JetBlue defects to the dark side

[cpzilliacus]

American City Business Journals via WTOP Radio: JetBlue defects to the dark side

When I visited JetBlue Airways headquarters this summer, I was prepared to find the carrier in a metaphoric bunker, fending off attacks from howling security analysts who accused it, among other crimes, of being "overly brand-conscious and customer focused."

But JetBlue wasn't in a bunker. Its executives had already surrendered and were activity formulating plans to destroy the airline's unique selling points and its nicely profitable niche as the nation's best-rated airline.

Not once at JetBlue's unprepossessing command center in the New York borough of Queens did I hear a defense of its policy to allow all customers to check a bag free of charge. Not once did I hear a defense of its fleet of Airbus A320 aircraft, which offers all flyers a humane 34 inches of legroom in comfy, thickly cushioned leather seats. Not once did I hear talk of the carrier's well-earned reputation for disruptive innovation, a policy that's made it the most successful aviation start-up in more than 30 years. And not once did I hear an executive promise to maintain JetBlue's 15-year reputation for being a markedly, provably, demonstrably better airline.

Instead, I heard rationalizations about the financial imperative of following the airline pack down the sinkhole of declining in-flight comfort. I got a lecture on the calculus of making your product just a little less awful than the other guys. And I also got the first draft of what is essentially JetBlue's new marketing mantra: We won't suck as much as the other guys.

[vdeane]

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

[formulanone]

Two words: It's faster.

The airlines have simultaneously offered more "a la carte services" as more perks and formerly free stuff are removed; theoretically, you pay only for what you need, but so as long as prices are as uneven as they are, someone feels the pinch.

For someone who plans their air travel months in advance, there's bargains to be had. For short-term planning and holiday travel, it sucks.

[jeffandnicole]

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

On my trips to Florida, I've generally driven.  Once, I flew, because I paid under $200 r/t for the tickets.  It's definitely faster, but I enjoy the drive as well.  So for me, the cheaper the airline tickets are, the more likely I'll fly. 

In the last week, I was in Punta Cana.  Since there's no bridge there yet, flying is the 1 and only real option.  Even cruise boats don't stop there, so that's not an option either!

[Pete from Boston]

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

Because people have different priorities than you. I know lots of folks whose family members are thousands of miles away.  They can either drive to see them at the holidays, eating up several days in each direction, or fly and spend that extra time with the people they love.  Frittering away their precious time on this earth rolling across drab interstates for days isn't everyone's cup of tea either.

[cpzilliacus]

I drove from Maryland to a conference in Denver, Colorado (and then on to Cove Fort in Utah), at least in part because of the opportunity to clinch all of I-70 in one (long) drive.

Could I have flown?  Yes, especially after having lost a fair amount of weight, but I am not thin, so it's not very enjoyable.

[Billy F 1988]

Good thing I boarded my flights with Horizon and Alaska Airlines on my way to Alaska and back in 2008 instead of JetBlue.

[jakeroot]

Good thing I boarded my flights with Horizon and Alaska Airlines on my way to Alaska and back in 2008 instead of JetBlue.

Excellent choice Mr F. Any flight to and from Alaska done on any airline other than Alaska Airlines is pure insanity. No other airline comes anywhere close to flying so often in such treacherous conditions.

[Billy F 1988]

Oh, not even close. The Horizon/Alaska pilots excel real nicely in cold weather conditions. The flight staff are great and make you feel like you can enjoy the sights and sounds of the plane. Can JetBlue match that? Answer: N O!

[vdeane]

Two words: It's faster.

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

Because people have different priorities than you. I know lots of folks whose family members are thousands of miles away.  They can either drive to see them at the holidays, eating up several days in each direction, or fly and spend that extra time with the people they love.  Frittering away their precious time on this earth rolling across drab interstates for days isn't everyone's cup of tea either.

To me, "it's faster" is not worth being treated like cattle by the airlines, like a terrorist by the government, subjected to being crammed in with a bunch of annoying people, all the while the threat of lost/stolen luggage is present.  No thanks.  This is even one reason why I'll never move out of the northeast.  Unfortunately it probably also means that I'll never get to places like New Zealand.

[yanksfan6129]

Two words: It's faster.

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

Because people have different priorities than you. I know lots of folks whose family members are thousands of miles away.  They can either drive to see them at the holidays, eating up several days in each direction, or fly and spend that extra time with the people they love.  Frittering away their precious time on this earth rolling across drab interstates for days isn't everyone's cup of tea either.

To me, "it's faster" is not worth being treated like cattle by the airlines, like a terrorist by the government, subjected to being crammed in with a bunch of annoying people, all the while the threat of lost/stolen luggage is present.  No thanks.  This is even one reason why I'll never move out of the northeast.  Unfortunately it probably also means that I'll never get to places like New Zealand.

When was the last time you've flown? For the vast majority of experiences, it's really not that bad. You hear about the sensational annoying passengers in the media but most of the time everyone is pretty compliant. Also, unless you really are of above average height and weight, the airline seats are not that bad for even a cross country flight.

[dfwmapper]

As someone who is significantly above average height and weight, I only fly first class, Virgin America main cabin select, or Frontier stretch seating. And I always skip the body scanner in favor of the rub and tug, because fuck the TSA and everyone who works for them.

[jakeroot]

As someone who is significantly above average height and weight, I only fly first class, Virgin America main cabin select, or Frontier stretch seating. And I always skip the body scanner in favor of the rub and tug, because fuck the TSA and everyone who works for them.

I like a good tug while waiting for my flight; gonna skip the scanner next time. Thnx for the info.

[cjk374]

If I can't drive there, I  have no business being there.   

[jeffandnicole]

The worst thing about the TSA is how they tend to talk down to you, especially if you didn't do something perfectly correct, and the fact that you never know what to do because each agent does their own thing.  When I fly with my wife, sometimes we both see the credential check person at the same time; other times they tell us one has to wait behind the sign.

Sometimes I've had good experiences; other times they're rude as hell.  This past trip, the agents in ATL were very friendly.  In PUJ, they didn't have the new fangled "we see what you look like naked" equipment, so everyone was patted down (either method is fine with me).

Planes - eh.  I don't have any issues with the seating.  But I swear I get bronchitis every time I fly anymore.

[Pete from Boston]

Two words: It's faster.

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

Because people have different priorities than you. I know lots of folks whose family members are thousands of miles away.  They can either drive to see them at the holidays, eating up several days in each direction, or fly and spend that extra time with the people they love.  Frittering away their precious time on this earth rolling across drab interstates for days isn't everyone's cup of tea either.

To me, "it's faster" is not worth being treated like cattle by the airlines, like a terrorist by the government, subjected to being crammed in with a bunch of annoying people, all the while the threat of lost/stolen luggage is present.  No thanks.  This is even one reason why I'll never move out of the northeast.  Unfortunately it probably also means that I'll never get to places like New Zealand.

You can of course impose whatever limits you choose on yourself.  But the answer to "why people put up with this" is that a lot of reasonable people put certain life needs above avoiding the indignity of flying.  Hell, people eat at fast food restaurants because it's faster, and its considerable ill effects linger well longer than airline treatment.  People have to make choices between bad things every day.

[1995hoo]

For me, flying versus driving (assuming the option exists....Hawaii and Europe aren't places to which I can easily drive) depends in part on the distance involved, the time to be spent at the destination, the reason for the trip, and the cost of flying and renting a car. We usually drive to Florida because we spend a minimum of a week. A day and a half at one end (we take the Auto Train home, a single overnight ride) is no big deal for a whole week compared to the cost of flying (two people) and renting a car. If we were going for a four-day weekend, of course we'd fly. We made a Labor Day weekend football trip to Laramie, Wyoming, a few years back, and obviously that was a flying trip for the same reason–too far to drive for a weekend trip (plus I was very busy with work).

When we go skiing in Quebec we always drive because we can be in Montreal in ten hours and I'd rather transport our ski equipment myself than let an airline do it.

[formulanone]

Two words: It's faster.

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

Because people have different priorities than you. I know lots of folks whose family members are thousands of miles away.  They can either drive to see them at the holidays, eating up several days in each direction, or fly and spend that extra time with the people they love.  Frittering away their precious time on this earth rolling across drab interstates for days isn't everyone's cup of tea either.

To me, "it's faster" is not worth being treated like cattle by the airlines, like a terrorist by the government, subjected to being crammed in with a bunch of annoying people, all the while the threat of lost/stolen luggage is present.  No thanks.  This is even one reason why I'll never move out of the northeast.  Unfortunately it probably also means that I'll never get to places like New Zealand.

More at: it's necessary for my job. Given the opportunity, I'll drive if it saves the company money, especially if it will get me home faster, or if it offers new roads to drive on. I profit nicely from the mileage, but the client's expectation of my prompt arrival  comes first. Which means there's no way to travel 1000 miles each way and be home in time to see my wife and kids without the aid of airlines.

Biggest perks are that I can spend more time with family (provided there's no mechanical/weather delays), the best window office seat in the world, and the frequent flier miles/perks are mine to bank. That, and the variety of different places every week prevents the job from getting too stale.

I think I'm just used to the never-ending BS that comes with it all, which does grind out some people down from the first 6 months of the job. Some of the things like TSA Pre-Check, free bags on most airlines, preferential selection, seating, upgrades, and boarding make things easier for frequent fliers...something I take for granted until I have to fly with an airline for which I have "no status".

In return, I don't really have to deal with rush hour traffic as much, but that's only foiled because I get to the airport around the time some folks are just waking up. (Wait...why do I do this again?)

Why JetBlue would trade their loyalty to be much like other airlines is beyond me. On the other hand, sometimes airlines make decisions which they use to test the waters. Some airlines make immediate changes to their policies, which can be particularly aggravating. So at least they'll wait around and see what the public thinks (not necessarily caring) and move from there. So they'll either look like the Prodigal Son for keeping their identity by reversing their decision, or become just another tin pusher in Satan's Bowels for charging more like the rest.

If JetBlue sees a large drop in passenger counts, then they'll know that asking another $25 out of every other passenger wasn't worth losing a $400 fare. It sounds like a test of loyalty; if they keep 95-99% of their pax because of the changes, they've still come out ahead. But if they also get to fill more seats because they created more seating capacity, then they've become even more profitable. After all, installing and reconfiguring an existing cabin for an extra row or two of seats costs a lot less than leasing another aircraft and paying another crew.

But if they can also keep the goodwill, personality, and service...then they hope that will keep them afloat. Airlines talk about personal service, but they also realize that most of their passengers shop by lowest prices first, convenience second. Probably the offer of a direct flight sways decisions for a little more money.

Airlines started charging for bags around 8-9 years ago to combat rising oil prices. As the price of jet fuel has decreased in the past few months, it sure seems like an unusual decision...although I'm guessing the flying public has long forgotten of the rationale for the fee, which ramped up the usage of carry-on luggage (typically free on most airlines).

[J N Winkler]

More at: it's necessary for my job. Given the opportunity, I'll drive if it saves the company money, especially if it will get me home faster, or if it offers new roads to drive on. I profit nicely from the mileage, but the client's expectation of my prompt arrival  comes first. Which means there's no way to travel 1000 miles each way and be home in time to see my wife and kids without the aid of airlines.

Other side of the coin:  there are some companies where business travel is used as a punishment.  It is the airborne equivalent of "freeway therapy" at employers that have multiple offices across a large, congested metropolitan area.

Airlines started charging for bags around 8-9 years ago to combat rising oil prices. As the price of jet fuel has decreased in the past few months, it sure seems like an unusual decision...although I'm guessing the flying public has long forgotten of the rationale for the fee, which ramped up the usage of carry-on luggage (typically free on most airlines).

The airlines also liked separate baggage fees because (1) unbundling allows them to quote lower fares in their advertising, and (2) fees in general are "sticky," which means the customer does not expect them to be waived or phased out, and thus they defend the airline's profitability whether oil prices are low or high.

[jeffandnicole]

Why JetBlue would trade their loyalty to be much like other airlines is beyond me. On the other hand, sometimes airlines make decisions which they use to test the waters. Some airlines make immediate changes to their policies, which can be particularly aggravating. So at least they'll wait around and see what the public thinks (not necessarily caring) and move from there. So they'll either look like the Prodigal Son for keeping their identity by reversing their decision, or become just another tin pusher in Satan's Bowels for charging more like the rest.

If JetBlue sees a large drop in passenger counts, then they'll know that asking another $25 out of every other passenger wasn't worth losing a $400 fare. It sounds like a test of loyalty; if they keep 95-99% of their pax because of the changes, they've still come out ahead. But if they also get to fill more seats because they created more seating capacity, then they've become even more profitable. After all, installing and reconfiguring an existing cabin for an extra row or two of seats costs a lot less than leasing another aircraft and paying another crew.

