KL911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5147 posts, RR: 15 Posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5944 times:
LCC's have proven that offering one way tickets for 50% of the return fare is popular with leisure travellers as well with businessmen. So, why do most non-lcc's still have that stupid Saturday night rule? Like now in summer, in the weekend the hotels are so expensive, while on tuesdays and wednesdays they're almost empty and cheap to book. I always book FR or Hapag Lloyd Express for a one night trip from tuesday till wednesday.
KL911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5147 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5881 times:
Thinking about that I would think a LCC transatlantic, or longhaul anywhere, could work. Just offer one way tickets, buy your food and drinks, or bring it yourself which I always do anyway. Beer is to expensive since I normally drink a beer every 15 minutes on a flight......
To be serious, why would a longhaul LCC not work? Same fares, same seat pitch, but just no saturday night rule....... I guess many businesses would book that airline. And it would benefit the leisure travellers as well. My last 2 Europe US trips where only for 24 hours, but you have to go in the weekend at the moment, I would prefer Tuesday- Wednesday.
Richardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3750 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5849 times:
A business traveller from LON-NYC who does not stay a saturday does not pay £199 return, they pay much more. But then again do business on a Friday or Monday and stay for the weekend, it is NYC after all.
Sleepyflyboy From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 73 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5849 times:
LCC's dont have large enough networks for a lot of businesses. a lot of companies for simplicity just stick with one airline... usually a major beause of the route structure or alliances with other larger airlines that go to almost every major airport. also availability of flights because business people need to be there now and time waisted in airports is time that that employee could be making money for the company. majors generally have higher frequency at airports and also offer the opportunity for the suit to connect to the same city through another flight. also another reason is that suits usually like to travel business class or higher. they usually get to keep the miles that they earn while flying for the company so they can often upgrade. upgrading on jetblue or southwest or another LCC's is impossible... they could however give you an extra bag of potato chips lol. if you travel enough flying loses it mystique and becomes boring and business people for that reason like direct routes. LCC's can offer cheaper tickets on the routes that they do offer but the major airlines will keep the sat rule to make money off the business folk on their other routes. while they will lose money on routes that LCC's fly they have the potential for a very profitable network as a whole.
from the business that is buying the tickets for its employees standpoint the sat night stay rule is a pain but the alternative of waisted productivity of the employee waiting 6 hrs for a flight. waist 6 hrs of the employees time while he is on the clock or pay the 100 bucks for a ticket on a major airline?
Tango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5643 times:
KL911 asks: So, why do most non-lcc's still have that stupid Saturday night rule?
Because most of the U.S. non-LCCs are stupid. As in stupid enough to think that they can go on targeting business pax with their price gouging schemes -- while asking aloud, "where have all the business travelers gone?" Fact is, they're back in full force, but either flying on the LCCs or outscheming and outconniving the legacies and being counted as leaisure travelers because they have figured out how to beat the legacies soundly at their own pricing games. In the legacies' way of thinking, if you're not paying an outrageous fare, you cannot possibly be a business traveler; just one example of how utterly stupid (besides out of touch with reality) the U.S. legacies are.
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19233 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5622 times:
A low-cost transatlantic service will not really be worth it, primarily because airfares during the winter are already low to very low - you can normally fly LON-NYC for about 180 GBP with BA, so about 90 GBP each way. You couldn't shave much off that at all. The only real possibility is to acquire old 747s or DC-10s and operate during the summer only, when fares are normally expensive to very expensive - it's normally 400 GBP or more to fly from LON to NYC. But this would have be impractical: what do you do with the staff and aircraft during the winter, when they're not needed? It would be inefficient. Also, low-cost airlines generally operate short routes and thereby have excellent aircraft and staff utilisation, which helps to reduce costs. But if an airline began transatlantic flights, it'd only be able to do one round-trip per day. Again, it'd only be worthwhile during the summer, but then there would be major problems to overcome. I guess you could possibly have two distinct seasons and operations: during the winter, you could - on a low-cost basis -fly to Lagos, Tokyo, Nairobi, etc., which are normally very expensive to get to when flying non-stop, and, during the summer, fly to the USA only, again on a low-cost basis. This would solve the problem of the what to do with staff and aircraft during the winter.
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
Geoffm From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2111 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5600 times:
Charter airlines obviously make enough profit flying long haul like LGW-SFB. In terms of service, many are similar to LCCs anyway. For example, seat booking costs extra, sometimes meals cost extra too, seat pitch is dire, etc, etc. One airline has a year-round fare of something like £500, which is £100-300 cheaper than scheduled airlines during summer.
Anybody remember that airline that was supposedly starting up last summer, LTN to SFB/MCO?
And there's that Backpackers' Express (?) starting up soon, UK to Oz.
Petazulu From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 701 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5564 times:
Cheers to that one! Major carriers are stupid. They gouge their best customers and as a frequent business traveller (1 to 2 times per week) it pisses me off! It should be the other way around! Business is back- but companies and people are smarter. The era of the $2,000 R/T midweek ticket between NYC and DAL is ending! Thank goodness! Long live competition.
M404 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2227 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 18 hours ago) and read 5370 times:
Thanks for asking a question I've asked out own pricing gurus for years to absolutely no avail. My theory was that since so many were buying phantom leg or back to back RTs to subvert this carrier enforced robbery and that so many FC cabins were filled with upgrades or non revs then why not dump the Sat layover reg, lower the premium (and the embarrassing fare differences with LCCs, raise the goodwill, return brand loyalty and have a reliable Load Factor that could be counted on. For far to long the legacies have counted in the 12% in the front cabin for something like 40% of the revenue. That market model is D E A D Hello..
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding