Continental Airlines

nkralev on March 30th, 2011

This should not be news, but it is: U.S. airlines have finally begun advertising some airfares properly, meaning they now show round-trip prices instead of the longtime marketing ploy of “each way based on a required round-trip purchase.” But those are just baby steps, as some taxes and fees are still being excluded.

When I wrote about false fare advertising in 2008, my copy editor at the Washington Times put this headline on my column: “Fare sales often lost in translation.” I compared the deliberately misleading airline practice to the mysterious “Twin Peaks” revelation “The owls are not what they seem.” I also wondered, If a round trip is required, why on earth is only half of the actual fare being advertised?

This month, United Airlines became the first major U.S. carrier to change its policy and advertise predominantly round-trip fares on its website — the only exceptions seem to be last-minute weekend specials. The airline is currently promoting five domestic and four international sales on its site, and they all include round-trip prices and fuel (YQ) surcharges — though some taxes and fees are excluded.

For example, a Business Class fare for a round trip from Los Angeles to Shanghai is shown as $3,513, while the total final price as of today is $3,572, if booked on nonstop flights. A round-trip Business Class fare from Washington to Rome is displayed as $2,411, and the final price is $2,460, if purchased today on nonstop flights. As you see, the differences are not that big.

All other carriers should follow suit. Continental and US Airways display some fares as round trips, but most of their advertising is still being done the old-fashioned way, as is American’s and Delta’s. Southwest, Alaska Airlines and Virgin America show one-way fares but don’t require round-trip purchases.

Although the Department of Transportation has looked into the issue and called on the industry not to deliberately mislead consumers, it has done nothing to stop the controversial practice. The European Union (EU), on the other hand, has been much more proactive on behalf of travelers. That’s why fares in Europe are advertised with the full ticket price.

Some of the European carriers that fly to the United States, such as Spain’s Iberia, are honoring the EU rules globally and displaying actual full prices on their U.S. websites as well. But others, such as British Airways, Air France and Lufthansa, while observing the rules on their home turf, have given in to the pressure from their U.S. competitors and adopted the “one-way based on a round-trip purchase” policy.

In January, all four above-mentioned European airlines offered the same fares from New York to London. The last three advertised $199, while Iberia showed $584, which is what the actual fare was, including all taxes and surcharges. Singapore Airlines, also having the guts to be honest with its customers, promoted a $586 fare from New York to Frankfurt that was truly the final price.

It’s high time the airline mentality of trying to trick customers changed once and for all.

RETURN TO MAIN COLUMN PAGE

Related stories:

Fare sales often lost in translation

When an airfare sale is not quite a sale

Airlines find new way to overcharge fliers

Continue reading about Proper airfare advertising comes to U.S.

nkralev on March 9th, 2011

As United and Continental prepare to become one airline, they are making changes that, though necessary, are affecting negatively their customers. One consequence is that upgrades on international flights will be harder to get in the short run, and more expensive in the long run.

The carriers announced last month that they would begin “cross-fleeting” — swapping routes in each other’s network — and some of those changes have already been loaded in their schedules. Both United and Continental will be serving certain routes in the next several months, but each of them is taking over other routes entirely.

For example, all Anchorage flying goes to Continental, as do the Washington-Paris and Washington-Amsterdam routes, now operated by United. The current Continental flights from Newark to Zurich and Brussels, as well as its Houston-Lima flights, will be flown by United.

That practice is not unusual in airline pre-merger situations. While the United-Continental merger was legally completed late last year, they will be operating as separate airlines until they secure a single certificate from the Federal Aviation Administration, which is expected to happen by early next year.

However, United and Continental are implementing the route changes before resolving some technical issues that will harm their customers.

If you are a United 1K flier and have system-wide upgrade certificates, you can’t use them on the previously United flights now operated by Continental — and the other way around. The same applies to your confirmed regional upgrade certificates on domestic flights. As of now, it’s technically impossible for the carriers’ reservations systems to accept upgrade certificates from the other airline’s frequent-flier program.

Mary Clark, a Continental spokeswoman in Houston, confirmed that certificates will be “carrier-specific” for the time being. “We are in the process of aligning the programs, and changes to the current policies will be announced as they are rolled out throughout the year. We aim to fully combine the programs by 2012.”

