Posts Tagged low cost airfares
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.
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.
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!
Saving Money on Busines Travel – A Reprise
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 7th, 2010
Some time ago – many years ago, in fact – I wrote an article, which I included on my website about this topic. In that article I make the statement: “When you call the travel agent, or go to your online booking site, 99% of all chances to save money on travel have been lost”.
Never more so than in a recent example of what I mean by this. Over a good few weeks, one of my clients worked with me to assemble a 12 sector itinerary, for an engineer, that covered ground in the Far East, including Bangkok, Singapore and a few other places. After all this was done and dusted, a few days before he was due to depart, a request came through to assemble an itinerary for London to Port Moresby, Suva and Honararia. As you know, all Pacific rim destinations.
You all know what is coming – “Why?”
The client company had an engineer, who is already in Singapore (a jumping off point for flights to Port Moresby) yet they want to send another engineer out from London, who, in effect, can have a drink with his mate in Singapore on the way through – rather than divert the guy already out there. Apart from cost, there is an engineer who is going to have to do a cattle class 14 hour flight (just to get to Singapore) and a goodly amount thereafter (again in cattle) – and be expected to hit the ground running after a whole day of non stop travel.
As far as cost is concerned, one could say Ah! I can get a return trip to Australia for £600 (or even £700) – a good price! No, it isn’t. In this instance £1 to fly to Australia and back is too much. Why? Because a chap is already there. No matter how many agents or booking sites the client goes to, no matter how cheap or how expensive a ticket may be – the point is that the second travel “event” should not be taking place at all. Any cost, therefore, is too much.
So, planning ahead is good way to save money – and that has nothing to do with travel agents, on line off line or any other line. In this case, it was the chap running the clients engineering department who got a sharp rap on the knuckles!
Shed a Tear For Fontenla-Novoa…. Not!
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 3rd, 2010
Oh, Boo-hoo! Poor old Fontenla-thingy (why can’t he just change his name to Smith?) is upset because RyanAir have trodden on his toes. “Unfair Subsidies” erm… “It’s appalling. I’m shocked” erm.. Perhaps what he should have said is “Oh Dear, Michael O’Leary is better at this than I am”.
True to form, our beloved (travel) trade press provides us with it’s incisive anaylsis “What can the Canary Islands have been thinking of…” thunders Lucy Huxley of Travel Weakley. Well, what they were thinking of is, I would suggest, that they (the Canaries) have a good opportunity to build traffiic during the off peak season, when the Charter outfits can’t hang the punters out to dry and so stop flying.
To suggest that RyanAir’s clients do not spend much money at resort is banal – after all – who are the people on cheap (ish) charter package holidays, anyway? I mean, Gran Canaria airport is not exactly packed out with private jets, now, is it? Perhaps RyanAir clients prefer to spend the money on themselves (ie in resort) rather than on travelling from A to B.
Michael O’Leary is, if anything, a go-getter. He negotiates. Hard. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. This trail-blazing style has produced, arguably, Europe’s most successful airline. What Fontenla-thingy doesn’t like is that O’Leary is better than he. Michael O’Leary has achieved deals that Fontenla could only dream about, runs an airline better than anyone else and achieves results better than anyone else. That’s the nub of all the fuss. So, Fontenla-Thingy, (and Air France/ KLM, for that matter) stop bleating and get on with the job.
Amazingly, Thommy Cook says that they will shift capacity elsewhere. Hmmm. I don’t suppose thinking first about if anyone actually wants to go “there” may be a prime consideration. Why not take a leaf out of Michael O’Leary’s book? Look around for something new. This single statement, about simply “shifting capacity” marks a single failure of legacy (and apparently, now, charter) airlines – and may mark what could be Fontenla’s downfall – the inability to seek out the new; the need to rely on shifting around amongst the (preceived-as-safer) old.
Watch and learn, watch and learn….
Murray’s Competition – Part 1!
Posted by murray in Latest News on May 29th, 2009
So, let’s put it to the test.
