Sauce For The Goose….
Posted by murray in Latest News on July 10th, 2010
The BIS (Department for Business, Innovation and Stupidity) have “advised” in such a way that tour operators may well have to pick up the tab for all those caught up in the ash cloud. Further, they now suggest that tour operators should be able to forsee events which even skilled and trained geologists and volcanologists find impossible to predict.
We do not have to look too far back to find a rather different example in the approach of Her Majesty’s Grateful Government. When the bankers fell into crisis (in an event which was easily foreseeable, save that the Serious Farce Office and other regulators who were supposed to watch out for exactly that sort of thing were all too busy “doing” dinners and lunches) we tax payers were told how seriously serious the matter was and that we would have to mortgage our children’s and our children’s children’s futures to bail out Bankers so that they would not have to sell their second yachts and/ or helicopters and wind up having to use the train to get to work like the rest of us.
Of course, the ash cloud matter is different. We are only talking about small people and small money and true to form, the present UK Government follows the maxim: “Money talks, merit walks” – rather like the USA Government getting all hot under the collar about BP and spilt oil, whilst doing relatively little about their own errant industries wreaking havoc in foreign pastures, specifically, Bhopal.
We have, however, moved away from a feudal economy towards a welfare economy. This is not a bad thing. The world is just too dangerous a place for private insurance companies to cope with (as Niall Ferguson said) and welfare covers a much wider orbit than 10 shillings and sixpence a week from the ‘nash. One of the main purposes of Government is to step in when calamity threatens to overwhelm; the insurer, so to speak, of the last resort. Irrespective of the corner of the business involved. The global affect of the bank disaster scales down easily to the European disaster of the ash cloud. In both cases, a whole industry is at stake. In both cases, many firms are at risk and in both cases, many jobs would be lost, were the industry involved compelled to shoulder all the costs of an unforseen, un-predictated and devastating calamity. Indeed, it could be argued that, as the banking disaster was not a natural phenomonon but a man-made one, the ash cloud is, possibly, a more deserving cause than the Banks.
More unbundling unbundling
Posted by murray in Latest News on July 7th, 2010
We are not really unbundling airfares at all, are we? Let’s face it, what it boils down to, is increasingly frenetic attempts to milk more money from long suffering cattle class passengers. No, really (say airlines) we are giving people the choice.
Are they? I want to travel; from A to B – but in first class. So, how much has, say, my pushing £10,000 fare across the pond been “unbundled”? I don’t have any bags, so the 3 pc allowance can be discounted – No, it can’t, say the airlines. I don’t want any food, so that can go as well. Erm… No, again, says the airline. I don’t drink… Nope. No allowance for that. Okay – Now, Here’s a real killer – I don’t need the lounges or the shower on arrival or the extra special check-in or the…. No, no, no say the airline. Actually, the same applies in business class and, where appropriate, in Premium Economy.
So, tell me, Why have others got the “choice” whereas I am stuck with having to pay for all this stuff I don’t want or need – Why can’t I get a cheaper first or business class fare? Well, you see, (says Mr Airline) we are basically making you pay something towards that lot down the back so we have to make it worth your while. And as you have clearly more money than sense, Mr My-Company-is-Paying-The Bill, what we are offering does not really cost all that much anyway, as we charge you a going rate….
My point is this. If unbundling is really a concept airlines wish to pursue, then all passengers should have the “right” to have an unbundled fare. Just unbundling the Y cabin, really supports the premise that it is all about trying to claw back some of the money lost, in a despotic attempt to offer fares that are hoplessly out of kilter with legacy airlines air travel costs, rather than deal with the real cost problems inherent in their arcane structures.
There are other issues as well. Unbundling works for low cost carriers because they operate short haul point to point stuff, aimed mainly at leisure travellers and the real budget end of the air travel spectrum. When we move into the medium and long haul arenas, it’s another ball game. Especially when we stray beyond simple there-and-back stuff.
