Browsing Posts published in May, 2010

I’m back with part two of the Phoenix Aviation Symposium Airline CEOsairline CEO panel. In part one, the CEOs talked about consolidation. In this post, they talk about competing and cooperating with low cost carriers.

On Competing with Low Cost Carriers in Europe
British Airways CEO Willie Walsh: I think what we’ve seen in Europe in 2009 has been more the impact of the truly global economic downturn [than low cost carriers (LCCs)]. People in the EU talk about BA losing to Ryanair, easyJet. There’s no evidence to support that. BA is holding market share relative to these guys because we’ve been competing with them for 20 years. I think we’ve been able to adapt to their sort of competition that they present us. It’s really a case now that the consumer has choice and can really understand what’s available. So a lot of the consumer media in the UK has recognized that there’s very little difference in terms of overall price between established carriers, network carriers and low cost carriers.

What we witnessed was a truly awful economic environment. Ryanair and easyJet suffered as well. They scaled back their growth, saw significant falling profitability and they struggle just as much as everybody else. The main issue for BA was the impact on premium travel. IATA estimates that 7 to 8% travel in premium and generate 25% of revenue. For BA, 13% travel in premium classes and generate 45% of revenue. We’ve seen some evidence of premium customers on short haul within Europe and moving away from the premium cabin. That doesn’t mean they’re moving from network carriers to low cost carriers. It means they’re moving from the front of the aircraft to the back, and I think that’s a structural change. Long haul premium travel is cyclical and there’s clear evidence that it’s now recovering. I’m convinced from everything I’ve seen that the competition between LCCs and national carriers will continue.

Qatar CEO Akbar al Baker: The same is true for LCCs in our region. Now, it’s a fashion in our region. The geography does not permit low cost carriers flourishing because we do not have deregulated skies. We do not have secondary airports, we have the same cost base. We are hardly losing our market share. Everyone asks when Qatar launches an LCC. We will do it when an LCC entrance into our market will impact share and it’s not happening because people in our region still want to travel on a full service carriers. They realize there is so much of a hidden cost in my region from low cost carriers. The fare will become nearly the same.

On the Convergence of Business Models Between LCCs and Legacy Carriers
JetBlue CEO Dave Barger: I don’t think the LCC concept will be gone even though there’s a migration that’s going on . . . . I don’t think the true LCC model goes away.

Republic CEO Bryan Bedford: I think the models are converging. What we’ve seen through forced financial restructuring are legacy carriers that have to rethink their business model. The product is moved more toward what the LCCs have been doing and LCCs have been moving more toward the legacy model – business class cabins, TVs, wi-fi. We’ve seen more amenities on the LCCs; less amenities on the legacies. So there’s a product convergence but the networks are so powerful.

Moving away from domestic to more balanced between international and domestic. As these alliances crystalize, some of the LCCs are going to wonder where do we go? How can we move people from small town America to the world? We see Southwest trying to create their own marginal expansion internationally. At the end of the day it’s a network business, and we’re trying to figure out ways to differentiate the product because the customer has decided to show a great amount of loyalty.

US Airways CEO Doug Parker: I think you’re right, there’s definitely a convergence. I think of it more that we end up having lower cost structure but more it’s hub and spoke airlines vs point-to-point carriers. JetBlue and Southwest connect a lot of people but they don’t have a hub and spoke which gives them a cost advantage. It used to be in the 90′s and 2000s that used to be largely generated by labor costs. You could have a model that worked; ran a hub and spoke out of Phoenix but had much lower costs than the other hub and spoke carriers because we had much lower labor costs. That you can’t do anymore because of what’s gone on with the legacies.

You have to get the cost advantage by avoiding hub and spoke. I don’t think you can start an airline doing the same thing in a different city and use a cost advantage. Southwest contracts have higher labor costs but they have much lower costs because of their model. The consumer won’t be able to differentiate but the LCCs won’t be flying to places like Asheville, North Carolina.

The final order has been released from the FAA and, in short, the tentative order stands. The FAA is requiring that Delta divest 14 slot pairs at Washington/National and US Airways divest 20 slot pairs at New York/LaGuardia before being allowed to complete their slot swap. This would then give Delta a net increase of 06_09_12 jackass105 slot pairs at LaGuardia and US Airways 28 slot pairs at Washington/National. Because of this, I am issuing a tentative order awarding the Cranky Jackass Award to the FAA. The comment period is now open and a final order will be issued pending further information.

