(Or: Why United is STILL the best bet for travelers out of Houston.)
Even though United has had their problems, and despite some shaky recent news, they do seem to be, slowly, getting a little better, I'm still holding the opinion that, for the Houston flier, they are the best option for the frequent Houston traveller. Most of my reasoning behind this is tied to their still relatively attractive Mileage Plus frequent flier program. For the family flying once a year or the occasional traveller I recommend price shopping, and taking advantage of package deals. For many, with bag fees added, this means that Southwest is a viable option and other discount airlines. For many in Houston, I understand that your personal feelings regarding the loss of Continental is too much to bear. For you United will NEVER be an option because of how they "dissed" the City of Houston. Whatever. I might also submit that this blog is probably not for you. I'm writing more for those who make their travel decisions with their head (and wallets) and not their hearts. If you travel frequently the numbers still fall out in United's favor. In terms of route network, alliances and benefits, United is a clear number one.
That gap grew recently as Delta has seemingly decided to decimate their SkyMiles program (and offer up a
rather ham-fisted excuse for how they handled it. The driver behind this is the coming move to revenue-based frequent flyer programs where, instead of miles flown, you receive "points" based on how much (or little) you paid for your ticket.
I've stated before that I believe something like this is inevitable, that the executive floors at most major airlines are currently incapable of seeing the forest for the trees. While there are a Million theories about why revenue based FF programs will be BAD for the airlines (and the traveller) with a few tweaks here and there I think they can be a positive, IF you're willing to accept a certain amount of risk and are willing to invest in a few credit cards.
First, this is NOT a blog post suggesting you should run out and start churning cards. I don't believe in that & I don't think that, for most people, this is a good idea. Second: I'm not going to provide any "referral" links to apply for credit cards because I don't receive any. If you want to go help a starving blogger feel free. Third: The credit cards that I'm going to talk about dont' yet exist. That's very important, this is speculation blogging, a peek into what I believe will become future air-travel.
The first thing to discuss is the move to revenue-based frequent flyer programs. I don't think any of these are going to be worth the money. If you think the airlines treat the mid-to-lower tired elites poorly now, wait until there's a financial number pinned to it. If (when) this becomes the norm my brand loyalty is 100% done. I plan to fly the cheapest option available and don't care who's metal is getting me there. (Except Spirit, I refuse to fly them because eventually they're going to charge me for being stupid enough to fly them) The good news is I believe that, once the mid-to-lower tier benefits go the way of the Dodo, you'll see a lot of other travellers abandon their plans as well and start price shopping in earnest. This *should* increase competition and result in moderately lower prices across the board.
The wild card in my vision are Mileage-based credit cards, and this is where I expect we'll see the biggest change.
One of the largest carrots that the airlines hang over the heads of frequent fliers are cabin upgrades. Early boarding and mileage bonuses are nice, but what people really want is the opportunity to fly Business or First class at economy prices. Even a free nudge up to economy plus is welcome. I believe that upgrades of this type are going to be the first thing to go from frequent flyer plans. When airlines start paying a lot of attention to how much people actually spend with them (they are paying attention now, and the tiered upgrades plans are evidence of this) then they're going to quickly move away from providing Business and First upgrades to mid-to-lower tier elites.
I believe they're going to outsource these upgrades to cards with higher annual fees to pay for them. Just as they currently do with miles, the banks will pre-purchase upgrades which will come along with the card. The higher level of card, the more upgrades are available per year. (including International and partner upgrades, expect to see a Star Allaince, OneWorld and Skyteam card with system upgrades). As a flyer you'll have to align your travel cards with whatever you would use the most. If you don't want to play this game then economy will probably be your best option, there are things you can invest in to make sleeping possible, and the seats more comfortable as well.
How far are we away from this?
Well, Delta is starting it, but I think we're a good five years away from seeing it implemented in any large-scale way, the public is going to have to be made to accept it over time just as we've accepted no snacks in economy, fees for bags etc. The lessons the airlines are learning is that the flying public will accept almost anything provided it's put in place on the sly and then the furor is allowed to blow over. Their argument is that you always have a choice to change preferred carriers or stop flying at all, the reality is that air-travel is not a true competitive market and in many cases the second choice is often far inferior to the first. We're now seeing in Houston what other markets have learned in the past.
