Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AirTran's Fares Aren't So Low...  
User currently offlineAa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3052 times:

I was looking at some flights recently and I noticed that AirTran's, while not the highest, weren't the lowest. I dug deeper and found these fares (from Expedia).

All flights: 1/10/04 to 1/17/04
BOS to FLL - AA $241, FL $247
MDW to DFW - DL $266, FL $269
BWI to LAS - AA $266, FL $271
PHL to LAX - HP $317, FL $323

Now AirTran isn't too far off, but standard carriers like AA and DL are supposed to be weak prey for FL.

75 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3005 times:

Here we go again...BOS-FLL leaving tomorrow and coming back on Tuesday is $436 on FL and $1,215 on AA.

Being able to "out lowfare the lowfare" carriers isn't doing too much for the old profit and loss statement.


User currently offlineM717 From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 608 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2970 times:

Aa757first,

What is the purpose of your post? Maybe I could do like Goingboeing did, and find an AA fare that is 3 times that of FL, then start a thread entitled "AA gouges pax by 300%". That would be just as relevant as your post.

If you want to post some meaningful numbers, then post the 2Q financial results for AA and FL. Nah...I didn't think you'd want to do that.  Insane


User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2939 times:

Eh, no matter what their fares are compared to other carriers...look at what their costs are compared to other carriers. Thats what matters. Fares can be changed in an instant, costs can't.

User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4506 posts, RR: 33
Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2912 times:

I just booked an AirTran BWI-MKE advance roundtrip this month for $116, and I could have had $111 if I had wanted to use the morning flight. Yep, if they weren't flying that route, you know Midwest and the Cartel-network carriers would be rushing to offer $111-$116 advance RT.  Big grin

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineJpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4389 posts, RR: 29
Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2894 times:

How can Midwest compete with AirTran? They simply cannot with that fare. Look how many more seats airtran has on their 717's than midwest does. If they offered the same fare look where the break even factor would be respectively. It is these low fare carriers that have totally reshaped the domestic industry in the United States, much like Ryanair in Europe. When people go by the lowest fare, YX simply cannot fairly compete. This is what is causing the implementation of the 'Saver Service', and i would be surprised if it eventually took over the whole airline. The LCC revolution is gradually claiming the best domestic carrier this country has had in decades, lets all enjoy 2-2 while we can.  Smile

Justin



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2868 times:

aa757first,

The reason why AirTran's prices are higher are because unlike the other airline mentioned on each routing, AirTran does not offer a direct flight between those cities, so one will have to change planes in Atlanta. So your thread is misleading, because you fail to mention that the AirTran flights were not direct flights.


User currently offlineAa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2834 times:

Srbmod, this is true, but if you wanted to fly BOS to FLL, would you care? As a matter of fact AA wins two ways: with the best fare and the added convenience of a direct flight. MDW to DFW both stop in ATL (or with DL you can chose CVG), BWI to LAS, AA connect in DFW, FL in ATL. PHL to LAX, HP connect in LAS, FL connect in ATL.

DCA-ROCguy:
Look at the Midwest 717 and the AirTran 717. Nope, Midwest can't be as cheap as AirTran.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Carter
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Justin Cederholm



M717, AMR Corporation lost $0.47 a share this quarter and, while I know FL made a profit, I can't find the number.

Goingboeing: Sure, you can save with FL, if you book ONE day in advance.




User currently offlineBonanzaAir From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 80 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2807 times:

aa757first,

Post all day long if you like, but Airtran is still going to be standing while AA or Midwest goes through some radical changes to compete, or die. Low Cost Airlines have the day. Every airline wants to be like them.

The times ..they are a changin.

Bonanza


User currently offlineJpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4389 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2796 times:

Bonanza,
You are right, the times are a changin. Sad But, not every airline wants to be like them, they HAVE TO be like them. Midwest didn't jump at the chance to be like AirTran, they would lose everything that makes them special, and keeps flyers like myself coming back.

Justin



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineGroundStop From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 611 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2751 times:

"AMR Corporation lost $0.47 a share this quarter and, while I know FL made a profit, I can't find the number. "

I'd be glad to tell you, without government subsidies, AirTran earned $0.28 a share. With government subsidies, AirTran earned $0.74 a share. From the Atlanta Journal Constitution; "AirTran's shares are up 224 percent over the past seven months, from $3.90 at the end of 2002 to a close of $12.62 Friday."

