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!

Downgraded: Any last smidgen of credibility for inflight radio interviews
If you’ve ever flipped through the inflight audio dial on American Airlines, you’ll know that there’s a channel (#9) devoted to “interviews.” University of Chicago economist and Freakonomics author Steve Levitt was invited to participate… for the low, low price of $3995.00. I honestly never gave those interviews advertorials much of a listen, but the participants pay-to-play? And for that much?? Wow. ZERO credibility. (Thanks, Dr. Vino!)

Upgraded, possibly: The international airport welcome wagon
The U.S. Senate has passed a bill expanding the “model airport” program to other international ports of entry.

In April, the DHS designated Houston’s Bush International Airport as the first “model” port of entry, adding multilingual signs and informational videos narrated in Spanish, French, German and English to guide arriving travelers through the customs and immigration process. Arriving visitors are also presented with a “Welcome to the U.S.” brochure.

Unclear if general tone of the arrivals halls will feel any less like a police station, what with the fingerprinting and generally gruff attitude of every employee, but here’s hoping it helps.

Downgraded: British Airways’ standing among royal Qataris
Members of Qatar’s royal family were kicked off a British Airways flight for not following safety procedures, when they refused to take their seats. Why wouldn’t they sit? “After boarding, the women complained about the seats they had been allocated because they were next to men they did not know.” Setting aside the culture clash: None of this would have happened if British Airways would actually allow advance seat assignments for passengers on fares lower than the most expensive tickets. (Given their seating concerns, I imagine the royals flew discounted business business class.)

Downgraded: Your privacy (who knew it could be downgraded more?)
Under an expanded security agreement between the US and the EU, gobs and gobs of personal data can and will be shared with governments. If asked, airlines will be required to hand over any information they collect from you. Ask for a king-size bed as part of your package? Homeland Security will know. (Via Consumerist)

Upgraded: TSA Chief Kip Hawley’s internet presence
Downgraded: Logical explanations
Security guru Bruce Schneier is running a multi-part interview with TSA Director Kip Hawley this week. The first part is here. Bruce questions the logic of the 3-ounce liquid restrictions, etc. I’m happy to see Hawley reaching out again, but some of the answers just don’t cut it. For example: “If a TSO finds you or the contents of your bag suspicious, you might get interviewed and/or have your bags more closely examined. If the TSO throws your liquids in the trash, they don’t find you a threat.” Huh? What? Read the whole thing.

(image)

Back in March, I posted about Spirit Airlines’ $9 fare club, which charges a $29.95 annual fee to provide members with access to “private” sale fares, apparently as low as $9 each way. In recent weeks, I’ve been receiving multiple e-mails requesting that **I** cancel someone else’s membership in the Spirit $9 club.

Letters start like “I am being charged at $29.95 fee for membership in Spirit Club. I do not remember joining this and I need to be removed/canceled immediately.”

Huh?? Why are you asking ME? I mean, I’d love to help, but shouldn’t the question be addressed to the airline? What’s going on here?

A few web searches and clicks, and I think I’ve found the answer.

1) If you do a Google search for “Spirit Airlines $9 club” or “Spirit $9 club,” the top-ranked search result isn’t Spirit’s own page for their club. It’s this site. This post. (Interestingly, if you add the word “fare” to your search terms, such as “Spirit $9 fare club,” you actually do get the Spirit Airlines website. The quirks of Google!)

But surely people can see from the content of that post that Upgrade: Travel Better is not the same as Spirit Airlines? For pete’s sake, the post even skeptically suggests that you shouldn’t waste your money on their club membership. I guess people don’t read.

2) More importantly, why are so many people complaining about memberships that they say they didn’t purchase? Is Spirit automatically signing people up for this club without their consent?

Again, it seems that people don’t read. Here’s what I think is happening:

If you go to the Spirit Airlines website and select flights for purchase, you get a summary page that presents your selected itinerary. On that page, there is also the following text:

Aha! The dreaded opt-out. If you don’t uncheck the boxes, you automatically buy travel insurance and join the $9 club, which automatically renews for $29.95 a year. Very sneaky, questionably ethical, and clearly designed to prey on the folks who don’t read things carefully — the same people who don’t notice that this site isn’t Spirit Airlines.