The history here is a long one. Delta wants to “win” New York while US Airways wants to focus on its profitable operation in Washington. This swap provided a unique opportunity for the two carriers to play to their strengths, improve the offering for customers (bigger airplanes, additional routes) and instantly improve their bottom lines. The only problem? They needed a waiver from the FAA which would allow US Airways to transfer the LaGuardia slots. Slot transfers had been prohibited in recent years thanks to a temporary order that is still in effect.

The FAA came back and tentatively approved the waiver with extremely onerous conditions. The most onerous condition of all was the one requiring Delta to divest 12 of the 42 slot pairs it was proposing to transfer at National. It wanted the slots to go to a new entrant or limited incumbent (airline without a lot of flights there already).

US Airways and Delta weren’t happy about this, but they came back with a different offer. US Airways said it would give 15 slots up at LaGuardia (5 each to WestJet, Spirit, and AirTran) and Delta would give 4.5 slots at National. This was far below what the FAA asked for, but it was an attempt at compromise.

Now, the FAA has issued its final order affirming its tentative order. The only difference? The size of the bundles in which slots must be divested. The total number doesn’t change, and this just makes no sense to me at all.

Much of the final order is spent responding to accusations that the FAA doesn’t have the authority to require these divestments. I couldn’t care less about that. The question here is what is going to be best for everyone involved?

The FAA goes on to use some fairly strange logic to support its position. The argument is one we’ve heard before. US Airways and Delta will increase their dominance at each airport and that’s a bad thing that will result in higher fares. To offset that increased dominance, they’re requiring that the airlines divest all these slots to give to low cost carriers.

This logic works just fine if the low cost carriers were actually going to use the slots to fly to some of the markets where they are concerned about competition, but that’s far from what will happen. Instead, we’ll see the low cost carriers use slots to fly on the busiest routes that already have competition. The small cities end up worse off.

Let’s look at JetBlue. As part of their American swap, they found a way to get nine flights at Washington/National. Did they send those to Buffalo or Roanoke? Yeah right. They put seven of them in Boston, where American, Delta, and US Airways already fly. They also put one in Orlando, where US Airways and AirTran already fly. Lastly, they put one in Ft Lauderdale, where US Airways and low fare king Spirit already fly.

This says nothing bad about the low cost carriers. It just shows that where low cost carrier service works, there are already a good number of options. But the most important lesson here? While the FAA is whining about airlines not being able to get into National and LaGuardia, JetBlue went in and got nine slots all by itself. Other airlines could do the same if they so chose. They just don’t want to pay the price for entry.

By taking away slots from US Airways and Delta, smaller cities will lose service while bigger cities simply gain more. The FAA complains that Delta has already said it will stop serving Roanoke, Virginia from LaGuardia, but do they really think that by giving a bunch of slots to low cost carriers, Roanoke will somehow maintain service to New York? Please.

So why is my order giving the FAA the Cranky Jackass award tentative? Well, I want to see how this all plays out before making it final. If the airlines do decide to go forward with this (which seems highly questionable at best, I believe a federal appeal is on its way), then I’ll want to see which low cost carriers get the slots and where they’ll fly. I know what I expect to happen, but I’ll wait to see it before issuing the final order.

The Continental and United merger has finally been announced, and well, there are certainly more questions than answers at this point. I decided to wait until the official announcement came out, hoping that there would be a ton of information in there. Unfortunately, there’s not. In fact, the only thing that wasn’t already out there was that Continental will keep its own logo and branding but with the Varney name. Just kidding, though that would be awesome. Not sure who Varney is? Read below. (The airline will actually keep the United name.) Though this is being billed as a merger of equals, Continental has to be the one in control here.

United in Name Only

Here’s what we know (and it’s not much). Continental and United will merge into a single brand. The brand will be called United, but everything else will be Continental including the logo, aircraft livery, and general branding. The headquarters will be in Chicago where United is currently based. (This was apparently a condition of the deal, otherwise I’m sure it wouldn’t have been this way.) Continental CEO Jeff Smisek will run the show while United CEO Glenn Tilton will sit up top as Chairman for two years, but probably won’t actually be doing anything. He’ll just get to hang out with his cool-guy title and count all the money he’s made over the last few years.

