Travel apps that really help – CNN Out of the Office
CNN is doing a lot of mobile stories this week so they asked me for some of my favorite travel apps. Here they are.

In the Trenches: Slowing Down – Intuit Small Business Blog
With a baby on the way, it’s time to re-set priorities and try to slow things down a little.

The Price You Pay For An Airline Ticket Is All In The Timing – CBS 2 Los Angeles
I was interviewed for one of those stories on when to buy a plane ticket and I turned into the center of the story, it seems.

Last week at the APEX expo, Virgin America announced plans for its next generation inflight entertainment system. Wait, doesn’t Virgin America already have one of the best systems around? Why would the airline be doing this? It just posted yet another quarterly loss (no surprise) so why is it messing around with introducing a new inflight entertainment system?

Actually, this one should bring costs down while even improving the experience for passengers. Anything that helps the airline bring its costs down is good, and since it’s good for the passenger experience, that makes it even better.

The buzz about the new system is that it’s wireless. That was the big buzz word this year at the APEX expo in general, but this probably isn’t what you think. The airline isn’t ditching seatback entertainment but instead is just changing the way that content gets to the seats.

The system that Virgin America uses now requires a lot of wiring throughout the airplane. The content comes through the wires from a “head end” system through the airplane until it gets to each seat. The systems are pretty expensive, especially when they’re from one of the existing titans of IFE, Panasonic, as is the case with Virgin America.

This new system from Lufthansa Systems will see content come from the same place, but that’s where things change. From there, the content will be wirelessly transmitted to each seat.

So when you get on the airplane, you’ll still see a monitor in each seatback as you do today, but the content will get there in a different way. You shouldn’t care if you just want to watch a movie.

Remember, this isn’t like streaming video from the internet. It’s still content stored on the airplane, but it’s just sent wirelessly. So transmission speeds and quality shouldn’t be an issue. Each access point should support about 60 devices (but could do more), and each Virgin America aircraft will have 3 access points.

But here’s where it gets cool. The content that you see on the screen is now super flexible. Would you rather watch TV on your own device? Go for it. The movies, TV, etc can all be watched on any device, not just the seatback. Want to watch on your mobile phone? Sure. It doesn’t matter. The only restriction is that if you use your own device, you can’t see the newest movies.

The movie industry has what it calls “early release” content, which is really just movies that aren’t on DVD yet. This is offered for airplanes but not if you use your personal device. The studios are afraid you’ll steal it. Eventually they’ll hopefully get over that, but until then, that should be the only difference.

Likewise, the system will also work with the internet that Virgin America currently has through Gogo. That system is getting a big upgrade as well with Gogo’s new ATG-4 system.

This new system will help Gogo deal with speed issues. That means adding directional antennas that will not just look for the closest tower but also at ones further away that might have more bandwidth available. And in those ground towers which transmit the signal, there will be an upgrade to EV-DO Rev. B technology, which will help speed things up. Lastly, there will be two modems instead of one on the airplane. The upshot is four times more capacity on the airplane than what’s there today.

But this does bring up a question. If Virgin America is sticking with Gogo for internet, then why not use Gogo Vision to stream content instead of going with the competitor Lufthansa Systems? The answer to me seems simple. Gogo Vision doesn’t have a seatback solution – it’s just streaming media and it seems Virgin America wanted more.

The only downer about all this? It’s a LONG way off. The first install isn’t until the end of 2012. Virgin America decided to talk about it because testing of equipment has begun, so the airline knew someone would find out. New deliveries starting late next year will get the system. Current aircraft will be evaluated on a case by case basis to see if they’ll bother to configure with the new system or stick with what they have today.

Virgin America continues to show that it can innovate with the onboard product. Now, if only the airline could just find a way to make money. . .

I’ve finished up my week at APEX, and it was a great one. That being said, I have a ton of stuff to sort through for future posts, so I’ll be pretty busy until next week. Today, I’ve got a guest post from Henry Harteveldt on Google’s new flight search.
–

Two days ago, Google unveiled a new flight search function. Following its successful acquisition of ITA Software, Google’s move was expected — only the timing remained unknown. But after a bit of testing, I think Google launched the product too soon. Since you never get a second chance to make a first impression, I don’t think Google did itself any favors by launching it when it did.

Like Kayak, Fly.com, Hipmunk and other similar “meta-search” websites, Google’s new flight search function allows a user to search and compare airline schedules and prices. Google’s flight search certainly offers several benefits:

• Convenience. Google is the most-used search engine, and adding flight search will only serve to increase the site’s utility to its users. As an advertising-based business, this obviously stands to benefit Google enormously as well — more people using more pages, spending more time on Google.
• Page download speed. Once I’d selected my travel dates, Google returned results almost instantly. A search on Kayak produced a calendar on the right-side of the page showing the best available fares, but users must wait several seconds (six to eight seconds, in my tests) for all the actual flight results to be returned.
• Proactive filters. Google’s flight search allows users to filter by both price and travel time. Both of these are smart. Research I did in my previous job shows that a large number of US online leisure travelers — likely the primary audience for this application — allow price to dictate their first-choice destination. The travel time filter is helpful (if not original — Travelmuse.com first offered this at least three years ago) for travelers who want to avoid long flights, especially if they’re taking a long weekend getaway and want to maximize their time at their destination.
• Integrated — though slow — booking. After a user has selected both outbound and return flights, a red “Book” button appears (beneath that is an ad for the airline, read on to see how that will play out). Clicking on it will take the user to airline’s website where he or she may proceed to complete the reservation. In my experiences, though, it routinely took eight seconds or more for the airline website page to appear (I didn’t encounter other delays using the Internet or my web browser — Google Chrome — while waiting for the airline page to load).

That said, as analyst I think Google jumped the gun in bringing this product to market. Why?

• Poor presence on launch day. Hint: If you’re going to tout that you’re bringing something to market, it’s usually a smart idea to let users find it. I did 10 searches on Google.com using the suggested “flights from [city] to [city]” phrase. None produced the “flights” link in the left-side navigation menu, as illustrated on Google’s blog. The “flights” link did appear in the searches I conducted today, September 14. Nitpicky? Maybe No. If you’re going to bring a product to market and tout it, make sure your users can consistently find and use it.
• A clunky map. If there’s anything Google knows besides search, it’s mapping. Google offers two nice features on its flight search map. First, it shows the prices for the destinations based on selected travel dates. Second, the departure airport shows an icon of a plane taking off, while the destination city shows a plane landing. After that, though, Google — surprisingly — disappoints. It’s not at all clear how a user interacts with the map. To change origin and destination cities, a natural response would be to try to move the icons around on the map. That doesn’t work — doing so shifts the map in the window. To adjust the destination city on the map, a user must click a different city. To change the departure airport, users must change the “from” city in the flight search box.

• Incomplete flight search results. Not all airlines serving a city-pair were returned. For example, a search for San Francisco-Washington DC (all airports) returned results for United, but no other airline. With a 6 1/2 hour flight duration, Virgin America’s (VX) San Francisco-Washington/Dulles nonstops should have been included (VX schedules those flights for roughly 5 hours, 10 minutes). On other searches, like Oakland-Houston, Southwest’s (WN)flights didn’t appear. I can understand not showing WN’s fares, but not its schedules, especially since media presented WN flight results. A San Francisco-LA search returned flights for American and United, but not Delta. A Delta.com search showed 11 flights southbound, nine flights northbound on the same travel dates.

• Uninspired user sort controls. I give Google credit for allowing users to sort flight results by airline alliances — that can be very helpful, especially for international flight searches. But the other controls are fairly standard — number of stops, connecting airport, and departure and return flight times. This site has nothing on either Kayak or Hipmunk, whose user controls are more visible. Yawn.
• A display that emphasizes airline commoditization. Yes, this is a new product. Yes, airline pricing is complex. But airlines are working hard to differentiate themselves, and Google’s flight display does nothing to help them. Google presents the least expensive economy-class fare. Nothing wrong with that, but Kayak presents premium economy fares. Airlines like United and Virgin America can’t merchandise their premium economy offerings on Google’s flight search tool. Carriers that offer amenities like in-flight Wi-Fi, in-seat power, or in-seat audio/video entertainment systems can’t promote those items in the tool, either. Hipmunk shows users which flight have Wi-Fi. These items are important to distinguishing elements for the airlines. Not offering at least some merchandising capabilities at its start places Google tangibly behind its competitors.

When a firm introduces what is essentially a “me too” product, its launch should incorporate enough bells and whistles to create a distinctive, compelling experience to encourage switching. As of now, Google’s flight search may be convenient, but it’s far from compelling.

Finally, there’s been a lot of buzz about how the flight search shows only airline websites. Cranky Flier readers no doubt know that airlines would like to increase their direct sales, primarily via their websites — their lowest-cost sales channel — rather than selling tickets through travel agencies. Don’t expect this to last. Remember that:

• Google is a publicly-held firm. Like all publicly-held firms, Wall Street and investors expect growth in gross income and operating and net profits each quarter.
• To help generate those revenues and profits Google sells advertising. Travel is a prime category. Within that category, online travel agencies (OTAs) like Expedia, Orbitz, Priceline, and Travelocity are major customers.
• The OTAs generally have larger marketing budgets than the airlines. Both Expedia and Priceline have large cash balances, and have — or have had — larger market valuations than many airlines.

The OTAs will not allow themselves to be frozen out of Google’s flight search display. The OTAs are authorized agents of the airlines, so I don’t see how Google can prohibit them from participating in a public channel like its flight search tool. Plus, if consumers are not provided the same choice in shopping channels on Google’s flight search engine that they find elsewhere, Google will not get the traffic it seeks. Bear in mind that Kayak started as an airline-focused price aggregator, and then added OTAs as a booking option. That move must have worked, otherwise would have stopped it.

I understand, and respect, why airlines may not care to have OTAs compete with them in this channel. I don’t expect airlines to sit idly by, either. In talking with carriers, I get the impression that some may be willing to pay Google referral fees for users who book through their websites. Of course, it’s possible the OTAs may pay more. The OTAs can subsidize paying a larger referral fee on air tickets to a meta-search site, since they can recoup that by selling other travel products like hotels or insurance, to the air traveler. Though airlines sell third-party products, they don’t generate the same volume of those products as the OTAs.

–
Henry Harteveldt is a co-founder of Atmosphere Research Group, where he leads its airline and travel research practice. Prior to starting Atmosphere earlier this month, Henry spent more than 11 1/2 years as the airline and travel analyst at Forrester Research, Inc.

A lot has been written about American’s fight with Orbitz, Expedia, and now Sabre, but I still don’t think that it’s been made very clear for “normal” people. Why can’t you book American on Orbitz and Expedia? What does Sabre have to do with you, the traveler? In the end, there shouldn’t really be an impact on travelers, but the current fighting is putting a temporary wrench into things. It will pass, eventually.

The first thing to understand is that this fight is NOT with retail sites like Orbitz and Expedia. Yes, they are now involved and do not currently show American’s flights, but it’s not their fight. The real fight is between American and the reservation systems (known as global distribution systems, or GDSes) that retail agencies like Orbitz use to make bookings. (It’s no coincidence that the company that owns two of those systems also owns Orbitz – see why they’re involved?)

Here’s the current lay of the land when it comes to airlines bookings.

As you can see, when you book with an airline directly, you eliminate the middleman, the GDS. That middleman, of course, costs money and the airlines pay for it, so airlines like when you book direct. But that’s not the only reason they like when you book direct. The airlines are also unhappy that the middlemen haven’t been very progressive at including ancillary fees (bag fees, priority boarding, etc) in the reservation process to make them easier to sell. They really want there to be a shopping cart, something that is ubiquitous everywhere else on the web today. In addition, they want the ability to be able to vary those fees for frequent fliers. If you’re an elite member, they don’t want to try to charge bag fees, for example. The GDSes just aren’t providing this quickly enough, so it’s time to fight.

But the airlines (at least, the legacy airlines) know that you aren’t going to just go straight to the airline to book every time. That’s good for your basic leisure traveler, but what about complicated itineraries involving many different airlines? Or what if you have a corporate travel agent that books everything for you? The retail sites and travel agencies are still important. The airlines just want to change how they exchange data with those companies.

With data transfer being so cheap and easy today, what the airlines are proposing, and American is taking the lead with, is that they set up a direct connection to cut out the GDSes. That saves money for the airline and it provides the ability to better sell their ancillary products in the process. Makes sense. So here’s what they want.

You’ll notice that there are now a lot more lines coming directly from the airline reservation systems. In reality, there is an XML data connection that the airlines will have sit on top of their systems (I spoke in depth with Farelogix about this, one of the companies that creates these). That connection will then be offered directly to the agencies, retail sites, and even the GDSes. Why the GDSes? They aren’t just going to to go away. Let’s say you need to go from LA to Mfuwe, Zambia. To get there, you might fly American part of the way, but you’ll need to fly on Proflight Zambia from Lusaka. You think they’re going to have a direct connection set up? Yeah right. They’ll still rely on the GDSes, at least for awhile.

But as you can see, I’m not just talking about the GDSes as the intermediaries but suggesting there could be others. If the GDSes wanted to get with the times, they could corner the market on being the intermediary. They could collect direct connections, combine it with traditional connections, and all would be good. They would just have a new way of connecting with the airlines, they would be able to handle the new “merchandising” that airlines have gone to in the last few years, and the costs would drop dramatically. But since they’ve been mostly fighting this (I think Amadeus may be the most open to it), that opens the door for others to step in.

Sure, the big online travel agents and corporate agencies could afford to take the direct connections and do the development work themselves, but not everyone can afford that. What about the little guys? For that, Farelogix (they aren’t alone) has actually created a basic front end system that an agency can download and use with ease. The agency just needs to get the airlines with direct connections to open the spigot and they’re ready to go. Farelogix can even integrate with the GDSes so that they can mix flights from those systems along with direct connections so that it’s all easy for the user to see in one place. As you might imagine, the GDSes don’t like this, so they won’t let most agencies actually mix their results like this. But technically, it’s completely possible.

Can you really compare all these different feeds? Yep. There are a lot of scare tactics being used out there to make people think that a direct connection is going to mean that every airline will offer information differently and you’ll never be able to compare. That’s bull. The big legacy carriers have actually created the Open Axis Group which has a standard airlines can use. (No, I don’t recommend using “axis” in any name when people are fighting.) That makes it easy to start integrating new airlines into a single interface as they create direct connections.

It’s just like you see on sites like Kayak or Fly.com. They take data from multiple sources and display it for you in one interface. The only difference is they don’t do the booking – they send you to each site to do it. This new fight just takes it one step further.

In the end, it’s the reservation systems that stand to lose the most here, and you as a consumer don’t stand to lose anything. If anything, you stand to gain when these new systems start allowing for more robust shopping cart capabilities to help you buy everything you need before you go.

Expedia Drops American Airlines — Right After Orbitz Battle – BNET Headwinds
Expedia has now joined the fight against American, which seems ironic since it just gained an advantage after AA pulled out of Orbitz. This is much bigger than that, however.

Continental-United Merger: How the Airline Emboldened Its Pilots – BNET Headwinds
United lost its bid to put a Continental code on 70 seat jets in Continental hubs. That’s good news for pilots.

Southwest’s Muddled Attack on Change Fees May Backfire – BNET Headwinds
Southwest has released its new change fee ads, and the message isn’t nearly as clear as “Bags Fly Free.” In fact, this could backfire.

In the Trenches: Learning in the Aftermath – Intuit Small Business Blog
Now that the big winter storms during the holidays have passed, it’s time to revisit what worked and what didn’t. We do need to make some changes.

As Sabre Enters War Over Flight Bookings, American Has to Find New Strategies – BNET Headwinds
The distribution war that American started is reaching a boiling point, and now the question is whether American will be able to find a way to survive without the GDSes.

Sabre Makes the Wrong Choice By Removing American Airlines – BNET Headwinds
Now looking at it from the other side, Sabre is not making the right choice here.