Until that time however there are still major benefits for frequent travellers to apply to, and use, an airlines frequent flyer program. On Delta however those reasons are getting fewer and fewer. If you can, I might start looking around for other options. Expect a competitor to offer a status match soon.
Thursday, September 6, 2012
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Short Haul Flights (09/05/2012)
Moving quickly through a host of unimportant things.....
Remember way back when (OK a week ago) when the unions were claiming a "win" in court? - Those who said they really didn't win were right on the money. Either the unions have bad leadership or incompetents translating the legalese.
Please, Please, PLEASE!! click my referral links. - This is the problem:
On another note: A good Texas BBQ round-up from the same author. - Yes, he makes some huge mistakes (always order from the fatty end at City Market in Luling for example) but he gets it about as right as a foreigner can.
How does Texas' Lockstep political media love the Julian and Juan Castro? Let me count the ways:
1. Erin Ramshaw of the Texas Tribune gets doe-eyed. - Not that the Trib is really "news". (they're more news-ish) but this was so sugar-laced I almost had to prick my finger after reading it.
2. It's (temporarily) cured Wayne Slater of his Karl Rove obsession. Twice. - Of course, Wayne being Wayne will cause us to fire up the drinking game soon I'm sure.
3. Ever seen a grown man cry? - Look, Burka is bad and has been bad for a long time. It's rare he writes anything that could be considered viable public opinion any longer. He's mailing it in.
The sad thing is the speech itself, and Julian Castro's presentation of it, was not considered to be all that great. Certainly not as good as speeches by Rubio and (possibly) Ted Cruz. So the only conclusion is that Texas' Lockstep Political media is fawning over the brother's Castro is due to the fact that they are Hispanic, and Democrats and not due to the fact that they have any special talent (They have talent, for sure but, by all accounts it's nothing remarkable). If you don't understand why that's a problem you're part of the problem.
As the scientific method gets thrown further down the hill, we're being saddled with some bastardized science-lite that focuses on emotions and trickery more than the actual scientific method. This should concern the hell out of folks on both sides of the political aisle. Sadly, it really doesn't.
Is this the election where the false journalism mask of neutrality is stripped away? CNN is jumping in with the Dems and Fox News jumped in with the Republicans a long time ago. MSNBC is not even a news source, they're straight (progressive) opinion now so I exempt them from this conversation.
Speaking of Bad Media. I've long been a critic of so-called "fact-check" journalism. It's as useless as the Pulitzer Prize that was awarded to the partisans that run Politifarce. Now that it's on people's radar we're seeing just how ridiculous it really is. Time to move "fact-checkers" to the back rooms, checking the veracity of stories" where they belong.
Possibly the worst media: I described the changes to Chron.com as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Some witty idiot on Twitter took that literally and replied that the Chron is "not sinking to the bottom of the ocean." Judging by this Houston Press story: Yes they are.
And finally:
Republicans are wrong: Democrats didn't "remove" God from their platform. They replaced him with Obama. If you're not the party of Religion then this is probably not a bad thing.
Remember way back when (OK a week ago) when the unions were claiming a "win" in court? - Those who said they really didn't win were right on the money. Either the unions have bad leadership or incompetents translating the legalese.
Please, Please, PLEASE!! click my referral links. - This is the problem:
Overall, though, I prefer the Chase Ink Bold small business charge card and Chase Ink Plus business credit card which do offer referral credit to me.Of course he does, because he gets money for them. There's no way to tell if this is an honest evaluation of the program. These types of posts do a disservice to the reader.
On another note: A good Texas BBQ round-up from the same author. - Yes, he makes some huge mistakes (always order from the fatty end at City Market in Luling for example) but he gets it about as right as a foreigner can.
