One for the mileage junkies out there in the US of A: Google Checkout, effectively an alternative to Paypal, is offering 2 bonus frequent flyer miles for every dollar spent through December 31, 2007.

It’s capped at 10,000 miles, i.e., spending $5,000 online. If that’s you, Ben Bernanke thanks you for your contribution to the retail-driven economy.

And don’t limit your miles-earning power to the power of the GOOG. Google Checkout still requires real payment from you, which could be via a miles-earning credit card. In that case, you’re effectively getting a 200% mileage bonus on top of the card’s miles.

Plus, if you reach the website of the retailer you’re buying from by clicking through an airline’s online “mall,” you can get another 2, 3, or even 10 miles per dollar, depending on the store. Leverage, baby, leverage!

Mileage bonuses are available on Alaska, Continental, Delta, Midwest, Northwest, US Airways, and United. Conspicuous in its absence: American. (JetBlue and Southwest use a different accrual scheme in their rewards program, so no surprise that they’re missing.)

Related:
- (aff)
- Earn miles by saving your money?
- Why haven’t bankers demanded better frequent flyer mile value?

(image)

Still not my idea of a good time

Reader EF dips into the blog archives and writes:

I disagree with your hatred of the Boeing 757 for international flights. It’s no different than flying from New York to LA, which I do in a 757 all the time. And you talk about the size of seats. I don’t see such a big difference between the seats on a 757 or a 747. What’s the big deal? What do you hate so much about this plane?

Indeed, a while back, I argued against the growing trend of using single-aisle Boeing 757s for flights across the Atlantic. I like my international planes big, and the 757 isn’t big enough for my tastes.

To me, EF, it’s not just the narrower seats. Instead, it’s the single aisle.

The single aisle makes lavatory access harder, even if you don’t have the aisle seat. It means more climbing over people, which disturbs you and them.

So forgive me while we wonk out with the numbers for a moment. Let’s compare the 757 to the most common widebodies flying over the oceans (and yes, we’re talking about coach here… let’s assume your upgrade didn’t clear):

• If you’ve got a 757, then only 2 out of 6 passengers per row (33%) have an aisle seat.
  2 out of 6 have to climb over two people to reach the aisle. That’s 33% of passengers who have the discomfort of the double-climb-over.

• If you’re on a 767 (2-3-2 configuration), then 4 out of 7 passengers per row (57%) have an aisle seat.
  0 out of 7 passengers have to climb over two people to reach the aisle.

• If you’re on an A330 or A340 (2-4-2 configuration), then 4 out of 8 passengers (50%) have an aisle seat.
  Once again, no one has to climb over two people to reach the aisle.

• The 777 depends on the configuration. It’s usually 3-3-3 (e.g., Continental, Delta, Cathay Pacific, Singapore, Air New Zealand…), but sometimes it’s 2-5-2 (American, United), or a tight 3-4-3 (Emirates).
  If it’s 3-3-3, then 4 out of 9 passengers per row (44%) have an aisle seat, and 2 out of 9 (22% – both window seats) have to climb over two people to reach the aisle.
  If it’s 2-5-2, then it’s still 4/9 (44%) aisle seats, but only 1 out of 9 (11%, the dreaded middle-of-five seat) has to climb over two people to reach the aisle.

• The jumbo 747 has a 3-4-3 configuration, with only 4 out of 10 (40%) of passengers per row having an aisle, and the folks at the windows (20%) with the 2-person climb.
• The A380 is like a 747 downstairs and like an A340/330 upstairs. See above.

So the bottom line: A 757 offers the lowest odds (33%) of getting an aisle seat. The 767 offers the best odds of the aisle, with 57%.

Simultaneously, the 757 offers the highest odds (33%) of being pinned in, forced to climb over two people to use the loo. The 767 and A330/340 force no one to crawl over two people.

Sounds to me like the 757 is the worst of both worlds for long trips.

And especially in an age of increased awareness of deep-veined thrombosis, getting out of your seat is something you really should be doing on medium- to long-haul flights.

I’ll stick to my preference for widebodies, thanks.

(image)

Flight delayed? Sue!
A judge in India has ruled that passengers whose Go Air flight was canceled were due the equivalent of US$380 each because of the mental anguish they suffered. Is this a trend? Where can I sue for suffering through flight delays inside a regional jet?

Get on the bus
The American Bus Association wants you to feel green about hitting the road: They claim that buses — ahem, motorcoaches — are more environmentally friendly than passenger cars, trains, and planes. According to their numbers, a bus gets 184 passenger miles per gallon, while commuter rail comes in at 86 and planes only make 42. I’ve sat behind some black soot-spewing buses, and I find this claim hard to believe. And what about all the electric rail out there? Nonetheless, one thing is indisputable: Buses are more efficient than passenger cars.