So, what do you do if you were careless and signed up for the $9 club? You can certainly cancel, but you may be out of luck in getting a refund. The terms and conditions of the $9 club state:

1.3. A Member may cancel his or her membership in the Club at any time by selecting the unsubscribe option within their FREE SPIRIT account profile or by notifying Spirit in writing at the address at the bottom of this page. Cancellations by mail will take approximately 4 to 6 weeks to become effective.
[…]
3.2. After 3 months after initial enrollment in the Club, and on each anniversary thereafter, Members will be automatically charged an annual fee of $29.95 for membership in the Club. Annual fees are non-refundable, notwithstanding Member’s cancellation of membership in the Club.
[…]
3.5. A Member will not be entitled to any refund of any membership fees upon cancellation of membership in the Club.
(emphasis added)

By forcing people to opt out, instead of opting in, to join the club, and by then making refunds impossible, it’s clear that those club memberships are designed to be pure profit, preying on the careless. Classy as always, Spirit!

Disgruntled club members may not get a refund, but should be sure to follow the instructions above and cancel their memberships. But I’m afraid I can’t help anyone do that.

Related:
- Is Spirit Airlines’ new club worth joining?
- Downgrades: Spirit Airlines to charge for ALL luggage, coffee, and soda
- Spirit Airlines to Democrats: Drop Dead

For the past two weeks, Southwest Airlines has been experimenting with family-section seating for its flights departing from San Antonio.

For those that haven’t flown Southwest: The airline uses an “open seating” model, which means that there are no seat assignments on boarding passes. You get assigned to boarding group A, B, or C, depending on how early your check in. The A’s get to board first and choose their seats from the pick of the litter. (If you want to ensure that you get that “A” boarding pass, see here.)

There have been a few different family-boarding variants: For example, one version has the gate attendants calling up boarding group A to board first, as usual. Thereafter, families are asked to board.

In another model, one section of rows on board is “reserved” for families to sit together. (Perhaps they should call this “Mullet Seating” — business in the front, party in the rear.)

Other experimental boarding models are still pending.

The concept isn’t just designed to appeal to families traveling together. That’s a side effect. The reality is that it’s in the airline’s economic self-interest, and helps them turn planes around faster:

“The goal here is to speed up the boarding process,” [spokeswoman Brandy King] said. […] Families that board with the last groups often are unable find adjacent seats. So flight attendants have to move some passengers around so that families can sit together. It’s a time-consuming process, King said, but it’s necessary.

But individual travelers who played by the rules to get an early-boarding pass might be ticked off that a family of six could trump their seat choice.

So the question is put to you: Is family seating a good idea or not? Should other airlines try something similar, or avoid this like the plague? Vote in the poll below, and hit the comments!

Related:
- Getting the best seats on Southwest just got harder
- Confirmed: Southwest Airlines to test assigned seating; Northwest abandons boarding by rows
- Southwest to maintain unassigned seating (for now)
- Seat selection, highbrow and low: Eos, Maxjet, Southwest
- EasyJet starts charging for early boarding

(image)

eBay auction: Fly the A380 in its commercial debut
If you want to fly on the A380’s maiden commercial voyage with Singapore Airlines, and not just admire Lego miniature models (above), then eBay might have your ticket. Coming soon, a charity auction of tickets on the inaugural flight, with proceeds going to Community Chest of Singapore and Doctors Without Borders. When can you start bidding? That depends on Airbus: “The auction will take place a few weeks before the flight. SIA said that it would announce the launch date once it had a delivery date from Airbus for the plane.”

Westjet: No paper required
Canadian airline Westjet is eliminating the need for printouts of e-tickets. A copy of your ticket on your laptop or smartphone will do the trick. Might not work on US-Canada flights — the ID checker at American airports would likely still try to scrawl their initials on your LCD screen. (via TheAirlineHub)

Drunken pilots? So 1990s. But drunken astronauts?
“At least twice, astronauts were allowed to fly after flight surgeons and other astronauts warned they were so drunk they posed a flight-safety risk.” Be glad Virgin Galactic hasn’t launched.

Eos opens new lounge at Stansted
All-business Eos Airlines escalates the trans-Atlantic wars with a new lounge at London-Stansted.

Qantas introduces premium economy
Wider seats (19.5″), more legroom, legrests, better menu, laptop power, noise-canceling headsets, and a separate check-in line. If flying to Australia, and if you feel like paying about twice the price of coach (but half the price of business), then Qantas premium economy may be the ticket. Coming February 2008 on their Airbus A380s and Boeing 747s.

Time-waster: Statris!
Test your USA geography and your motor reflexes with Tetris-esque geo-fun! (via BoingBoing)

A short piece in Travel Weekly, the industry trade magazine, points to a potential problem for U.S.-based travelers and consumers:

[Travel industry financial-services bigwig Airlines Reporting Corporation] has been working on an incentive program that would reward travel agencies when corporate travel buyers switch from credit cards to cash when paying for airline tickets.

Under the plan, ARC would pay a rebate to ARC-approved travel agencies and corporate travel departments if they switched air accounts of $1 million or more from credit card to cash payment. The amount of the rebate would be less than the fee the airlines pay to credit card companies.

The plan reflects an ongoing concern among carriers about credit card merchant fees. Airlines see those fees as the next distribution cost that must be tackled, following on travel agent commissions and GDS costs.

Uh oh.

Bottom line: Airlines don’t want you paying with a credit card, since they give a small percentage of each sale to the credit card processing company. Naturally they’d love to keep that money.

Europeans, for example, are already accustomed to this. Take Ryanair, which charges 2.50 euros per flight per passenger if booking with a credit card. That adds up fast. Other airlines have less onerous policies, but there’s still a “convenience fee” added on for using plastic.

But credit cards aren’t just a convenience for shoppers. (And I’m not just talking about earning miles or points.) Credit cards carry important consumer protections that would be lost if airlines and agencies started preferring cash or debit. When there are schedule irregularities or airline bankruptcies, credit card companies can get you your money back. And cards come with insurance coverages that cash never does. (During our honeymoon, my Visa covered all our expenses when a tropical storm delayed our departure by a full day. Try getting that with cash.)

So as a consumer, and as a red-blooded American, I love my plastic. I’m not alone. It may be hard to get Americans to switch to cash, but it sure looks like the airlines are going to try.

Update: The ARC cash “discount” program has been shelved, for now. But the idea remains in circulation, even if this specific proposal didn’t work out at this time. “The airlines’ concerns included technical ones and ‘political issues,’ namely their relationships with credit card companies,” according to TravelWeekly. This is an idea that will come up again. Consider yourself warned.

(image)

American Airlines officially announced the expanded rollout of their improved business class seats to their Boeing 777 fleet yesterday, on the same day as United’s announcement of their next-generation business class. It’s good to see some improvements. But I’m sorry, American, United takes the trophy home on this one.

American’s seat is an step up from their old seats, but it’s a tweak, not a redesign. The seat is angled when fully extended, which in my book puts it immediately behind any 180-degree product.

Better lighting? Better power ports? Privacy screens? All good. But not top of the line.

Much like United’s announcement, the focus is on the hardware, not the service aspect. Don’t get me wrong, improvements of any kind are great, and I’m looking forward to similar bravado in improving economy class seats. (… crickets chirping …) But I’d like to see an American carrier commit not only to improving the mechanics of travel, but also the experience of travel. Consistent, friendly, helpful service. Is that too much to ask?

It’s official: United Airlines has rolled out their next-generation business class seats, and they look good. (They rolled out a first class prototype a few months ago.) The new seats will be fully lie-flat, which is great news. They’ll also alternate forward and rear-facing seats, much like British Airways’ ClubWorld.

Some videos introducing the new seats, with some fanfare, can be found at United’s press release. See also their promotional site for the new business class: suitedreams.united.com. Better yet: An anonymous tipster forwarded this internal company “employee q&a” memo (MS Word doc) — it’s still a sales pitch, but it’s pretty detailed.

So what to make of the new UA business class? Four thoughts:

First, the seats themselves look very good. 180-degree lie-flat. Proper. Screw those angled flat seats — gravity always wins, people! Nice big screen. Wider (23.5″) than the current-generation first seats. On its own, it looks like other new-generation seats out there, with larger screens. But they’re the best looking seats offered by an American airline right now.

Second, the alternating forward- and rear-facing seats will be an adjustment for many people, but British Airways has been doing it for a while, and they’re still selling tickets. (Interestingly, the promo photos show two parallel seats…)

Third, the service is supposed to improve along with the seat. But “service” is really “features.” That is, new food from chef Charlie Trotter, and better in-flight entertainment. (Movies and games.) But what’s missing from the company’s PR pitch is the actual service in flight. A great restaurant is more than a tasty-sounding menu and a nicely decorated room. It’s how the customer is treated that makes a world of difference. The same is true of an airline, and United’s in-flight customer service has been hit-or-miss lately. It’s not clear that the company realizes this, either. The promotional materials focus on the hardware, and not the human “software” that really makes or breaks the experience.

Fourth, and from the customer’s point of view, the question remains: How much is this going to cost? And how much more difficult will it be to get an upgrade (or free frequent flyer ticket) into these swank new seats? The airline says it’s not raising prices, or changing upgrade policies, but it’s easy to limit award supply or to blame “market forces” for a price hike.

At any rate, the new seats are a step forward for the airline. The new seats will only be on internationally-configured three-class Boeing 747, 777, and 767 planes, and the rollout will take thirty months to complete. I’m hoping to try them on for size some day soon.

The TSA has ruled that lighters will once again be legal to take onto airplanes, effective August 4. Not Zippo lighters or other “torch” lighters, just “common” lighters.

Amazing. Bottled water is still illegal, but a container containing a flammable liquid is permissible. That’s freedom, baby.

And why the two week delay? Do lighters’ magical terrorist powers somehow expire at midnight on August 3?

Sounds like a big step forward in the expansion plans of all-smoking airline Smintair!

Speaking of Smintair, the tobbaco-laden German/British airline with the absurd claim that its air will be healthier than nonsmoking airlines’, looks like it’s actually making headway. They recently put up a timetable (pdf) that has them flying Dusseldorf to Tokyo and on to Shanghai starting October 28. The countdown is on.

The Smintair website remains one of my favorites, for sheer comedy. Everything from the poorly translated English, to the 1970s porn-esque styling, to nuggets like this line from the employment page: “Allergics to any kind of smoke or aviation specific conditions, militant Anti-Smokers, or people with other social deficiencies are kindly asked to not apply.”

(image)

Virgin America’s website crashes (Mechanical delay?)
Virgin America finally opened its virtual doors for business, and within minutes, their site crashed. As Cranky noted, this might be the sort of thing they prepared for a little better. Maybe they should have upgraded from that $6.95/month Blue Host web hosting plan. Flights start August 8. If you want to buy tickets on Virgin America, and they’ve got some good promotional fares going, you can call them at 1.877.FLY.VIRGIN.

As I write this, a quick search shows that their flights don’t yet seem to be loaded on all the major online booking sites. Too bad: I was about to suggest booking online with Hotwire or Priceline, since both are waiving booking fees for all airfare on all airlines for the rest of the summer. But VirginAmerica’s fares aren’t available yet on those sites. No luck on Expedia or Travelocity, either. So far, I’ve only found the fares on Orbitz. If it’s any consolation, some airlines, such as jetBlue, are matching some sale fares. (aff)

Update 11pm: Virgin America’s site is back up. Huzzah.

Simpsons marketing goes airborne
Remember the saucy chalk-outline advertisements targeting air travelers flying into London-Gatwick? The same tactic has been put to use as part of the marketing hullabaloo for the upcoming Simpsons movie, to some controversy, because the drawing of Homer is mocking the, erm, virile outline that was left in a British field centuries ago by pagans. As far as Simpsons marketing goes, I prefer the conversion of 7-Elevens to Kwik-E-Marts anyway.

Travel to avoid… if you can
Joe Brancatelli has a great set of tips in a recent Portfolio column. He offers a list of airports and airlines to avoid if you can, and the special circumstances for each. For example, avoid flying Northwest Airlines in the last ten days of each month. They don’t have enough crew members, and they run short at the end of every month, leading to cancellations. Other tips are equally astute. (What, no swipe at Chicago O’Hare? Too easy?) Go read the whole thing.

Short-haul awards are back on American Airlines
Good news: Tim Winship reports that American Airlines is bringing back its 15,000-mile economy roundtrip short-hop award for nonstop flights less than 750 miles (each way). That’s a 10,000 mile savings per ticket. Dates of eligible travel will be September 1, 2007 through February 29, 2008. See here for full details. Historically, this means that United will announce a similar deal within a week or so. Start your stopwatches, the countdown is on!

Lufthansa has been surveying some of its customers to gauge interest in all-sleeper seat economy class cabins. It’s in interesting idea, much like sleeper cars in trains can come with more economical couchettes vs. actual beds.

The image above (via FlightGlobal) is apparently one of several designs under consideration, and minimal information is available at this time. Given the dimensions of the pictured cabin, with the flat ceiling, it would appear to be on the lower deck of an Airbus A380.

