Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NWA Toughens Stay Rules  
User currently offlineFlyabr From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 666 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3936 times:

in order to save money...or take more in...nwa has toughened stay rules.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080404/northwest_airlines_revenue.html?.v=2

can someone explain to me how this really helps the company's bottom line? thanks!

63 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3923 times:

problem is if they are leisure travlers they are by definition price sensitive.....thus all this will do if now you must stay a SAT and SUN night will be it will drive leisure pax away from NWA.....Now if only the other lunk headed legacies match NWA, then this will be a tremendous gift for the LCCs

User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3898 times:



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 1):
thus all this will do if now you must stay a SAT and SUN night will be it will drive leisure pax away from NWA.....

To make money, isn't this why most air carriers eliminated this practice to actually MAKE more money, not lose money? NW is going the wrong, wrong way! Go figure!  sarcastic 



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21534 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3865 times:

This isn't anything to do with SAT/SUN. Most airlines have dumped the SAT stay for leisure routes, AFAIK. What they are saying is that a leisure travel can only count as such if they actually plan to spend a full day in a destination. And the deepest discount will go to customers staying 3 or more nights.

Now, I guess it's their business to decide whether you are a tourist or not, but frankly I don't get the point of this. All it's going to do is drive customers away. And piss off business customers, since there are times they can plan in advance if they know they have to be somewhere for one night.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3856 times:

It's just a way in which to more efficiently manage their inventory.

User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25512 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3824 times:

United has implemented a similar thing by requiring Saturday night stays again on fares in some markets.

From the airlines point of view such restrictions are meant to defeat the business traveller that uses such deep discount fares and force them into using higher priced more flexible fares, and hence boost yields.

To the detriment of many carriers, fares have evolved into a pricing structure that now have minimum advance purchase, minimum stay, or other time/day restrictions which has caused yield erosion in traditional strong business markets. Basically airline hope this causes some folks to 'buy up' to higher fares to gain additional flexibility knowing business travellers have pretty fixed schedules.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineFruteBrute From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3428 times:

I despise NWA for pulling this stunt.

I just tried to book an airfare 22 days into the future where I need to spend one night. MSP - SFO. $ 1,340 r/t.

If I want to book TWO tickets using back-to-back I can get them for a total of $ 754 for both. I refuse to reward this stunt, and just booked on Frontier, as well as three other tickets on Frontier for my coworkers. Fare w/ one stop $ 308.

In addition on two flights I could have chosen NW, I've decided to book VX, and Airtran. I'm so sick of the legacies acting like idiots.


User currently offlineJetJeanes From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3409 times:

it doesnt make any difference to me, even with their hub here i wont fly them


i can see for 80 miles
User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3357 times:

This move does seem quite odd, and rather...stupid. I am not a C.E.O by any means but I know how paying passengers think, and its quite literally with the money for the most part.

I don't see how this movie generates more Customers, or rather makes more revenue off the decision.

It will make those mileage runs on NWA a bit harder to come by since there is no stay involved, usually.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineAsstChiefMark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3357 times:

Why does an airline care how many nights you stay somewhere?

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31055 posts, RR: 87
Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3339 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 9):
Why does an airline care how many nights you stay somewhere?

Because they are trying to force business passengers to pay more.

Most business trips do not involve a Saturday or Sunday night stay, to say nothing of both. So by making fares that do not require a stay over either or both nights more expensive then ones that do, they can get more money out of passengers flying for business.


User currently offlineSchipholjfk From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 579 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3332 times:

Another dumb move by once great airline! By sticking it to the customer you don't make any money. Return customer is the best customer. By continuously gouging the customer for idiotic moves does not earn them any loyalty. It's amazing that these execs at NWA can come up with ideas like this. While good airlines from around the world are making profits even with fuel being at higher cost, it is these old legacy U.S. carriers who keep on loosing money. There is no innovation or original thinking on these airlines' part... all do they is come up with brilliant ideas like second luggage charge, etc. Nothing more than gimmicks that simply angers consumers. In every industry you innovate to make yourself stand out while continuously upgrading your product... except in U.S. airlines business where it is retreat march. Yet you look at the pay scale of some of these executives and wonder what business school they attend other than University of Scamville Business School. What a dumb move... this will do nothing resolve the underlying problems at NWA yet aggravate their thinning customer base.


The fun of flying... love it !!!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31055 posts, RR: 87
Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3318 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 11):
Another dumb move by once great airline! By sticking it to the customer you don't make any money. Return customer is the best customer. By continuously gouging the customer for idiotic moves does not earn them any loyalty. It's amazing that these execs at NWA can come up with ideas like this.

The airlines have been doing this since Deregulation. Airlines have scores of fare bases for each city pair specifically to try and extract the maximum revenue out of each passenger by charging them differently for every seat on the same flight.