United is expected to adopt Continental’s reservations system eventually, but until then, there may be another way to resolve the issue. The carriers announced this week that miles can now be transferred between United and Continental accounts. I wonder if they can make it possible for upgrades to be transferred as well. It’s unclear if they looking into such an option yet.

There is another issue with the United system-wide upgrades whose impact is just now becoming apparent. For years, they have been allowed only on tickets booked in W class or higher, which makes S, T, L and K classes ineligible. Continental recently adopted the same rules.

This means that customers often have to spend hundreds of dollars more than the lowest available fare, just to qualify for an upgrade request — and if the upgrade doesn’t clear, they are left with a lot less money and the same coach seat they would have had if they had paid much less for it.

Things are getting even worse. In January, because of the merger, United added a 14th coach booking class, G, which was a regular published booking class on Continental, but on United it was previously an unpublished travel-industry discount class — it didn’t earn miles and was ineligible for upgrades.

Now, instead of four, there are five booking classes ineligible for system-wide upgrades. So what? you might ask — just a small technicality. Not quite. As a result of this change, W fares are getting more expensive. For example, a base fare of $800 that might have booked in W class before, now books in S or T. A few days ago, I helped a friend with a ticket from Washington to Bangkok, and the W base fare was more than $1,400 round trip — including taxes and surcharged, it came up to $1,900.

There is no question that fares have been going up for some time. A few years ago, a W fare to Bangkok was about $900, including taxes. In 2002, an H fare was $900. So the trend is clear and it didn’t start yesterday. But adding one more booking class makes things even worse.

It’s worth pointing out that American Airlines system-wide upgrades are allowed on all published booking classes.

Another negative change as a result of the United-Continental merger is that, similarly to the upgrades, discount vouchers from one airline cannot be used on the other. So if you want to use a United voucher for a ticket to Anchorage, you can’t, because United has given its seasonal service to Continental.

This week, the United website seems to be including Continental flights in electronic certificate-discounted itineraries, but the official policy hasn’t changed. It may be a website glitch, given that it also allows Lufthansa flights, and the vouchers’ terms and conditions specifically say that they are not valid on code-share flights.

One positive merger-related change is that United customers can now avoid StarNet blocking — it has diminished but still exists — by transferring their miles to Continental, which doesn’t block Star Alliance partner award seats.

NOTE: Several months after this column was published, United and Continental made it possible to use upgrades on flights operated by the other airline, including on mixed itineraries.

RETURN TO MAIN COLUMN PAGE

Related stories:

United, Continental execs at odds over loyalty program

United executive breaks old barriers

Keeping United international first class

United StarNet blocking

Continue reading about United fliers hit by pre-merger changes

nkralev on February 24th, 2011

Delta Airlines has cemented its status as the network U.S. carrier with the worst frequent-flier program, further devaluing its long-cheapened SkyMiles. The leadership of the program or the airline — or perhaps both — doesn’t seem to understand what the loyalty business in 2011 is about. It may be time for a new team at the top.

For more than a year, Delta failed to publish an award redemption chart for most of the world, resulting in lack of transparency about how many miles were really needed for an award ticket.

When it finally unveiled a chart this week, the mileage rates on many routes were increased significantly. Many loyal SkyMiles members felt cheated and disrespected, calling Delta’s move a “stunt” in comments posted on FlyerTalk, the largest online travel community.

If you wondered why Delta announced last week the elimination of miles’ expiration, my guess is that it tried to soften the blow of what was coming — and to claim that it cares about its customers. In reality, almost everything SkyMiles has done in recent years has been decidedly customer-unfriendly. I’m not an active SkyMiles member and have no dog in this flight, but I’ve been appalled enough to write about it.

In comparison to its two largest competitors, American and United, Delta’s upgrade and award policies are the most restrictive and inflexible. Its system-wide upgrade certificates are only valid on tickets booked in Y, B and M class, and are not transferable. American’s upgrades can be used on just about any fare and gifted to other people. United’s certificates exclude only the lowest booking classes and can also be transferred.

In 2008, Delta devalued its miles by adding a third award tier, in an attempt to mask its very poor award availability at the lowest level. A year later, it devalued its elite status when it introduced a fourth tier, Diamond, on top of Silver, Gold and Platinum. If that’s not bad enough, Delta also charges some fees that are hard to justify, such as $50 for booking an award originating outside the United States.

The main reason frequent-flier programs exist is not to make customers happy, but to make money — and most of them do. I’ve never considered that a problem. A successful business deserves all the rewards it can get. My problem has been with the way airlines have been trying to make money through their so-called loyalty businesses. For decades, they have had an utterly peculiar philosophy, which can be best described at a “screw the customer” approach, which I explain with a misguided view of what the loyalty business is about.

Fortunately, a few airline executives recently saw the light, and things are starting to change. I’ve written several times about what Graham Atkinson did when he was president of United Mileage Plus for less than two years, beginning in the fall of 2008. He understood the essence of customer loyalty and showed that what’s good for the company doesn’t necessarily have to be bad for customers. While he wasn’t able to end StarNet blocking, he actually listened to customers and reversed decisions based on their feedback.

American’s AAdvantage program also has progressive leadership that rewards top fliers appropriately and has tried to make it easier for members to use their miles. There is still a lot to be desired, but it’s on the right track.

Delta, on the other hand, has been stuck in the 20th century. It seems it’s working hard to perfect the “screw the customer” approach.

RETURN TO MAIN COLUMN PAGE

Related stories:

United executive breaks old barriers

US Airways hears feedback, fixes website

Customers gain sway over airlines

United keeps free stopovers on awards

Continue reading about Delta SkyMiles needs new leadership

nkralev on February 14th, 2011

US Airways has denied recent suspicion that it has begun to block award seats made available by its Star Alliance partners for mileage redemption by members of its Dividend Miles program — a practice pioneered by United Airlines, which I first exposed in 2008.

The airline has been silent on the issue since reports about apparent blocking surfaced last fall. Many travelers said they found award inventory on various Star carriers, using one or more of the publicly available sources — the websites of All Nippon Airways, Continental Airlines and Air Canada — but US Airways agents were unable to see those available seats.

To some of us, that looked very much like StarNet blocking — manipulating the alliance’s award “middleware,” which provides access to any Star partner’s inventory on a first-come-first-served basis, to avoid paying other carriers for seats booked on their flights. The patterns resembled those on United, with the most filtering applied to Business and First Class cabins, though some fliers stumbled on coach seats as well. The most affected availability appeared to be on Lufthansa, but also on Swiss, United and others.

In addition, it made financial sense for US Airways to be limiting access to premium partner awards. In the last couple of years, it has in effect been printing miles with lightening speed, as a result of extraordinary promotions it has had, including selling miles at 100-percent bonus. Many Dividend Miles members bought miles and redeemed them for Business and First Class on partner flights, which likely weighed heavily on US Airways’ budget.

Several travel bloggers wrote about the issue, including Gary Leff on “View from the Wing” and Ben Schlappig on “One Mile at a Times.” Leff was more inclined to give the airline the benefit of the doubt, suggesting the problem might have been caused by technical glitches, as well as US Airways agents’ ignorance that some of their partners have First Class in addition to Business.

I’m not a big Dividend Miles fan, though I did help my sister buy miles for a trip to Europe with her family last summer, so it took me some time to look into the issue. I finally got around to it and alerted a US Airways contact at its Phoenix headquarters who has been very helpful in the past — Valerie Wunder, associate manager of media relations. She asked the powers that be and gave me the following response:

“We don’t block award inventory on other airlines, nor do we do the inverse — other Star partners block us from seeing their inventory to maximize their revenues.”

Probably the most frequent difficulty Dividend Miles members have been experiencing has to do with intercontinental First Class awards on Lufthansa, Swiss and others, so I asked Wunder if US Airways may be trying to restrict access to those specific seats.

“We have no restrictions on redemptions, regardless of class,” she said.

However, she offered no explanation for the problem. The mystery continues.

RETURN TO MAIN COLUMN PAGE

Related stories:

Clarifying United’s StarNet blocking

US Airways hears feedback, fixes website

New Lufthansa business class in a year

Continental shows new transparency

Continue reading about US Airways denies StarNet blocking

nkralev on October 27th, 2010

Do you sometimes prefer making a connection or two instead of taking a nonstop flight, either to save money or rack up more frequent-flier miles? You might have to change your ways. Domestic U.S. transfers are now allowed much less frequently than before, and making connections on flights between an airline’s hubs is almost impossible.

