US Airlines Earned $3.4 Billion in Baggage Fees For 2010

by: Siva Vayali - June 15th, 2011   Filed under: Airlines Add Comment

The US Airlines raked in a whopping $3.4 billion in baggage fees for 2010, according to the statistics released by the US Department of Transportation.  Compare this to $1.14 billion for 2008; the revenue from baggage fees has grown almost 300%. Delta claimed the top spot with almost a billion dollars in baggage fees. The four major network carriers (Delta, United, American, US Airways) each earned more than half a billion dollars in baggage fees.

[TABLE=6]

Combine this with $2.3 billion in reservation change/cancel fee – the US passengers paid $5.7 billion in fees. These fees have become a lucrative revenue stream for the airlines in times when the cost of fuel has soared. The industry trade group, Air Transport Association of America (ATA), defends these fees as one way to keep the carriers in black. These fees are here to stay, no matter what happens to the fuel prices.

Some interesting observations:

The big four network carriers account for nearly 80% percent of the baggage fee.

The baggage fees are exempted from the 7.5% excise tax levied on tickets.  So most airlines charge baggage fees as a separate line item to take all the profit generated from this ancillary revenue.

Spirit, not a top-15 airline in the US ranks at number eight in baggage fees. As you know Spirit charges for carry-on bags as well (only the carry-on bags stored in overhead bins, not the ones stowed under the seat!). Most airlines do not charge fee for the first carry-on baggage.

Southwest stands out

While all other airlines collect baggage fees, Southwest does not. Southwest needs to be commended for this. Despite being squeezed by the increasing fuel costs, the airline maintains that it has no plans to impose a baggage fee.

More transparent rules are coming

The Department of Transportation in April announced a new set of rules related to the baggage fees. They include:

The airlines must refund the baggage fee (in addition to the compensation) if the baggage is lost or not delivered in a timely manner. As of now, if the baggage is lost or delayed, most airlines do not pay back the baggage fee. Some offer credit for future travel. DOT has not clarified what it would consider a timely manner of delivery. This rule will be effective from August 23, 2011.

Airlines must clearly disclose all the fees in the ticket. This rule will be effective from October 24, 2011. The ATA has asked the government to delay the implementation of these rules for another six months.

Hopefully, with these new rules, the passengers get a fair deal while paying for baggage fees.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Washington Dulles to have underground Metro Rail Station

by: Siva Vayali - April 7th, 2011   Filed under: Airports 4 Comments

Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD) has been my home airport for the past 15 years. So, when the airport authority made its decision on the location of the Metro Rail station, it prompted me to write down my thoughts on it.

Dulles Main Terminal - Courtesy: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority

Dulles Main Terminal - Courtesy: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority

Dulles used to be one of the most derided major airports in the United States. Located 23 miles West of downtown Washington, it was considered as a white elephant when opened in 1962. Most flights to the nation’s capital operated out of the close-in National Airport (since then renamed as Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport). With a signature Main Terminal, designed by the famous Finnish American Architect Eero Saarinen (who also designed the famous Gateway Arch in St. Louis and the futuristic TWA terminal in New York’s JFK airport), Dulles has one more unique feature: the mobile lounges. These odd looking vehicles transport passengers between terminals and planes.

Dulles has come a long way. A Perimeter Rule was put in place by the US Congress prohibiting long distance flights from National. The Washington DC area expanded rapidly and Northern Virginia became a hotbed for technology companies and government contractors. Dulles has become the busiest airport in the region, outpacing National and Baltimore Washington International. It is one of the major international gateways in the country today with United Airlines operating a major hub.

The major renovation programs in Dulles have helped it improve the standing among passengers. The recently launched AeroTrain connects the main terminal with all Concourses except Concourse D. I thoroughly enjoyed it on my recent trip to India. Even though the mobile lounges are still used to transport arriving international passengers, the train covers majority of the departing passengers. The redesigned Concourse B is also an excellent facility where most international airlines operate. But Concourses C and D are a different story. It is a shame that United has to operate its hub out of these outdated facilities. The airport authority and United have indefinitely shelved the plan to replace these facilities. Hopefully, a day will come to sunset these old structures.

The final piece of the puzzle is the metro rail access to the airport. Construction of Phase 1 is in progress. Phase 2 will bring the rail to the airport. The contentious question is the location of the airport station. With soaring costs, the original plan to build the station right under the main terminal was rejected. Two alternative proposals were put forth: an underground station closer to the main terminal and an above ground station farther away from the main terminal. The airport authority was right in selecting the underground station. This is more convenient to passengers with much shorter distance to cover than the above ground station. I know it is going to cost more. But, the long term vision of more user friendly station should be given preference over the short term, cheaper alternative that is not user friendly. I remember that when the Metro opened the station in Reagan National Airport, I avoided using it to the airport because my flights departed from Terminal A, which is a long walk (or take a shuttle bus). When Terminal B/C opened and connected directly to the metro station using the covered walkway, it was more convenient. A longer walk to the Terminal from the station could deter the passenger from using the rail, especially in Dulles with lots of international passengers.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Thoughts on Lufthansa’s selection of Miami as the next A380 destination

by: Siva Vayali - March 31st, 2011   Filed under: Airlines, Airports 1 Comment

Lufthansa today announced that Miami would be the next US destination to be served by Airbus A380. The world’s largest passenger airplane would replace the Boeing 747 currently operated on the Frankfurt – Miami route.

Lufthansa A380 - Courtesy: Lufthansa

Lufthansa A380 - Courtesy: Lufthansa

Lufthansa’s selection of North American destinations for A380 is interesting:

New York JFK is currently served four times a week using A380. The JFK service will become a daily on A380 starting April 10, 2011 (this means LH will delay the resumption of A380 service to Tokyo Narita, suspended due to the recent Tsunami and Earthquake, for a longer period). San Francisco will be served using A380 starting May 10, 2011. Miami will get A380 service starting June 10, 2011.

The JFK service is a no-brainer. The interesting thing to note here is Lufthansa’s preference of Miami and San Francisco over Newark Liberty (EWR), Chicago O’Hare (ORD) and Washington Dulles (IAD), all Star Alliance hubs and major gateways for LH. As more A380’s join the fleet, these gateways would get the service, but right now, they are not included.

There could be several reasons for this. I believe the following reasons played a major role in the selection process.

1. Single daily flight is easy to upgrade: Miami, with just one flight per day, and virtually no connection traffic, gives Lufthansa the flexibility to switch the metal from B747 to A380. San Francisco, though a Star hub, is also served by a single Lufthansa flight. So, it is easy for LH to replace the B747 with A380. Newark, Chicago and Washington need multiple flights from Frankfurt, as Lufthansa connects majority of its US bound traffic from these hubs through Star partner United. From these hubs, Lufthansa needs multiple frequencies a day to provide better connection options to its frequent flyers.

The exceptions to this theory are Toronto (YYZ) and Los Angeles (LAX), both Star hubs with a single Lufthansa flight (though Toronto is served by 2 daily flights from its anchor Air Canada).

2. A380 better than B744 on non-hub cities: Operating an A380 is more cost effective than a B744. Lufthansa’s B744s have poor customer reception. Replacing them with A380 would provide a better chance to protect its turf in hubs dominated by other carriers (MIA is a good case – it could deter American Airlines from starting a competing service).

3. Alliance Partners have a say in equipment upgrade: United and Air Canada have a transatlantic joint venture with Lufthansa and the schedules at Star hubs are coordinated between these carriers for optimal connections. United, being the anchor at EWR, ORD and IAD, has to make sure parity of service quality with Lufthansa in these hubs. So, United may be less receptive to LH upgrading these routes with A380, because its own product would fall behind in quality. The same argument goes for YYZ and Air Canada.

[TABLE=7]

So, my prediction is this: the next Lufthansa destination for A380 will be Los Angeles, followed by Houston and Boston.

Newark, Chicago, Washington and Toronto will have to wait get their turns.

Moral of this analysis: sometimes, being a hub with multiple daily flights to a destination can be a drawback to get better service!!!!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jet Airways talking to Delta, Air France and KLM – A gain for SkyTeam?

by: Siva Vayali - March 15th, 2011   Filed under: Airlines, Airports Add Comment

Jet Airways is reportedly in talks with Delta Air Lines, Air France, KLM and Alitalia to form a transatlantic joint venture with SkyTeam. As India’s largest and most respected airline, currently Jet does not belong to any of the major alliances. It has code sharing pacts with many airlines from different alliances.

Jet Airways Boeing 777 - Courtesy: Jet Airways

Jet Airways Boeing 777 - Courtesy: Jet Airways

Why considering a Joint Venture with SkyTeam now?

Ideally, Jet would like to join Star Alliance. It has strong relationship with Star through its code share pacts with Brussels Airlines, United, US Airways, Air Canada, and ANA. Majority of Jet’s European traffic is routed through Brussels Airlines. Jet uses Brussels Airport as a transfer point for connecting passengers between India and North America. It also has strong ties with Oneworld carriers through code share pacts with American Airlines and Qantas. Jet has no code share partner from SkyTeam, except with Alitalia through its recently launched Delhi – Milan Malpensa route.

SkyTeam Partners - Courtesy: SkyTeam

SkyTeam Partners - Courtesy: SkyTeam

So, why Jet would consider the option of joining SkyTeam or a JV? With Air India joining Star and Kingfisher Airlines joining Oneworld, Jet is running out of options. It has been reported that the Indian government was against Jet joining Star as it might dislodge Air India as a second tier partner. SkyTeam does not have any major airline from India in its kitty. So, the deal could be mutually attractive.

Is it good for Jet?

Jet Airways has built a nice little operation at Brussels Airport. It is an efficient operation with all flights arriving and departing within the same short window of time. This makes transfers easy. Brussels Airport, being small compared to other European hubs and a one-terminal facility, also helps (but, I have heard few complaints about passport control and security scrambling to handle high passenger volumes in short window of time). Code share partner Brussels Airlines (now part of the Lufthansa group) provides decent connections throughout Western Europe and Africa. Jet Airways can keep the revenue from lucrative North American traffic to itself as the later does not have flights across the Atlantic.

Joining an alliance with SkyTeam would involve Jet transferring its hub from Brussels to Amsterdam’s Schiphol airport, where KLM operates a mega hub. KLM offers much better connections throughout Europe, Africa and North America than Brussels Airlines. Delta Air Lines also has significant operations at Schiphol. This greatly expands Jet’s ability to offer connections. If Jet starts a flight to Atlanta, it would virtually put the entire North America under its map through Delta’s network.

But, the downside is that Schiphol has a much better transatlantic connectivity and competition than Brussels and how much control would Jet get on the transatlantic routes from there. Media reports suggest that SkyTeam is willing to allow Jet to takeover only one route from Amsterdam. Currently Jet Airways operates its own metal on Chennai – New York JFK, Mumbai – Newark, and Delhi – Toronto sectors, all routed through Brussels. It has plans to add more North American destinations in future. If Jet has to shift the hub to Amsterdam, would it be able to offer these routes? KLM serves to Delhi and Delta servers to Mumbai currently. From Schiphol, KLM and Delta pretty much cover the entire North and South American continents. Under these circumstances, what could Jet offer using its own metal? How the revenue would be shared? What would happen to Jet’s existing code share agreement with American Airlines? All these questions need to be answered.

A win for SkyTeam and a loss for Star Alliance

If this happens, it would be a major win for SkyTeam.  It was scrambling to find a partner in India. It could not ask for a better one than Jet Airways. Jet connects the length and breadth of India. SkyTeam instantly gains access to the second fastest growing economy in the world.

It would be a major loss for the Star Alliance. Star would be better served with the inclusion of Jet than the current proposed partner in Air India. The government owned Air India is in survival mode and it’s joining the alliance has been delayed due to several operational reasons. Air India is also financially bleeding, with massive debt and labor issues and it is steadily losing market share in both domestic and international routes. I don’t know why Star, especially Lufthansa, preferred Air India over Jet. One reason could be that, Lufthansa has a major presence in India and did not want a stronger carrier that could compete with it.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Reagan National Airport And Long Distance Flights

by: Siva Vayali - February 9th, 2011   Filed under: Airlines, Airports 3 Comments

The FAA Re-Authorization bill is stuck in the United States Senate because of a battle over allowing more long distance flights to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (commonly called just National Airport in the Washington/Baltimore metro area).

Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport - Courtesy: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority

What is the Perimeter Rule?

Reagan National Airport has a Perimeter Rule that prevents flights longer than 1250 miles. It is also a slot-controlled airport, which means the number of take-offs and landings are strictly controlled by the FAA. Any increase to the number slots has to be approved by the FAA/DOT. This means the slots are one of the most valuable commodities. Airlines scramble to get slots at Reagan National. The traffic is mostly business travelers and O&D.

Why Perimeter Rule was put in place first?

  1. The initial objective of the Perimeter Rule was to drive traffic to the newly built, once thought as a white-elephant, distant Dulles International Airport.
  2. With the advent of Jet age, the rule was cited as a preventive measure to control noise around the densely populated Northern Virginia suburbs of Arlington and Alexandria.
  3. With the terrorist attacks on September 2001, the security angle also came into play, because of the airport’s proximity to downtown Washington and Pentagon.

Why the Rule is still in place?

The real reasons for not relaxing the rules are the following:

  1. The local population living around the area vehemently opposes any relaxation of these rules fearing increased air and noise pollution. This means the local politicians have no incentive to support this measure.
  2. Both Reagan National and Dulles are run by the same agency – Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, which sees no big reason to change the status quo.
  3. The local population is used to drive to Dulles, as it is the main international gateway to the region. People on the Maryland side of the beltway have easy access to Baltimore Washington Thurgood Marshal Airport (commonly referred here as BWI). BWI offers excellent low fare choices as it is the hub for Southwest Airlines.
  4. All the three airports thrive because of their unique advantages (National – preferred by the business traveler, mostly O&D traffic; Dulles – primary international gateway with wealthy population living around; BWI – excellent low fare choices).
  5. And finally, the local law makers and airport administrators have some concern of loosing traffic to Reagan National if more flights and destinations are added (which is not true as I explain it later).

These reasons make sense as it is a local transportation issue and hence the local people and leaders should make decision.

Why Perimeter Rule is a problem?

  1. The restrictions are against the free competitive market spirit of America.
  2. Also, the Western US markets such as California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Colorado and Utah want direct non-stop access to Reagan National Airport. Their argument cannot be dismissed either – they want to have access to the closest airport to downtown Washington.

What is the problem in adding more services to Western markets?

  1. The issue gets complicated as there are no free slots available to add more flights.
  2. Adding new slots will be opposed by the local population living around the airport.
  3. Exiting slots cannot be used to start services to these new markets because of the fear that the smaller markets in the Midwest will loose their existing service. The law makers and business leaders in Midwest would not agree to that.

So, what should the Congress do?

Should it repeal the Perimeter Rule? No.

Should it keep the rule as is? No.

Congress should strike a compromise.

  1. Allow very limited number of new slots to Reagan National in order to serve San Francisco, San Jose, San Deigo and Portland, OR markets of the Western states. These markets lack non-stop service to Reagan National airport.
  2. These slots should not be used for expanding existing services to markets such as Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Denver and Salt Lake City, because they already have non-stop services to Reagan National.

What are the implications of adding few new slots?

Local Population Living Around National Airport – With modern jetliners, the noise and air pollution is much less than what we think. So, this should not affect their quality of life.

Markets that already have services to National Airport – New slots are used for these services and hence it should not be a problem.

Dulles Airport – There are some concerns with the local law makers and airport administrators that Dulles might loose some traffic. But, the impact on Dulles would be minimal. Dulles thrives and it is the largest airport in the region. It serves two of the wealthiest counties in country (Loudoun and Fairfax). It also serves the economic engine of Northern Virginia, namely the Tysons Corner and Dulles Technology corridor. With United operating its transatlantic hub, there should be plenty of connecting traffic in addition to the O&D.

BWI Airport – BWI would do fine too, as it caters to the Baltimore market in addition to the Washington market. It also has the low fare juggernaut in Southwest.

US Airways – Ideally US Airways would prefer to use its existing slots because new slots would be very difficult to justify as it is the dominant carrier at National. But, it could argue with DOT that as a dominant carrier, it should get some new slots so that it can offer connections to West Coast for smaller Eastern communities through National. I am not sure how this argument will fly with DOT. So, if new slots are allowed, it would mostly be negative to US Airways as other airlines would compete to get them. If few of the existing slots are allowed to start these services, US Airways would be the major beneficiary.

United Airlines – United also has something to gain and loose in this arrangement. As a dominant airline at Dulles, it might loose some business traffic to National Airport because San Francisco is one of the top destinations in Washington/Baltimore area. On the same token, as a dominant airline in SFO, United could win new slots to serve SFO from National (Virgin America would compete to get these slots too).

Other Airlines – If Portland, OR is allowed to have direct service, Alaska airline may benefit.

Tags: , , , , , , ,