The problem for them now is that the Internet has made all that once-secret pricing information public. This had subsequently hurt the Yield Management system because with a few clicks of a mouse, customers can see that booking a day earlier (or taking a flight an hour later), they can save money so it is getting harder and harder for the airlines to charge different fares for adjoining seats on the same flight.


User currently offlineFlyabr From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3295 times:

thanks for the feedback, gang...what stich's says in particular makes sense. so essentially it's a fare increase for business travelers but pushed off as a change to leisure fare rules...

however...at what point do we all get tired of the nickel and diming that's going on?? and how do the old legacy carriers continue to add these fees when the GIANT (WN) does not? last i heard WN still doesn't charge a fee for ticket changes within a year...or have crazy stay rules. only problem for me is the closest WN airport is nearly 6 hours away...!


User currently offlineSchipholjfk From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 579 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3285 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
The airlines have been doing this since Deregulation. Airlines have scores of fare bases for each city pair specifically to try and extract the maximum revenue out of each passenger by charging them differently for every seat on the same flight.

Well.. all know that airline ticket pricing is one of the biggest scams on the Earth. Try that in any business and I want to see how many of you stand for such a pricing structure. Imagine walking into a supermarket and paying twice the amount for an item compared to someone who bought the SAME item the day before... no one will tolerate that. Airlines have been doing this for years... but thanks to the Internet balance of power is now equalized. While most people understand various pricing structures, my question is simply: by forcing customers to stay longer at a location how does NWA benefit when that same customer can now promptly find another airline and perhaps better pricing and options on the Internet? It seems this policy will only force customers to move to another airline with cheaper prices and better options resulting in net loss for the airline. I think most of us can agree that in today's world most of us price compare for everything on the Internet first before making a purchase. So loyalty is not the game any more... pricing and convenience is. This policy from NWA seems a bit on the contrary to day's realities.



The fun of flying... love it !!!
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25512 posts, RR: 50
Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3262 times:

Its not nickel and timings, airlines are simply trying to regain some pricing power and and yield management.

Fares in the last couple of years have been out of wack and allowed last minute walk up tickets, or those with virtually no restrictions to cost near the same as advance purchase ones. What NW and UA in a different manner have done is simply go back to differentiating fares by stay requirements, something that was common practice until very recently.

Just like the $25 fee for the 2nd bag, this also could be something the remainder of the industry decides to readopt.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineN801NW From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 744 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3235 times:

It looks like NWA was the only airline to put out a press release acknowledging they had done this. They are the fourth carrier to implement these requirements.

Quote:
Northwest Airlines today matched several other network carriers in extending the minimum stay requirements for many domestic leisure fares. Fares that formerly carried a one or two night minimum stay now require a two or three night minimum stay.

United Airlines led the increase, which has also been matched by Delta Air Lines and American Airlines.

Northwest Airlines Extends Minimum Stay Requirements for Domestic Leisure Fares in Response to High Fuel Costs


User currently offlineFruteBrute From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3199 times:

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 14):
Well.. all know that airline ticket pricing is one of the biggest scams on the Earth. Try that in any business and I want to see how many of you stand for such a pricing structure. Imagine walking into a supermarket and paying twice the amount for an item compared to someone who bought the SAME item the day before... no one will tolerate that.

I literally can buy 4 round trip tickets ON THE SAME FLIGHTS using back-to-back methods, as the one R/T of $ 1340 is. The minimum stay belongs back in 1978. Not 2008. It makes loyal fliers experts at "cheating" your system. Yeah, great way to build loyalty guys. What morons.

I could maybe see if it was a flight for tomorrow or under 3 days. $1340 for a 21 day advance purchase? Get real. Don't these idiots realize that this rule alone was one of the major reasons LCC got started, and flourished in the first place???

Seriously, why would anyone fly a legacy these days like NWA? Less service, no IFE, no food, nickel and dime charges, old airplanes w/ less legroom, grouchy flight attendants, yet want to charge $ 1340?

[Edited 2008-04-05 17:55:21]

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31055 posts, RR: 87
Reply 18, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3144 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 14):
While most people understand various pricing structures, my question is simply: by forcing customers to stay longer at a location how does NWA benefit when that same customer can now promptly find another airline and perhaps better pricing and options on the Internet?

In NWA's case, they are hoping business people are wedded to WorldPerks (especially if they have elite status) and they will therefore just pay the extra rather then save money flying someone else and have no status (so no upgrades, no priority check-in, no priority security screening, etc.).


User currently offlineTVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2394 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3097 times:



Quoting FruteBrute (Reply 17):
Seriously, why would anyone fly a legacy these days like NWA? Less service, no IFE, no food, nickel and dime charges, old airplanes w/ less legroom, grouchy flight attendants, yet want to charge $ 1340?