How does Texas' Lockstep political media love the Julian and Juan Castro? Let me count the ways:
1. Erin Ramshaw of the Texas Tribune gets doe-eyed. - Not that the Trib is really "news". (they're more news-ish) but this was so sugar-laced I almost had to prick my finger after reading it.
2. It's (temporarily) cured Wayne Slater of his Karl Rove obsession. Twice. - Of course, Wayne being Wayne will cause us to fire up the drinking game soon I'm sure.
3. Ever seen a grown man cry? - Look, Burka is bad and has been bad for a long time. It's rare he writes anything that could be considered viable public opinion any longer. He's mailing it in.
The sad thing is the speech itself, and Julian Castro's presentation of it, was not considered to be all that great. Certainly not as good as speeches by Rubio and (possibly) Ted Cruz. So the only conclusion is that Texas' Lockstep Political media is fawning over the brother's Castro is due to the fact that they are Hispanic, and Democrats and not due to the fact that they have any special talent (They have talent, for sure but, by all accounts it's nothing remarkable). If you don't understand why that's a problem you're part of the problem.
As the scientific method gets thrown further down the hill, we're being saddled with some bastardized science-lite that focuses on emotions and trickery more than the actual scientific method. This should concern the hell out of folks on both sides of the political aisle. Sadly, it really doesn't.
Is this the election where the false journalism mask of neutrality is stripped away? CNN is jumping in with the Dems and Fox News jumped in with the Republicans a long time ago. MSNBC is not even a news source, they're straight (progressive) opinion now so I exempt them from this conversation.
Speaking of Bad Media. I've long been a critic of so-called "fact-check" journalism. It's as useless as the Pulitzer Prize that was awarded to the partisans that run Politifarce. Now that it's on people's radar we're seeing just how ridiculous it really is. Time to move "fact-checkers" to the back rooms, checking the veracity of stories" where they belong.
Possibly the worst media: I described the changes to Chron.com as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Some witty idiot on Twitter took that literally and replied that the Chron is "not sinking to the bottom of the ocean." Judging by this Houston Press story: Yes they are.
And finally:
Republicans are wrong: Democrats didn't "remove" God from their platform. They replaced him with Obama. If you're not the party of Religion then this is probably not a bad thing.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Alaska 2012
Alaska 2012, a set on Flickr.
Finally got the Alaska Trip pictures uploaded and (sort of) cleaned up over the weekend.
All I can say is that Alaska is, without question, the most beutiful place I've ever visited. Enjoy.
Note: there are 190 something pictures in the entire set. I'm not sure why flickr posts only a few here instead of just posting one and then the link. Odd.
Friday, August 31, 2012
US Airways/American Airlines Merger: A bad idea that probably has to happen
American Airlines, US Airways merger talks start. Scott Mayerowitz, AP via Chron.com
A merger will fold together two airlines that already have a lot of duplicate operations and, presumeably, place US Airways management in charge of the new company. There doesn't seem to be many strategic reasons for following through with this merger other than the fact US Airways CEO Doug Parker wants, desperately, to be in charge of a big airline.
I've a feeling that's all it's going to take. Given the size of competitors Delta and United economies of scale suggest that, if there is no merger, or if one player is left out, they're doomed long term. This will leave three giant airlines and a bevvy of small, low-cost, poviders battling it out of the consumer dollar. It will also signal a retrenchment in the North American airline industry. The big three will dominate their hubs with reduced competition which will result in higher consumer prices. Ironically, although it will anger the consumer, this will be healthier for the remaining players in the long run. Higher prices = increased profitability. In order to find low fares passengers will be faced with ticketing at fee-based airlines such as Spirit and Allegiant, with Southwest remaining the outlier. (advertised as low-cost -but not really- with (for now) fewer fees).
While there's still chatter out there, from industry analysts and bloggers that this merger is unlikely to occur, I firmly believe that it will. I also believe that Federal anti-trust approval is almost a given. Were there any concerns on those fronts they would have arisen in the United-Continental tie.
A "new" American Airlines is coming, whether or not it's an "improved" AA remains to be seen. I'm doubtful on the latter.
