Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5752449/

Topic: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: xcltflyboy
Posted 2013-05-01 10:03:11 and read 15178 times.

This press release indicates that Frontier, like Allegiant and Spirit, will begin charging (certain) passengers for carry-on bags, as well as beverages. Is this a positioning move to align themselves the policies of a potential suitor?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fronti...ces-customers-using-160000209.html

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: 0NEWAIR0
Posted 2013-05-01 10:07:42 and read 15175 times.

I don't believe this announcement is new news. I think it has been known for some time now that Frontier was moving towards an unbundled product and service offering that would be some what similar to Allegiant and Spirit. They're quickly changing in an effort to survive.

[Edited 2013-05-01 10:08:00]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: stlgph
Posted 2013-05-01 10:09:28 and read 15139 times.

Not necessarily. Instead it could outline potential revenue for an interested buyer to either a) sweeten a deal or b) Republican can ask more in a sale.

[Edited 2013-05-01 10:09:53]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: sw733
Posted 2013-05-01 10:16:08 and read 15052 times.

So, they will charge carry-on fees to people with Basic fares that are booked on 3rd party sites...any idea what percentage of the customers will fit in to this? Sounds like it could be decent sized, but not necesarilly gigantic.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-01 10:16:11 and read 15054 times.

Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 1):
I think it has been known for some time now that Frontier was moving towards an unbundled product and service offering that would be some what similar to Allegiant and Spirit.

It's not at all similar. F9 has the opposite goal with unbundling. They WANT people to buy the more expensive bundled fares (see their website, where they boast that Classic Plus gives you "more than $175 in value" for usually far less than $175 in fare difference). NK doesn't even sell a bundled fare.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: xcltflyboy
Posted 2013-05-01 10:25:14 and read 15028 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):
It's not at all similar. F9 has the opposite goal with unbundling. They WANT people to buy the more expensive bundled fares (see their website, where they boast that Classic Plus gives you "more than $175 in value" for usually far less than $175 in fare difference). NK doesn't even sell a bundled fare.

Excellent observation, Cubsrule.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jreuschl
Posted 2013-05-01 10:28:38 and read 14987 times.

WN says "Thank you!"

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: EricR
Posted 2013-05-01 10:29:37 and read 14989 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):
It's not at all similar. F9 has the opposite goal with unbundling. They WANT people to buy the more expensive bundled fares (see their website, where they boast that Classic Plus gives you "more than $175 in value" for usually far less than $175 in fare difference). NK doesn't even sell a bundled fare.




And to add to this, Allegiant's objective is to sell a complete travel package (air fare, hotel, rental car, etc.). Therefore, while all 3 can be categorized as ULCC's, each has its own strategy unique to each carrier.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-05-01 10:39:15 and read 14912 times.

What is ground breaking here is carryones will still be free if you book at FlyFronter.com. If you book at Orbitz or Expedia etc there will be a carryon fee.


The problem I see with charging for beverages is they are doing only to the lowest fare pax. Naturally they still want a premium product for their better passengers. Kind of like what they do for TV. But what happens when pax begin changing seats to open seats?

Overall what they aren't doing isn't too bad, but it will complicate things a bit. Hope the revenue they get (or cost savings) is worth the confusion.

If this works I can see airlines begin charging pax differing fees if they use Third Party sites for bookings.

Quoting xcltflyboy (Reply 5):
Excellent observation, Cubsrule

Ditto

Quoting jreuschl (Reply 6):
WN says "Thank you!"

Southwest will soon be a
'Full Service" airline

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: santi319
Posted 2013-05-01 10:43:12 and read 14883 times.

Quoting jreuschl (Reply 6):
WN says "Thank you!"


Actually, judging by the numbers posted by NK and G4 vs all the other airlines, WN says " Oh Crap!"....

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: sw733
Posted 2013-05-01 10:46:47 and read 14835 times.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 8):
What is ground breaking here is carryones will still be free if you book at FlyFronter.com. If you book at Orbitz or Expedia etc there will be a carryon fee.

It's not even that, from my understanding of it. If you were to go on Expedia and book a full-fare, refundable ticket for a Frontier flight, I assume it would not have a carry-on fee. It's only if you book the "basic", absolute cheapest ticket on Expedia (and others) that would be hit with a carry-on fee. Perhaps I am incorrect, but that's how I read it. That being said, I would guess that the majority of people booking on Expedia are doing so to find the cheapest, not the most flexible, of fares.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-01 10:54:30 and read 14808 times.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 8):
The problem I see with charging for beverages is they are doing only to the lowest fare pax. Naturally they still want a premium product for their better passengers. Kind of like what they do for TV. But what happens when pax begin changing seats to open seats?

To me (a semi-frequent F9 traveler), one of the mysteries of F9 is how they make the onboard differentiation work. The answer seems to be that f/as keep a tight hold of their manifest and engage the passengers who are entitled to freebies while not really engaging the others directly. Most folks who buy a fair amount of Classic Plus but don't have status will grab the card that activates the tvs from the f/a, swipe it and hand it back. Those with status can simply swipe their FF cards to get free tv.

Of course, the group of FFs with status plus travelers in Classic Plus tickets is a lot smaller than the group that will get free soda and free carryons under this plan. That said, most F9 f/as (in contrast with f/as at other carriers, particularly DL), do a good job of keeping non-paying customers out of Stretch seats. To succeed at unbundling, the carrier has to have f/a buyin. F9 seems to have that. I don't know how exactly they got it.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-05-01 11:02:37 and read 14766 times.

Quoting xcltflyboy (Thread starter):
This press release indicates that Frontier, like Allegiant and Spirit, will begin charging (certain) passengers for carry-on bags, as well as beverages. Is this a positioning move to align themselves the policies of a potential suitor?
Quoting sw733 (Reply 3):
So, they will charge carry-on fees to people with Basic fares that are booked on 3rd party sites...any idea what percentage of the customers will fit in to this? Sounds like it could be decent sized, but not necesarilly gigantic.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):
It's not at all similar. F9 has the opposite goal with unbundling. They WANT people to buy the more expensive bundled fares (see their website, where they boast that Classic Plus gives you "more than $175 in value" for usually far less than $175 in fare difference). NK doesn't even sell a bundled fare.

If I may, very few people understand what the purpose of of the carry on bag fee is. It is not as 99.9% of people think, to generate revenue through the collection of the fee. That is a sizable side benefit, but that is not why Spirit did it and it is not way F9 should do it.

The sole reason that the carry on bag fee is a good idea is that in this industry everybody has the same price because everybody matches each other down to the nickel. When the price is the same for everybody, you decide which airline to fly based upon other factors like frequent flier program, schedule frequency, product comfort, etc. Frontier loses on most of those measures by virtue of being a small carrier, as did Spirit. So what Frontier ends up carrying are only passengers that the other airlines didn't want. The other airlines planes fill up and then Frontier takes their revenue management cast-offs. A bottom feeder. That strategy won't pay the fuel bills.

The way to make money in this industry consistently is to not be matched. That is very difficult to do. The only way to do it is to introduce a product that the other carriers can't copy. Allegiant has done that with tour packaging. It is very hard to compare Allegiant's package pricing to any other airline and it's even harder for other airlines to decide how to price against them because they don't have time or tools to compare package prices and back into an air fare that is competitive.

Similarly, the legacies are not (yet) charging carry-on bag fees. At the point they do that it will kill NK unless they find a new differentiator, but until they do, NK's fares will not be matched almost all the time by the legacies (because if they match and NK collects a carry on fee, they are at a revenue disadvantage) which gives NK an enormous advantage. They will then get a disproportionate share of traffic across all segments and all the way up the revenue management pricing ladder. It's really brilliant even if I hate it as a consumer.

So, for Frontier will it work? It may work. The way they are doing it with only OTAs is different, but that is where people are price shopping, so I give them some credit for that. I think on F9.com they eventually unbundle as well if that is not already the plan. I think this has the potential of giving WN a big advantage financially in Denver where it seems NK has done well competing against way too many other airlines. I do not think this has anything to do with merging other than improved earnings helps sell the company. If anything, it means they are not close on a deal to sell the company as this is a big change that will take a while to implement. The biggest issue I'd expect for F9 is compliance. They have subbed out every station except Denver. Contract handlers won't be good about collecting the carry on fee. That's just a fact of life. It's basically untrackable, so if the contractor doesn't collect it then F9 will never know it went uncollected and unless they pay the contractors a commission on the fee they have no incentive to harass customers about it.

Quoting jreuschl (Reply 6):
WN says "Thank you!"

Right now F9 already should have a fare advantage against WN because WN does not charge chkd bag fees. I think WN has been matching them anyway and eating the loss. This will make it harder for them to do. If WN matched F9's base fare it would cost WN a lot of money but would likely decimate what remains of F9 in Denver. OTOH, they have shown limited appetite toward matching NK for any sustained period of time.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-01 11:11:04 and read 14692 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
The biggest issue I'd expect for F9 is compliance. They have subbed out every station except Denver. Contract handlers won't be good about collecting the carry on fee. That's just a fact of life. It's basically untrackable, so if the contractor doesn't collect it then F9 will never know it went uncollected and unless they pay the contractors a commission on the fee they have no incentive to harass customers about it.

Two points on this:

1) I expect f/as will be part of the enforcement scheme (just like they have to enforce Express Boarding now).

2) Most of F9's contract handlers are not scum-of-the-earth lowest bidders but actually do a pretty good job. Much like YX used to, F9 uses a lot of actual airlines (AS in GEG, for instance). The contract handlers are already pretty good about doing what they are supposed to do with top end passengers, so I don't see why bottom end passengers would be any different.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Kcrwflyer
Posted 2013-05-01 11:45:50 and read 14543 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
Similarly, the legacies are not (yet) charging carry-on bag fees. At the point they do that it will kill NK unless they find a new differentiator, but until they do, NK's fares will not be matched almost all the time by the legacies (because if they match and NK collects a carry on fee, they are at a revenue disadvantage) which gives NK an enormous advantage. They will then get a disproportionate share of traffic across all segments and all the way up the revenue management pricing ladder. It's really brilliant even if I hate it as a consumer.

Are you suggesting that all the legacies have to do to lower their fares to NK's level is start charging for carry-ons? There is no way on this earth that that's the case. Nobody matches NK's fares now ( to my knowledge) or has the desire to do so. The entire legacy cost structure is much too far out of line to match fares with NK and not leed profusely with every ticket sold.

Even if the legacies start charging a carry-on fee, we all know they won't lower fares as a result. It will only make their domestic product less attractive. Everyone that hates NK now for charging for carry-ons ( yet still flies them) will either have less of a product differential to cite when booking... making NK an even more attractive option. OR a less, less attractive option depending on how you lok at things.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: sw733
Posted 2013-05-01 11:59:09 and read 14487 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
If I may, very few people understand what the purpose of of the carry on bag fee is.