Which airline has the healthiest snacks?
Domestically, it’s United and their $5 snackboxes according to Charles Stuart Platkin of dietdetective.com. See his post for the lowdown on the various airlines’ snacks.

Business class shootout!
Reader Gianugo has personally tested three of the all-business class airlines that cross the Atlantic. In his tests, Silverjet comes out on top, with L’Avion and Maxjet trailing. (No test of Eos Airlines, but they’re generally at a much higher price point.) The L’Avion review certainly jives with previous reports from the field (here and here). Read his detailed post for the breakdown of what makes these discounted business class airlines tick.

No more being charged extra fees for returning your car with a full tank
Consumer victory! One of the very first posts on this blog — in its first week of inception, in fact — railed against Budget Rent-a-Car’s practice of levying a $9.50 charge if the odometer registered fewer than 75 miles upon return. This is one of those “what are they thinking” fees that gives the travel industry a bad name. I’m pleased to report that the Federal Trade Commission has clamped down and told Budget to stop. (via Consumerist)

Shameless self-promotion, part one
Chris Elliott, consumer advocate, National Geographic ombudsman, and general thorn in the travel industry’s side, compiled his list of the seven “most influential” travel bloggers. You’re reading one of them. Huzzah! The others: Paul Brady at Jaunted, Arthur Frommer, Holly Hegeman at PlaneBuzz, CondeNast’s Wendy Perrin, Ben Popken at Consumerist (where I’ve been a guest blogger on several occasions), and FareCompare’s Rick Seaney. Nice company to be in, to be sure, and a good starting point for your other blog-reading needs. There are seven runners-up, too, so go read the whole thing. Consider other blogs, like the Travvies winners from earlier this year. (Or heck, the finalists!) And peruse the blogroll in the pulldown in the right sidebar for more great blogs that I read regularly.

Shameless self-promotion, part deux
Upgrade: Travel Better goes audio: You can hear a few snippets of me commenting on recent frequent flyer mile devaluations on Marketplace, which aired this morning on public radio. If you didn’t wake up to the “dulcet tones” of my voice on your clock radio this morning, you can hear the clip and read the transcript here.

(image)

A bizarre little video snippet from the heart of YouTube: A train cruises through the center of a Bangkok street market. The last few seconds are surreal.

Gives new meaning to drive-through…

With everyone talking green these days, and with many environmental groups squarely putting the travel industry in its crosshairs, European mega-tourism conglomerate TUI has announced that it will use its size to make good on the green mandate. The tour company is putting pressure on hotel companies to make their operations more environmentally sound.

“In five years we want minimum standards in all our hotels,” said Dermot Blastland, managing director for TUI UK and Ireland, which carries 30 million passengers a year across Europe to 200 destinations. “We will not feature hotels that do not comply.” He said that he expects other companies to follow its lead, as customer demand drives the move to more sustainable travel.

No specifics on what those green standards actually are, and five years is a long time for companies to catch up.

I’m hoping that the standards include more than putting a card in the hotel room to tell you how to notify housekeeping whether or not you want your sheets washed or your towels changed.

But it’s a start, and if a 600-pound gorilla like TUI gives its standards teeth, then they’re very likely to gain global relevance.

Some may be crying hypocrisy, since TUI operates airplanes after all, which aren’t known for their carbon-neutrality. But it’s a smart business move, even if hoteliers may be crying environmental blackmail. A company that’s willing to step forward and make a move like this signals to consumers that they’re taking the environmental impact of travel a smidgen more seriously than their competitors, and that could tip the scales for some folks weighing vacation alternatives.

Note to airlines: This is how you get in front of bad PR. By taking a stand that improves the greater good, and demanding that others follow or get left behind, the company comes out looking like a knight in shining armor, even if it’s not really a selfless act. There’s got to be a way for airlines to spin their less-than-stellar environmental reputation — or their less-than-stellar passengers’ rights reputation, for that matter — in a way that benefits the masses and simultaneously makes the company look good.

How to add injury to insult: Five United Airlines employees at O’Hare Airport, who were working on the Thanksgiving holiday, seemingly got food poisoning from the airline-sponsored turkey dinner.

The likely culprit? Turkey that didn’t “smell quite right.”

(The airline-food joke is just too easy. It’s just sitting there. You’re thinking it, I know.)

On the bright side, perhaps the employees will get worker’s comp as well as overtime. Whoo.

It was a well-meant gesture on the company’s part, and an effort to mend fences with a thoroughly disgruntled group of employees. Well-played.

Despite their nausea, three of the five nauseous employees returned to work. Something tells me they weren’t picking at the leftovers in the staff lounge later that day.

(Thanks to reader J!)