Canadian-British trans-Atlantic discounter Zoom Airlines, which made waves when it started flying from New York to London, has canceled all flights and started bankruptcy proceedings.

Their homepage is yet another airline tombstone, a statement from the CEO that the airline is belly-up. (Technically, it’s two airlines, a British company and a Canadian company. Both are insolvent.)

From their statement:

For customers who have future travel plans involving a Zoom flight for which reservations and payment have been made, you should refer to your credit or debit card company to apply for a refund. We have set out details of other airlines who operate the same or similar routes to those flown with Zoom in the hope that this may assist you in making alternative travel plans to replace the flights that you had booked with Zoom.
[...]
We have been advised that British Airways and Virgin Atlantic are graciously offering special fares to assist Zoom customers that have been displaced by the suspension of our services.

As I write this, there is not yet any information about these special fares on either the British Airways or Virgin Atlantic websites. Note, however, that this sounds like replacement tickets, and does not suggest that BA or VS will accept Zoom tickets as-is.

If you are in the middle of an already-started itinerary, call these airlines to see what they can do for you. If your travels haven’t started yet, call your credit card company and seek a refund. Fast. Now. Get on it. Go!

Related:
- Trans-Atlantic low fare competition heating up: Zoom and Ryanair
- Zoom across the Atlantic: Low-cost airline coming London-New York?

Back in April 2008, the Department of Transportation rolled out new rules for bumped passengers. This past week, the New York Times got around to singing the praises of the recently-increased compensation for passengers bumped from overbooked flights. But they miss the bigger point: Getting a bigger payment for being bumped is all well and good, but finding a seat — any seat — on a later flight is getting nearly impossible. And I’m sure the higher payments still inadequately compensate passengers for their trouble.

First, a summary of the good news:

Travelers can now receive up to $400 if they are involuntarily bumped and rebooked on another flight within two hours after their original domestic flight time and within four hours for international. They are eligible for up to $800 in cash if they are not rerouted by then. The final amount depends on the length of the flight and the price paid for the ticket.

Big bucks, right? Almost.

First off: Note the phrase “up to.” The calculus for your compensation isn’t as simple as it sounds. They’ll double the value of the flight segment that you’re bumped from (not the value of the whole ticket), or give you the recently-hiked max value. The new rules (which went live May 18) doubled the caps on compensation, not the total compensation. And with ticket prices having risen significantly, it may not be a big payday.

Note also that this isn’t the same as voluntary denied boarding compensation. That’s when the airline asks for people to willingly surrender their seats in exchange for a voucher or cash, typically a free domestic ticket. See your contract of carriage for that airline’s particular rules for voluntary denied boardings. But beware the fine print: These vouchers tend to have restrictions on which booking class the seats must be in, advance purchase rules, etc. You’re effectively getting a coupon for a free ticket when the airline is having a fare sale.

Anyway, all the compensation for being inconvenienced isn’t worth squat if you can’t actually leave the airport for your destination. Planes are fuller than ever. The odds are good, the next flight is overbooked, too, so escaping that airport is getting harder. Longer and longer waits at airports mean snowballing inconvenience. Does that “doubled” compensation sound adequate anymore?

The one observation in the NYT piece that’s noteworthy is that, as per the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, involuntary denied boardings are increasing. On the one hand, fuller planes mean smaller margins for error, and thus greater overbookings. But the financial incentives have changed with the higher payouts, so one might have expected airlines to overbook fewer passengers, given the higher cost of accommodating them. The fact that denied boardings are rising indicates that the new rules aren’t deterring overselling. The cost of the compensation remains far smaller than the revenue from oversold tickets.

Added bonus: There are reports of airlines redefining what denied boarding actually is, so they don’t have to pay out. Shabby attempt at legal mumbo jumbo, but that’s the reality we’re living in.

Bottom line: Denied boarding is no picnic, especially if you’ve got nonrefundable travel plans at your destination. (Case in point.) Getting paid a couple hundred bucks for your inconvenience won’t necessarily cover your true costs, and no amount of positive media coverage will change that.

(image)

A Ryanair flight from Budapest to Dublin had to make an emergency landing because of a can of leaking soup.

Insert joke about airline food here.

Ok, so this isn’t funny if you’re a passenger with life-threatening allergies to mushrooms, and if you’ve suddenly got mushroom soup dripping onto you from an overhead bin.

Perhaps THIS is the liquid security threat that TSA agents have been protecting us from so diligently.

Westin recently launched the WestinWorkout — whereby you can have a treadmill or spinning machine in your hotel room.