Makes the stockholders, as well as myself and fellow employees quite happy.

JP

AirTran ATLCSS



User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4506 posts, RR: 33
Reply 11, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2733 times:

You are right, the times are a changin. But, not every airline wants to be like them, they HAVE TO be like them. Midwest didn't jump at the chance to be like AirTran, they would lose everything that makes them special, and keeps flyers like myself coming back. Justin

Midwest can save themselves in the new economic situation, I think. Justin, you are correct that Midwest could become entirely "Saver Service." But they don't have to lose their special touch entirely in doing so:

--Convert the fleet to *all 717.* YX can reach anywhere in the US from MKE, MCI, or OMA with the 717. Standardize the fleet.
--Switch seating to "Saver" 2-3 on all planes. Sorry, 2-2 will need to go, but like JetBlue they could still have leather seats and good seat pitch.
--JetBlue spent a load on its DirecTV system, and has the lowest CASM in the industry. What JetBlue spent on DirecTV, Midwest should spend on *on-the-ground* flight catering. Have someone make the nice meals and bake the fresh cookies *on the ground.* Hand each passenger a box meal with cookies as they board. Anyone who's worked for a large corporation or gov't knows how good box meals can be if the caterer is good. These meals of course can be distributed to pax on mainline *and* Skyway flights.

What would still make Midwest special is that they can distribute the meals to all pax without extra charge. Before long, we can be pretty sure that all food other than peanuts on Cartel-network carriers will be sold on board, if at all.

That way, YX could turn the tables--lower their CASM, still offer good service, and offer their Milwaukee hub. Yes, the Skyway flights would probably still be more expensive, but most of them are probably connecting, and their overall fare could be lower.

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineN951U From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2713 times:

And why aren't you working up in Milwaukee, Jim, with all the answers?

Not everybody out there wants LCCs.


User currently offlineAa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2708 times:

DCA-ROCguy, which is more important, legroom or width? Here's my idea:

All 717 fleet, like you said.

Keep 2 by 2.

Reduce pitch from 34 to 32.

Have someone from catering place the cookies on the pan, all ready to go, then have a F/A put it in the oven and bake them in-flight.

Have limited food charge. For example, a $4 meal is sold at $2.

Switch to internet booking only.

Have only E-tickets

Also, instead of satellite TV, have shows and movies on demand. The screens could say during take-off "Midwest Airlines - Powered by Sony." Midwest could get shows for free (or close to it.)

How's that?


User currently offlineJpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4389 posts, RR: 29
Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2662 times:

Well heres my 2 cents worth for YX:

Personally, i would prefer pitch over width, maybe thats just because im not very wide myself, lol.

definitely have the 717's replace all DC-9's. The MD-80s will be around awhile in the 143/147 configuration serving vacation destinations through a new partnership with Mark Travel/Funjet.

IFE is definitely a good idea, something like Aa757first said would be great to have. YX ditched their pretty good audio IFE a few years ago, i am not real familiar with the reason they did this.

And lastly, while restoring food service to what it once was would be optimal, i know its a long shot. I would like to see meals of that caliber for sale then, rather than 'in flight cafe' box lunch types. Their meals were incredible. On dinner flights back home to MKE from LGA they served filet and lobster tail. No joke, and every flight over 1:30 had a full size meal, even red eyes had either pasta salad or similar on china, or a sandwich with full hershey bar. What im trying to say, is if im going to pay for food, i want to atleast think it is great.
Oh, and with the CC cookies issue, they are warmed inflight, and served from a big pile on the cart. (atleast all flights get cookies now, in the days off full meal service, it was usually only lunch flights, which could be a bummer)

Midwest has avoided chapter 11 for now,a nd hopefully profitablitity comes soon...long live YX. The last thing i want to see is the further development of this NWA 'mini-hub' here in MKE. When northwest has a city in control, we know what happens, $$$ ^^^, and no cookies.  Angry

Justin



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineAA61hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13977 posts, RR: 57
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2645 times:

Yeah I looked into FL, they wanted 290$ DFW-DAY, with a stop in ATL. While AA wanted 230$ direct, with better times.