No big deal, you might say. Wouldn’t any reasonable person choose a nonstop any time? Not necessarily. Different travelers have different priorities — some would rather save time, others money. But the best thing about the previous practice was that passengers had options. Now, that’s no longer the case.

Until June, you could make four transfers each way between Washington and Los Angeles on United Airlines — both cities are United hubs. Since then, the lowest fares have said this in the legal routing rules:

TRAVEL MUST BE NONSTOP

It’s not until fares of just under $700 round trip that the routing gets a bit more liberal — but it allows only one connection and only at a hub airport. Here is how this looks in the United tariff:

WAS-CHI/DEN/LAX/SFO-LAX

The slash indicates that you must choose among Chicago, Denver and San Francisco, but you can’t go through two of them — you would have been able to do so had there been a hyphen between them.

How does this affect you? As of this morning, the lowest published United fare between Washington and Los Angeles is $119 each way and books in L class — but it’s only valid on nonstop flights. What if none of the nonstops on the day you need to fly has available L seats? Then you will have to buy up to S booking class — the next lowest currently published — or whatever seat is available. There may be L availability on a connection through Denver, but it wouldn’t qualify for the L fare because it’s not nonstop. The bottom line is, the routing restriction will cost you at least $100 more.

United was actually the last of the major carriers to clamp down on routing rules, and many mileage runners — people who fly just to accumulate miles — had lots of fun for a long time. It still has one of the more liberal rules — except between hubs. American Airlines and US Airways follow the same policy. American requires a nonstop between Dallas and Miami, and US Airways between Philadelphia and Phoenix.

Delta Airlines is one of the strictest. For example, discounted fares between Atlanta, its main hub, and most major cities require a nonstop, even if that city is not a hub, such as San Diego and Las Vegas. A fair comparison would be the United routing between Washington and Las Vegas, which is much more generous:

WAS-SFO/LAX/DEN/CHI/WAS/EWR/HOU/CLE/PHL/CLT/PHX-LAS

This is actually a typical United routing. You can transfer only once at a hub, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be a United hub — Continental and US Airways hubs are also allowed, because United code-shares a huge number of their flights. Of course, current Continental hubs will become United hubs once their merger is complete.

Delta is so strict, in fact, that sometimes it requires a nonstop when neither of the two cities is a hub — for example, between Washington and Los Angeles. The curious part is that Delta doesn’t fly nonstop between those cities, but it code-shares the only daily Alaska Airlines flight from Washington National. So the only way to get a decent fare is to book that one flight at 9:15 a.m. If you can’t, you have to pony up.

To be fair, Delta allows both nonstops and “direct” flights, and when the other carriers say nonstop, they do mean nonstop. “Direct” flights are those fictitious flights I wrote about last month, which have nothing in common except for their number — most of them are operated on different planes and require changing gates and sometimes even terminals.

In addition, Delta is not always as draconian as in the Washington-Los Angeles case. Here is the routing between non-hubs Chicago and Los Angeles:

CHI-SLC/MSP/DTT/CVG/MEM/ATL/LAX/IND/DEN/SFO/LAS/PHX-LAX

The smaller the city, the more liberal the routing — although some bigger places seem to fall through the cracks, probably not for too long. Here is the United routing from Washington to Houston.

WAS-ATL/CLE/DTT/DAY/CMH/IND/RDU-CHI-HOU

WAS-ROC-BUF-CHI-HOU

WAS-ABE/HAR/ROA/SDF/RIC/CAK/CRW/ORF-CHI-HOU

WAS-NYC/EWR-ATL/CLE/DTT/DAY/CMH/IND/RDU-CHI-HOU

WAS-NYC/EWR-ROC-BUF-CHI-HOU

WAS-NYC/EWR-ABE/HAR/ROA/SDF/RIC/CAK/CRW/ORF-CHI-HOU

If you look closely, you will see that up to four transfers are permitted here — this many hyphens are very rare these days. I have the feeling this generosity will disappear once United and Continental start flying as one airline, for which both Washington and Houston will be hubs.

International routings are much more liberal and sometime can fill a page, but that’s a topic for another column.

RETURN TO MAIN COLUMN PAGE

Related stories:

Airlines find new way to overcharge fliers

DOT should ban fictitious flights

Time for travel school — you are invited

Educating the flying public

Continue reading about U.S. carriers tighten routing rules