First time here? Check out the site's "greatest hits" or read a random post from the archives. Feel free to ask a question, and consider subscribing to the latest posts via RSS or e-mail. Thanks for visiting!

A few years ago when gas prices were at $1 a gallon, I laughed at your regular host, Better Living Through Miles, as he told me he had declined a free upgrade to an SUV from a rental car company. Was it the safety I wondered? No, it was the horrendous gas mileage he replied.

Well it turns out that lots more people are following BLTM’s frugal lead these days. The WSJ has a story in today’s Personal Journal reporting that daily rates on SUV rentals are now lower than fuel-efficient mid-sized cars across the country. In Boston, it’s $71 for a mid-size, $63 for an SUV. In DC, it’s $83 and $71. And in LA, $41 to $37.

Wow, with spreads like that already reflecting the high gas prices, it’s almost time to step in and rent a Jeep! Anyone for some offroading? However, be sure to check the rental agreement since many companies don’t like their 4×4s actually going off-road. And for city driving, the lower gas mileage could be a real buzzkill.

Do you take into account the mileage of cars you rent these days?

–Dr. Vino

(Update May 29, 2006: Full WSJ article now available without a subscription here.)

tags: travel | rental cars

I know that car rental companies are getting more onerous in their restrictions on rentals. (Like low-mileage charges…)

I also previously discussed the reduction in the grace period from 59 minutes to 30 minutes at Hertz.

But yesterday, when I picked up a car from Dollar Rent a Car at Salt Lake City Airport, I was treated to two conditions in the contract that I’d never seen from a major rental agency at an airport:

- No grace period at all. None. Pick up the car at 12 noon, return it a week later at 12:10? Pay an extra hour.

- No taking the car out of state. I’ve seen this at Enterprise Rent-a-Car for insurance rentals, but at an airport? From a major agency that deals with tourists, businesspeople, etc.?

Dollar should consider this my last patronage…

tags: travel | car rental | Dollar Rent a Car

Off to Utah for a week, so limited posting. Perhaps we’ll have a special guest star, but no promises…

(image)

El Al vs. the TSA
Maybe it was the report of Jessica Simpson putting her dog through an x-ray machine at LAX. Or the Wired story about the idiotic airline-by-airline management of the no-fly list in America. Or maybe it was the story about dogs being trained to sniff out DVDs instead of, say, explosives, at London’s Stansted Airport. (Ok, that’s UK security, but still…) In any case, Israel’s national airline, El Al, has been quietly screening its own luggage at US airports (LAX, JFK, MIA, and ORD) with the consent of the TSA. In fact, they’ve replaced the TSA’s software on scanning equipment, because it wasn’t “sensitive” enough, and assigned their own screeners to the job (though TSA staff remain on-site to supervise). The issue came to light when El Al sought to expand the process to Newark Liberty International Airport.

Wilma vs. the Reverse Pyramid (sounds like a wrestling matchup)
Airlines regularly tinker with their boarding procedures, in an effort to move people onboard faster and reduce the time between flights. Passengers are more commonly called by seating area or zone, rather than row number. Wired breaks down the competing models — the classic “back to front,” AirTran’s “rotating zones,” United’s “Wilma,” USAirways’ “Reverse Pyramid,” and Southwest’s zoned free-for-all (more generously termed “self-organizing”). Click on the “See How it Works” image/link in the article for a graphical demonstration. The reverse pyramid especially seems to make a lot of sense. (Note: While the demo shows first class boarding first, it ignores elite members’ early boarding privilege, for what it’s worth.) Suggestion for the crack programmers at SeatGuru): It might be nice to know which boarding zone a seat is in before you select it…

Wine vs. … well, vs. nothing. Just wine.
As mentioned here, wine bars are expanding in U.S. airports. USA Today reports that Sacramento Airport has approved the opening of a wine bar, which will feature local/regional wines. As a fan of the wines of Amador County, I give this a big thumbs up. The bar will be run by Taste, Inc., the folks behind Washington-Dulles’ Vino Volo.

Airbus vs. the Greyhound bus
25 years after frequent flyer programs were launched, Greyhound’s new frequent rider program “Road Rewards” hits the street. Questions remain: Will they seek membership in OneWorld, SkyTeam, or Star Alliance? Do they just use Mapquest to figure out your points? (via USA Today)

(image)
tags: travel | air travel | airport security | El Al | TSA | wine bars | Greyhound | airplane seating

The folks at FareCompare have improved their site to create a new fare search tool. It builds on the lists of newly-lowered fares that they’ve been offering for the last few weeks (previously mentioned here).

The new tool is notable in that it lets you list and sort fares not only by destination (obviously), but by airline, price, price per mile cost, and price change. Looking to find a cheap fare to beef up your mileage balance? Search by price per mile. Looking to find the recent fare sales? Search by savings. But perhaps most importantly for people loyal to a particular airline, it allows for sorting by major US carrier. (International destinations are covered, but not international airlines. JetBlue and Southwest aren’t included either.)