American Airlines and US Airways are one step closer to a potential merger.
The companies said Friday they signed legal documents allowing them to confidentially exchange information. But a deal is still far from reality."It does not mean we are merging — it simply means we have agreed to work together to discuss and analyze a potential merger," US Airways CEO Doug Parker said in a letter to employees Friday.
A merger will fold together two airlines that already have a lot of duplicate operations and, presumeably, place US Airways management in charge of the new company. There doesn't seem to be many strategic reasons for following through with this merger other than the fact US Airways CEO Doug Parker wants, desperately, to be in charge of a big airline.
I've a feeling that's all it's going to take. Given the size of competitors Delta and United economies of scale suggest that, if there is no merger, or if one player is left out, they're doomed long term. This will leave three giant airlines and a bevvy of small, low-cost, poviders battling it out of the consumer dollar. It will also signal a retrenchment in the North American airline industry. The big three will dominate their hubs with reduced competition which will result in higher consumer prices. Ironically, although it will anger the consumer, this will be healthier for the remaining players in the long run. Higher prices = increased profitability. In order to find low fares passengers will be faced with ticketing at fee-based airlines such as Spirit and Allegiant, with Southwest remaining the outlier. (advertised as low-cost -but not really- with (for now) fewer fees).
While there's still chatter out there, from industry analysts and bloggers that this merger is unlikely to occur, I firmly believe that it will. I also believe that Federal anti-trust approval is almost a given. Were there any concerns on those fronts they would have arisen in the United-Continental tie.
A "new" American Airlines is coming, whether or not it's an "improved" AA remains to be seen. I'm doubtful on the latter.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Future United: IAH
Stumbled across a pretty good piece of speculative blogging this morning regarding United's future plans for IAH. Some you probably already know, some you might not.
United's Hub Capacity Dance. Edward Russell, Airline Business Blog @ FlightGlobal.com
Of course, there's nothing new about the 10% capacity cut to IAH, we've already started to see the effects of that, as well as United's terrible PR blunder blaming the City Council's Southwest Airlines decision for changes that were probably already in the works. What was new, to me, was the addition of an Airbus base in Houston and the probably shifting out of the legacy Continental 737 fleet to Chicago. This means that, overall, Houston is going to get older, less reliable birds that are lacking in amenities and comfort. Houston is also going to be inundated with the new "slim" fuel-cutting seats that are also, according to some people who have sat in them on international airlines, borderline excruciating if United doesn't decide to accept the extra padding upgrade. Given United's operational stance of late, I'd say the odds are 30% for them spending extra money for passenger comfort.
From what I can see, these changes portend a drop in the hard product flight experience for UA customers flying out of IAH. They're going to be put into older, and in some cases woefully under-powered, metal with uncomfortable seats, no chance of getting in-flight wi-fi, a reduced number of flights with in-seat power jacks and worse choices for in-flight entertainment. While it has been revealed that IAH is going to receive theNightmare Dreamliner even that is a service reduction, in terms of overall seat numbers.
Given that Houston customers don't appear to be in a conciliatory mood I'm unsure why United would want to focus many resources in that hub, choosing instead to focus on Chicago and Denver where they're being given financial reasons to do so. You have to think that the IAH-AMS and IAH-LHR plannedNightmare Dreamliner service is going to be directed more to connecting passengers than anyone flying based out of Houston. (Although, it will be a plus to Houstonians should they choose to partake in the service, if the plane is as advertised)
Continental billed IAH as "their largest hub" and spent years throwing Billions of dollars of hard and soft product toward it. Now that United has taken over the economies of scale have determined that IAH, while still a prominent hub to be sure, will not be the key player in the game that it once was. Is this attributable to the Southwest/HOU expansion decision as United claims? Certainly not, but the decision to abandon long-term agreements at IAH certainly didn't help. So, getting back to the title of this post: Future United at IAH is certainly going to be much less cutting edge and passenger friendly than present United at the same. IAH will move from a global hub to a more regional (South America) hub with a noticeable downgrade to the domestic hard product.
