I worked for TWA from 1989-1999. TWA tried fewer coach seats and called if Comfort Class. It didn't work. They then went to 2 classes of service. a 727 went from f12 Y134 to F12 Y120 and finally to F20 Y 120. The 727 was fianally retired. AA also tried restructuring its fares. They had exactly 4 coach fares. They had a walk-up 7 day, 14 day 21 day and 30 day. That lasted less than a year. So AA is trying something that they havetried and failed with in the past. They have also tried someting that TWA had tried and failed with in the past. I now fly 3 airlines America west, Jet Blue and Southwest. I don't have time for the games. Why should I fly at their convenience to get a reasonable fare. I don't neccesarilly care if I get the lowest fare, but I'd like a reasonable fare at a time near to or when I want to travel. I also want to be able to change my travel plans if need be with at least some consideration from an airline. Things do happen after all. AA is the last airline I'll call. Airlines don't really try to do a good job. They just try to get good press. Once all is said and done.A seat on a plane is a seat on a plane. Keep the peanuts. I'll bring a lunch Steve TWA 1989-1999 --- Bill Hough <psa188@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Giving An Inch and Charging Three Yards > > BY JOE BRANCATELLI > > June 5, 2003 -- First, the bad news: More room > in coach at American Airlines is dead, on every > flight and at every seat. Forget the airline's > dissembling, partial withdrawal announced late last > month. By this time next year, you can bet your > aching knees that American will be back to 31 inches > of legroom. > > Next, the good news: American's decision to cap > first- and coach-class fares on some routes presages > the creation of a fairer, flatter pricing structure. > When the dust clears, American will emerge as what > it hopes will be the very model of a modern major > carrier: Coach fare structure and service at or near > the standards set by Southwest and JetBlue and > premium classes with comparatively affordable, > walk-up fares. > > Finally, the coulda-woulda-shouldas: American could > have made More Room work if it hadn't allowed > corporate arrogance to once again obliterate a good > service initiative. And it would have been able to > save More Room even now if only it had adhered to > its own dictums about what travelers should pay for > the privilege of flying American. > > Don't be surprised that American is axing its > clumsily named "More Room Throughout Coach" > initiative. The airline signaled the change last > August when it announced the retirement of its > obsolete Fokker jets. Never a favorite > of frequent flyers, the smallish Fokkers at least > had first-class cabins and the More Room > configuration of 34 inches in coach. In almost all > markets, however, American has replaced the Fokkers > with all-coach American Eagle regional jets offering > just 31 inches of pitch. > > American neglected to mention that switch last month > when it ludicrously claimed that More Room will > remain available on 80 percent of its departures. > And don't believe for a second that the switch to > Less Room on Boeing B-757s and Airbus A-300s is > where American will now draw the line. One by one, > each of American's fleet types will be stripped of > More Room. It took American almost two years to pull > the seats out of its coach cabins. The retreat to > Less Room can't be accomplished all at once, either. > Converting one plane series at a time is simply a > tactical approach to the mechanics of the process. > > "You can't sell an airline like American with two > kinds of pitch in coach," one AA executive told me > the day after the Less Room announcement. "We've got > enough trouble trying to differentiate our product > without trying to explain why some planes are > comfortable and others aren't." > > So what's American's game? Phase in Less Room > tactically because that's the only way you can do > it, publicly deny that you're making a strategic > retreat and, while competitors are trying to figure > out what the hell you're doing, buy enough time to > recreate the fare structure. > > And that's the good news: One of the reasons > American is wedging us back into knee-crunching > coach seats is that most of the carrier's management > is finally convinced that only a simpler, fairer, > flatter fare structure can generate new revenue for > American Airlines. About this time next year--or > maybe sooner if braver AA pricing gurus have their > way--American will implement a fare structure that > pretty much mirrors the Southwest/JetBlue approach: > six or eight coach fares that aren't strangled by > convoluted purchase rules that depress discretionary > leisure travel or hobbled by stratospheric walk-up > prices that depress legitimate business-travel > demand. > > American previewed a version of the new fare > structure on the three New York-California routes > where it altered prices at the same time it made the > Less Room announcement. American capped coach fares > at $299 one-way, the new de facto maximum pioneered > by JetBlue. But the real news was in first class, > where American capped one-way fares at $599. > > American didn't have to cap first-class fares > because it doesn't compete with discounters up > front. But the goal was to tell frequent flyers: You > want seat comfort and some cosseting? We now have a > reasonable first-class price. > > That's what American sees going forward: Walk-up > prices competitive with discounters at the back of > the bus and a new regimen of affordable fares up > front. > > "Most of us are now convinced that the old pricing > systems can't be fixed," an AA executive told me > last week. "The new model is simplicity in coach and > affordability in first so we can actually sell some > seats up front instead of giving them away as > upgrades. We hope that means more revenue." > > Which is where we come back to the extra seats being > wedged into coach. Critics who say that it's stupid > for American to add coach seats because they aren't > selling the seats they already fly aren't looking at > the facts. As it has shed jets and frequencies, > American's load factor--the percentage of seats > filled--is rising. American filled 73.7 percent of > its seats last month, a jump of 4.1 points compared > to last May. May's load factor was also ten points > higher than its 63.7 percent load factor in January, > 2000, the month before American announced More Room. > > > If American is right--lower, simpler fares will > generate badly needed extra revenue by increasing > traffic--it needs to find additional seats. By > "de-peaking" its hubs, American has increased the > number of hours each plane can fly. That means more > seats. But with few new jets in the pipeline and > none of its parked planes deemed cost-effective to > recommission, American believes it needs the 12-15 > seats that it will squeeze back into each of its > existing aircraft. > > All this makes sense to me. For travelers who want > the lowest possible fares, American will offer > simple coach prices and industry-standard coach > seating. For business travelers who want more > comfort, there will be an affordable fare for a seat > in a premium class. > > Still, there are the coulda-woulda-shouldas. We > could have had More Room in coach if only American > hadn't been so arrogant. It never made More Room the > centerpiece of the airline's strategy. It allowed > More Room to be sabotaged by sporadic and often > uninspired advertising; unfocused, ham-fisted > marketing; the disastrous TWA acquisition; the > recession; and then the denial and paralysis of the > post-9/11 period. > > How badly did American manage More Room? One small, > personal example. Almost 18 months after American > first announced More Room, I bought and flew two > dozen segments and then wrote a column raving about > it. American was thrilled and posted the column on > its internal Web site. But when I tried to forward > American some of the thousands of E-mails I received > from frequent flyers who said they hadn't tried More > Room because they had never heard of it, American > wasn't interested. It's corporate policy: American > is never interested in hearing from business > travelers. > > And then, of course, there were the fares. Departed > American chief executive Don Carty was always fond > of saying that he was convinced travelers would pay > 35 percent more to fly American. So why didn't > American ever put that maxim into practice? If > American thinks $299 one-way is a fair price to pay > for Less Room on flights between New York and Long > Beach or Orange County, California, why is it > charging $1,233 to fly with More Room between New > York and Los Angeles? That's 312 percent more. And > $311 for each extra inch. > > When they write the history of the failure of More > Room, someone ought to remember that. More Room > might have succeeded if only American didn't try to > get away with giving an inch and charging three > yards. > > What do you think? I'd like to know. Contact me at > JBrancatelli@xxxxxxxx > > > > > The best slide auction on the net: > http://www.auctiontransportation.com/sites/psa188/ > Attend the Newark Airport Airline Collectible Show & > Sale: > http://www.freeyellow.com/members/psa188/page1.html > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com