years behind schedule on delivery many carriers are trying to figure out an appropriate deal with Boeing to account for the delays. Qatar, however, is the first to make such a public statement about the issues.
Doesn’t’ really have much effect on me as a guy out traveling but it certainly is an entertaining twist to the compensation discussion that seems to happen all too often.
Posted by Seth on September 21, 2011 under frequent flyer, News, points |
United Airlines announced a number of details regarding their 2012 Mileage Plus program rules today on both MilePoint and FlyerTalk. The announcement puts to an end much of the speculation about the future of the loyalty program for the world’s largest airline. The news is, unsurprisingly, a mixed bag. There are plenty of winners and losers with the upcoming changes. On the whole the changes appear to be a net positive (they certainly are for me) though there will be plenty of upset customers, too.
Qualification Tiers
The qualification tiers are pretty much staying the same, though some of the names are changing. The "Premier" tag from the legacy United is sticking around as are the metallic tier levels from the legacy Continental. The 1K and Global Services names survive as well. Qualification will be based on Premium Qualifying Miles or Points and the qualification levels are 25/50/75/100K PQMs or 30/60/90/120 PQPs. These numbers are consistent with previous announcements from the company. Global Services remains invite-only for the most part (more on that below).
Also of note is that qualifying for status will now require actually flying on United or Copa metal. Only four segments are required which isn’t particularly burdensome.
The benefits for each tier are changing a bit, especially on the award miles earning front. Most notable are the changes to the bonus miles earnt for being elite. Gold and Platinum elites will now earn 50% and 75% bonus miles respectively, down from the 100% they currently earn. This is a definite downgrade for those customers. At the same time the number of bonus miles accrued for buying a premium fare is going up. At the top end a full F fare on a 3-cabin aircraft will now net a 150% bonus on award miles; that’s way better than the current 50% bonus.
Upgrades
Complimentary upgrades are mostly following the legacy Continental pattern with pretty much every route that is not marketed as a premium product being eligible for free upgrades. Additionally the regional upgrades will be valid on all flights between Hawaii and the Mainland US, making the legacy CO wide-body service eligible while it is not currently. The exclusion of Guam – Honolulu is a surprising one from this list given the aircraft configuration but other than that the list is quite favorable for all customers.
The legacy Continental policy for "instant upgrades" will continue on full-fare economy tickets. Y fares will book into F for all elites with no capacity controls. B fares for all elites will book into a capacity-limited upgrade bucket. M fares for 1Ks will also book into the capacity-limited bucket. I’m a big fan of this policy balancing the value of long-term and immediate value to the company though I know some others disagree.
Companion upgrades will be implemented as a combination of the best of both programs going forward. A companion in the same reservation as an elite customer will be eligible at the same tier level as the elite, akin to the current United policy. The benefit will also apply to the Y/B/M-Up Instant upgrades described above. Finally, a companion that is not in the same reservation as an elite can be added to the upgrade list at the airport, keeping the legacy Continental approach to the benefit live.
Another significant change is in the access to Economy plus seating. The new program will restrict advance access to those seats to Gold elites and higher. A definite loss for the lowest elite tier on this one, though the Silvers will still have access once the flight opens for check-in.
Lifetime Status
Perhaps the most significant changes are coming with the lifetime status recognition program. The policies from Continental and United were quite different historically and aligning them was the subject of much consternation and debate amongst travelers. It looks like the company hit a home run on this one. Going forward the qualification for this status will be based on actual miles flown on United metal. Going into 2012, however, the existing lifetime mileage balances between the two programs will be combined. Even better, legacy United customers will have their existing actual miles balances upgraded to their lifetime EQM balances. That’s a HUGE win for those customers.
The benefit levels will mostly match those of the legacy United program, with Gold at 1MM, Platinum at 2MM, 1K at 3MM and Global Services at 4MM. Yup, Global Services now has a published qualification level. Additionally, the legacy Continental benefit of a spouse/partner getting the same status as the lifetime elite will survive. These changes make the new lifetime status program arguably the most compelling in the industry.
The rest
At the top end the benefits package remains pretty impressive. Platinum and 1K elites will receive a reimbursement for the Global Entry application fee and no charges for award bookings inside 21 days, award changes or award redeposits. Gold elites and higher get free same-day changes to tickets, 3×70# checked baggage and they’re keeping Star Alliance Gold status.
Silver elites are the biggest losers coming out of these changes (they lose a free bag, too) which isn’t all that surprising given the size of that customer pool. A credit card will likely get you the same benefits as Premier Silver status with a lower cash outlay. At the top end the benefits are top notch, particularly in the lifetime status benefits.
I can certainly see where there are winners and losers in the new scheme. I’m mostly just happy I’m in the former category.
Posted by Seth on September 20, 2011 under Flying, News |
Every now and then I find myself wondering if there isn’t a better way to get access to some nugget of data related to travel. More often than not I’m disappointed to find out that the answer is generally that the tools aren’t available. When I can, I try to change that. Welcome to my latest effort: The Round-the-World Fare Comparison Tool.
The tool holds nearly 13,000 data points for fare pricing from 197 different airports around the world (one per country for most countries). There are nearly 100 different fare types in the system, including not only RTW fares but also some regional options like Circle Asia, Circle Pacific and Circle Japan options.
That’s a whole lot of data that needs to be managed and filtered. I certainly won’t go so far to claim it is perfect yet – the site is very much in beta right now – but there are options to sort by point of origin, fare type and cabin of travel available right now and more in the works.
Currently there are six different airlines being used as data points for the fares, two each from the three global alliances. In nearly every case the fares match but there are enough quirks and variances that I’m keeping all the data in there and available. The fares do not include taxes, fuel surcharges or aircraft-specific fees but the goal of the tool is to facilitate comparing prices between alliances or to figure out the best place to start a trip rather than get to final pricing.
Here’s what it looks like if you choose a specific origin country/airport:
The different cabins are color-coded so you can quickly see the different types of fares available to you.
Want to search by fare product. Here are the nearly 100 available to you:
Pick one and you’ll get a clickable, color-coded map:
The green icons represent the cheapest 20% of the markets for that specific fare while the red are the most expensive 20%.
I’m still working on options for other ways to "slice and dice" the data. Got a suggestion or an idea of a view that would be useful? Leave a comment and I’ll see what I can do.
In the mean time, give the tool a whirl and let me know what you think. And check out some of the other tools while you’re on the site. You might be surprised at how useful they can be.