I understand it completely, but that wasn't really what I was getting at. I remember when AA started introducing bag fees, they talked about how few people it actually would hit, between the frequent fliers, international travelers, full fare customers, military customers, etc, etc. I am just wondering what percentage of F9's customers this would impact - that is, people only buying the absolute "Basic" fare from a third party provider. I really have no idea if that's 5% of F9's customer base, or 50% of F9's customer base.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: DLD9S
Posted 2013-05-01 12:48:22 and read 14376 times.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 8):
What is ground breaking here is carryones will still be free if you book at FlyFronter.com. If you book at Orbitz or Expedia etc there will be a carryon fee.

It will be curious to see if the OTAs react to this. I wonder if Frontier can survive by only selling tickets on their own site if the OTAs decide to cut ties. Sure, most of them also sell Spirit, but then again Spirit is not penalizing just a select group of customers.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Frontier14
Posted 2013-05-01 13:30:36 and read 14302 times.

Quoting sw733 (Reply 3):

Unless things have changed in the recent past months less than fifty percent of Frontier's tickets have been booked on their website per Shurz's comments a couple of calls back. They want that number to increase significantly and this is a step in that direction they hope.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-01 13:36:21 and read 14281 times.

Quoting Frontier14 (Reply 17):
Unless things have changed in the recent past months less than fifty percent of Frontier's tickets have been booked on their website per Shurz's comments a couple of calls back. They want that number to increase significantly and this is a step in that direction they hope.

Things have changed some. The latest I heard was that the number was closer to 60% and that at TTN it is around 80%.

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Frontier14
Posted 2013-05-01 13:47:26 and read 14252 times.

[quote=mariner,reply=

Things have changed some. The latest I heard was that the number was closer to 60% and that at TTN it is around 80%.[/quote]


Thanks Mariner for the updated numbers. This is good news.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-05-01 14:46:46 and read 14127 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
Most of F9's contract handlers are not scum-of-the-earth lowest bidders but actually do a pretty good job. Much like YX used to, F9 uses a lot of actual airlines (AS in GEG, for instance). The contract handlers are already pretty good about doing what they are supposed to do with top end passengers, so I don't see why bottom end passengers would be any different.

Just remember the whole handler thing is changing at F9. With news out, that all stations are going to contract handling and F9 seeking to do multi-city bundle deals, most stations will be covered by likes of Swissport, Menzies, Servisair etc..

Lowest bidder rules.   

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-05-01 14:51:40 and read 14089 times.

Quoting DLD9S (Reply 16):
if the OTAs decide to cut ties

Yes, there could definitely be some OTA retaliation

CubsRule's comments have been pretty good on this thread.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: OB1504
Posted 2013-05-01 15:59:50 and read 13716 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
The biggest issue I'd expect for F9 is compliance. They have subbed out every station except Denver. Contract handlers won't be good about collecting the carry on fee. That's just a fact of life. It's basically untrackable, so if the contractor doesn't collect it then F9 will never know it went uncollected and unless they pay the contractors a commission on the fee they have no incentive to harass customers about it.

Fortunately for my former colleages at Spirit, this consideration is what keeps them from outsourcing staff at legacy stations such as FLL or LGA. The higher costs from having organic employees are offset by the increased revenue brought in by more stringent enforcement of the baggage policy.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 20):
Just remember the whole handler thing is changing at F9. With news out, that all stations are going to contract handling and F9 seeking to do multi-city bundle deals, most stations will be covered by likes of Swissport, Menzies, Servisair etc..

That being said, Swissport is one of the better ground handling companies. At Miami International Airport, they provide customer-facing staff for 23 of the 37 scheduled passenger carriers, including the likes of Avianca-Taca, Lufthansa, and (of course) SWISS.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-01 16:53:41 and read 13492 times.

Frontier's social media pages have been very interesting to watch today...

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-01 17:33:25 and read 13329 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 23):
Frontier's social media pages have been very interesting to watch today...

With quite a lot of the noise coming from people who are buying $39 fares - as happened last time.  

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-01 18:07:31]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-01 18:05:58 and read 13473 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 20):
With news out, that all stations are going to contract handling and F9 seeking to do multi-city bundle deals, most stations will be covered by likes of Swissport, Menzies, Servisair etc..

I'm not sure how you get from bundle deals what I've termed "scum of the earth lowest bidder." With F9 looking to outsource the likes of LAX, LGA and DCA, most legacies and regionals could easily put together a package deal, and the likes of Menzies don't have a presence in BMI or BIS.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: unmlobo
Posted 2013-05-01 19:00:52 and read 13044 times.

Coming unbundled or coming unglued? Clever choice of words for the thread title.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: n471wn
Posted 2013-05-01 19:09:28 and read 13141 times.

Frontier is shooting themselves in the foot once more.....

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-01 19:19:12 and read 12985 times.

I'm not necessarily saying they are gonna do bad but they are really ruining their brand. They are being just like Spirit, the only difference, people in Denver have 2 other (larger) options.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: questions
Posted 2013-05-01 19:22:09 and read 12955 times.

What was F9's original business model? Who was their target? What was their service offering focus -- no frills; trying to be like B6? And what are they trying to be today? They kind of sound like a mess.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-01 19:24:24 and read 12933 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 28):
I'm not necessarily saying they are gonna do bad but they are really ruining their brand

With what part of F9's brand are the new fees inconsistent? The "you can get a $39 ticket on expedia with a bunch of perks" part? I doubt that's the part of the brand they want to target.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: skycub
Posted 2013-05-01 19:34:40 and read 12749 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 24):
With quite a lot of the noise coming from people who are buying $39 fares - as happened last time.

I checked out the Frontier Facebook page... I did not see anywhere where the people leaving comments had a chance to post what fares they paid.

Am I missing something?

Maybe you, as the leading Frontier expert on this site, have the ability to see what fares the Facebook posters have paid?

Please help me see what fares the posters on Frontier's Facebook page have paid... it would help me better appreciate their comments.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-01 19:36:15 and read 12752 times.

Quoting questions (Reply 29):
What was F9's original business model? Who was their target? What was their service offering focus -- no frills; trying to be like B6? And what are they trying to be today? They kind of sound like a mess.

Frontier's original model was always to be the cheaper alternative, long before JetBlue came along.

Its original slogan was "Always Affordable." How has that changed?

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-01 19:45:54 and read 12635 times.

Quoting skycub (Reply 31):
Maybe you, as the leading Frontier expert on this site, have the ability to see what fares the Facebook posters have paid?

Some research was done on it when they first changed the rules for third party booking, which caused some yells on Facebook - and here.

Quoting skycub (Reply 31):
I checked out the Frontier Facebook page... I did not see anywhere where the people leaving comments had a chance to post what fares they paid.

I'm scarcely the leading Frontier expert. I live in New Zealand and have no plans to return to the US. My chances of flying Frontier are slim to none and Slim left the building seven years ago.

I follow the airline for fun.

Quoting skycub (Reply 31):
Thank you in advance for your help.

Sorry, I don't think I can help you. Pretty much everything I know is in the public domain, apart from the occasional snippet from old chums.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-01 19:54:48]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-05-01 20:21:47 and read 12248 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
Two points on this:
1) I expect f/as will be part of the enforcement scheme (just like they have to enforce Express Boarding now).

That could be, but at the moment you mix the FAs into the enforcement mix you will see a huge decline in "love" for what has traditionally been a strength at F9, the inflight product. If they are enforcers you are making them "the enemy" instead of just the ground staff. I'd say that is probably not the way to go and the FAs won't like it either.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
2) Most of F9's contract handlers are not scum-of-the-earth lowest bidders but actually do a pretty good job.

Frankly, scum of the earth are going to have less issue with collecting the fee. People who provide good customer service will find this fee collection enforcement very difficult.

Quoting Kcrwflyer (Reply 14):
Are you suggesting that all the legacies have to do to lower their fares to NK's level is start charging for carry-ons?

Yes. They can lower them to NK levels now, but they don't because NK would get more revenue than they do. Obviously the legacies would only lower their fares where they compete with NK or F9 with the express purpose of killing them. They would probably just pocket the added fee on all other routes.

Quoting Kcrwflyer (Reply 14):
Nobody matches NK's fares now ( to my knowledge)

Generally no, but they all take a premium that they think offsets the carry on bag fee diversion, but it clearly doesn't work at suppressing NK's profitability.

Quoting sw733 (Reply 15):
I am just wondering what percentage of F9's customers this would impact

People will almost always buy the cheapest option.

Quoting DLD9S (Reply 16):
Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 8):
What is ground breaking here is carryones will still be free if you book at FlyFronter.com. If you book at Orbitz or Expedia etc there will be a carryon fee.

It will be curious to see if the OTAs react to this.

They will probably be dropped by at least some.

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 22):
Fortunately for my former colleages at Spirit, this consideration is what keeps them from outsourcing staff at legacy stations such as FLL or LGA. The higher costs from having organic employees are offset by the increased revenue brought in by more stringent enforcement of the baggage policy.

I believe it

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: IllinoisMan
Posted 2013-05-01 21:04:55 and read 11876 times.

Another reason not to fly F9. Remind me again, why did everybody fight so hard to support the sale of YX to these guys? I mean, the "Save the Cookie" campaign worked out really great, didn't it? Not long after Republic bought out YX, changed the name to F9, laid off the legacy YX pilots and fight attendants, it abandoned the fresh-baked cookies on flights into and out of MKE. No doubt they sent the ovens to the scrapyard (for a few bucks) and then added a few more cramped coach seats to their flying cattle cars.

[Edited 2013-05-01 21:07:10]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mke717spotter
Posted 2013-05-01 22:22:35 and read 11321 times.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 35):
Another reason not to fly F9.

Not sure it matters too much for MKE...unless you're forgetting that F9 has cut about 90% of its service here?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-01 22:43:30 and read 11205 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
I do not think this has anything to do with merging other than improved earnings helps sell the company. If anything, it means they are not close on a deal to sell the company as this is a big change that will take a while to implement.

I think this is another example of projecting one's wishes onto an unrelated event. Are you implying that Frontier would not be continuing its evolution to an ULCC model were a bidder preparing to make an offer? I fail to see any correlation there whatsoever, but maybe that's just me?

Quoting Frontier14 (Reply 17):
Unless things have changed in the recent past months less than fifty percent of Frontier's tickets have been booked on their website per Shurz's comments a couple of calls back. They want that number to increase significantly and this is a step in that direction they hope.

I think that's a primary reason for doing the fee the way they did. To drive traffic to FlyFrontier.com.

Quoting n471wn (Reply 27):
Frontier is shooting themselves in the foot once more.....

How?

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 28):
m not necessarily saying they are gonna do bad but they are really ruining their brand. They are being just like Spirit, the only difference, people in Denver have 2 other (larger) options.

Well, having three other options in DEN hasn't deterred Spirit. I'm not going to predict success or failure for Frontier, but dont they sort of have to stick to the plan, as it were? Want to be an ULCC? Walk the talk.