One of the big features of present medium and long haul arrangements is that the rules (perhaps I should say “conventions”) are pretty much universal. So, I can go from Zurich to Riyadh to Dubai to Karachi and back to Zurich in the knowledge that, having bought my ticket and established at my starting point what I am taking with me and what I get is all included, I can be sure that the same conventions will apply throughout my trip. If things get unbundled without taking present conventions in mind, things get a bit tricky. So leg 1: Luggage Okay, but have to pay for food. Leg 2: Food included but have to pay for baggage; Leg 3: No luggage or food included… and so on. We also find another issue: What does my ticket include? Would the ticket selling airline have to tell me what is and what is not included – and would I be able to take it all in without a) having a laughing fit and start shouting “You can’t be serious” down the line – or b) simply give them the address of a good pshyco-analyst? Or do we find ourselves in the same hoplessley banal situation similar to the UK’s railways, whereby if I walk into my local railway station and ask for a ticket from Gerrards Cross to Leeds, I will be told that I can buy a ticket to Marylebone and then would have to buy another ticket at Euston – so, in airline terms, the carrier from Zurich would say “I can sell you a ticket to Riyadh and then you will have to buy another one there”.
It would not take long for anyone to work out what a devastating affect this would have on the practicality of global air travel, not to mention the cost of buying one way, point to point fares.
… just thought I would throw this in!
What is really useful …. to a travel agent…!
Posted by murray in Latest News on July 6th, 2010
So, we are, what? 10 years in? 20 years in? to the internet, with all it’s developments. Every five minutes, we are told about this or that “new” internet “tool” and how each and everyone of them is going to “revolutionise” travel. Well, do they? What has really proved useful to the average agent-in-the-street? I can’t speak for everyone, of course, but I will tell you what I find invaluable on a day to day basis.
Needless to say, I cannot live without my GDS. I am not going to debate the pros and cons of each, but you need one. Further, you need to be able to work it and by that, I mean by using the “native” or as some would say “cryptic” entries. Point and click is a waste of time. It has been tried but never really caught on and as long as you know your entries, working using the native language is very much faster.
What else? Google Earth is essential. Now, when I am asked for a hotel, no matter where it is in the world, I can ask the client where the meeting is and then say “Yes, I have a hotel booked. You come out the hotel, turn left and it’s about 300 yards down on the left hand side” – And I can do that for any address, anywhere in the world.
Expedia is next. “Expedia is a booking system” I hear you cry. Well, it is – but have you ever looked at a fare on your GDS and thought “That doesn’t look right” or “I wonder if I have missed a very much cheaper way of doing this itinerary”. Now, as we all know, you either have contracts for CAT45 etc fares, or you don’t. So, if in doubt, I will run the itinerary through Expedia. You have to be a bit careful with connections and times but it means that you can be sure your fare is right and that you have not missed something. Further, it allows you to weigh up options – an Expedia fare may be cheaper, but is it worthwhile making two changes (say) instead of one, to save maybe £30 on a £800 fare.
Tripadvisor has its uses. We all tend to book the big groups, mainly because we know, then, that we will get a standard. If we book Leading Hotels of the World, it will be good. Hilton, NH, Marriott or Ramada are safe for middle management, Intercontinental for the boss and Mercure, Novotel or Ibis for the clients lesser (but nonetheless important), troops. Trouble is, the group hotels, the “safe bets” can be full and then we may be working in the unknown – and this is where Tripadvisor comes in.
Wegolo is an invaluable asset to know, as well. This is almost like having a GDS for the low fare carriers – and it’s global, too. Odd low cost types pop up on the GDS system but this can be more of an irritation than anything else – How many of us have managed to do a USA connection from, say British Airways to JetBlue! Worse, airlines such as Aer Lingus who try to get the best of both worlds and wind up falling in between the two. Airlines should be either a) On or b)Off GDS systems. Wegolo lets you check (and book) on low cost carriers that may exists practically anywhere in the world – without having to, effectively, remember all sorts of airline names – and not to mention, remember their routes as well.