Go big or go home
User currently offlineAa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2610 times:

While I'm not "wide", jetBlue, Song and AA are advertising great pitch, so Midwest could advertise this as their own.

User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4506 posts, RR: 33
Reply 17, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2593 times:

And why aren't you working up in Milwaukee, Jim, with all the answers? Not everybody out there wants LCCs.

Why do you think I'm flying up there? Big grin Just kidding, I'm going to see friends.

Let's see:
Midwest: fighting off Ch. 11.
AirTran: profitable, and stock price rising.

The market is speaking pretty clearly, you're in the minority. I'd like to see Midwest stick around as much as anyone else, but they need to change if that is to happen. Regarding pitch vs. width, Midwest would likely have to go with pitch. 2-2 vs. 2-3 is simply too much capacity lost. With 2-3 seating and 32" or 33" pitch, a 717 could probably still seat 100.

I'm leery of doing *any* cooking or heating in flight. That requires expensive on-board ovens and kitchens, which need to be maintained even if already on board existing a/c. All food preparation should, I think, be done on the ground, and a completed box handed to passengers. Such meals could include items like filet mignon or lobster if YX wants, and maybe a small charge like you suggest Aa757first. But there shouldn't be any china to wash.

How much does non-satellite on-board IFE cost? If it can be done cheaply, maybe, but again, we're talking radical surgery to save YX. My own hunch is that food more than IFE defines Midwest. All resources should, I think, be put in that direction. But it's really interesting to hear all the suggestions.

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineAa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2575 times:

Midwest will most likely not go to 3 by 2. Why? Front page of the 2002 annual report: "These customer-friendly aircraft will feature our signature two-by-two leather seats."

User currently offlineJpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4389 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2563 times:

Well yeah, 2 X 2 was the plan for the 717's and everything else in the fleet for that matter at that time. Since then, 5 MD-80s have been set for 'saver service' and 2 X 3 refurbishment. If saver service takes off, 2 X 3 is not out of the question for the 717's.



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineJpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4389 posts, RR: 29
Reply 20, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2550 times:

Also ( i should have added this before) there is not much of a question about width vs. pitch. Tightening up the pitch to 31-32 will add, oh, about 3 rows of seating, or 12 seats. Going 3-2, you keep your pitch and rows the same, but add another row of seats, instantly 31 more seats. Makes more sense.


The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4506 posts, RR: 33
Reply 21, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2505 times:

Midwest will most likely not go to 3 by 2. Why? Front page of the 2002 annual report: "These customer-friendly aircraft will feature our signature two-by-two leather seats."

Would that Midwest could do that, Justin. But the airline's financials have worsened since during 2002. The most relavant front pages are those of 2003 editions of the the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. They report that Midwest is barely fighting off bankruptcy, and pleading with Milwaukee County for help. What the last year's annual report said can change very, very quickly when a company is staring into the abyss of Ch. 11, or worse, Ch. 7. If management decides that 2 x 3 seating needs to become standard airline-wide, they'll do it.

Long live YX, indeed. Let's hope they find the right formula to profit in the new industry economic environment.

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineIndustrialPate From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2501 times:

AirTran's fares are so low, you can't say no!

User currently offlineM717 From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 608 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2493 times:

"Not everybody out there wants LCCs."

Maybe. But obviously, not enough people wanted the product that Midwest was offering, hence their difficulties. They must adapt or disappear. Even now, it may be too late.


User currently offlineCapt078 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2471 times:

several of the above comments were very accurate, the most important of which was the comment that aiirtran's costs are significantly lower. now, to understand low-cost carriers (also known as low-fare carriers), you have to appreciate that this moniker applies to business travel (last minute travel). all airlines offer low fares if you book them at the right time. it is very common to find the lowest fare for a specific route on one of the "service" (major hub and spoke) carriers, but usually this requires a significantly early booking (at least 14 or 21 days). the catch, is the last minute walk-up fare. while aa or delta might match or beat one of the low-cost fares, their respective walk-up fares will usually be astronomical. now, you may find the walk-up fares are near the same as the low-cost carrier because the major wants to match the lcc, but know that on uncompetitive routes, that high-cost carrier will have extremely high walk-up fares. conversely, southwest and jetblue, ata, airtran, and america west all promise fares no higher than $299 each way (walk up). when southwest first did this, it was unprecedented. that's why, even when the majors may offer an equal or even cheaper fare, southwest loyalists will still chose swa, because they're honest and fare and passengers aren't baffled by some arcane fare structure.