Quoting questions (Reply 29):
What was F9's original business model? Who was their target? What was their service offering focus -- no frills; trying to be like B6? And what are they trying to be today? They kind of sound like a mess.

I believe Frontier (in it's current incarnation) debuted in 1994, long before JetBlue was launched. The past several years (some might say the past 20 years) have been somewhat tumultuous, but certainly the period as Republic-owned has been challenging for many, many reasons. They have been going through Extreme Airline Makeover, and that can be a brutal process. Hopefully this gets them to a place of profitability, because up until now that has often been an elusive goal. As a business, then, what's the point if not to earn a buck?

Quoting enilria (Reply 34):
That could be, but at the moment you mix the FAs into the enforcement mix you will see a huge decline in "love" for what has traditionally been a strength at F9, the inflight product. If they are enforcers you are making them "the enemy" instead of just the ground staff. I'd say that is probably not the way to go and the FAs won't like it either.

Based on my recent flights on AS and WN, I'd say they are plenty comfortable being enforcement officers. And that's just over the handling of carryon's (AS) or hoping for a second dixie cup of soda on a 2:40 flight (WN). Not much love there, frankly.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 35):
Another reason not to fly F9. Remind me again, why did everybody fight so hard to support the sale of YX to these guys?

Are you still worked up over this? It's been almost FOUR YEARS - isn't it time to start the healing?

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: BN747dfwhnl
Posted 2013-05-01 23:12:11 and read 11082 times.

Quoting Frontier14 (Reply 17):
Unless things have changed in the recent past months less than fifty percent of Frontier's tickets have been booked on their website per Shurz's comments a couple of calls back. They want that number to increase significantly and this is a step in that direction they hope.

On the local Denver news tonight (at least the TV station I watched), they had a short news blurb about these fees but did not clarify that they wouldn't apply if purchased on flyfrontier.com/would apply to lower-based fares from third-party sites. The news station said the carry-on fees would apply to overhead-bin carry-ons, not carry-ons able to fit under the seat in front of you, and said passengers could pay a $25 at booking or face a $100 fee at the airport. Obviously it's not the news station's job to be an advertisement for flyfrontier.com, but it does seem a bit remiss on their part not to mention in any way that the fee won't be applied to every passenger boarding the plane, especially since F9 is a "hometown" airline. The general gist of the news blurb was that F9 will soon charge for carry-ons and soda. The news anchor even quipped that the seat belts will still be free.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-01 23:20:53 and read 11031 times.

Quoting mke717spotter (Reply 36):
Not sure it matters too much for MKE...unless you're forgetting that F9 has cut about 90% of its service here?

Yes, that was sad, especially the money side of things.

Between them, TPG, Northwest/Delta and Republic/Frontier lost well in excess of half a Billion trying to save/salvage Midwest and MKE. It may be closer to three quarters of a billion when it's all added up, because TPG alone lost over $400 million and Northwest/Delta lost $200 million.

As in these financials, Midwest Airlines itself lost half a billion in 2008, before Republic took over:

Republic Files Financials For Midwest (by Mainland Oct 20 2009 in Civil Aviation)

Some of that loss was impairment - the "goodwill" that Midwest was claiming, which was really worth zilch and had to be written off.

That's the way the Cookie crumbled - and nearly took Frontier down with it - but of course, the Milwaukee shareholders made out like bandits on the deal.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-01 23:28:16]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-02 02:04:02 and read 10459 times.

Quoting jreuschl (Reply 6):
WN says "Thank you!"

Yup...and they just have to sit back and watch their market share in DEN increase even more.

And apparently, my flight on F9 three years ago was my last...too bad, because they WERE a great airline.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-05-02 05:24:49 and read 9703 times.

My concern is I always book at flyftontier.com but how will the staff at the gate know I booked at the company web site? I guess based on the type of boarding pass I have? One time I book at flyftontier.com and get charged will be the last time I fly them. They have one chance to get this right.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-02 05:48:06 and read 9533 times.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 41):
One time I book at flyftontier.com and get charged will be the last time I fly them. They have one chance to get this right.

Agreed completely, but it shouldn't be hard. They'll just have to sell separate fare codes on flyfrontier.com and elsewhere (even if some of those codes have the same monetary fare).

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-05-02 07:05:50 and read 9077 times.

They are smart for realizing their current brand isn't going to work for them. But the mistake and risk they take is making their brand confusing. For higher fare pax, they will be a full service airline. Free drinks, including alcohol for the best customers, free TV and free carryons.

For lesser fares that book on OTAs, they will be like Spirit or Allegiant.

For lower fares that book on F9 webite, something inbetween.

Communication and employee cooperation and understanding of policy will be required not to make this a fiasco. Cuz it has the potential to be.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 42):
Agreed completely, but it shouldn't be hard. They'll just have to sell separate fare codes on flyfrontier.com and elsewhere (even if some of those codes have the same monetary fare).

oh oh. That might mean separate buckets for RM. Anytime you have separate fare codes you often need separate buckets. Sometimes they can be nested in the same bucket though with a capacity limit within the bucket.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-05-02 07:10:05 and read 9029 times.

CubsRule:

Your comments and observations on this topic have been among the best that I have ever seen on A.net for any poster.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-02 07:23:31 and read 8922 times.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 43):
That might mean separate buckets for RM. Anytime you have separate fare codes you often need separate buckets. Sometimes they can be nested in the same bucket though with a capacity limit within the bucket.

Thanks (and thanks for the compliments). Fare buckets is the term I was trying--but failing--to come up with above. We know F9 has the IT infrastructure to differentiate fare buckets for things like free alcohol and free checked bags. It shouldn't be too difficult to add differentiation for carryons and soda.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 43):
Communication and employee cooperation and understanding of policy will be required not to make this a fiasco. Cuz it has the potential to be.

Again, this is an astute observation, but to me it's more evolutionary than revolutionary for F9, so I don't think it'll be too hard.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Pe@rson
Posted 2013-05-02 07:34:47 and read 8839 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 40):
And apparently, my flight on F9 three years ago was my last...too bad, because they WERE a great airline.

They might have been "a great airline" from a product/service perspective - I don't know as I haven't flown them - but they certainly haven't been good at earning profit. Between 2004 and 2011, their average operating margin was -1.85%, so they lost, on average, 1.85 cents per every $1 in revenue. In their best year, 2009, their OM was 2.3%. It was worse still on a net basis: its average was -4.57%, so it lost 4.57 cents for every $1 generated. (This was driven by a net margin of -19.2% in 2008.)

In terms of actual performance, they have, between the same years, lost, on an operating basis, $200m for an average loss of $25m/year. And it has become worse in recent years, e.g. losses of $75m and $55m in 2011 and 2010 respectively. (The next-highest loss was in 2007, with $35m.) On a net basis, they lost a total of $468m, or an average of $58.5m/year, driven by a loss of $248m in 2008.

So while they might have been "a great airline", they very clearly need a major transformation.

===

Data from Flightglobal.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: n7371f
Posted 2013-05-02 08:38:54 and read 8444 times.

I am very curious how F9 is going to pull this off - boarding and during flight - without large risk to its excellent customer service reputation.

How much of a mess is the boarding process going to be for agents to differentiate between a flyfrontier.com booking and someone else?

How easy is it going to be for gate agents to promptly issue a carry-on bag fee? Will the passenger stand in the boarding line and hold up everyone else - or will there be an area to the side to avoid holding up everyone else?

During the flight, clearly the pace of the service will slow...maybe even substantially. Flight attendants are now glorified grocery store checkers. Even with a manifest right in front of them, they'll have to constantly be cross checking -- and even more problematic will be having to register dozens more credit card transactions.

I'll give F9 management benefit of the doubt on this and assume they've been planning this out for months and have every scenario checked out. I sure hope they do - otherwise the date this is implemented will be a mess. In my many experiences with F9, they are excellent in normal operations but become totally unglued under abnormal ops -- and all of these changes present potential major abnormal operational headaches.

We shall see...

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: kgaiflyer
Posted 2013-05-02 09:22:40 and read 8152 times.

Quoting jreuschl (Reply 6):
WN says "Thank you!"

Just an observation -- At BWI WN seems to be growing way faster than NK.

It would appear that in this region, folks like the WN product better than the NK product.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-05-02 09:28:53 and read 8100 times.

Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 48):
It would appear that in this region, folks like the WN product better than the NK product.

Nothing to do with people. NK can't be everywhere. They are only a 50-plane airline, not 700 like SWA.

But when the day comes NK decides to add 30-flights in DC area like they have at DFW, I see no reason why they should not have the same success and high loads as they do across the nation in other cities.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: ScottB
Posted 2013-05-02 09:31:34 and read 8063 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 42):
They'll just have to sell separate fare codes on flyfrontier.com and elsewhere

They don't necessarily need to use different fare classes; the place of issue for the ticket will also differentiate between company and third-party booking channels.

Quoting n7371f (Reply 47):
During the flight, clearly the pace of the service will slow...maybe even substantially. Flight attendants are now glorified grocery store checkers. Even with a manifest right in front of them, they'll have to constantly be cross checking -- and even more problematic will be having to register dozens more credit card transactions.

I'm not sure the service slows that much, since essentially the only customers eligible for free beverages will be elite frequent flyers and those who purchased Classic/Classic Plus. Pretty much all of those can show their boarding pass or membership card. And there will obviously be fewer people ordering drinks with the end of complimentary non-alcoholic beverages. The pace of the service probably ends up not being an issue given how few short legs they fly.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
The biggest issue I'd expect for F9 is compliance. They have subbed out every station except Denver. Contract handlers won't be good about collecting the carry on fee. That's just a fact of life. It's basically untrackable, so if the contractor doesn't collect it then F9 will never know it went uncollected and unless they pay the contractors a commission on the fee they have no incentive to harass customers about it.

Agreed. If you work for a third party the incentive to get into confrontations with customers is reduced. Especially if you're really not all that well-paid.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-05-02 09:48:40 and read 7940 times.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 50):
Agreed. If you work for a third party the incentive to get into confrontations with customers is reduced. Especially if you're really not all that well-paid.

Except when the airline pays commission to handler employees for such revenue.

For example folks like Sun Country, WestJet, Volaris all to some degree give back a portion of fees collected (baggage, upgrades, change fees, etc) to encourage compliance with policy.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-05-02 09:58:22 and read 7815 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 37):
Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
I do not think this has anything to do with merging other than improved earnings helps sell the company. If anything, it means they are not close on a deal to sell the company as this is a big change that will take a while to implement.

I think this is another example of projecting one's wishes onto an unrelated event. Are you implying that Frontier would not be continuing its evolution to an ULCC model were a bidder preparing to make an offer? I fail to see any correlation there whatsoever, but maybe that's just me?