Probably not the future the Houston Airport System had in mind when they started this fracas, but a future that they could probably do very little to prevent from materializing. Given the nature of large companies, these changes have been on the drawing board for a while, City Council and the HAS have just provided United with a scapegoat allowing them to justify it. That no one is buying into their flimsy rationalization is totally beside the point.
United's Hub Capacity Dance. Edward Russell, Airline Business Blog @ FlightGlobal.com
The Chicago-based airline is in the midst of a network realignment that should build on the strengths of its 10 hubs while eliminating the weaknesses. Part of this is a 10% capacity cut at its largest hub in Houston by 2015 that, while officially in response to the local city council's decision to allow Southwest Airlines to build a federal inspection services facility for international arrivals at the city's Hobby airport, is widely seen as a big part of the rationalisation of the legacy Continental Airlines and legacy Untied networks.
(...)
New crew bases, increased gate counts and lower airport rental fees in Chicago and Denver all suggest that this capacity shift is happening. First, United said that it will open a Boeing 737 base in Chicago and a Boeing 767 base in Denver with legacy Continental crews, and an Airbus base in Houston with legacy United crews in August. This allows it to bring the Continental 737 fleet, which is larger and younger than the Airbus A319 and A320 fleet, to O'Hare and more larger aircraft to Denver.
Of course, there's nothing new about the 10% capacity cut to IAH, we've already started to see the effects of that, as well as United's terrible PR blunder blaming the City Council's Southwest Airlines decision for changes that were probably already in the works. What was new, to me, was the addition of an Airbus base in Houston and the probably shifting out of the legacy Continental 737 fleet to Chicago. This means that, overall, Houston is going to get older, less reliable birds that are lacking in amenities and comfort. Houston is also going to be inundated with the new "slim" fuel-cutting seats that are also, according to some people who have sat in them on international airlines, borderline excruciating if United doesn't decide to accept the extra padding upgrade. Given United's operational stance of late, I'd say the odds are 30% for them spending extra money for passenger comfort.
From what I can see, these changes portend a drop in the hard product flight experience for UA customers flying out of IAH. They're going to be put into older, and in some cases woefully under-powered, metal with uncomfortable seats, no chance of getting in-flight wi-fi, a reduced number of flights with in-seat power jacks and worse choices for in-flight entertainment. While it has been revealed that IAH is going to receive the
Given that Houston customers don't appear to be in a conciliatory mood I'm unsure why United would want to focus many resources in that hub, choosing instead to focus on Chicago and Denver where they're being given financial reasons to do so. You have to think that the IAH-AMS and IAH-LHR planned
Continental billed IAH as "their largest hub" and spent years throwing Billions of dollars of hard and soft product toward it. Now that United has taken over the economies of scale have determined that IAH, while still a prominent hub to be sure, will not be the key player in the game that it once was. Is this attributable to the Southwest/HOU expansion decision as United claims? Certainly not, but the decision to abandon long-term agreements at IAH certainly didn't help. So, getting back to the title of this post: Future United at IAH is certainly going to be much less cutting edge and passenger friendly than present United at the same. IAH will move from a global hub to a more regional (South America) hub with a noticeable downgrade to the domestic hard product.
Probably not the future the Houston Airport System had in mind when they started this fracas, but a future that they could probably do very little to prevent from materializing. Given the nature of large companies, these changes have been on the drawing board for a while, City Council and the HAS have just provided United with a scapegoat allowing them to justify it. That no one is buying into their flimsy rationalization is totally beside the point.
Short Haul Flights (08/28/2012)
Still trying to catch up from last weekends travel......
Remember my post about how credit card referrals were damaging travel blogs? I offer the following into evidence:
View From the Wing 1
View From the Wing 2
One Mile at a Time 1
One Mile at a Time 2
In both cases the bloggers in question devoted more than 1/2 their daily blogging output to credit card referral deals. They're both averaging 2 credit cards posts for 1 travel post. The natives are starting to get restless.