Really, that’s about all we know. Here are a list of questions that I’d like answered, but I’m sure that won’t happen for a long, long time.

  • Will they keep Economy Plus?
  • Will they keep international First Class?
  • Will their labor groups figure out an integration plan before the America West/US Airways pilots do?
  • Will Channel 9 survive the merger?
  • Will any United execs other than Tilton be asked to stay?
  • If not, which small island country will they buy for their retirement?
  • How long will it be before the Cleveland hub disappears?
  • What will they do for inflight entertainment?
  • Did United really just use US Airways to get Continental back to the table?

I’m sure you have more questions, but we just aren’t going to get any answers for awhile. Though talks had been on and off for some time, this latest round was quick and dirty. I think they just had their checklist of big things to figure out and assumed everything else would work itself out later. Apparently, the pilot integration wasn’t on that list, because that still has to be decided.

Labor will be a big issue here because the cultures at the two airlines are so different. I mean, I hear that people at Continental sometimes even enjoy their jobs. Crazy, right? But the work rules are pretty different and there will be some issues as they try to come together, that’s for sure.

This should be very good news for front line United folks. They’ll finally have a leadership team that’s interested in running an airline instead of prettying one up until someone else decided to come along and buy it. But for Continental people, it’s a mixed bag. They should be able to make some gains in some areas, but having that headquarters move to Chicago threatens the strong culture that has helped Continental succeed in the last 15 years. I’d be cautiously optimistic if I were at Continental, but I’d have a lot of concerns.

Who else will love this merger? No, not US Airways. They’re pretty mad. I Walter Varneywas thinking about Walter T. Varney. Who? In 1925, Walter started Varney Air Service in Pasco, Washington. He sold it in 1930 to United Aircraft and Transport which became United Air Lines in 1933. In 1934, he founded Varney Speed Lines in El Paso, Texas. He got out within a year, but in 1937, the airline would become Continental. Can you imagine what he would think if he saw his two airlines become the largest in the world?

I like this merger a lot from a United perspective, especially if it means fresh blood at the top. For Continental, it’s a bit more of a question mark. If done right, this should be a rock star merger. Now let’s just see if they can avoid screwing it up.

I know, I know. You want to hear all about the Continental/United merger right? Well, I’m not writing about it until it’s officially announced even though that may happen by the time I wake up today. I’m actually working on a huge backlog of interesting material from last week’s Airline CEOsUS Airways Media Day and the Phoenix Aviation Symposium. Today, I thought I’d give you a peek at the final panel of the week, the executive panel. This is a long post, but it’s simply the first of three.

The Phoenix Aviation Symposium is a great event that gives really excellent access. I mean, I (and a few others) had a beer with British Airways CEO Willie Walsh while he talked about the volcanic ash situation. I also had a drink with JetBlue CEO Dave Barger later on. That sort of thing doesn’t happen very often in one place. Why are all these CEOs milling around? For the executive panel. This year, it was made up of US Airways CEO Doug Parker, JetBlue CEO Dave Barger, British Airways CEO Willie Walsh, Qatar Airways CEO Akbar al Baker, and Republic CEO Bryan Bedford.

Though recording wasn’t allowed, I typed as quickly as I could and got a pretty good transcript down. There wasn’t any huge news here, but I think the candid back and forth between the panelists makes for some really interesting reading. I’ve trimmed it down a bit to focus on the most interesting pieces. Let’s get on with it.

On Recent Industry Crises and Priorities
Qatar CEO Akbar al Baker: Unfortunately, this industry has been very unlucky – faced with either natural or national calamities. As far as Qatar is concerned, we have been a bit fortunate. Besides the premium yield taking a beating, we are not dropping our trousers to get passengers on the airplane. We are fortunate because we operate a very lean structured airline; productivity of staff is very cleverly measured. We have no unions so people are accountable to management and a CEO who is very ruthless.

We have one of the lowest aircraft/employee ratio of any scheduled carrier and a very clever fuel hedging structure in place. I know that people think I have an oil well behind my office and that we get very cheap fuel, that we get a lot of government subsidies. I am a businessman. I would be ashamed for someone to give me handouts to run my airline. We are very cash fluid generated by the ancillary business we have. The airline has the alcohol distribution in a country that people think is dry.