For some, this is a good thing. For me, it’s the antithesis of what I want in a hotel room. I don’t get the appeal of having a large piece of exercise equipment next to your bed. Aesthetically it’s all wrong, especially in a chain that pitches serenity and luxury. Much like I don’t like to sleep at the gym, I don’t like to use exercise machines in the bedroom.

I’ve worked out at hotel gyms, and they’ve never been crowded. It’s hardly a meat market. I guess it’s convenient to not have to take an elevator down a couple floors, but is that really so hard? I’m sure market-testing indicates a market niche here.

I’m reminded of two things. First, a theme in Robert Putnam’s somewhat alarmist book on the “collapse and revival of American community,” Bowling Alone: Activities that were once communal or social activities have become solitary and individual. We can’t even work out in a gym anymore when we’re away from home.

Second, it gives me the opportunity to tell a Bob Costas anecdote. And none of my Bob Costas anecdotes — none — are complimentary. Thankfully the Olympics are over, so I don’t have to see his arrogant mug on my television any longer. Hallelujah!

In my one and only job in the hospitality business, back in the mid-90s, I worked in the offices of a 4-star hotel in Chicago. Costas and other NBC Sports figures were regular guests, typically in town to cover Chicago Bulls games. The sportscasters and the visiting team typically stayed at the same hotel. Coworkers related stories galore about the ego trips that some of these celebrities went on, but it was always the sportscasters, never the athletes, who drew the employees’ ire.

In one of his more minor transgressions (and the reason why I’m mentioning him now), Costas insisted on having exercise equipment trucked up to his room, because he didn’t want to work out at the hotel’s attached health club. The same health club where visiting NBA teams regularly worked out. Good enough for the Seattle Supersonics, but not for Bob.

My favorite story, though: Costas complained to a staffer because the sun was waking him up, shining brightly into his face every morning. The reply: “Were the curtains closed?” (No.) Costas flies off the handle, screaming at the staffer for “questioning him.” He proceeds to insist that housekeeping come up to his room to cover the bedroom windows in his suite with black construction paper. Much to my chagrin, the hotel management agreed to do it.

Bottom line: Now Westin is letting us all be Bob Costas, hiding from public sight while we curl our dumbbells or ride our spinning cycles in the same rooms where we work and rest. Will they take construction-paper requests for windows soon, too?

Would this be a room you’d reserve? Hit the comments.

As has been noted here several times before, several airlines (American, Delta, Virgin America, for starters) are rolling out inflight wi-fi using technology from AirCell. But in each instance, there have been assurances that the option of doing voice-over-IP phone calls, such as Skype, would be blocked. And it is. But, of course, someone has found a workaround.

The workaround is an application called Phweet, which lets you make voice calls to friends who are linked to you on Twitter. Andy Abramson posts the details on his VoIP Watch blog, in which he describes a successful test of the workaround on an American Airlines flight:

I invited Joanna, she replied and once I figured out how to get Phweet to answer (I had to use Safari, not Firefox) Joanna and I were having a lovely conversation while she was on an Aircell flight. I don’t mean a five second hi, hello. I mean, a real conversation, as she held her Lenovo UMPC up to her face. I even heard the announcement from the flight attendants as she was about to land.

Here’s the logic. Flash audio is embedded inside Flash. Unless Aircell wants to block all Flash traffic, this is the way to talk.

Inevitably, other Flash-based systems will emerge, so phone calls won’t be limited to Twitter users.

Enforcing a “no calls” policy will now fall on the shoulders of the flight attendants. I don’t think the odds are good that they’ll be able to maintain that order for long.

Canadian startup car-sharing company CityFlitz is rolling out $1/day car rentals, with rentals up to one week.

$1.00? Take that, Zipcar!

This isn’t Hertz, to be sure. The service is, at first, limited to the Toronto area. (Vancouver is in their sights.) Vehicles are small (easy to park!), such as Mini Coopers or Smart cars.

The catch? The cars will be covered with ads. You’ll be a driving billboard. And you’ll be expected to drive a minimum of 30km (18.6 miles). But the rental costs you a single loonie.

Friend of the blog Dr. Vino guest-posted about ad-supported rental cars in Paris a year ago. It’s spreading.

You may not want to use the service if you’re picking up a client and taking them to lunch. But for personal use in town, it’s certainly a cheap option.

Unlike, say, airlines that slather their seatback trays or interiors with ads, and yet charge you a hefty airfare, there’s a real discount here for putting up with advertising. And as long as you’re driving, you don’t even have to be subjected to the ads yourself.

Would you drive around in a mobile billboard for a dollar a day? Hit the comments.