In principle, a sleeper cabin sounds great, especially for ultra-long haul flights. Somewhat like a premium economy cabin, it offers an intermediate step between regular economy seats and business class. It’s perhaps a bit hard to envision staying flat for a long duration, so I would hope that there is a way to comfortably sit, and not just lie. And that top bunk might be a bit scary during turbulence. But the fact that this is even in discussion is a good sign: Lufthansa is thinking outside the box.

(Hat tip to the FlyerTalk newsletter)

For just over a year, the major airlines have been fighting it out with all-business class upstarts like Maxjet, Eos, and L’Avion for trans-Atlantic premium traffic. Most of those seats are going from New York to London. But the Pacific has been conspicuously absent, with the skies still dominated by the big network carriers and their traditional economy/business/first configurations. Now Maxjet wants to fly to China.

Much like their bigger competitors, they filed paperwork with the Department of Transportation in an effort to get one of the very few available slots (see here for some background). Maxjet proposes a route that takes passengers from Los Angeles to Seattle, and then on to Shanghai.

Given that Maxjet is up against every other major US airline for a single flight slot that’s up for grabs, there is no way on earth that the Department of Transportation would give Maxjet the rights to the route. Maxjet’s Boeing 767s can’t carry nearly as many passengers or as much cargo as would be in the “national interest.” But the proposal signals that the company is looking beyond London.

So why hasn’t there been an entrepreneurial company that sells all-business flights to somewhere in Asia? The demand for premium cabins is high on those long trips — and frankly, that’s where you WANT to be in business class. A flight from New York to London isn’t really that long, and most people can manage that in coach. But a long-haul flight from North America to Asia or Australia in coach? Brutal.

I’m no airline economist nor an aerospace engineer, so I don’t have the answer. Perhaps the problem is filling planes that can actually reach Asia from the U.S. without a refueling stop in Alaska. Filling a 747, 777, or A340 with nothing but business class passengers might be tough for a new company, and most smaller planes don’t have the range to make it across the ocean. (Note that Maxjet’s proposed flight leaves from Seattle, not LAX or SFO, which cuts a bit of mileage from the flight.) And some of the Asian carriers (e.g., Singapore and Cathay Pacific in particular) offer a really top-tier business class product, raising the bar for potential competitors.

One alternative might be Oasis Hong Kong Airlines. They aren’t all-business class, but they are selling premium seats at a major discount to their competitors. Oasis promises service from Hong Kong to Oakland, California soon (though their promise of starting service by June went unfulfilled). They are currently flying from Hong Kong to Vancouver and London. A roundtrip business class ticket to fly between Hong Kong and Vancouver runs around US$2800 without any special sales or promotion.

Perhaps China isn’t the right route for Maxjet. But Korea or Japan might make sense. Bring on the trans-Pacific competition.

Reader Michelle writes:

I got an e-mail from American Airlines, asking me to support their Chicago to Beijing flight. This is so weird! When has an airline ever written asking for this before? Does public support of a proposed route really matter or does it only matter because it’s China?

I got the same e-mail. And a day later, I got a similar e-mail from Northwest, asking me to support their bids for Detroit-Shanghai for 2007 and Detroit-Beijing for 2009. Other e-mails are bound to roll in, from Delta, US Airways, Continental, and United.

Within the United States, domestic airlines are allowed to simply start service to any cities they like. But for international service, airlines require permission from both governments of the countries they fly to and from.

Incidentally, that’s why airlines lobby for “open skies” agreements, which allow them to forgo the permission process, and let them just fly from anywhere in country A to anywhere in country B.

China is a huge market, and everyone wants a piece. And for now, there is not yet an open skies agreement between the U.S. and China. (The two governments are negotiating one off and on.) But an interim agreement means that US-flag carriers can start one flight to China in 2007 and two flights in 2009. The Department of Transportation has to pick the winners of these lucrative routes, and that’s why you’re being asked to voice your support.

The last time the airlines lobbied like this was in late 2006. United Airlines won the Washington-Beijing “capital-to-capital” route.

So whose bid should you support? I have no idea. I have personally never — not once — expressed support for any airline’s bid for service. The proposed routes tend to give one airline a monopoly or duopoly on a specific route, and that’s not exactly consumer-friendly. Remember, the airlines want that route so they can make money, which, as for-profit corporations, they should. But that doesn’t mean it’s in your immediate interest either.

(image)