Because they get me there on time with a nice first class seat. I bring my ipod, The planes are clean, and even the old DC 9's have 717 interiors, and the legroom is the same as any airline. I have not noticed the grouchy flight attendants. As a 160-K Plat-Elite I am not happy with any fare increase, but I understand the reason.

The airline business is, frankly, in the toilet. I can understand any airline trying to boost their yield any way they can. Other than that and you will see many more of them going belly up. Nobody wants to pay more. Nobody wants to fly "old" planes. And we want at least 8 flights a day to East Nowhere. Oh, and we want all the airline employees to get big pay raises.

Unfortunately, the price of everything is going up. Just fill up your car.


User currently offlineFruteBrute From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3059 times:

$843 for First Class on Sun Country MSP to SFO R/T. That seems pretty reasonable.

I'm silver elite on the NW/DL Skyteam program. It's simply not worth it to try to go out of my way to fly NW or DL these days. I've decided to keep my One World Sapphire status, and forgo the SkyTeam alliance completely if I can. Fly the One World group when I'm overseas and fly LCCs when I'm here in the USA.


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3039 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
What they are saying is that a leisure travel can only count as such if they actually plan to spend a full day in a destination. And the deepest discount will go to customers staying 3 or more nights.

Interesting point, and I fully agree with your entire post indeed. Why is the business of any airline as to why anyone goes to any destination (marketing purposes aside of course)......and thus does someone flying out in early morning, and back home in the evening, constitute a business or leisure traveller considering they technically have both spent an entire day in a destination?


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3029 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
From the airlines point of view such restrictions are meant to defeat the business traveller that uses such deep discount fares and force them into using higher priced more flexible fares, and hence boost yields.

Easy way around that is simply to ticket back-to-back.


User currently offlineFlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

maybe NW and the other legacies should just quit the roundtrip airfare thing and only allow one-way purchases. two one-way tickets would bring in waaaay more revenue than current roundtrip itineraries do! :lol:  Wink

User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3010 times:



Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 14):
Well.. all know that airline ticket pricing is one of the biggest scams on the Earth. Try that in any business and I want to see how many of you stand for such a pricing structure. Imagine walking into a supermarket and paying twice the amount for an item compared to someone who bought the SAME item the day before... no one will tolerate that.

There's nothing scam about it, it's quite open and transparent. The comparison you're using are two different things entirely

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 14):
I think most of us can agree that in today's world most of us price compare for everything on the Internet first before making a purchase. So loyalty is not the game any more... pricing and convenience is. This policy from NWA seems a bit on the contrary to day's realities.

Not quite sure how you correlate this. Firstly you say you price compare (most of us which by implication includes yourself) everything before purchase, then complain that loyality is no longer a factor. The two in one sentence are contradictory. Also, who's realities......your's or the airlines'?