The point is that if you were really just days from selling the company which is where they said they were a quarter ago and big decision like this would almost certainly wait for the sign-off of the new owners. It's like ordering aircraft. Now would be an extremely dumb time to order aircraft. Let the new owners make their own decisions. When you make those decisions for them you are reducing the saleability of the company. It's like painting all the walls of your house red right before you sell it because you like red. Not the time to make big changes. Get it?

The fact they did this tells me, as I said, that they are not close to a sale. Frankly, why would i care if they were sold or not? I'd like to see them remain independent and not merge away. Is that so horrible of me? Regardless of my feelings, making a big change like this tells me they are not expecting to sell the company any time soon and BB's comments in the quarterly call stated that they are making decisions based upon making F9 profitable for RJET for the forseeable future even as they continue to try to sell. That's definitely a step back from last quarter when he said that during March they expect to announce a transaction. The mere fact we are now two months past that with nothing happening makes it pretty clear that whatever they thought was close to happening was not close to happening.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 37):
Based on my recent flights on AS and WN, I'd say they are plenty comfortable being enforcement officers.

Perhaps, but F9 FAs have always been a key strength of the product in terms of friendliness and such. This will end that if they have them looking you over and collecting fees. BTW, how long will drink service take if they are scanning credit cards for every single passenger?

Quoting ScottB (Reply 50):
Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
The biggest issue I'd expect for F9 is compliance. They have subbed out every station except Denver. Contract handlers won't be good about collecting the carry on fee. That's just a fact of life. It's basically untrackable, so if the contractor doesn't collect it then F9 will never know it went uncollected and unless they pay the contractors a commission on the fee they have no incentive to harass customers about it.

Agreed. If you work for a third party the incentive to get into confrontations with customers is reduced. Especially if you're really not all that well-paid.

Exactly

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-02 10:04:51 and read 7762 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 49):

But when the day comes NK decides to add 30-flights in DC area like they have at DFW,

And then slowly cuts back on them bit by bit over the next few years?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: toltommy
Posted 2013-05-02 10:09:50 and read 7744 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
Contract handlers won't be good about collecting the carry on fee. That's just a fact of life. It's basically untrackable, so if the contractor doesn't collect it then F9 will never know it went uncollected and unless they pay the contractors a commission on the fee they have no incentive to harass customers about it.

It may be tedious but it is trackable. It's as simple as an intern in revenue management pulling a manifest and looking at the past date PNRs for the flight. On the basic fares with an ARC number associated there should either be a bag fee or a carryon fee in the PNR. If not, why not? The airline can charge the failure to collect back to the ground handler. Once that happens, the groud handler will make sure the front line employees get the message.

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 22):
Fortunately for my former colleages at Spirit, this consideration is what keeps them from outsourcing staff at legacy stations such as FLL or LGA. The higher costs from having organic employees are offset by the increased revenue brought in by more stringent enforcement of the baggage policy.

With all the new stations NK has opened in the past few years, how many have NK front line employees? I'm thinking none? The ground handlers must be meeting the company's expectation, or they'd be gone.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-05-02 10:27:49 and read 7712 times.

Quoting toltommy (Reply 54):
It may be tedious but it is trackable. It's as simple as an intern in revenue management pulling a manifest and looking at the past date PNRs for the flight. On the basic fares with an ARC number associated there should either be a bag fee or a carryon fee in the PNR. If not, why not?

Sort of, but I assume they are doing like Spirit and allowing under seat carry-ons for free still. That makes it impossible. You could get something like a backpack or mini-duffle that you can stuff under there and provide you enough belongings to stay with friends.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-02 10:30:31 and read 7702 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 52):
Perhaps, but F9 FAs have always been a key strength of the product in terms of friendliness and such. This will end that if they have them looking you over and collecting fees.

They are already looking over our shoulders and collecting fees for food (all passengers) and alcohol (some passengers). How is this different?

Quoting enilria (Reply 55):
Sort of, but I assume they are doing like Spirit and allowing under seat carry-ons for free still. That makes it impossible. You could get something like a backpack or mini-duffle that you can stuff under there and provide you enough belongings to stay with friends.

F9 f/as already have to enforce the underseat versus in the overhead dichotomy for some passengers. How is this different?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-02 11:09:34 and read 7609 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 52):
Now would be an extremely dumb time to order aircraft.

But - they have.

According to the fleet plan they have at least 3 more A320 coming in this year/  

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: 767driver
Posted 2013-05-02 11:27:07 and read 7527 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 52):
Perhaps, but F9 FAs have always been a key strength of the product in terms of friendliness and such. This will end that if they have them looking you over and collecting fees. BTW, how long will drink service take if they are scanning credit cards for every single passenger?

About half the time it does now since less people will be ordering drinks. Just get on any of the full NK flights from SAN/LAX-LAS or FLL-MCO/TPA where they can do a full service and still have 20 minutes leftover to twiddle their thumbs

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: planeadmirer
Posted 2013-05-02 11:41:34 and read 7502 times.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 35):
Another reason not to fly F9. Remind me again, why did everybody fight so hard to support the sale of YX to these guys? I mean, the "Save the Cookie" campaign worked out really great, didn't it? Not long after Republic bought out YX, changed the name to F9, laid off the legacy YX pilots and fight attendants, it abandoned the fresh-baked cookies on flights into and out of MKE. No doubt they sent the ovens to the scrapyard (for a few bucks) and then added a few more cramped coach seats to their flying cattle cars

Enjoy the drive to ORD...... Because one might reasonably think that non-stop service was more important than fresh baked cookies which turned out not to be true.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-02 12:09:32 and read 7431 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 52):

The point is that if you were really just days from selling the company which is where they said they were a quarter ago and big decision like this would almost certainly wait for the sign-off of the new owners. It's like ordering aircraft. Now would be an extremely dumb time to order aircraft. Let the new owners make their own decisions. When you make those decisions for them you are reducing the saleability of the company. It's like painting all the walls of your house red right before you sell it because you like red. Not the time to make big changes. Get it?

I "get it" but disagree. They aren't spending billions on airplanes, they are making a modest change to their fee structure. You make it sound like a radical departure from their business model goals - it isn't. Additionally, in my opinion, any investor at this stage is looking for one thing - results. If this furthers their advance towards profitability, they will be onboard.

Quoting enilria (Reply 52):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 37):Based on my recent flights on AS and WN, I'd say they are plenty comfortable being enforcement officers.
Perhaps, but F9 FAs have always been a key strength of the product in terms of friendliness and such.

And Alaska's FA's and onboard service aren't? Sorry, but again I simply disagree. And I won't even get into the WN experience. Personally, I've usually enjoyed both of these carriers, but on my most recent journey I left my flights feeling like they were no different than any other carrier, and certainly not memorable in any way outside of my own negative experiences in a few areas.

Should F9 be held to some higher standard than these two market leaders?

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-02 13:11:23 and read 7317 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 60):

Should F9 be held to some higher standard than these two market leaders?

Not when they're racing to join NK and G4 at the bottom of the airline cesspool!

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: planeadmirer
Posted 2013-05-02 13:21:08 and read 7303 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 61):
Not when they're racing to join NK and G4 at the bottom of the airline cesspool!

I may not want to fly NK or G4, but a lot of people do and pay good money to do so and both airlines are profitable compared to the previous F9 model. The market is speaking and F9's management is listening.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: GentFromAlaska
Posted 2013-05-02 13:38:09 and read 7245 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 37):
I think that's a primary reason for doing the fee the way they did. To drive traffic to FlyFrontier.com.

I would also add it is a less expensive means to market and advertise the brand. Just as people eat with their eyes first; the leisure flyer tend to fly with their wallets/purses first.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-02 15:22:31 and read 7127 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 61):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 60):
Should F9 be held to some higher standard than these two market leaders?
Not when they're racing to join NK and G4 at the bottom of the airline cesspool!

I posted this reply in the Spirit earnings thread:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 24):
Quoting Noise (Reply 23):It says a lot when the country's worst airline in terms of quality of service is actually one of its most successful.
It says a lot about marketing, cost-control, knowing your targeted consumer, and focusing on one thing and doing it really well.

You might find these carriers a "cesspool", but to many people they find them perfectly fine. Again, I don't see much difference in service levels between AS, WN and what anyone else is doing. Why should F9 be "more" special than they? What has that done for their bottom line? They are up against the worlds largest airline, America's largest domestic airline, and the most competitive CASM ULCC in the country in DEN. Do you want DEN to be their Alamo? I'm guessing they employees and shareholders of F9 don't.

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Frontier14
Posted 2013-05-02 19:56:01 and read 6933 times.

Quoting n7371f (Reply 47):
n7371f


I'll give F9 management benefit of the doubt on this and assume they've been planning this out for months and have every scenario checked out.

The dickie birds were chatting about all of this coming last fall. Are we surprised, I would say no. Are we disappointed, yes. But life is full of changes and if Frontier is to survive, it has to change. It has. Southwest, Delta and some A.netters all have their agendas with Frontier, but this little airline continues to fight much to their chagrin. Seigle and friends will most likely get the separation deal done, and then the fun will begin. Are you ready?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-05-02 20:07:39 and read 6912 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 56):
Quoting enilria (Reply 52):
Perhaps, but F9 FAs have always been a key strength of the product in terms of friendliness and such. This will end that if they have them looking you over and collecting fees.

They are already looking over our shoulders and collecting fees for food (all passengers) and alcohol (some passengers). How is this different?

Buying a product for $3 or $10 is one thing. This is a lot of money and the argument will be "it fits" under the seat. They really have to do that before they board. Surely Spirit doesn't enforce on the airplane???

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 56):
Quoting enilria (Reply 55):
Sort of, but I assume they are doing like Spirit and allowing under seat carry-ons for free still. That makes it impossible. You could get something like a backpack or mini-duffle that you can stuff under there and provide you enough belongings to stay with friends.

F9 f/as already have to enforce the underseat versus in the overhead dichotomy for some passengers. How is this different?

Because now you have FAs combing the airplane during the madness of the boarding process wielding a credit card reader. I'm sorry, but this has to be done before boarding.

Quoting mariner (Reply 57):
Quoting enilria (Reply 52):
Now would be an extremely dumb time to order aircraft.

But - they have.

According to the fleet plan they have at least 3 more A320 coming in this year/

That's just replacing planes that are going away. Are those A320s new???

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 60):
they are making a modest change to their fee structure.

For a "modest" change it sure has gotten a lot of attention. Go to google news.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 61):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 60):

Should F9 be held to some higher standard than these two market leaders?

Not when they're racing to join NK and G4 at the bottom of the airline cesspool!

I wouldn't say that, tehy are doing what they need to survive and it may work if WN decides they can't match it. It could also backfire if WN keep pressuring them on pricing.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jerseyguy
Posted 2013-05-02 20:20:18 and read 6875 times.

How bad are the 3rd party fees that they are so concerned with them, with places like TTN and ILG on their routemap and assuming they are looking for more airports like this in order to get less reliant on DEN you would think they would love 3rd party sites like orbitz and travelocity. With their alternate airport features they highlight the savings at these airports. A search of Philadelphia to Chicago with alternate airports checked (on orbitz) brings up a huge difference in fares $97 vs $257 for United and USAirways (6/10-6/20). Unless they are going to really advertise which also costs money, I'd think they'd do better with the Orbitz/Travelocity s of the world.

If you use flyfrontier.com it really isn't a horrible announcement (except of course unless you figure its only a matter of time before they stop waiving the carry-on fee).

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: IllinoisMan
Posted 2013-05-02 20:53:29 and read 6834 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 37):
Are you still worked up over this? It's been almost FOUR YEARS - isn't it time to start the healing?

I was once a Summit member and and I'm very sad to see F9 slide into the "nickel and dime" model. If you don't like working with the Orbitz of the world, don't work with the Orbitz of the world, period, rather than adding extreme penalties. The extra labor to keep track of all of the different fare classes has a cost. Not an overt cost, but a cost nonetheless. Consumers don't have time for complexity. Newsflash...People use the third party sites because of lower fares...All you're doing is punishing those customers for shopping around for a good price.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-02 21:34:48 and read 6783 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 66):
That's just replacing planes that are going away. Are those A320s new???


You didn't make that qualification originally, but yes, I believe the first A320, at least, is new - whatever difference that makes - and of course, I guess the later 80 x Neo will be.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-02 22:07:46]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-02 22:09:59 and read 6716 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 66):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 60): they are making a modest change to their fee structure.
For a "modest" change it sure has gotten a lot of attention. Go to google news.

I'm not sure why making the news somehow makes this a bigger deal than it really is? It isn't groundbreaking. It isn't all-emcompassing. And it won't affect (imho) an outside investor coming in one iota.

Quoting enilria (Reply 66):
It could also backfire if WN keep pressuring them on pricing.

When you are essentially out of options, I don't think things can "backfire" per se. It isn't that Frontier has many options to be successful but have chosen to go rogue, it's that they can't compete as a legacy with the worlds largest airline, can't compete as an LCC with the worlds largest LCC, and so must find a way to move forward into profitability in a niche that the others (to date) haven't touched.

To me, sticking to their guns circa 2008 would have "backfired" more than this, though I know that sounds more argumentative than I mean it.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 68):
Newsflash...People use the third party sites because of lower fares...All you're doing is punishing those customers for shopping around for a good price.

They are rewarding people for buying from FlyFrontier. It's perverse because they really can't go any lower on fares at their website, so they have to instead dissuade people from using third-party sites as a preference by making it more expensive.

I realize people won't like it. But that booking costs Frontier more than if they get it through their website. Every nickel and dime does indeed matter.

For you, of course, it won't. You can fly out of O'Hare like many people choose to do, and for Frontier and MKE there is virtually nothing left to even discuss. Regardless, for the people who find value in the Allegiants, the Spirits, and yes the Frontier's of the world, it will all work out just fine.

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-03 05:30:21 and read 6571 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 70):
They are rewarding people for buying from FlyFrontier. It's perverse because they really can't go any lower on fares at their website, so they have to instead dissuade people from using third-party sites as a preference by making it more expensive.

Who is twisting Frontier's arm and forcing them to sell lower fares on OTAs than on flyfrontier.com?

Quoting enilria (Reply 66):
Because now you have FAs combing the airplane during the madness of the boarding process wielding a credit card reader. I'm sorry, but this has to be done before boarding.

Of course it does. All the f/as have to do is catch the cheats--just like Express Boarding now. Again, I don't see the difference.

If it were me, I'd make the fee two or three times as high if you get caught cheating on the plane.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: gustywinds
Posted 2013-05-03 07:05:34 and read 6483 times.

Someone asked the question about the cost to Frontier when passengers book via the OTAs (Travelocity, Priceline). F9 claims it costs them up to $25 per booking. That's simply too high when F9's fares are so low. Frontier's message is simple - Book directly with us and get a better value with more options.

http://news.yahoo.com/frontier-airlines-fares-no-longer-223110740.html

Quote:
It has been encouraging travelers to book flights on its own website by offering those customers advance seat assignments, lower fees and more frequent-flier miles.

Frontier says it costs the airline up to $25 per booking when passengers book on other sites.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: HiFlyerAS
Posted 2013-05-03 07:15:16 and read 6487 times.

I read recently that Frontier has a strong possibility of being sold off by Republic Holdings to Spirit. Maybe these changes at F9 are connected in some way? As far as mergers go, this would make perfect sense to me...it would create the largest ULCC in the country and would be a force to be reckoned with for the majors.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jerseyguy
Posted 2013-05-03 07:27:02 and read 6463 times.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 73):
I read recently that Frontier has a strong possibility of being sold off by Republic Holdings to Spirit. Maybe these changes at F9 are connected in some way? As far as mergers go, this would make perfect sense to me...it would create the largest ULCC in the country and would be a force to be reckoned with for the majors.

F9 and Spirit merge? Now I think I know how the fans of Midwest Express felt. Hoping that doesn't happen.

Quoting gustywinds (Reply 72):
Someone asked the question about the cost to Frontier when passengers book via the OTAs (Travelocity, Priceline). F9 claims it costs them up to $25 per booking.

$25 a booking. Thats way too much. You could do a lot of advertising for that kind of money.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-03 09:05:34 and read 6366 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 71):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 70):They are rewarding people for buying from FlyFrontier. It's perverse because they really can't go any lower on fares at their website, so they have to instead dissuade people from using third-party sites as a preference by making it more expensive.
Who is twisting Frontier's arm and forcing them to sell lower fares on OTAs than on flyfrontier.com?

I think I stated my position poorly, as I wasn't trying to imply that anyone was forcing Frontier to do anything. What I was trying to say - and explained perhaps better by gustywinds below - is that Frontier isn't trying to "punish" people for book at OTA's, per se, but rather trying to encourage them to book through FlyFrontier.com. However, I don't see how they can come out ahead by lowering fares on their own website to entice people, so they instead "raise" the cost of doing business at the OTA to encourage people to book directly with them.

I don't know if that's their true intent - it's only how I see it. It could be that they are going to add the fees to ALL fares eventually, but for now are training the consumer to go to their own website by using the more nuanced fee structure for now.

Quoting gustywinds (Reply 72):
Someone asked the question about the cost to Frontier when passengers book via the OTAs (Travelocity, Priceline). F9 claims it costs them up to $25 per booking. That's simply too high when F9's fares are so low. Frontier's message is simple - Book directly with us and get a better value with more options.

Thank you.

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-03 09:19:55 and read 6337 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 75):
I don't know if that's their true intent - it's only how I see it. It could be that they are going to add the fees to ALL fares eventually, but for now are training the consumer to go to their own website by using the more nuanced fee structure for now.

I think what you are seeing now is what you are getting. Unlike NK and G4 (and arguably more like at least some legacy fees), F9 has always used fees more to encourage behavior than strictly to gain revenue.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-03 09:37:56 and read 6330 times.

Quoting jerseyguy (Reply 74):

F9 and Spirit merge? Now I think I know how the fans of Midwest Express felt. Hoping that doesn't happen.

Fine with me...kill 2 for the price of 1

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-03 09:50:59 and read 6308 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 76):
I think what you are seeing now is what you are getting. Unlike NK and G4 (and arguably more like at least some legacy fees), F9 has always used fees more to encourage behavior than strictly to gain revenue.

I'd agree with that.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 77):
Fine with me...kill 2 for the price of 1

Bitter much?

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-05-03 10:31:24 and read 6242 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 69):
I believe the first A320, at least, is new - whatever difference that makes - and of course, I guess the later 80 x Neo will be.

Those planes weren't just ordered and I think the same point is valid there. Having all these aircraft orders is a noose around their neck. That's why they've had to unwind the E190 commitment and I assume no buyer will take their C-Series commitment. They could have lucked into something with the NEOs if those spots are valuable.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 70):
Quoting enilria (Reply 66):
It could also backfire if WN keep pressuring them on pricing.

When you are essentially out of options, I don't think things can "backfire" per se. It isn't that Frontier has many options to be successful but have chosen to go rogue, it's that they can't compete as a legacy with the worlds largest airline, can't compete as an LCC with the worlds largest LCC, and so must find a way to move forward into profitability in a niche that the others (to date) haven't touched.

Again, you only took the negative comment. I think this strategy works well for NK and could for F9. I think it works better in places like TTN/MCO/etc than it does in DEN. Frankly, nothing is going to work well in DEN. There are simply too many competitors and too much pressure. Also, if F9 starts adding stuff like ATL-MSP/MDW and MIA-MDW will it work as well as what NK is doing? Will NK retaliate? It seems like F9 is attempting more of a true RyanAir model which means alternative airports as opposed to NK which has mostly shied away from that by flying to the main airport is nearly every case. I'd also say that if this model is truly magical then things like MCI-SFO and MKE-LAX are back to being top candidates even though that have already given up on them.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 73):
I read recently that Frontier has a strong possibility of being sold off by Republic Holdings to Spirit. Maybe these changes at F9 are connected in some way?

The reasons to synchronize the products even before a purchase is agreed to seems like nonsense.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mikefrommke
Posted 2013-05-03 10:46:33 and read 6216 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 79):
I assume no buyer will take their C-Series commitment.

The C-Series order is for Republic and would not be included in the assets partially acquired by a new investor unless that investor really wanted them.

Quoting enilria (Reply 79):

The reasons to synchronize the products even before a purchase is agreed to seems like nonsense.

Ding ding ding! Frontier (like AA when they ordered all those planes) makes decisions under the assumption that they will have to go it alone. A merger is highly unlikely, they are looking for an investor.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-03 11:35:52 and read 6143 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 78):

Nope, just massively anti-carryon fee...

If your bottom line is that bad that you feel the need to charge people who already do the work for you by carrying on their own bags, then please roll over and die and let someone better do the job.

[Edited 2013-05-03 11:49:20]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: HiFlyerAS
Posted 2013-05-03 11:36:16 and read 6146 times.

Quoting mikefrommke (Reply 80):
A merger is highly unlikely, they are looking for an investor.

An investor? For how long now has RAH been trying to unload Frontier? Merger, investor, whatever....they just want to be rid of it.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-03 11:46:21 and read 6137 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 79):
Those planes weren't just ordered and I think the same point is valid there. Having all these aircraft orders is a noose around their neck.

They're usually thought of an extremely attractive asset. At the very least, worst case, they are excellent - that is early - production slots.

Quoting mikefrommke (Reply 80):
A merger is highly unlikely, they are looking for an investor.

A merger has always been highly unlikely. BB said so from the git-go.

The first "action" of the separation was to make agreements with the pilots and f/a's which gave the two groups percentage holdings in the separated airline.

It is a.net and the media who decided outright sale.

On the matter of extra work for the f/a's, down here they deal with five different fare classes in the economy cabin, and we (mandatory) automated check-in. There are very few problems.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-03 11:51:15]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-03 12:38:18 and read 6054 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 81):
If your bottom line is that bad that you feel the need to charge people who already do the work for you by carrying on their own bags, then please roll over and die and let someone better do the job.

Again, though, the point isn't necessarily for people to pay this fee. It's to steer them to flyfrontier.com. What's wrong with steering folks to your own web site?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mikefrommke
Posted 2013-05-03 13:10:24 and read 6009 times.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 82):
An investor? For how long now has RAH been trying to unload Frontier? Merger, investor, whatever....they just want to be rid of it.

This idea that RJET wants to be totally rid of Frontier is a complete fabrication by the media and message boards. They are looking for another party to take a majority holding in the airline, which they are legally obligated to do based on the contract they have with the pilots and F/As. They have an out clause if they get I think 5% profitability for a full year before that. RJET's circumstances for buying Frontier have not changed (looking for more than fixed fee flying) but they would be perfectly happy to have another investor come in to capitalize the airline and let RJET's share earn continual revenue with minimal effort on their part. They are looking for the best deal for their shareholders, which an outright sale would most certainly not produce enough money to break even.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: beechtobus
Posted 2013-05-03 13:56:24 and read 5969 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 81):

"Nope, just massively anti-carryon fee...

If your bottom line is that bad that you feel the need to charge people who already do the work for you by carrying on their own bags, then please roll over and die and let someone better do the job."

Yes because everyone knows that the extra weight of oversized carry ons and extra the time at the gate for people to pack everything but the kitchen sink into the overhead is a freebie for the airlines. Physics and cost of lost time due to extra time boarding do not apply here because overhead space is god given. But what if they run out of overhead space for the last several passengers, which happens on, say...every flight I've been on in recent years? Then what, these people are entitled to space in the overhead bins, they should sue.

Get real man, your anti Spirit, Allegiant and now Frontier banter because of overhead baggage fees is a little ridiculous. If people don't accept these fees, they will overwhelmingly choose with their wallets and the airlines will have to adjust their pricing or they will fail, that's capitalism. Something (I.e. Spirit and Allegiants record profits of late) is telling me that people embrace, or at least largely accept the choice to bring a larger carryon that they will have to pay for, or save some money by taking a bag that fits under the seat. Face it buddy, the ala cart pricing model is here to stay, if you don't like it, speak with your wallet. But to wish for a company to fail and put people who earn a paycheck out on the street because the company runs its business in a way that you don't like and has absolutely no effect on your life is pretty childish.

Target has a crappy return policy and overpriced garbage, this is my opinion. I don't like how they do business, so I do not shop there. I don't however cheer for them to fail and for their employees to be on the street because a) that is just odd, anti social behavior, b) just because I don't like them, I don't think that people who do like them should be denied the choice of shopping there, and c) if I don't shop there, they have absolutely no effect on my life whatsoever.

[Edited 2013-05-03 14:34:56]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: milemaster
Posted 2013-05-03 16:17:49 and read 5841 times.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 35):
Another reason not to fly F9. Remind me again, why did everybody fight so hard to support the sale of YX to these guys? I mean, the "Save the Cookie" campaign worked out really great, didn't it? Not long after Republic bought out YX, changed the name to F9, laid off the legacy YX pilots and fight attendants, it abandoned the fresh-baked cookies on flights into and out of MKE. No doubt they sent the ovens to the scrapyard (for a few bucks) and then added a few more cramped coach seats to their flying cattle cars.

Man, you really like cookies.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: OB1504
Posted 2013-05-03 18:30:17 and read 5729 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 81):
If your bottom line is that bad that you feel the need to charge people who already do the work for you by carrying on their own bags, then please roll over and die and let someone better do the job.

I'm sure the shareholders of Spirit disagree with you.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-03 23:59:07 and read 5554 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 79):
Again, you only took the negative comment.

I didn't take it as a negative. I just see it as an out-of-options scenario. But it's not worth dragging out further.

Quoting milemaster (Reply 87):
Man, you really like cookies.

Hahahahahah  

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-04 01:10:13 and read 5525 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 84):
What's wrong with steering folks to your own web site?

How about simply not allowing third party sites to sell your tickets...seems to work for WN?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-04 01:14:06 and read 5530 times.

Quoting beechtobus (Reply 86):
Get real man, your anti Spirit, Allegiant and now Frontier banter because of overhead baggage fees is a little ridiculous. If people don't accept these fees, they will overwhelmingly choose with their wallets and the airlines will have to adjust their pricing or they will fail, that's capitalism. Something (I.e. Spirit and Allegiants record profits of late) is telling me that people embrace, or at least largely accept the choice to bring a larger carryon that they will have to pay for, or save some money by taking a bag that fits under the seat. Face it buddy, the ala cart pricing model is here to stay, if you don't like it, speak with your wallet. But to wish for a company to fail and put people who earn a paycheck out on the street because the company runs its business in a way that you don't like and has absolutely no effect on your life is pretty childish.

Oh come off it...the fact of the matter is that two of these three airlines were running in the red due to mismanagement until they decided to stick it to their customers. Same goes with checked baggage fees, but that's for another debate. The point is simple...they're getting something for nothing. They don't have to do ANYTHING to make money off of carry-on fees. It may be legal, but it sure as hell is unethical!

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-04 01:23:22 and read 5544 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 90):
How about simply not allowing third party sites to sell your tickets...seems to work for WN?

That may happen. Frontier has already dropped Expedia. It's a process.

The only people this really affects are those who buy the cheapest fare through a third party website.

For the rest, not much has changed.

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-05-04 08:44:01 and read 5393 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 90):
How about simply not allowing third party sites to sell your tickets...seems to work for WN?

They may be headed that way, but they will have in greatly increase advertising spending.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Frontier14
Posted 2013-05-04 10:16:33 and read 5364 times.

A shock of some sorts in reading the Denver Post letters to the editor this morning (5/4) in that the paper actually posted a letter from a Frontier customer supporting the new unbundling policies. This is quite unusual as the Post rarely prints anything that is supportive of Frontier since SW arrived on the scene.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: beechtobus
Posted 2013-05-04 12:28:47 and read 5253 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 91):

["...the fact of the matter is that two of these three airlines were running in the red due to mismanagement until they decided to stick it to their customers."]

Well, since you don't specify what you mean by "stick it to their customers", I'm going to guess you mean charging carry-on baggage fees since that's what we are talking about in the context of NK, G4, and F9. As usual, you are once again wrong.

NK has not reported a loss since 2006 and started charging for carry ons in August 2010, four years later.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100550728
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/06/news...nies/spirit_airlines_carry-on_fee/

G4 has had 41 consecutive profitable quarters to date (profitable since the end of 2002) and started charging for carry on baggage in April 2012, after ten years in the black.

http://atwonline.com/operations/alle...iant-air-2012-net-income-jumps-591
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/03/travel/allegiant-air-carryon-fee

F9s profits/losses are a bit harder to track being under the Rjet umbrella but its a moot point as they haven't started charging for carry-ons yet.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 91):

["The point is simple...they're getting something for nothing. They don't have to do ANYTHING to make money off of carry-on fees."]

Really?! So just because a representative of the airline is not physically handling the bag, It doesn't cost anything?? Any added weight on an aircraft, whether its in the cargo pit or overhead costs money. Obviously you don't get this, so I will explain it to you: if each passenger on a full Spirit A320 brings 40 lbs with them, while not sounding like much per person, this adds an extra 7,120 lbs to the aircraft (178x40). Any extra weight (of which 7120 lbs is considerable)= reduced performance= higher fuel consumption = equals higher costs for the airlines. This is tangible, not a wild eyed theory I came up with. Airlines know this, so in order to mitigate these cost, most started charging for checked baggage. The problem now is that passengers essentially carry on what they can to avoid these charges. Not only has the weight simply shifted from the cargo pits to the cabin, now extra time is needed for boarding and deboarding for people to cram and uncram this baggage into and out of the overheads. Time equals money. If a cab driver waits for a customer at a store, the meter still runs. The driver is not physically doing anything but the idle time is still costing him as he could me making money on another fare. The same applies to airplanes, if they're not flying, they're not making money. If a plane does 6 flights a day and loses just 10 minutes on each due to added time boarding/deboarding, this is an hour that the plane is out of the air per day, an extra 2 hour flight over 2 days that the airplane can be making revenue. Again, tangible costs to the airline that someone is paying for. So who should pay? I personally feel it should be the people that bring the added weight, this is only fair, do you disagree?

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 91):

["It may be legal, but it sure as hell is unethical!"]

Seriously man, an ethical debate about carry-on baggage? Spirit and Allegiant (and I'm sure when Frontier starts charging) do not hide the fact that they charge for carry-ons. If you book on either airline, you are brought to a screen in the booking process before you purchase anything that explains in bold font the baggage charges and gives you the opportunity to purchase them there. It's not on a different screen in fine print ( And don't argue the fact that Orbitz or what not doesn't disclose these charges, if a third party resells a ticket without disclosing potential charges, this nondisclosure is on the third party, not the airline). If you don't bother to read the clear baggage policy when booking, Spirit anyhow (not sure about Allegiant) has big signs and baggage sizers at its ticket counters and in most cases, near security checkpoints once again explaining the baggage policy and what the costs will be at the gate vs. the ticket counter.

If these charges were hidden until you got to the gate, or charged to your card without consent, then you have an ethical debate, but not with how clear NK and G4 make it that they charge for carry ons pre-purchase. Also, in no case do you not have a choice of other airlines at the airports that G4, NK, or F9 serve or nearby. So it's not as if these airlines hold some kind of monopoly, duopoly, or triopoly ( if that's even a word) anywhere.

Shoddy maintenance or price collusion or hidden charges = unethical. Charging for carry ons while actively informing the customers of your charges = yeah I don't think so, nice try.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-05 06:28:50 and read 4976 times.

Here's something that perfectly illustrates the mentality that seems to plague folks here regarding carry-on fees:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpE_xMRiCLE

It's the frog in boiling water scenario. Some folks here would rather be boiled alive...and frankly, I am not buying it. If these airlines are hurting for money that bad that they feel the need to charge folks to do their dirty work for them, then they are nothing but scum...and I will celebrate with joy the day they go away! Yes...I said it. They deserve to go under!

Folks on here slam WN because they refuse to charge for bags and are just leaving money on the table...maybe they have a higher sense of personal ethics to their customer base that other airlines just seem to discard in the pursuit of the almighty dollar. Then you have airlines who just think the customer is nothing but a number or a head of cattle...charge them for everything, milk them for every last dollar...nickel and dime them...take advantage of their stupidity. After all, they're just after the cheapest fare...I don't care how much money you can make, there's a line between profit and downright thievery...and they've crossed it!

[Edited 2013-05-05 06:36:19]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jerseyguy
Posted 2013-05-05 07:26:17 and read 4928 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 96):
Folks on here slam WN because they refuse to charge for bags and are just leaving money on the table

I applaud WN for that myself and its the reason that they are my second choice of airline (F9 is #1 based on a convenience factor).

