That utilization # is waaaay off. It's worth way more than 3%. Think of it this way, if SWA is able to squeeze in 9 flights per day and AA only 8 (based on saving 20 minutes per turn-around, that's 160 minutes or 2.66 hours), SWA's fleet is 1/8th more productive in producing revenue (12.5%). When you add in seat density and no short "spoke" flights, this advantage gets multiplied.
Having worked in the aerospace industry the differences are very clear when you're a supplier to LCC versus traditional carriers: LCCs, while they care about the "purchase price" of the good or service they buy from you, they're also very concerned with how expensive it is to deploy / integrate your product or service (things like reliability, cycle time, etc.). Traditional carriers typically just want purchase price concessions and want to be on their way. SWA was always a tough customer, but you knew they'd find a way to get creative with you and get it done. AA was all about cost -- they'd hit you over the head repeatedly about price. It's like they had a script to read from.
Also the types of flights that easyjet and ryanair operate are much different than the types of flights the big guys operate. anything over 2 hours on ryanair or easyjet will make you want to kill someone.
@MrBlahBlah: I concur. They're a nice option to have, but if you have some slack in your budget, pay more for a "real" airline.
Of this article doesn't mention the 10 quid baggage fee, and like the 15kg limit per bag, which adds up quickly for anyone not doing a small weekend trip.
@OMG! Ponies!: It's not the production costs for the in-flight entertainment, it's the administration. They need a lot of people to ensure the right tapes (they still use tapes) make it on to each jet, every month. It adds minutes to the "turnaround" costs (SouthWest won't do anything that prevents them from changing a plane over in more than 20 minutes), and is one more thing for the flight attendant to deal with.
One of the big advantages to plane-enabled wifi is the ability for in-flight entertainment to be downloaded, TiVo style, onto a hard drive on the plane when it's at the gate instead of tranferrring physical media. Then all AA/UAL/etc has to do is sign a license agreement and the management is done by someone else.
@ripfire: Yes, and call me when it's economically viable to fly anybody anywhere for 25 bucks. Because apparently, jet engines will no longer be running on expensive fuel, but instead on magical fairy dust. And the metal frame will be replaced by wishes and dreams.
Wheeeee!
In all seriousness, if $50 is too expensive for you to fly somewhere, I think you're better off staying right where you are. It's safer for the rest of humanity.
@hypnotoad: SouthWest is the only airline I use. I'm paying them to take me somewhere, and if they can do it cheaper than the other guys by way of more seats, less entertainment, and no food, than fine. As long as I get to my destination. I can always listen to music, or - god forbid - talk to the person beside me.
@e-friend: I don't know why SouthWest is even in this comparison: they only fly within the US. Apples and oranges. Spending a couple hours in mild discomfort is one thing; flying across the atlantic is another, which is why Lufthansa and British Airways charge more and are still in business.
don't forget that for a long while southwest had a static fuel cost and everyone else had to suffer that huge jump in oil prices. southwest is really one smart cookie.
@Nick: I love Nick: Yep, fuel is one of the highest cost items in the airline budget, but isn't reflected here. Also, paying the company's debt. A lot of legacy carriers pay a lot of interest on their huge debts and pension plans.
It's just a matter of time before one airline offers free internet to compete, and before you know it, everybody will provide it free, and we will be able to take it for granted as nature intended.
@Akibake-: They offer $2 water, $10 "snack packs", charge $15 to get your luggage to your destination and have removed all entertainment, blankets and pillows from flights.
There is no competition in air travel anymore, so be thankful they're only asking $13.
Now if United could just get me power at my seat so my laptop battery does not die out on me when making that 5 hour flight. Not all of us have the new 17" Mac Book Pro with 8 hours of battery life!
I think $5 would be more reasonable. Unless you have a bunch of important business stuff to do that can't wait and requires internet, I don't see too many people paying $13 for a few hours of internet.
@justinpe: Well, the important business stuff is often done by people who have a business to pay for their internet access. This just essentially restricts the internet to business people, and only the most desperately bored travelers. I guess they could cut in flight programming to encourage the use of their internet!
08/17/09
Having worked in the aerospace industry the differences are very clear when you're a supplier to LCC versus traditional carriers: LCCs, while they care about the "purchase price" of the good or service they buy from you, they're also very concerned with how expensive it is to deploy / integrate your product or service (things like reliability, cycle time, etc.). Traditional carriers typically just want purchase price concessions and want to be on their way. SWA was always a tough customer, but you knew they'd find a way to get creative with you and get it done. AA was all about cost -- they'd hit you over the head repeatedly about price. It's like they had a script to read from.
08/17/09
08/17/09
Of this article doesn't mention the 10 quid baggage fee, and like the 15kg limit per bag, which adds up quickly for anyone not doing a small weekend trip.
08/17/09
There was a nice fluff piece on McDonald's; I'd imagine that McDonald's paid AA to show it as part of the NBC/Universal in-flight entertainment.
08/17/09
One of the big advantages to plane-enabled wifi is the ability for in-flight entertainment to be downloaded, TiVo style, onto a hard drive on the plane when it's at the gate instead of tranferrring physical media. Then all AA/UAL/etc has to do is sign a license agreement and the management is done by someone else.
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
Wheeeee!
In all seriousness, if $50 is too expensive for you to fly somewhere, I think you're better off staying right where you are. It's safer for the rest of humanity.
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
Less seats per aircraft = more legroom, less feeling like you're stuck in a sardine can for hours
Bigger airports = better connections to your final destination
Long hauls = do you really want to save a few bucks by flying NY to LA via Chicago, Atlanta and Dallas?
Travel agencies = some are good and come in handy if you need to reschedule due to weather, illness, etc
Different aircraft = appropriate size aircraft to fit the flight (= more destinations)
Better salaries = happier staff = better service (sometimes)
Just my 2 cents' worth...
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/18/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
01/14/09
Also, an alternative photo apropos to this story: [www.mintred.com]
01/14/09
01/14/09
How about giving it for free to win over the competition?
01/14/09
How would they break your spirit if they gave you something free?
01/14/09
01/14/09
There is no competition in air travel anymore, so be thankful they're only asking $13.
01/14/09
01/14/09
01/14/09
01/14/09
01/14/09
I hate US Airways just that little bit more knowing that (and who thought it would be possible to hate them more?).
01/14/09
Besides, can you REALLY put a price on having access to Gizmodo? I think not.
01/14/09
01/14/09