I should also mention seatguru. I don’t use seatguru that often but GDS seat maps are, though accurate, not as clear as seatguru can be. Especially when one has a very particular client. Also useful for seat pitches and the like.
Apart from the obvious email, the most useful mobile communication tool is the humble SMS text message. Iphone apps have their uses, but no internet access, no app. The SMS text message gets through, no matter what. It lurks in the ether and when it sees a chance – zip! – it’s there. This I know from my experience trying to communciate with my brother who was caught up in 9/11. Mobile phone calls were neigh on impossible – but a text message got through, each and every time. If there is a disaster, communication lines get clogged – fast. Whereas the iphone-dependent person cannot get through, the SMS person can get through to their agent. A big plus, when the chips are down. (And so is having an agent). The same applied, incidently, during the more recent volcanic ash saga.
Do you know any other really useful tools?
Luton Out of All Proportion?
Posted by murray in Latest News on July 5th, 2010
Being an agent, I have to organise travel on many different levels. Sometimes first class, sometimes business, sometimes leisure. In the space of a telephone call, I can go from “best there is” to “cheap as chips”, from long haul to short, from a simple there-and-back to a complicated itinerary of 15 or more flight sectors. Each booking needs the same amount of attention to detail, not to mention a certain mental agility with regard to tarvel planning, unique to travel agents.
Over the years, there have been many changes to air travel arrangements. The most relevant of which being the arrival of the low cost carrier. Althougth this arrival has brought cheap(er) air travel to the masses, for those that were used to the days of “get in early for a reasonable fare” – some changes have not been so wellcome.
In times past, if anything, you knew where you stood. To get a cheaper fare, you travelled over a weekend, you booked in advance. For a business person going to Europe, out on a Monday, back on a Tuesday, the best that he or she could hope for was a Eurobudget. We knew how much baggage we could take, we knew we would “get something on the ‘plane” and generally speaking, life went on. This all had to change. I don’t know the reason why, but it did.
Low cost airlines did not march over every airlines route map. They specialised in short haul stuff, holiday routes and in the case of RyanAir, opened up new routes that had never existed before. Despite this, the legacy airlines decided that they wanted a go at the low cost ethos – but for all the wrong reasons. Legacy airlines saw this simply as an opportunity to harvest more revenue and reduce such things as on-board service, without stopping to think about why people travelled with them in the first place – and one of the main reasons being that many passengers simply did not want the “low cost” ethos!
But that is not what I am on about, here. I want to talk about “proportionality”. What do I mean? This morning, I took my daughter to Luton Airport for the “… Where you truly whisked here from Paradise – Naaaah, Luton Airport” treatment. A trip to Palma. This trip had come about simply because a client had over 100 kilos of luggage and the easiest (and cheapest way, in this instance) was for the client to travel with 50 kilos and for her to go along with another 50, have a swim and a day in Palma and come home.
My first observation was that a luggage trolley cost £2. Now, certain low cost airlines will fly you to some places for 1 Euro. So, how can you pay 1 Euro for a flight and £2 (or 2 Euros) for a luggage trolley? Where is the “proportionality” in that? To put it another way, given the present £12 promotion of RyanAir, the cost of a trolley is 17% of the airfare. If you want to bypass the security queue another £3 and the minimum at the car park to see No1 daughter safely away £4.50. A total of 80% of the fare. There is more cost involved in using Luton Airport than in the cost of getting from Luton to Alicante. And do not forget that hidden in the cost of your ticket, under “taxes and charges” is the £8 UB tax – which is, basically, what you have already paid Luton Airport for, well, the privilege of using Luton Airport. This makes the cost of simply using Luton Airport more than some fares from Luton Airport.
I don’t know about you, but I like finality on pricing. I want to buy something or a service that does a job and in an ideal world, be able to then use that service without having to put my hand in my pocket every five minutes. There are things I know I will need – like a car park – but those should be at a fair cost, given that I have already paid, in my fare, an element for the use of the airport. Technically, I suppose, the airline has paid the airport for the use of that airport and that charge, presumably, should pay for their passengers to use that airport – UB tax is for Passenger Service Charge – and by all accounts, if the ramblings of airlines using Luton are correct, Luton manages to cook up some nice charges for their ‘planes to use the airport. £2 is a lot for a trolley. Why should I have to pay – why would I need to pay – £3 to bypass a queue? Should not the airport provide enough staff that daft length queues do not arise? Further, though Easyjet staff are, in my opinion, well trained and respectful – how does Luton manage to find, for their staff, the most irritable and bad tempered people around?
This is what I mean about proportionality, or to put it another way, that airports, specifically Luton, need to get their snouts out of the trough.
Travolution Summit – Really!
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 20th, 2010
Reading through the tweets that have come along all day, courtesy of various people attending this “high-tech” summit, one has to stifle a bit of a yawn. It’s not that the stuff coming out is not valid, some of it is interesting – the thing is, that it is in the forum of this “thing of tomorrow” summit arena – and what seems to get many excited is stuff that traditional high street agents have known all along.
Take the statement from Frommers about pictures being most important and video not so important. The Director of Frommers, no doubt, felt like he was talking to his Year 6 class. This is why traditional agents liked brochures (I am talking pre-universal-internet, here) – and still do. We have known this all along, that pictures count. We also knew that people rarely, if ever, use videos – or CD’s – as witness the number of dusty video tapes that used to adorn some forgotton backwater of any agents shop. Yet, this information was picked up by nearly all and re-tweeted ad nauseam. We traditional agents knew that, tell us something we don’t know.
Then people ask about the silver market and are people missing out. Well in the on-line world, they may be; here again, the traditional agents sigh: Yes, we know about that – actualy, traditional agents know quite a bit more than that – they pursue all markets – hard (we have to) – if a client has money and an agent can get it off them – he or she will. We have heard it all before, the pink market was another one (late to mid 90’s, I believe).
Then again, the Bing bloke says that 25% of searches go straight to the back button, back to the search page. Reflecting on this, I can only assume that Bing is not very good at producing search results, if people have to have another go …. perhaps what one is looking for, is on page 3.
“41% of cruises were booked by Daily Mail readers”, thunders another. Really? You believe that? Without so much as a by-your-leave, this nugget is picked upon, without any form of verification and tweeted, again ad nauseam. These techy types will believe anything. 41% of Daily Mail readers book cruises, possibly. The Daily Mail advertising sales department really scored a hit, there!
Step forward the Bing Bloke for another nugget: It takes 2-4 weeks of research from first search to purchase. Again, if I was Mr Bing, I think I would be a tad more cautious with bandering my weaknesses. Any self respecting high street agent would be upset if it took longer than 20 to 40 minutes from first encounter to a sale. True, we allow people to take the brochure away, but with some well placed advice and good agent guidance, let’s say that we would see our client back in 2 to 4 days. Internet sales types clearly have an awful lot to learn.
Whilst we are on about “too much information” or rather, being careful with what you share – Lawrence Hunt said that lowcosttravel group is the 20th fastest growing business in the UK. Now, no-one in travel wants to hear that. You see, many of us remember other “fast growing” travel groups – let’s start with Court Line, Intasun, Exchange Travel…. Not to mention Xcel and a few others. We, who are really in travel, don’t want “fast growing”. We want to hear the adjectives such as “sensible”, “well-established”, “prudent” and above all, “reliable” – not “fast-growing”. True, there are some of that ilk that we have lost over time, but there will always be some fall out.
There seems to be an issue with many of the speakers and, I fear, those who are sending out the tweets. They clearly must know a lot about technical stuff, about the web – and about re-inventing the wheel – yet many seem to know naff-all about travel.
The Hidden Mysteries…
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 17th, 2010
We have not grasped this at all. Nothing is moving which operates over the height of, say, a double decker bus. If, that is, you can get on one. It is not a question of a later flight, or even tomorrow or even the day after tomorrow. Europe is grounded – and we are all going to stay grounded for a while yet. I have never come across this – even after the calamity of New York, there was something that could be done, we knew, at least, that in a few days time something could be done. Now, we don’t.
There is a great mass of humantity which stretches across the continent of Europe, indeed, of our globe who all wish to be somewhere else and that somewhere else, is home. We cannot, at this stage, even think about starting a new venture.
So what will we discover? Air travel, at best, for anyone who travels cattle class, is a miserable experience. Even before you start, you are faced with long lists of what you cannot do, followed by long queues, followed by more people telling what you cannot do, followed by being confined to your seat, followed by more queues, followed by people assuming that you are hard, psychotic terrorist until you can prove otherwise, followed by…… To get home, you have to do it all again. America is wondering why their tourism is down, airlines wonder the same.
I should add that it is different for the budget airlines – they do exactly what they say on the tin, and no more – we have come to accept that – so for them the issue is not as dire.
Coupled with this, air travel has now demonstrated it’s vulnerabilities. Air travel was always vulnerable to extremes of weather; now it also is vulnerable through strike action, it is vulnerable through acts of terror – now it has shown that it is vulnerable through it’s own technology. Aircraft engines are designed to fly at x thousand feet or they use too much petrol. They are not designed to cope with ash in the high atmosphere – although the famous case of the Jumbo came through, having gone right into an ash cloud – as technology advances, it becomes more sensitive – more fickle, even – we do not realise this until an event such as this occurs – and this is a great failing of technology – it may be clever, but it is not robust. If British Airways had kept a few Vickers Viscounts knocking about the place, many may be able to get home. Think of cars, a battery failure on a modern car means you are stuck – in the old days, you just got out the starting handle.
The increasingly vulnerable nature of air travel coupled with the unpleasant general experience is a poisonous brew. The vulnerabilities may, in some measure, be addressed. The experience – the “holistic travel experience” can be easily dealt with. Airlines, however, choose not to. Indeed, with things like unbundling of fares, they are intent on making that experience even worse.
Then there is the matter of choice. People can choose which airline to fly on and all airlines compete. What may have been missed, is that people may choose simply not to travel, unless absolutely necessary. Worse, it may be the premium traffic that decides not to travel. Not because of cost (though that is an important aspect) simply because it is all simply too much like hard work. What is dangerous for airlines, is that firms may discover that they can manage very well without having people flitting about the place. After all, global business managed to get on before the advent of mass air travel. Firms may decide that a person based at an outpost, with greater executive powers, is a better way of doing things than someone having to go there all the time. An example of this (on a different level, of course!) was British “Gunboat Diplomacy” where decisions were made and actions taken by young naval officers without the benefit of even being able to telephone a higher authority. It actually worked rather well (at the time).
Then we will have the knock on – and for the airline business, this just adds to the cost. Premium traffic can just decide not to travel. Premium traffic has the financial ability to hole up in a nice, comfortable hotel and wait until it is all over, premium traffic has satphones, communications technology, a yacht that it may be able to call on – even a mate with a light aircraft. What airlines have to deal with, when the skies re-open, is us normal people. People on cheap tickets, away with the family, on charter flights, who now have maxed out credit cards, no cash and are sleeping at terminals. Premium traffic does not want to travel in amongst all this – so they wait. Revenue not only falls, but airlines then have to spend money flying with aircraft full of people whom they may even have to pay, rather, compensate, for being on board.
This is not the end, not even the begining of the end. In realising how vulnerable air travel is and by realising how miserable air travel is for many people – and above all, by doing something about those aspects – it may just be the end of the beginning.
Rachmanism Alive and Well, Thank You!
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 16th, 2010
During a pan-European catastrophy, we should all rally round and help, right? Well, nice to think so but certain sectors of travel, notably airlines, think otherwise. Well, they will help…. as long as you pay.