25 AirNZ : Although I'll probably get flamed for it, but I actually applaud that move. No, I've nothing against business pax as such but they are the pax who DE
26 FruteBrute : Loyalty is generated by offering a product or service at a competitive rate. The legacy airlines have made their best customers experts in 'beating t
27 REALDEAL : this seems nuts with most of the worlds airfares becoming one ways. Pax may fly NW in 1 direction & another airline in reverse direction or another ai
28 AirNZ : Sure you can indeed......as long as you remember that doing so is actually illegal, the same as buying a cheaper return ticket in lieu of a single. B
29 FruteBrute : Perhaps we are disagreeing only on semantics here, but it is not 'illegal' as such. There is no law that states this. Now it may be against the airli
30 AirNZ : I'm not disagreeing with you. I was pointing out that one can't talk about/claim the high ground of 'loyalty' while comparing pricing to find and the
31 FL787 : Hey, Could someone please explain this for me? Thanks
32 FruteBrute : Let's take my case for example. I fly to SFO every month or so. I want to fly from MSP to SFO on 4/27 and return on 4/28 to MSP. Airfare $ 1,340. If
33 Dc-9-10 : Lets just try MSP-SFO Buy a ticket from MSP-SFO R/T Leaving the 1st come back on some random day like the 20th to get a good fare. Buy a second ticke
34 Post contains links Wjcandee : The problem with back-to-back ticketing is that it violates most airlines' contracts of carriage, and they can cancel or charge you the fare differenc
35 MilesDependent : It's best to do back-to-back ticketing on different airlines where possible. I suspect it would be in the airline's conditions (which you accept when
36 Stitch : You can, however, "nest" tickets perfectly legally. For a mileage run, I flew SEA-SFO-ORD-SFO on a Saturday and SFO-ORD-SFO-SEA on a Sunday. The firs
37 FL787 : Thanks for explaining that for me. I don't know why anything like that would be considered illegal.
38 Post contains images BR715-A1-30 : "YOU!! Don't tell ME how to do my job!!!" Seriously though, while it seems all of the other legacies (or, the big 6) are coming out ahead, NW seems t
39 Dc-9-10 : The reason why the board won't do this, especially now, is that the management was brought in to do what exactly they did, reduce costs and increase
40 AirframeAS : Are you sure about that? I dont think so, bro.... Isn't that illegal? You can get caught doing this easily and then the air carrier can blacklist you
41 REALDEAL : if airlines r going to be that stupid, then u can fly with 1 airline on 1 ticket & another airline on another ticket.
42 AirNZ : It's highly illegal because, the basic premise at the end of the day, is that you are fraudulently obtaining air travel. Whilst not immediately 'obvi
43 OA260 : I think the EU should step in and regulate this . If a passenger wants to buy back-back then thats their right IMHO. You are paying two fares and two
44 Analog : The CoC is not "law"; if a private company wants a law passed they have to go through the trouble of bribing representatives (sorry, contributing to
45 Wjcandee : For what it's worth, in airline-speak, "illegal" is often used to mean "against the rules". For example, an "illegal connection". That's a very-commo
46 Analog : Sure, but without qualification or obvious context it means against the law, especially when someone says: To me that means "illegal under federal la
47 Wjcandee : Hey, what can I tell you? Which is why I also mentioned that folks (supervisors as well) sometimes get confused when "illegal" is used in this busines
48 Xjramper : Or you could just purchase your ticket on another skyteam carrier, if your loyalty is truly with the skyteam. Because a 3 second search over at delta
49 Analog : But it's not fraud in the criminal sense. Can you cite any examples of b2b ticketing resulting in a conviction, or even an incitement or grand jury i
50 FruteBrute : Congratulations! Your training seems complete now. You are now ready to employ that splendid attitude of 'blame the customer first' and make snide pe
51 XJRamper : I love it when I am right. XJR
52 FlyABR : when you guys book b2b tickets do you ever call the airline and cancel the return segment, or do you just not show up for the return flight? just wond
53 Analog : Charge your credit card; in theory you agreed to that. Beyond egregious cases and stupid people (calling up and saying what they're doing), I doubt i
54 FlyABR : charge me extra for giving up a seat i already payed for, that they can now resale (probably at a higher fare) because i cancelled the return trip in
55 Viscount724 : That happens every day in supermarkets and other retail stores 50% off or 2 for the price of 1 specials etc. are very common. The day after the sale
56 Viscount724 : Minimum stay requirements on the lowest fares have been around since long before deregulation. And such requirements used to be much stricter than 2
57 Analog : The most appropriate pricing policy is the one that maximizes profit while staying within the law. Anything else is a violation of the airline's duty
58 Post contains links PNQIAD : Looks like NW has backed down slightly on the customer unfriendly move - it has eliminated min. stay requirements on US competed routes: Northwest Eas
59 GSPSPOT : So, why don't the airlines simplify things (much like the U.S. income tax system should do) for us and themselves by setting standard and advance-pur
60 Analog : It might be more sane, but it would not be more consumer friendly, as it would generally mean that the lowest fare is not as cheap as it is now. The
61 GSPSPOT : However, wouldn't this help bring about the decrease in capacity that the airlines are after, as fewer people would probably fly, then planes would b
62 Analog : But people want cheap flights, and airlines want to fill the last seats on their aircraft, which are not always going to be full (100% load factor =
63 GSPSPOT : Well, as they say, "you can't always get what you want". People getting insanely cheap fares can't go on. I'd rather see the cheapest of the cheap fa
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...
Judge Rules NWA FA's Have Right To Strike posted Thu Aug 17 2006 18:48:09 by Saabmeister
Ho Hum On NWA.. Then POW! posted Thu Apr 3 2008 14:44:40 by Learjet23
Reasons For The Closure Of NWA's BOS Hub? posted Tue Apr 1 2008 18:03:57 by KingAir200
NWA PDX-AMS Begins Today! posted Sat Mar 29 2008 07:17:22 by LHPDX
NWA Joins The $25 For 2nd Bag Club posted Fri Mar 28 2008 10:46:28 by LAXintl
What Is The Deal With NWA And Seat Assignments? posted Thu Mar 27 2008 13:10:50 by Schipholjfk
NWA: 747 Cockpit In The Smithsonian posted Mon Mar 24 2008 09:26:09 by Nycbjr
Biman/NWA Hybrid Livery. Difficult... posted Sat Mar 22 2008 12:38:01 by OwlEye
Could The A340-500 Be A Good Fit For NWA? posted Wed Mar 19 2008 21:47:36 by Jetjack74
NWA Pilots Try To Keep Merger Plus Cutbacks? posted Wed Mar 19 2008 04:15:42 by Xbraniffone