But if they can also keep the goodwill, personality, and service...then they hope that will keep them afloat. Airlines talk about personal service, but they also realize that most of their passengers shop by lowest prices first, convenience second. Probably the offer of a direct flight sways decisions for a little more money.

Airlines started charging for bags around 8-9 years ago to combat rising oil prices. As the price of jet fuel has decreased in the past few months, it sure seems like an unusual decision...although I'm guessing the flying public has long forgotten of the rationale for the fee, which ramped up the usage of carry-on luggage (typically free on most airlines).

On a similar note:

In Las Vegas, hotels started charging resort fees.  There's 2 main companies out there: MGM & Harrahs.  MGM charged the resort fees, Harrahs didn't.  In fact, Harrahs made a huge deal that they were resort fee free.  On forums such as TripAdvisor, people bitched and moaned nonstop about the resort fees.  And guess what happened?  Nothing.  MGM saw occupancy levels remain just as steady as they always had been.   So MGM decided what the hey...let's raise the resort fees.  And then guess what?  Occupancy levels still remained level. 

Finally, one day, Harrahs jumped in and started charging resort fees as well.  People howled and cried.  And you know what...those people still come.  Hell, even small hotels started charging resort fees because they could...and people would pay them.  Payouts for some games are reduced.  People still play.

Returning to JetBlue:  This is exactly what FormulaOne is describing.  JetBlue may have a dedicated fan base, or they may have people that have seeked them out because of pricing, or maybe passengers went with them because they flew where they needed to go.  People are going to bitch and moan about everything, but they ultimately decide who they're going to use. If they decide to stick with JetBlue, it only means increased profits for the company.

[mtantillo]

Just one of many reasons why I won't fly.  I don't understand why people put up with this.

One thing I've noticed is that the "cutoff distance" for drive vs. fly is still increasing. Back before 9/11, people from my old firm used to fly from Raleigh to Charlotte for meetings because it was fast and easy. Now, a family friend who lives on the east end of Long Island has decided it is easier to drive from there to Chicago than to fly, because of all the hassle involved.

[briantroutman]

It's sad to see it happen, but JetBlue is just grappling with some unfortunate realities. An airline's profitability is largely dependent on attracting and maintaining the loyalty of business travelers–people who in many cases aren't spending their own money. While price isn't entirely a nonissue to this group, it's secondary to the convenience of the airline's route map and schedules–and the value of its rewards program. For everyone else–the occasional and leisure travelers–air travel has essentially been commoditized, and absolutely everything hinges on the raw ticket price (before fees). How else do you explain the fact that Spirit, the most loathsome, nickel-and-dime airline in America, is also the most profitable and fastest growing–while the once high-flying fan favorite JetBlue is coming back down to Earth and the equally beloved Virgin America has been hemorrhaging money for years?

Southwest has been fairly resolute in maintaining their original sense of purpose, but even they have taken a tinge of the big airline-isms that have spread across the industry. For example, they still have their egalitarian one-class cabin (no first class), but the boarding procedures have changed in recent years to heavily favor their frequent fliers, high-dollar business fares, and people who pay extra for the privilege. Since I fly Southwest so often, I'm guaranteed an A boarding position, but I can imagine that if I was the occasional traveler who got stuck with a C boarding pass–and therefore a middle seat in the back of the plane–I'd love Southwest a lot less.

Part of me hopes they keep their "bags fly free"  policy forever, but on the other hand, I never check bags, so I'm merely subsidizing the people who do.

To me, "it's faster" is not worth being treated like cattle by the airlines, like a terrorist by the government...

If you never fly, where are you getting this impression of air travel? It's nowhere near as bad as that. But it's incredibly easier for the frequent traveler. Even in a major airport on a busy day, I don't think I've ever been more than the 10th person in line for TSA Pre Check. You don't have to take anything out of your bag, take your shoes off, or even take off your jacket. You walk through a standard metal detector (not a body scanner), and that's it. It might as well be 1987 again. At my two most commonly-used airports (SFO and LAX...both very large and busy airports), my average time–from stepping onto the curb to arriving at my gate–is about 10 minutes.

[Dr Frankenstein]

I'll agree with vdeane and disagree with yanksfan; I'm a plane spotter / aviation enthusiast, and I still think that flying sucks. My last flight from YVR to YUL sucked. Nothing in particular happened besides a bit of turbulence; it's just the entire experience, from the check-in in Vancouver to getting in the car in Montreal that was less-than-enjoyable in its whole. Arrive hours early at the airport, check-in, pay through the nose for my ski gear, have it swabbed forever by a CATSA agent, empty all my shit while going through security because a piece of fudge and the fact that my laptop was missing key were suspicious, eat a crappy overpriced lunch, wait at the gate while the plane comes in late, get shoved into the Airbus A320 in the most inefficient way possible (see Mythbusters), plow through a pile of people shoving insane amounts of baggage into the oveheads, then sit in as little space as possible. Of course, the guy in front of me lowered his seat as far back as possible, eliminating whatever little space I had (I'm not even tall). Had my laptop, didn't pull it out; it was too cramped. Later, I wanted to pee, but the the two people between my window seat and the aisle were firmly installed in front of their iPad and laptop watching a movie, and the attendant was going through with the food cart. I just sucked it up and waited for the rest of the five hour flight. Nothing to look at through the tiny window (it was at night), my neighbour's movie sucked, the games on my phones grew bland after about an hour and I didn't feel like sleeping. Then there's the crowd at the baggage claim at the other end of the trip, and our friend navigating the traffic in the airport loop and trying to find a spot to pick us up. Good thing it was a domestic flight and I didn't have to go through customs...

Not a single time did I feel like someone ever gave a shit about me as a customer, and I paid a couple of hundred to be subjected to that.

Quite the contrast from Amtrak and especially VIA Rail, if you ask me.

And all in all, it was a pretty average flight. No screaming babies, no major turbulence (by my standards, my friend would disagree), no annoying passengers, no baggage falling from the overhead, no one got sick.

The main problem is that pretty much everyone involved (the airports, the airlines, the TSA, etc.) knows that they can get away with offering the shittiest service and the least comfort they legally can (especially in Economy!) and people will still buy plane tickets, because it's such a time saver. Replacing free things by à la carte offerings while keeping the ticket price as is (or even raising it) will only aggravate their customers, not drive them away. JetBlue's "Cheapening" is just a very sad demonstration of how bad that whole thing has gotten.

[pctech]

Got to show the "share holders" their expected %1000/quarter gains at all cost.
This country really needs a decent a long distance passenger train system, not the shell that Amtrak is.

[vdeane]

When was the last time you've flown? For the vast majority of experiences, it's really not that bad. You hear about the sensational annoying passengers in the media but most of the time everyone is pretty compliant. Also, unless you really are of above average height and weight, the airline seats are not that bad for even a cross country flight.

About six months after I was born.  So yeah, I'm not used to all the BS from the airlines and the TSA at all.  Aside from picking up/dropping off a rental car, the last time I even set foot in an airport was when Mom and I dropped off or picked up Dad from one of his business trips in the mid 90s, back when security was just a metal detector at the terminal (rather than a checkpoint with naked body scanners and "enhanced" "patdowns" (read: sexual assault), etc. just to get past the lobby) and nobody needed the permission from anyone to get to the boarding area if they weren't getting on the plane.

I don't mind the idea of small seats (in fact, I like small, cramped spaces); it's being crammed in with complete strangers that gets me.  I find extended periods with people I don't know to be rather draining.

If you never fly, where are you getting this impression of air travel? It's nowhere near as bad as that. But it's incredibly easier for the frequent traveler. Even in a major airport on a busy day, I don't think I've ever been more than the 10th person in line for TSA Pre Check. You don't have to take anything out of your bag, take your shoes off, or even take off your jacket. You walk through a standard metal detector (not a body scanner), and that's it. It might as well be 1987 again. At my two most commonly-used airports (SFO and LAX...both very large and busy airports), my average time–from stepping onto the curb to arriving at my gate–is about 10 minutes.

The internet - where every complaint from the holiday/annual vacation-only travelers with no Pre Check, frequent flier bonuses, etc. gets aired out.  Obviously if I ever needed to fly I wouldn't have any of those things that would help make the experience more pleasant.  And as an introvert, the idea of any means of transit where I have to come into contact with other people will automatically be rated lower than driving as a given.  Plus reading about all the TSA stuff is enough to consider the whole process humiliating (FYI, my threshold for that is likely to be lower than for most people).