During the recent British Airways strike or rather, non-strike, other airlines licked their lips with glee as desperate travellers would throw any amount of money at them, just to get home. “You can refund your ticket” “You can change to another date”
Picture © Ian Britton www.freefoto.com
What was most clearly missing was any apparent programme by airlines to re-book stranded passengers without them having to spend hours trying to call some off-shore, parrott staffed, call centre or queue for hours in a smelly terminal whilst the one person on the airline ticket desk tried to cope. For the business traveller, especially for those who used a human travel agent, life was a bit easier – they could just go to a hotel and await a call from their agent to say what had been arranged for them. Not so the familly of four who had taken advantage (say) of a cheap deal for a European break.
What was also evident was the Rachman style pricing. Yes, there is a seat available – but it will cost. Yes, you can have a hotel room – but it will cost. Rachman would, indeed, have been proud
With the volcano saga, unlike anything before, everything came to a halt – and I mean everything. The only advice was “call your airline” or call your agent” – and? The airline could (in all fairness) do nothing. If there are no ‘planes, there are no ‘planes. Trains are full. Hotels are full and even the ferry companies across the sea to Ireland and the continent of Europe have little or no space for the massive throng of humanity, of all creeds and colours, heaving their way, like refugees, across the expanse of Europe.
Why are there no contingency plans? Why is there no central point for advice or for help for those with maxed-out credit cards, no cash and no place to rest their heads? Whilst huge swathes of our – and other nation’s – population struggle to get home, our leaders preen themselves and worry if they should or should not use make-up for a television appearance.
Shame.
Travel Awards? Not today, thank you.
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 14th, 2010
In a former life, I worked for Watneys. The brewers. A cindarella job. “We want you to help look after about 100 tenanted public houses. We wll give you a car and we want you to go round and make sure the beer is up to par” Needless to say, after a year or so, several near misses and a broken marriage, with a lot of help from AA (not the airline) I gave up alcohol. Today, just for today, I am sober.
One of the annual Watney rituals revolved around the (then) Evening Standard “Pub of The Year” award, which accolade, Watneys were keen to have. In order to achieve this accolade, some oik was sent out out, armed with about £10,000 (which was a lot of money in the mid ’80’s) to buy every Evening Standard available so that the voting coupons could be filled in. One year, I remember, the oik duly came back with lorry loads of the paper, only to find that the voting coupon was not in that particular day’s issue!
(Correct) Paper in hand, the office staff were all given instructions which pub to vote for and then all sat down to do their bit.
Ever since that time, I have this rather jaundiced view of award ceremonies. They are all fixed. Indeed (and in all fairness) it would be difficult to police the voting, but fixed they are. Lately, I was looking at the “World Travel Awards” (mainly because someone sent me a “vote for us” email) and was a little surprised to see who won last year. Some of the awards, you think “fair enough” but others?
“Leading City Break Destination” – Lisbon. LISBON?? Think Brussels without the excitement. No mention of Rome, Paris (the most romantic city on earth), Florence, Venice, Prague… “Business Hotel” – Movenpick Istanbul (really!). Now, the Turks have worked hard, because they feature widely – “couples” and “design” resort, “conference” resort and Hey! Even their Tourist Board gets a look in – I wonder how they managed that?
Forte Village Resort won Europe’s Leading Resort – (a “fair enough” – if you can afford it). But “Leading Luxury Hotel” – the “Grand Hotel Europe” in St. Petesburg?? The list goes on (and on, and on…) For any award to be worth something, the award has to be credible. An Olympic Gold Medal (or any Olympic medal) is credible – you have seen it for yourself, it is irrefutable. The George Medal, the Congressional Medal of Honour, the Croix De Guerre… and on a (much lesser) level, the rosette my youngest daughter won at the Gymkhana… they are all credible, they are all honoured and respected – you cannot get one by getting the staff to fill in forms, YOU have to do YOUR bit. On the other side, you can see that travel awards, from various sources and for the reasons mentioned above, are not credible and because they are not credible, they are….. worthless.
Travel award ceremonies are all well and good. They are a useful opportunity to scrub up, for ladies to dust off their posh frocks, to relax and enjoy some good like-minded company, to chew the cud – a drink and a chat, though, that is all they are good for.