25 JpetekYXMD80 : M717, Before the troubles the airline industry has faced in the aftermath of 9/11, Midwest was doing alright. They were not rapidly expanding, they ne
26 Aa757first : Here's a good example of a rapidly growing carrier. Were they making money? Yeah, lots of it. Were they buying new planes? Yep. Were they adding route
27 M717 : Hey Aa757first, ValuJet became the current AirTran, one of the more successful and profitable airline companies currently flying. Still making money,
28 Wedgetail737 : Air Tran has made quite an impact on ICT in terms of lowering fares.
29 Rumorboy : Valujet had new airplanes?
30 Aa757first : M717, you consider ValuJet successful? They killed a 105 people, was grounded, and then came back only to see no one would fly them. As a matter of fa
31 M717 : "Valujet had new airplanes?" I was going to comment on that, but they did place the order to be the launch customer for the MD-95, even though it was
32 Wedgetail737 : The MD-80's and DC-9-20's were new to Air Tran's fleet at their peak. Valujet took all of the blame for their Everglades crash when it was the falsifi
33 Aa757first : Sorry. ValuJet had "new for them airplanes". Great sources, too. THY (Turk Hava Yollari) or something like that. Anyway, I thought people would know t
34 Rumorboy : aa757first I think its past your bed time.
35 Wedgetail737 : Not that the MD-80's were that young either...weren't they MD-81's?
36 Post contains images IndustrialPate : I think its past your bed time.
37 M717 : Aa757, If you read my post, I said the CURRENT AirTran is successful. Right? And if the truth be known, it was SabreTech that "killed 105 people", and
38 Post contains images Aa757first : Not sure. I did snatch up an MD-80 safety Card from ValuJet! It just says "MD-80 Series." Rumorboy, I'm allowed up until 11:00 PM.
39 Rumorboy : I say lets take a vote. Who has more posts on airliners.net? Airtran or UA. Seems every time I come on this board its either about airtran or United.
40 Wedgetail737 : I would've like to have flown on the DC-9 Sports. I got a lot Valujet stuff from the Underground in ATL when they were big.
41 Rumorboy : Im so glad you get to stay up that late!!
42 Post contains images M717 : Well, it may not be past Aa757's bedtime, but it's past mine, so g'nite y'all!
43 GroundStop : "you consider ValuJet successful? They killed a 105 people" By your logic, the airline you take your name from would be considered quite unsuccessful,
44 Wedgetail737 : Oh...I have no doubt that the Air Tran management and crew are very proud of themselves right now...high profits, low costs, great BOEING airplanes. T
45 Aa757first : Yeah, AA also carried 108 million people last year, meaning, because of the sheer number of their flights, they will have more. I know AirTran carried
46 JpetekYXMD80 : Aa757, Don't let these guys get you down, they just look at your age and think you dont know airlines from your reflection in the mirror, keep on stat
47 Rumorboy : But AA customer service sucks. Don't know about Aero Peru.
48 Aa757first : Thanks, JpetekYXMD80.
49 Wedgetail737 : Hey! I prefer to fly AA. I flew on AA enough to rack up 200,000 miles...that includes all of the bonus miles and Alaska Airlines flights. I really did
50 Wedgetail737 : I should also mention that AA has the best couple-friendly airplanes. All of AA's airplanes, except 757's and 737-800's, have the love seats. I don't
51 Aa757first : Well between AA and BA, they are pretty powerful. But then again so is Star.
52 Wedgetail737 : I'm a big fan of QF and CX.
53 JmhLUV2fly : I didnt read any of the replies to this post...but I will expand abit on the initial post and give you my thoughts. First of all, I do believe that if
54 Flyer732 : Another worthless post by an armchair expert. Having just put in 13 hours at AirTran, I can't say what I want to say to you right now, I'll get kicked
55 Goingboeing : Yeah, AA also carried 108 million people last year, meaning, because of the sheer number of their flights, they will have more. That statement is of l