The challenge is to fly around the world for the least amount of money. There are some rules:
1. The trip must include a touchdown in Europe, Middle East, Far East, Africa, Indian sub-continent, Australasia, Northern and Southern Continental America. You can start from where you like, but your start and finish must be at the same airport.
2. The itinerary must be fly-able. For example, if you connect from a legacy carrier to a low-cost carrier, the connection must be practical.
3. Backtracking and anything else is allowed.
4. There is no time limit, but extra points awarded for the fastest trip.
Prizes – we need some. So would any airline or hotel group who would like to contribute some free flights or hotel nights, please let me know. Now would be good. So, won’t cost you any money just some flights and hotel nights! And a lot of Twitter/ Social Networking promotion.
These are the basics. So, before we launch away, if anyone has any comments suggestions or tweaks, let me know now. The prize, by the way, would be for the cheapest workable itinerary – you don’t actually have to fly it (unless an airline will sponsor such a prize!)
I am not a number!
Posted by murray in Latest News on April 23rd, 2009
This low cost lead in price mania with airlines is doing no good. Indeed, we read about many people complaining that their initial price, to get from A to B, has mushroomed from £1 to £100 (or so).
Airlines, having offered a cheap fare, find that they are simply not generating enough money and fish around for something else. Scratchcards, charges for extra luggage (or just charges for luggage), no food, charges for a glass of water and, perhaps, charges for being able to breath air at 30,000 feet.
Where to go? Okay. I know that if I buy a cattle class ticket I know I am not going to get a big seat. I know that I will have to stand in a line and that the queue will move and that I will always wind up behind the single person who suddenly, at the last moment, really has 14 kids, three sets of Grandparents, enough luggage for a year in a far flung land and wants to know why he cannot take the goat in the cabin.
But that does not mean that I cannot be treated like a human being, more importantly, be made to feel like a human being. It does not mean that I have to be looked down on, herded and generally have things done to me that make air travel one of the worst experiences known to man; like shopping at IKEA.
I never said that I wanted to fly from here to there for £1. I am quite happy to pay a bit more – if I get value for that bit more. What does a cup of coffee and a nice sandwich cost? A bit of leeway on my luggage? A paper? A sweet at take off? A smile, even? An extra £5 a ticket an extra £10 or £15 a ticket? For me, I would prefer to pay that. Getting anywhere these days, by air, will cost me at least £75 – if not £150 or £200 so what is an extra £10 or £15 – if that extra money takes away the things that really winds people up and installs in those of us that have to travel in riff-raff, a little touch of sunlight.
What marketing outfit tells these airlines that people have to have fares for £1 or £5 – yet ignores the myriad of travellers who get very angry and frustrated by the eternal add-ons? Air Berlin is an interesting example, Air Berlin manage to do this: They manage to make you feel human, they do manage to smile (No, I am not get paid by Air Berlin – I used them, with my family, to fly from Stansted to Munich and I was very, very, surprised and pleased with their excellent service). They give you a decent sandwich, even a paper, gave me a (very welcome) bit of leeway on the luggage and did not look at me as if I had just appeared from a rather unsavoury manhole. Easyjet manage it (but may be going down the route of finding things to charge for) They still manage to smile, have a few humans about the place and certainly at Luton, have some customer agents who can show the legacy, Heathrow, lot a clean pair of heels when it comes to customer service.
So, my message is: Do not keep trying to find ways of winding up us punters. If you need an extra few quid to make life that bit more bearable, as far as I am concerned, be my guest. Be bold and be brave. An idea: If needs be, sell a ticket and then sell an inclusive ticket – An extra £10, £15 or £20 and for that you get to sit a bit up front and all the bits of leeway we had before – not £5 here or £2 there – it is not difficult to do. If more people book the extra, just move the curtain down the cabin a bit, I am sure that the airlines can work it out. And if they have to move the curtain all the way down the cabin, well – Who’s complaining?