Just note this: Please, please, don’t expect me to believe in them…..
…all getting very silly…
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 13th, 2010
Image: Daniel St.Pierre / FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Usually, with the BTC stuff, I have to read it several times before any lightbulbs start to flicker. It is all good stuff, but being a simple-minded sort of chap, it takes a while to understand the thrust of what they are on about.
A typical BTC missive arrived with a thud into my email in box. Another weighty tome, a bit like dropping the Encylopedia Britannica onto the desk and saying “precis this by this afternoon”. This time, I followed through about this bloke from Farelogix, Jim Davidson, but not of the “nick, nick” variety, who seems to have a bit of a bee in his bonnet about, well, about an awful lot really.
I have read some of the Farelogix press releases. They do not make sense. For example, one dated Feb 2010 talks about “…consumers generally make their reservations through a travel agency… where overall cost is a primary requirement” In the next breath we have “…Many travelers would welcome access to a new world of convenience and add-on choices available directly from their mobile device prior to departure.” Erm, Yes. If cost is a major concern, they are hardly likely to want to add stuff on, are they? Another statement runs “..Airlines can offer individual travelers a variety of add-on services, such as seat upgrades, priority boarding…” Wow! Farelogix has found the holy grail – have their mobile service and Hey! Presto! your $9 ticket will get you a seat in first class – and you join the front of the queue.
Mobile technology has it’s place and will become more popular – but I think the prophets of mobile technology need to take a reality check. You see, according to them, we agents should all have disappeared just after Graham Alexander Bell said “Look, these tin cans and this piece of string – could we make communication better?” We have had the telephone – and we are still here. We have had the fax machine – and we are still here, the mobile phone, the internet and the internet on mobile phones – and we are still here. We have had our commission taken away, so clients pay us a fee – and we are still here. Why? Simple – because in the final analysis, man is a social animal – we like to communicate and I mean really communicate. As in: talk a bit about the weather, what the last trip was like, the bloke/ bird that we sat next to (depending on orientation) a bit of banter, a laugh or as the Irish say, for the craick…..
For all Farelogix may go one about how their kit may be the best thing since sliced bread, that social element can never, ever, ever be replaced by any form of technology. And it is that social thing which makes us belong – and why real agents will always have a place.
Where “Unbundling” Unbundles…
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 9th, 2010
This is the latest thing – “unbundling” – take out all the things you may not want on your flight and then charge for things that are optional. This keeps the fares low – Right?
Not exactly. Fares are regulated by a very pure form of supply and demand. They always have been. As any flight fills up, so the price rises. At which stage, therefore, does it become unreasonable to charge for things that are “extras”?
I have just checked RyanAir for a flight from Luton to Lanzarotte – out on the 11th April back on 15th. At the time of writing I would be charged £59.99 (really, £60) to get there and an eye-watering £239.99 (£240) to get home – total £262.33. I happened to pick RyanAir, but I could have used any airline that is getting their snouts into the unbundling trough. Now, if the “unbundling” theory holds true, really all seats should be, say, £5 and then one can add in all the extras, including the charge if you need air at 32,000 feet – with justification. The thing is, if I have to pay £239.99 rather than £59.99, why should I have to pay all the “extras” on top, still?
This begs the other question – What should the “Man on the Clapham Omnibus” reasonably expect a fare to cover? An aeroplane that goes to the appointed destination, a qualified crew – yes, obviously. Now, with a holiday flight (as Lanzarotte is) why should I not reasonably expect the fare to cover my holiday bag – and given that it is pushing 3 hours or so, a cup if tea, say, a wee even a sandwich (God forbid). Further, and no-one in the airline business seems to want to ask this, would passengers not prefer to pay an extra few quid on their fare in order to have the items mentioned, included? Who says: “Fares must be cheaper than chips”? Answer: No-one. Given that I am paying £239.99 rather than £59.99, I think that I can reasonably expect a few things – Even a “Good morning” and a smile would be a start!