Besides being a thinly veiled outlet for advocacy journalism, one of the complaints against the Texas Tribune is that they are too Austin focused. I'm not sure about that since they are a political reporting operation, but they sure do love them some Texas Longhorns.
Romney's big mistake was not making a birther joke, it was assuming that anyone on the left has a sense of humor.
Yes, Please, Please, Please draft Cecile Richards - Because what the Texas Democrats really need to do to show the State they are in line with their values is to nominate someone slightly to the left of Ralph Nader. Either the Texas Dems are happy with their plucky underdog status or they really don't get it. (I'm betting on the latter)
Speaking of the fringe left, David Crossley has finally wandered so far off the reservation that even Kuffer can't follow him. What you have lining up against the Metro referendum are all of the right enemies to have. Given that a "yes" vote is a good idea. Maybe this little snit-fit will cause Mayor Parker to reconsider some of her Metro board choices and make some serious replacements but I'm not holding my breath.
Apparently, the only things you need to know about Michael Williams is that he's pro voucher and previously was an elected chairman of the Texas Railroad commission. The fact that both of his parents were educators, and that he has a resume full of education experience that makes him qualified for the job, is only something one in Texas' lockstep political media would choose to report on were he of a more mainstream (read: liberal) frame of mind toward education issues.
So, the RNC protesters don't like Texas. This makes sense when you consider the Occupy and Code Pink movements don't like to have anything to do with anything that's remotely successful, including their own groups. Which is why they're dressing up as vaginas and had such a crime problem in their public park sit-ins.
And finally.....
So, you're a member of the media and you're not invited to a RNC delegate party. What to do? If you're one reporting member of Texas' lockstep political media the answer to that question is to make up a laundry list of things you imagine they might do and then suggest that surely they wouldn't, and then use that as the basis for your story. Yes, this is how far Texas political reporting has devolved over the last several years.
Remember my post about how credit card referrals were damaging travel blogs? I offer the following into evidence:
View From the Wing 1
View From the Wing 2
One Mile at a Time 1
One Mile at a Time 2
In both cases the bloggers in question devoted more than 1/2 their daily blogging output to credit card referral deals. They're both averaging 2 credit cards posts for 1 travel post. The natives are starting to get restless.
Besides being a thinly veiled outlet for advocacy journalism, one of the complaints against the Texas Tribune is that they are too Austin focused. I'm not sure about that since they are a political reporting operation, but they sure do love them some Texas Longhorns.
Romney's big mistake was not making a birther joke, it was assuming that anyone on the left has a sense of humor.
Yes, Please, Please, Please draft Cecile Richards - Because what the Texas Democrats really need to do to show the State they are in line with their values is to nominate someone slightly to the left of Ralph Nader. Either the Texas Dems are happy with their plucky underdog status or they really don't get it. (I'm betting on the latter)
Speaking of the fringe left, David Crossley has finally wandered so far off the reservation that even Kuffer can't follow him. What you have lining up against the Metro referendum are all of the right enemies to have. Given that a "yes" vote is a good idea. Maybe this little snit-fit will cause Mayor Parker to reconsider some of her Metro board choices and make some serious replacements but I'm not holding my breath.
Apparently, the only things you need to know about Michael Williams is that he's pro voucher and previously was an elected chairman of the Texas Railroad commission. The fact that both of his parents were educators, and that he has a resume full of education experience that makes him qualified for the job, is only something one in Texas' lockstep political media would choose to report on were he of a more mainstream (read: liberal) frame of mind toward education issues.
So, the RNC protesters don't like Texas. This makes sense when you consider the Occupy and Code Pink movements don't like to have anything to do with anything that's remotely successful, including their own groups. Which is why they're dressing up as vaginas and had such a crime problem in their public park sit-ins.
And finally.....
So, you're a member of the media and you're not invited to a RNC delegate party. What to do? If you're one reporting member of Texas' lockstep political media the answer to that question is to make up a laundry list of things you imagine they might do and then suggest that surely they wouldn't, and then use that as the basis for your story. Yes, this is how far Texas political reporting has devolved over the last several years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)