It’s reminiscent in some ways of the Travelocity-powered fare lists on Yahoo — see the Chicago example here. To view another city, change the last three letters in the link to the city or airport code for your desired departure location. But the FareCompare tool is better.

There’s room for improvement, of course: I’d still like to see an option to search fares by departure date, or at least departure month, right up front, before clicking on the output. It’s annoying to find a low fare for a destination you’re traveling to next month, only to find the fare is only valid for this coming weekend.

But it’s a great start. Add it to your arsenal of travel search tools.

A few years ago, Warren Buffett assessed the airline business this way:

…if a capitalist had been present at Kittyhawk back in the early 1900s, he should have shot Orville Wright. He would have saved his progeny money. But seriously, the airline business has been extraordinary. It has eaten up capital over the past century like almost no other business because people seem to keep coming back to it and putting fresh money in.

Sure enough, fresh money is coming into the business.

Silverjet, the latest entrant (alongside Maxjet and Eos) in the London-New York all-business-class space, successfully raised £25 million (approx. US$46.6 million) in an IPO. 75% of shares went to institutional investors, with management retaining 19%. While funding does not guarantee that the airline will actually fly, it’s certainly far more likely.

The company’s goal? To “offer passengers ‘the same level of service as EOS but at the same price as Maxjet.’” Flying from the London-area Luton airport, served primarily by discount airlines, Silverjet promises speedy check-in, as late as 30 minutes before departure.

Unlike Maxjet and Eos, Silverjet states that it plans to expand outside the transatlantic space:

The airline has already identified 30 routes that would suit the airline’s business model and started the licensing process for three long-haul routes outside North America.

We’ll be watching. But, perhaps like Warren Buffett, we won’t be buying the stock.

The proposed open skies treaty between the United States and the European Union (earlier commentary here and here) suffered another setback last week, when the US Department of Transportation restated its proposed rules for foreign ownership of US-based airlines. At present, non-US individuals or entities can hold no more than 25% of the voting stock of America’s airlines; the EU wants the US to raise that number to 49% — the same limit that Europe mandates for its own airlines.

Though technically separate issues, the open skies treaty and the foreign ownership rule are intimately linked in negotiations, ostensibly for “security reasons”:

“Open skies” discussions between the European Union and the United States have stumbled over U.S. concerns that the new regulations would allow European airlines to play a greater role in the management of U.S. carriers. Because of domestic opposition, it was reported this week that the United States has decided to delay the new rules. As a result, a European Union spokesman said, the EU will not move forward this year with an agreement.

Any eventual agreement would open the skies no earlier than summer 2007.

The latest rules go a step further than the existing restrictions. They specifically state that American airline shareholders or boardmembers must have veto power over foreigners: International investors’ purchases would buy them equity, but not control, as they would have no voice if the Americans on the board objected.

Feel safer, knowing these rules are in place? Maybe we should extend the same rules to banks, car makers, and insurance underwriters, whose products could presumably have security ramifications as well. Let’s build a moat while we’re at it.

This is economic nationalism at its finest, and it’s probably unworkable in practice. Will every corporate decision be subject to USDOT regulation in light of these new rules? If an airline makes any change, must they demonstrate that an American made the decision? Ridiculous.

Caught in the crossfire is Virgin America, the proposed San Francisco-based discount carrier. Some controversy (and delay in license approval) has emerged over whether the new airline is owned or controlled by the Virgin mothership and its headstrong helmsman Richard Branson, in violation of existing USDOT rules. (Incidentally, Virgin America’s chairman is Canadian-born (gasp!!) Donald Carty, former head of AMR Corporation (American Airlines).) Even California’s Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is getting into the game, lobbying the federal government to approve the Virgin America application.

Once again, nationalist bluster and the security canard are getting in the way of reason — and lower fares.

(image)
tags: travel | air travel | open skies | regulation | economic nationalism | security

(Updated August 6, 2006; original text is crossed out, corrections follow in text. Reason for update is here.)

Last week we discussed coach tickets that automatically upgrade actually book into first class (usually Q-UP or Y-UP fares; Z fares book into business class on three-class or international flights). (Updated August 6, 2006: Q-UP and Y-UP fares are first class fares, NOT economy fares with an upgrade. A minor distinction, but an important one in case your flight gets overbooked, or if a gate agent tries to tell you your “upgrade” was denied. See here.)

The folks at FareCompare have come up with two useful tools for finding discounted first class fares. First, they offer a Q-UP and Y-UP fare list for U.S. cities. This link will take you to the y-up (or equivalent) fares for Chicago; change the departure city at the top of the page.

Even better, they offer a handy guide (PDF) for booking Q-UP and Y-UP fares on the airlines’ websites. (Citing problems with the airlines’ homepages, they refer you to Expedia.com instead for USAirways and Delta.)

I’d add a caveat: Some of the discounted first class fares their methods find are nonrefundable first class. For example, a United QUAUPN fare is nonrefundable; a QUAUP fare can usually be refunded.) The fare without the N at the end might just cost a few dollars more (single digits) but it offers much more flexibility. You may need to pick up the phone to buy the refundable version.