JetBlue CEO Dave Barger: I’m sure Willie will talk about dealing with volcanic ash . . . Talking about oil speculation. When oil runs to $147 a barrel, then it’s down to $37 or $38 a barrel, it’s very diffcut to run the business. And also worldwide climate change. The impact it has on the industry as well. This is an industry that’s incentivized to really be carbon friendly. It’s our number one cost.

The second issue as well – it was intriguing – the labor panel; it’s no secret we’re 12,000 crewmembers at JetBlue and we have no unions. It’s not pro or anti-union but the issue of labor relations at our company. It’s a different lens. It’s a second thought that we spend a lot of time on.

The third area is how that then leads into consolidation. Whatever happens with the industry landscape, the crewmembers are looking at consolidation. “Am I protected? What’s next? What does this mean with our interline agreement with American Airlines?” We’re really spending a great deal of our time on these.

Republic CEO Bryan Bedford: What did strike me about the panels is who wasn’t here. We had government, the regulators, labor. We have lawyers, we have airline CEOs, finance guys, manufacturers, but we didn’t have the customer here. It really struck me we didn’t have the customer here. It’s amazing how we do as a business moving people around at the highest degree of safety and yet people hate us. I wonder why is that? Maybe it’s all the bickering between management, between labor, between the airlines. For so many smart people, we could do better, maybe better telling our story.

The fact that we have to have legislation on the passenger bill of rights says it all. If I have a 15 minute line wait to check out of my local grocer, I don’t expect Congress to solve that problem. I take my business elsewhere. Where’s the incentive for airlines to outperform if the customer is going to buy based on price?

US Airways CEO Doug Parker: I think we’re in a really interesting time. This looks the same to the outside world, but I would argue that what we’ve gone through in the last couple years is phenomenal and unprecedented. We’re talking about $80 oil now. I vividly remember when we did the America West/US Airways merger. Part of what we’re telling people was we’re building an airline that would be profitable at $50 a barrel oil. So that’s where we were just 5 years ago. Nobody thought it was even possible to be profitable at $80 a barrel.

We also just went through a recession unlike anything our business has ever seen. Certainly more prolonged than 9/11 impact. We’ve never seen in one year industry revenues fall 20%, which they did and we weathered. If we had 2008 RASM [unit revenue] or $60 barrel oil, everybody would be talking about the record profits this industry is making now. So at any rate, I think the industry has made some major fundamental changes that still have us losing a lot of money. Unfortunately, to suggest that both would happen would not be something we’d think could happen. I just hope that we keep that discipline. I worry somewhat that things get better and we start to do the things we did in the past.

Finally, consolidation is happening and it’s huge into what it’ll do to our ability to make this industry long term profitable. All the issues in this industry are the things that make long term problems. Things like labor relations and government regulation become less of an issue because you have a business that can run like a business. The problem is we’ve never had an industry ever that has been long term sustainably profitable.

British Airways CEO Willie Walsh: My predecssor at BA used to say that he had a lot of luck in his role as CEO and all of it was bad. He left 5 years ago; he lied. You just cannot, if you read this script, people would say you’re making it up . . . We’ve seen a unique combination of cyclical impact and structural impact at the same time in a period that was incredibly tough to deal with. Oil is now structurally higher. The days of $20 oil is gone. It’s likely to be closer to $100. We have a big issue now in terms of financing – it’s much more expensive. Just when we think we’re getting our head above water, something comes along – volcanic ash.

I’ve read in the newspaper about the skies being covered in volcanic ash. We dealt with a computer model that said there was volcanic ash. That’s a scandal, but our industry has to deal with those issues and we look forward to the next crisis. The good thing is that we’re still here. To think we came through 2009 with all the challenges shows you how determined and resilient this industry is but things have got to change.

On Consolidation
Doug: The industry is destined to consolidate. There’s value in having a larger network with customers and shareholders by doing things more efficiently. I think it makes sense. I believe we’re headed to an industry, simply hub and spoke airlines, legacy carriers. We didn’t need 7 of them in 2005, we don’t need 4 of them now, we need 3 and that’s where we’ve always been headed. You have all sorts of guys, JetBlue, Frontier, etc flying around doing what they do well, making sure if you get your costs too high, they’ll steal your market share. I think it’s a good model. Generally these leaks have been accurate, so we’ll have another merger done on Monday.