56 Aa757first : Maybe you didn't see this post. AirTran has a fatal event rate 5.88. AA is 0.52. Do you know what that means?
57 Goingboeing : Bottom line - Herb Kelleher (of Southwest) said that had the same thing happened to SWA at the same time in their history as the Valujet 592 crash, th
58 Aa757first : Well, I'm sure the families of 592 will take comfort in the fact the incompetent mechanic ValuJet contracted blew up their plane, not the pilot. 11/12
59 Goingboeing : I notice you convienently left out AA 191...I'd LOVE to hear your justification for that one.
60 Flyer732 : You know AA757, what I fail to understand is you bash us in this post, but are excited about us in another one of your posts...so how about you just d
61 Aa757first : Sorry, could you give me a date on 191 or a registration number. Crashdatabase doesn't use flight numbers.
62 Aa757first : First, Flyer732 I don't think I'm "bashing" anyone. I don't recall getting "excited" about you either.
63 Post contains links Goingboeing : Read this one closely: http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=36919&key=0 Comments?
64 Rumorboy : Aa757first is a kid. He likes to stir the pot. Just ignore him. To him Valujet is a great subject to talk about because he thinks he knows all. Let hi
65 Aa757first : Your right GoeingBoeing AA crashed a DC-10, killing everyone. I also believe this was the crash that grounded all DC-10 aircraft? Funny how AA didn't
66 Rumorboy : Aa757first, your point is mute. There is nothing you have said that is new. Same stuff that has been written time and time again. I haven't said anyth
67 NonRevKing : Aa757first, there is a reason why your respect rating is a goose egg. First off the comment: "AirTran has a fatal event rate 5.88. AA is 0.52. is a bi
68 Goingboeing : Rumorboy, I never said AirTran was unsafe. I noticed how you didn't say anything on the topic at hand... Maybe you should reread post number 30 in wh
69 Fjnovak1 : Aa757first, you also made a mention of Valujet getting planes from some Turkish airline. This is true, they did pick up 4 or 7 examples from them, but
70 Travatl : After eight years of working for AirTran (including two with ValuJet), and two and a half years of posting on this webiste, I am AMAZED that this argu
71 JpetekYXMD80 : "Aa757first, there is a reason why your respect rating is a goose egg." There most certainly is. And it is that he joined 2-3 days ago. Why dont you a
72 Gr8slvrflt : If anything, AirTran is safer because of the ValuJet crash. The airline was grounded and the entire operation retooled from the bottom up. FAA inspect
73 JpetekYXMD80 : OK, can we end this Airtran safety discussion now. I think we all can agree their safety record overall is acceptable. Getting back to Airtran and low
74 M717 : I was going to rebut some of Aa757s "opinions" with facts. Such as the fact that AA's pilot training program was required by the FAA to undergo many c
75 Srbmod : VJ592 put the entire industry's maintenance practices under the microscope. America West and Alaska Airlines have been threatened to have their operat
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
LCC Aren't So Low-cost After All! posted Fri Aug 13 2004 00:10:28 by Dakotasport
Why Are Fares So Low At PIT? posted Sat Nov 11 2006 20:20:20 by ATLAaron
Why Aren't AirTran Fares Displayed On Itn.net? posted Wed Nov 28 2001 11:25:01 by Lowfareair
Are Airtran X-Fares Being Cancelled? posted Sat Jun 25 2005 23:30:40 by Flyingchoirboy
Low Cost Airlines, Not So Low Cost posted Sat Feb 5 2005 08:17:32 by AirWillie6475
Why Are Aircraft Meal Tables Always So Low? posted Mon Oct 4 2004 15:02:53 by Oxygen
Why Was The 767-400 Sales So Low? posted Sat May 8 2004 00:40:47 by GREATANSETT
AirTran X-Fares posted Mon Jan 12 2004 05:42:46 by Pgh234
Window's On CRJ 100's...Why So Low? posted Sun Oct 19 2003 22:16:53 by Jmets18
Is AirTran's X-Fares Program A Good Deal? posted Mon Jul 7 2003 04:28:10 by Hartsfieldboy