- Neat video clip of FedEx aircraft on approach to Memphis Airport during a thunderstorm, avoiding the cells. (via coudal.com)
(Update: Original video link is dead, click here instead)

- United Airlines’ pilots to ramp up friendliness campaign. Part of this includes making official the previously occasional practice of pilots handing out their business cards to the most frequent flyers, with a little note thanking them for their business. My next United flight is Saturday; we’ll see if this mid-tier elite gets a card in coach…

- Fellow Star Alliance carrier USAirways reported a small profit this past quarter. Kudos to them!

- Best. Airline. Slogan. EVER. “Blazing like a mother comet producing meteor showers throughout the world.” (Starflyer Airlines of Japan, via coudal, again!)

- While other airlines have announced revamping of first or business class service, Qantas announces improvements to economy. Minor changes, but still…

- An amazing new resource for people in North America looking for cheap fares, though it’s designed for travelers going on a mileage run — a cheap trip whose purpose isn’t to actually visit some other location, but to earn frequent flyer miles (usually for elite status). Fares are ranked on a cents-per-mile basis and published to a FlyerTalk message board. See here.

- While metal knives are an endangered species on board aircraft, spoons are still the stainless steel you love. Love airline spoons? This is your site. (via boingboing)

Warning: Don’t try this on flights to/from Washington National Airport… From The Observer:

Angry economy passengers stormed the first-class section on an international flight in a mid-air mutiny. The pilot of the Pakistan International Airlines jet radioed ahead, and 14 people were arrested on suspicion of endangering the aircraft after landing at Manchester Airport.

Cabin crew lost control after the flight was delayed for four hours in searing heat on the tarmac at Islamabad airport in Pakistan. With economy packed, a number of passengers decided to upgrade themselves to the empty luxury section at the front of the Boeing 747. It is believed the crew asked them to move but they refused, so police were called in as the plane landed in the UK on Friday morning.

A spokesman for Greater Manchester Police said: ‘Police at Manchester Airport were alerted to a problem on an incoming PIA flight from Pakistan. When the plane landed, 14 of the passengers were arrested on suspicion of endangering an aircraft in flight.’ The airline refused to comment.

Note, however, that they didn’t land the plane enroute. They waited to land in Manchester, so the “mutineers” enjoyed more spacious seating for the remainder of their flight. Who says that crime doesn’t pay!

It’s no surprise that European discount carriers advertise ludicrously low fares and then start tacking on the fees. But what ARE some of those fees? The Guardian takes on Ryanair:

Customers seeking a 79p fare on Ryanair end up paying far more. A traveller paying by credit card and needing to check in a single bag will end up with a bill of £20.22 - after tax, an airport charge, a baggage charge, a payment fee and a 33p “wheelchair levy” to cover the cost of carrying disabled passengers.

But it is the insurance surcharge, amounting to more than 10% of Ryanair’s average fare, which is coming under the greatest scrutiny. In common with other airlines, Ryanair introduced it in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001 to cover a spike in the cost of insuring planes.

Yes, yes, Ryanair is still dirt cheap. It’s also really nasty to their employees and treats them to some questionable training practices. My favorite revelation in the Guardian piece: “On one occasion, [Ryanair chief Michael O’Leary] banned head office staff from charging their mobile phones at work on the grounds that it was costing Ryanair too much money.” (And you thought finding an outlet at the airport was bad!)

Such fees, plus the fuel surcharges that airlines are continually tacking on, are one area where I’d really like to see stronger regulation. As I’ve suggested earlier, just giving a base fare and then tacking on endless fees is false advertising. In the case of Ryanair, collecting fees for charges they don’t incur is not just unethical: It’s their business model.

tags: travel | air travel | Ryanair

Microjets, a.k.a. very-light jets (VLJs), are back in the news. The Wall Street Journal profiled Vern Raburn, the man behind Eclipse Aviation and the Eclipse 500 jet, which promises to hit the market next year.

Microjets’ primary market niche, as discussed earlier here, is for air taxi service, connecting cities which don’t have regular (or convenient) scheduled air service. Two thirds of orders are going to air-taxi hopefuls, with the remaining third primarily headed to recreational pilots.

Unlike private jets, VLJs won’t boast generous legroom or onboard amenities. The Eclipse 500 doesn’t even have an onboard toilet.

Yet buyers are reportedly pre-ordering the jets at a rate of one per day. Current price: $1.48 million.

One thing that’s missing entirely from the WSJ’s discussion is fuel economy, especially relevant given the recent rise in the price of oil. How fuel-efficient are these planes, anyway? Are they the Hummer or the Prius of the sky? And will they be economically feasible if oil rates remain high?

Even the private jet market has begun paying attention to fuel savings, through winglets. Some manufacturers, like their commercial aviation counterparts, have added these scoop-like extensions at the tips of wings to selected aircraft, reducing fuel burn by 5% or more. (How do they work? See here.) Aviation Partners, the maker of the aftermarket wing extensions for Boeing 737s and 757s, has an apparently even more fuel-efficient concept on deck: spiroid winglets. Odd-looking, but you can’t argue with fuel efficiency. (via IAG)