[Doug later emphasized that he "wasn't trying to suggest that anything is going to go on with US Airways anytime soon. To the contrary, things are going great as a standalone and we can do that for as long as we want. It's years off."]

Bryan: We’re certainly acting as the networks are realigning. The synergy opportunities are just so significant. I think the industry is looking for ways to find stability. Labor wants it, customers want it, and financing teams want it. The struggle if you’re a regional is one of the ways networks drive synergy is they segment the market differently. If 70% of your market is willing to connect, it doesn’t matter where they connect, so those hubs become marginal. Pittsburgh, St Louis, Raleigh/Durham. And if you’re a feeder in those markets, you lose that flying. The best case was that it wasn’t growing and the worst case is that it was shrinking. We want to grow the pie. How do we get a bigger slice of it? We need to figure out ways to incent customers to pay more for the product.

Willie: Part of the problem [in Europe] is we still have to have a structure that complies with air service agreements on a global basis. . . . A lot of the complexity we’re dealing with there is that BA can continue to fly to Japan and China, and Iberia can continue to fly to Latin America. There’s still a lot of complexity holding us back. Who knows, 10 years from now we might be looking at genuine global consolidation.

Akbar: I know you’re pulling me into politics here, but I need to leave the United States this evening. Some airlines of course would like to block other airlines growing. I do understand maybe from their nationalistic point of view, but at the end of the day the world is deregulating. The commerce is becoming more, there are no borders, in this way we are taking advantage in our region by growing. If there was a real wish of consolidation or a political directive of consolidation especially since we are government owned, it would have happened between Etihad and Emirates. Emirates is a well established airline would have been ideal to be named as a national carrier. The same with Qatar, they have an economic requirement, want to make it an dominant hub in the region. We were part of Gulf Air, but Gulf Air was not serving the national aspirations so this is how Qatar Airways was born, but we also, I agree with Willie, maybe in 10, 15 years time, that consolidation wind will also blow toward us. But as of today I don’t think it will happen.

We are blessed with one thing; we are located in such an advantageous geographical region, at the crossroads of east and west. We have huge O&D potential: Africa, Russia, China, and this is exactly what we’re tapping. This is what’s making the airline prosper. We are one of the few carriers that span to all the continents. You note just 10 years ago, nobody had even heard of Qatar Airways, and I’m sure 99% of the people don’t even know how to pronounce my country. This consolidation in my region today I think will not happen for the foreseabble future, so we have to work independently very similar to US Airways.

Dave: I think a term we use internally is one of open architecture. I’m biased on Kennedy and it’s geography. The ability to associate what we started prior to our conversion to Sabre with Aer Lingus in that traffic over JFK and Boston; Lufthansa owns 17% of JetBlue. We’re not part of Star but the world seems to be changing. Not just the open architecture but contrarian relationship. The interline deal with American is pretty basic, but I do think we can put together networks to break the model. That doesn’t mean we won’t go into an alliance but this open architecture to connect to Doha or over to Heathrow or wherever, it’s pretty exciting.

From a labor crewmember perspective, it’s really hard because people don’t quite trust what this is all about. I do think for us, consolidation, hey we suppport it but we don’t plan to be part of it. We’re going to let the industry around us consolidate. Our model is different at this point in time.

Virgin America Earnings: Still Losing Money, But Less than BeforeBNET
Fourth quarter earnings are out, and Virgin America . . . well, still lost money. Buy hey, things are better.

Volcanic Surprise: Icelandair Made Crisis Management Look EasyBNET
Watching Icelandair manage through the crisis was a real treat. They did a great job of flying a flexible operation.

Finnair Doesn’t Want Compensation for Volcano DisruptionsBNET
Here’s a goofy one – Finnair doesn’t want any compensation from the state, but this actually makes sense.

Spurned US Airways Still Bullish on Airline ConsolidationBNET
At Media Day, US Airways Chairman and CEO Doug Parker said that even if United and Continental pair off, he’s still a happy man.

US Airways Exec Explains Government Role for Airlines: Do No HarmBNET
C.A. Howlett laid out US Airways’ thoughts on the government’s role in this industry.


About | Directory | Shop | Credit Cards | Awards | In the News | Ethics | Cranky Concierge
Powered by WordPress | SRS Solutions | © 2006-2012 Brett Snyder All Rights Reserved | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy