September 27, 2005

• OK, so some people questioned my statements about Airbus planes.  Why shouldn't we fly them?  WHY?  Because I said so.   J/K.  Because they just imitate Boeing, come to America and build their "design" centers in places like Wichita where all the Boeing engineers live, offering them more money to work for them.  Then they build their planes in Europe with government subsidies so that Boeing can't compete.  Then some of the U.S. airlines buy airbus planes, Boeing lays off 5,000 workers at a time, the airlines get in trouble because the economy turns down and need the United States government to bail them out, and our tax dollars have in the end gone to subsidize Airbus too!  Airbus=Americans without jobs.  Flying Airbus=Unpatriotic.  Because I said so. 

  
  

  Actually, I don't have a big burden on this issue. I've got a bigger soap box of late: Don't fly the low-cost carriers!  That's what's really unpatriotic.

  
  

  Why?  Because the legacy airlines have made America what it is today.  They've given us the ability to see grandma at Christmas and connect seamlessly to London or Osaka.  They've been through thick and thin and in times of crisis or even bad weather inevitably take losses instead of passing the same to the traveling public.  In spite of popular misconceptions, the legacy carriers actually are operating very efficiently.  American Airlines, for example, actually operates at a lower cost than Southwest.

  
  

  The difference in my opinion, is that the legacy airlines have a different business model, one that makes their long haul flights (transcontinental and international) their income streams.  In order to "feed" these profitable flights they have maintained a network of both profitable and unprofitable short-haul flights to cities where there's far less demand and less business (think higher priced last minute tickets) travel going on.  The profitable routes make up for the money-losing routes, and many of the passengers from the money-losing cities end up on money-earning flights.  This business model is in the best interest of the American traveler.  Especially if your grandma happens to live in Des Moines.

  
  

  The so called "low-cost" airlines don't fly internationally.  Some, like Southwest, don't even connect in very many airports where you could fly onward internationally.  Instead, they have "cherry-picked" the most profitable routes and siphoned travelers on those routes from the bigger carriers.  Of course they are cheaper on those routes, because they're only flying profitable routes and only on the days and at the times when the demand is highest and profit greatest.

  
  

  But will they take you to Des Moines for Christmas? Nope. But Delta will.  The big question is, What would happen if the "low-cost" carriers succeed in running the legacy airlines out of business?  I'll tell you what would happen.  This would be an America with air service only to the most profitable, highest volume routes, and only at the times and on the days of the week in the best interest of the airline.  It would be an America completely dependent on foreign carriers for international travel (that's right, you'd be flying Air China to Shanghai, not American Airlines, KLM to Amsterdam, not Northwest).  Or else... Southwest would start offering international flights, and probably the necessary service to Des Moines and other unprofitable cities.  And we'd be right back where we started.  Probably with higher fares.

  
  

  OK.  I'll be quiet.  As you can tell, I'm bored.

  
  

  I'm in South Africa.  Hoping to update with pictures soon.  I miss all of you!  Glad I can at least read your xangas and wish I was there.

  • 5:51 am
  • 8 Comments