A few things about Frontier:
1. Carry-on charge can be avoided by purchasing on flyfrontier.com (Is it possible they will charge everyone down the road yes but for now it is waived).
2. Frontier actually sells cheaper tickets, I couldn't find anything close to the price of my TTN-MDW ticket except for Spirit out of ACY or LGA and they charge $15-20 just to use their website as a convenience fee.
3. Change fee on Frontier is $50. Major airlines are at $200
4. That change fee can be $0 if you purchase a classic fare which for most tickets is $25 to $35, includes 2 checked bags and free select seating.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-05 07:54:04 and read 4866 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 96):
Folks on here slam WN because they refuse to charge for bags and are just leaving money on the table...maybe they have a higher sense of personal ethics to their customer base that other airlines just seem to discard in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.

Given that all of these fees can be avoided by simply booking on flyfrontier.com, I'm having a hard time understanding how these fees are unethical in any sense. OTAs cost F9 money. They are simply passing those costs along.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-05 07:59:04 and read 4862 times.

I agree about F9's scenario...and I really loved the trips I had with that airline. But they could have easily avoided all this negative press and stooping to the bottom rung by simply STOPPING SALES THROUGH THIRD PARTIES.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-05 08:03:06 and read 4852 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 99):
But they could have easily avoided all this negative press and stooping to the bottom rung by simply STOPPING SALES THROUGH THIRD PARTIES.

Maybe that's where they are headed? The publicity raises folks' awareness of flyfrontier.com and will pull traffic away from the OTAs. Seems pretty shrewd to me if that's the idea. We'll see if it works.

Of course, F9 does interline, so OTAs can be useful. But in that scenario, it's still easy to avoid the fees by buying a more expensive ticket, which has long been another of F9's goals with the fees.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-05 12:55:44 and read 4743 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 100):
Maybe that's where they are headed? The publicity raises folks' awareness of flyfrontier.com and will pull traffic away from the OTAs. Seems pretty shrewd to me if that's the idea. We'll see if it works.

Sure. Frontier dropping of Expedia was a big clue:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...ill-no-longer-sell-tickets-expedia

"Frontier Airlines will no longer sell tickets on Expedia""

Now that the knee-jerk hoo-haa about the new fees is starting to die down, more considered minds are emerging. This one from the Denver Post:

http://www.denverpost.com/business/c...recast-industrys-future?source=rss

"Frontier is not the first to add fees, but is pioneering the fight against OTAs. Southwest Airlines has always resisted OTAs, but experts agree that customers often just don't like change from their carriers.

"It is probably not any fun to be a Frontier salesperson this week, but all that will settle at some point. If you are a very savvy traveler, you get the hint," Mann said.

In an industry strapped for cash, the commission skimmed off of each ticket sale by OTAs is a major hindrance to airline profits, he said, but the middleman is no longer needed with the technological advances of airline websites."


And this from Motley Fool:

http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...sh-airline-fee-a-game-changer.aspx

"Is This Outlandish Airline Fee a Game-Changer?

Frontier's move is groundbreaking for two particular reasons.

First, it adds yet another airline to those charging for carry-on bags. Spirit and Allegiant are writing the book on utilizing high-margin optional fees to drive bottom-line growth, and other regional airlines appear likely to catch onto this growth-driver. Either that or they will simply be left behind.

Second, it could put third-party booking sites in a bind. The advantage of third-party sites such as Expedia and Orbitz is that they usually undercut airlines' website ticket prices and allow users to bundle their flight with other items like a car and hotel to maximize their savings. However, if airlines suddenly begin penalizing passengers who purchase their ticket through these third-party websites by imposing carry-on baggage fees, if the math makes sense, they'll simply make their purchase via the airlines' website."


Whether - or when - Frontier will drop the other OTA's is unknown to me, but we seem to be heading in that direction. Or maybe the OTA's will drop Frontier, which amounts to the same thing.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-05 13:09:01]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: par13del
Posted 2013-05-05 14:22:59 and read 4683 times.

Quoting enilria (Reply 12):
The way to make money in this industry consistently is to not be matched. That is very difficult to do.

So are we saying that WN cattle call is a good thing 
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 84):
Again, though, the point isn't necessarily for people to pay this fee. It's to steer them to flyfrontier.com. What's wrong with steering folks to your own web site?

Well this works in politics and people accept it - discourage folks from smoking by taxes - but in the commercial arena one can expect push back, I wonder if fair trade clauses will apply?
I agree with others that it would be better, simplier and much quicker to just dump the OTA's, if they have to keep them due to some agreement with other parties this is an underhand method which will be recognized as such by those third parties.
How much is this complicated process going to cost?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: santi319
Posted 2013-05-05 14:29:07 and read 4666 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 96):
It's the frog in boiling water scenario. Some folks here would rather be boiled alive...and frankly, I am not buying it. If these airlines are hurting for money that bad that they feel the need to charge folks to do their dirty work for them, then they are nothing but scum...and I will celebrate with joy the day they go away! Yes...I said it. They deserve to go under!

Thats a very mature comment.....

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-05 14:46:08 and read 4647 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 99):
I agree about F9's scenario...and I really loved the trips I had with that airline. But they could have easily avoided all this negative press and stooping to the bottom rung by simply STOPPING SALES THROUGH THIRD PARTIES.

Quite ignoring any contracts or agreements they may have with the OTAs? From the article about dropping Expedia:

""The contract with Expedia was up for renewal, but an agreement could not be reached," said Kate O'Malley, spokeswoman for Frontier, in an e-mail."

The contract with Expedia was up for renewal, so it was easy enough not to sign a new one. However, the contracts with the others are ongoing - for now. So we get another clue:

"Frontier tickets will still be available, for now, on other third-party travel sites such as Travelocity, Orbitz and Priceline."

Note: "for now."

I wonder how much American's battle with Orbitz cost, if only in legal fees?

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: par13del
Posted 2013-05-05 16:39:22 and read 4557 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 104):
I wonder how much American's battle with Orbitz cost, if only in legal fees?

Probably a lot because AA was trying to "welch" by unilaterraly lowering fees to be paid versus looking for an amicable way to end the relationship.
Most contracts have an out with a penalty fee, in this case we may assume that F9 has looked at the cost of termination and decided either they could not afford it or they could get the same result with this option.
Time and the OTA's under contract will tell how successful.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-05 16:48:46 and read 4548 times.

Quoting par13del (Reply 105):
Most contracts have an out with a penalty fee, in this case we may assume that F9 has looked at the cost of termination and decided either they could not afford it or they could get the same result with this option.

I think that is a completely reasonable assumption - and maybe a richer airline would be willing to pay the penalties - but in Frontier's case it leads to:

http://www.denverpost.com/business/c...recast-industrys-future?source=rss

"It is a matter of training the public to see the benefit in booking directly on the airlines' websites, Mann said, and finding the right ways to offer bundle levels. He predicted that OTAs will not be around for much longer."

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-05 17:10:15]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: IllinoisMan
Posted 2013-05-06 01:33:49 and read 4287 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 101):
Now that the knee-jerk hoo-haa about the new fees is starting to die down, more considered minds are emerging.

And yet this is all from the airline's perspective, not the customer's. These fees won't be a forecast for the industry's future if travelers will switch to a different airline until they roll them back. Its not a "given" that the others will follow - near simultaneous price hikes amongst the airlines have failed before. Airline service stinks, planes are dirty, seating is crowded, food stinks, where does one stop? I've flown first class a lot in the past year and its not much better. I'd rather pay more for a flight (not for fees) and get better treatment including more room in "cattle class".

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-06 02:47:03 and read 4268 times.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 107):
And yet this is all from the airline's perspective, not the customer's. These fees won't be a forecast for the industry's future if travelers will switch to a different airline until they roll them back.

Hmmm? What I quoted was from the media and analysts' perspective. The airline said nothing in those articles.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 107):
These fees won't be a forecast for the industry's future if travelers will switch to a different airline until they roll them back.

There'll be some seepage, I'm sure, but I assume Frontier is ready for that, based on what happened when it dropped Expedia. I guess a lot of folk switched to the Frontier website. Passengers - especially those in search of a bargain fare - may be more internet savvy than you give them credit for.

Quoting IllinoisMan (Reply 107):
I'd rather pay more for a flight (not for fees) and get better treatment including more room in "cattle class".

You've told us that so often - usually followed by a lamentation for Midwest - and you've also said that you never fly Frontier anymore, so none of these changes affect you and aren't intended to appeal to you.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-06 03:26:03]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: GentFromAlaska
Posted 2013-05-06 09:06:33 and read 4121 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 90):
How about simply not allowing third party sites to sell your tickets...seems to work for WN?
Quoting mariner (Reply 92):
The only people this really affects are those who buy the cheapest fare through a third party website.

For the rest, not much has changed.

We have to remember there a couple of third party sites exclusivley set-aside for the military community travel management centers including SATO which sell official government travel and at least one non-offical travel URL for the military and government sect of the populous. Even WN sells ticket on at least one third party URL I know of.

F9 may not want to shoot themselves in the proverbial foot by enacting a zero tolerance sell policy.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-06 10:01:19 and read 4067 times.

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 109):
We have to remember there a couple of third party sites exclusivley set-aside for the military community travel management centers including SATO which sell official government travel and at least one non-offical travel URL for the military and government sect of the populous.

Military travel is different...
I think we're talking specifically about expedia, orbitz, kayak, and travelocity.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Antoniemey
Posted 2013-05-06 11:38:39 and read 4016 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 96):
Folks on here slam WN because they refuse to charge for bags and are just leaving money on the table.

And people here also ignore the fact that WN INCLUDES the extra cost of bags in their base fare. If you are comparing prices on an advance purchase, WN will ALWAYS be higher than their competitors. As you get closer to the travel date is when WN becomes cheaper. No money is being left on the table, but WN has managed to convince the masses that they are the default cheapest option.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jerseyguy
Posted 2013-05-09 07:54:23 and read 2786 times.

To everyone who wanted to know how they would work out the carry-on thing, who pre-paid or who qualifies for free because they booked at flyfrontier.com. Here is my boarding pass (with all the personal info removed) which shows that the words "CARRY-ON" appear because I booked on fly frontier.com (and because they haven't started charging yet). It also has ECONOMY written on it so that they know I have to pay for drinks when they start that.

http://flic.kr/p/ehSYDY

[Edited 2013-05-09 07:56:55]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: N908AW
Posted 2013-05-09 09:42:54 and read 2714 times.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 73):
I read recently that Frontier has a strong possibility of being sold off by Republic Holdings to Spirit. Maybe these changes at F9 are connected in some way? As far as mergers go, this would make perfect sense to me...it would create the largest ULCC in the country and would be a force to be reckoned with for the majors.

That's not entirely true...Indigo Partners LLC is one of the rumored suitors, but they are only a minority (16.6%) shareholder in Spirit after their IPO in 2011 (Indigo was an owner before then). Indigo's founder is the chairman of Spirit's BOD though.

Nevertheless, such a transaction does make a merger more likely than not. Which is a shame, because even though their brand has changed considerably, Frontier employees are still remarkably proud of their brand. They have not and will not let it go quietly.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jerseyguy
Posted 2013-05-09 10:10:28 and read 2681 times.

Quoting N908AW (Reply 113):
Which is a shame, because even though their brand has changed considerably, Frontier employees are still remarkably proud of their brand. They have not and will not let it go quietly.

Yes, their brand has changed considerably but I'd pick them over Spirit anyday of the week (and twice on sundays   )

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: awacsooner
Posted 2013-05-09 12:17:01 and read 2613 times.

Quoting jerseyguy (Reply 114):
Yes, their brand has changed considerably but I'd pick them over Spirit anyday of the week (and twice on sundays )

You're not the only one.

There is a fierce loyalty to the company that their employees have...the only other US airline I've seen that kind of passion is WN. It's just a shame that the company has stooped to this level...

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 12:39:20 and read 2595 times.

Quoting awacsooner (Reply 115):
There is a fierce loyalty to the company that their employees have...the only other US airline I've seen that kind of passion is WN. It's just a shame that the company has stooped to this level...

It's called survival - to a large extent against Southwest. Or because of Southwest.

mariner.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: psa188
Posted 2013-05-09 13:05:51 and read 2562 times.

Quoting Antoniemey (Reply 111):
And people here also ignore the fact that WN INCLUDES the extra cost of bags in their base fare.

For this I give them credit for honesty. I'd rather pay one fare up front than get constantly nickle and dimed after I've bought my ticket.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mikefrommke
Posted 2013-05-09 13:47:51 and read 2523 times.

Quoting psa188 (Reply 117):
For this I give them credit for honesty. I'd rather pay one fare up front than get constantly nickle and dimed after I've bought my ticket.

That's why the Classic or Classic Plus fares exist on Frontier.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-09 15:52:38 and read 2467 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 116):
It's called survival - to a large extent against Southwest. Or because of Southwest.

..

That's the irony. People hold up the likes of Southwest - which is fine - but ignore that WN is in many responsible for Frontier's woes. It's hard to imagine that Frontier would be doing all of the things that they are doing currently had it remained a UA/F9 DEN. But what's done is done and Frontier needs to adapt or die. Some obviously prefer the latter - why, I don't know - but to ignore reality is just crazy.

It's like someone in a bad economy who loses their job and can't find a position in their industry. They might have to mow lawns, work fast food, etc. to make ends meet, but to these people that'd be "sinking to a new low" or something. Hey, you do what you gotta do. Frontier is trying to make lemons into lemonade - no need to spit in it.

Quoting mikefrommke (Reply 118):
That's why the Classic or Classic Plus fares exist on Frontier.

Were I to do a LCC/ULCC, I'd do it the same way. Offer a COMPLETELY unbundled product, but offer options to buy bundled packages for a set price. For example, one option might be to include a seat assignment and one checked bag. Another option might be "all in", including two bags, priority boarding, FF miles, etc. It just makes sense to me. But I'm not running an airline.

-Dave

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 16:03:21 and read 2453 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 119):
That's the irony. People hold up the likes of Southwest - which is fine - but ignore that WN is in many responsible for Frontier's woes. It's hard to imagine that Frontier would be doing all of the things that they are doing currently had it remained a UA/F9 DEN. But what's done is done and Frontier needs to adapt or die. Some obviously prefer the latter - why, I don't know - but to ignore reality is just crazy.

I don't think any small airline has had to withstand the juggernaut that Southwest was/is at DEN - even the CEO admitted that they changed the model for DEN - but hey, Frontier is still flying.

But I find it particularly tasteless (offensive?) for the Southwest CEO to announce that Frontier is "nickel and diming" its passengers because of these changes.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-09 16:04:45]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-09 16:15:02 and read 2431 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 120):
But I find it particularly tasteless (offensive?) for the Southwest CEO to announce that Frontier is "nickel and diming" its passengers because of these changes.

There is absolutely nothing offensive, tasteless or bad about what he said. He was stating a fact.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 16:21:44 and read 2426 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 121):
There is absolutely nothing offensive, tasteless or bad about what he said. He was stating a fact.

Mr., Kelly was stating an opinion, not a fact, and I find it fairly tasteless - even offensive - when overtly committed Southwest supporters weigh in on what Frontier is doing as well.

One could argue that Mr. Kelly tried to nickel and dime his way through the auction for Frontier. Had they offered a decent price Frontier would no longer exist.

But that is only an opinion, of course.

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-09 16:31:07 and read 2409 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 122):
and I find it fairly tasteless - even offensive

Well you are taking it way to personally then, no reason for it and it certainly wasn't meant to be offensive, just to state a fact.

Quoting mariner (Reply 122):
Mr., Kelly was stating an opinion, not a fact

Charging for carry-on bags and non-achoholic beverages is certainly nickel and dimming, but hey, you can think what you want.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 16:34:58 and read 2410 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 123):
Well you are taking it way to personally then, no reason for it and it certainly wasn't meant to be offensive, just to state a fact.

Why would it be personal? You keep claiming it is a fact, when it isn't.

If Mr. Kelly had said that Frontier is nickel and diming those pax who book through OTA's I wouldn't have had a problem with it.

But he didn't say that.

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-09 16:43:20 and read 2394 times.



Quoting mariner (Reply 124):
But he didn't say that.


He's not the Frontier PR department.

Quoting mariner (Reply 124):
You keep claiming it is a fact, when it isn't.

Frontier is nickel and dimming, period. I'm not gonna continue this though. Think what you want, but it is certainly nickel and dimming.

[Edited 2013-05-09 16:44:56]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 16:57:01 and read 2371 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 125):
Frontier is nickel and dimming, period. I'm not gonna continue this though. Think what you want, but it is certainly nickel and dimming.

I can't do anything other than shrug.

Given all that has happened at DEN - including the auction - I think Mr. Kelly might, for once, have just kept silent.

"Nickel and diming" - unrelated to base fare charged - is in the eye of the beholder.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-09 16:58:44]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: skycub
Posted 2013-05-09 18:02:09 and read 2317 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 126):

I can't do anything other than shrug.

Good lord you do that a lot. Shrug. Shrug. Shrug. Don't your shoulders ever get tired?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 18:05:19 and read 2312 times.

Quoting skycub (Reply 127):
Good lord you do that a lot. Shrug. Shrug. Shrug. Don't your shoulders ever get tired?

Haven't done it too much for a while - not since others started copying it. 

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-05-09 18:26:11 and read 2282 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 123):
Charging for carry-on bags and non-achoholic beverages is certainly nickel and dimming, but hey, you can think what you want.

No, as a number of us have pointed out, F9 wants to change behavior, not collect the fees. Mr. Kelly apparently does not understand this.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-09 18:29:45 and read 2267 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 129):
Mr. Kelly apparently does not understand this.

Of course he understands this, he even mentions it in the article, he just wants it to be seen a different way... That doesn't change the fact that it is still nickel and dimming.

[Edited 2013-05-09 18:30:26]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 18:33:07 and read 2269 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 130):
That doesn't change the fact that it is still nickel and dimming.

So when Frontier was offering $15 fares TTN-CMH that was nickel and diming their passengers?

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-09 18:38:32 and read 2260 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 131):
So when Frontier was offering $15 fares TTN-CMH that was nickel and diming their passengers?

Yes. That is a very low fare, but that doesn't change the fact that they are also nickel and dimming beyond that.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 18:43:33 and read 2259 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 132):
Yes. That is a very low fare, but that doesn't change the fact that they are also nickel and dimming beyond that.

You need to explain that one to me. If you didn't have a bag, you could do the round trip for $30 and $20 over the base fare gets you most of the goodies.

If you think that's nickel and dining, we are speaking a different language. But then I thought:

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 125):
I'm not gonna continue this though.

I guess we do speak a different language.

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-05-09 18:51:53 and read 2238 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 133):
If you didn't have a bag, you could do the round trip for $30

The fare is not nickel and dimming. The definition of nickel and dimming is "to expose to financial hardship or bankruptcy by the accumulation of small expenses." So those small expenses like carry-on bags ARE nickel and dimming.

I'm not saying its a bad thing, if it works for them, it works. I'm just stating that by the definition, Frontier is nickel and dimming.

[Edited 2013-05-09 18:54:11]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jerseyguy
Posted 2013-05-09 18:56:58 and read 2227 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 134):
to expose to financial hardship or bankruptcy by the accumulation of small expenses.

I know that Frontier's customer base might have an income on the lower part of the scale but $22 each way is hardly a "finanical hardship". Most people even lower income people pay that taking the family out to dinner. Plus if they happen to need to make a change to their ticket they are going to save a $100 per ticket vs most major carriers.

[Edited 2013-05-09 19:03:12]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 19:04:17 and read 2204 times.

Quoting jerseyguy (Reply 135):
I know that Frontier's customer base might have an income on the lower part of the scale but $20 or $2 is hardly a "finanical hardship"

  

Even so, no one has to pay the charges, the base fare gets you where you want to go, with a small carryon.

I don't think (?) we've quite reached the point yet of the airline charging for printing out a boarding pass if you don't do it at home, as happens at Ryanair, and which I might consider nickel and diming.

We may get there, of course, although Smartphones may take over that capacity.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-09 19:09:12]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: jerseyguy
Posted 2013-05-09 19:47:31 and read 2152 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 131):
So when Frontier was offering $15 fares TTN-CMH that was nickel and diming their passengers?

Actually it was $16 in honor of Ohio State making the Sweet 16 during March Madness. The regular fare is $39 which is pretty good too.

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: FreequentFlier
Posted 2013-05-09 20:46:39 and read 2105 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 125):


He's not the Frontier PR department.


And who needs an actual PR department when you've got a virtual one right here on A.net?

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-05-09 20:51:00 and read 2106 times.

Quoting FreequentFlier (Reply 138):
And who needs an actual PR department when you've got a virtual one right here on A.net?

LOL - hate to tell ya', but a.net isn't the world, or even a teensy-weensy fraction of the travelling public.

What amazes me is the attention that Frontier gets on this website. There are four - count 'em - active threads. They tried rolling 'em all into one, but some posters didn't like that, either.

mariner

[Edited 2013-05-09 21:16:31]

Topic: RE: F9 Coming Unbundled?
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2013-05-09 22:54:46 and read 2029 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 128):
Haven't done it too much for a while - not since others started copying it.

Lol There seems to be a plethora of shrugs and dickie birds anymore around here - but so far, only one sparrow fart.  
Quoting airliner371 (Reply 134):
dimming

I only say this because you use it multiple times in each post, but "dimming" is like turning down a light. "Diming" is the word that you are looking for.

- Dave


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/