<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Reality Check: Three reasons why legacy airline brands are dead (and who to look out for)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/</link>
	<description>World's largest airline branding resource</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:37:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: vimalrai</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-3369</link>
		<dc:creator>vimalrai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:06:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-3369</guid>
		<description>I couldn&#039;t agree more with this assessmet of legac airlines in general. There are some exceptions however. Many of the airlines that are &quot;stuck&quot; because of large capex expenditure, expensive commitments and perhaps a unionised workforce. Then again, many are also stuck because of tunnel-vision backward thinking management that is secretly hoping for the glory days to return.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I couldn&#39;t agree more with this assessmet of legac airlines in general. There are some exceptions however. Many of the airlines that are &#8220;stuck&#8221; because of large capex expenditure, expensive commitments and perhaps a unionised workforce. Then again, many are also stuck because of tunnel-vision backward thinking management that is secretly hoping for the glory days to return.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vladimirc</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-3137</link>
		<dc:creator>vladimirc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 00:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-3137</guid>
		<description>While I agree with everything in this post, I believe that the biggest problem with legacy carrieres is their financing. After so many years of heavy capitalization for airplanes, routes, and infrastructure, legacy carriers do not have the nerve, nor the flexibility to develop new business models. Unfortunately, they fall into a cycle of &quot;re-trenching&quot; using past financial strategies, and just dig a deeper hole.&lt;br&gt;That mold needs to be broken. Some have gone the route of bankruptcy, with mixed results. The solution needs to be developed between the carriers and finacial institutions. Airlines need to develop a new business model, and as stated in the post, possibly more than one that can operate concurrently. Then the financiers need to give the carrier an opportunity to put the plan(s) into motion and (hopefully) generate the promised returns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I agree with everything in this post, I believe that the biggest problem with legacy carrieres is their financing. After so many years of heavy capitalization for airplanes, routes, and infrastructure, legacy carriers do not have the nerve, nor the flexibility to develop new business models. Unfortunately, they fall into a cycle of &#8220;re-trenching&#8221; using past financial strategies, and just dig a deeper hole.<br />That mold needs to be broken. Some have gone the route of bankruptcy, with mixed results. The solution needs to be developed between the carriers and finacial institutions. Airlines need to develop a new business model, and as stated in the post, possibly more than one that can operate concurrently. Then the financiers need to give the carrier an opportunity to put the plan(s) into motion and (hopefully) generate the promised returns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vladimirc</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-2709</link>
		<dc:creator>vladimirc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 17:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-2709</guid>
		<description>While I agree with everything in this post, I believe that the biggest problem with legacy carrieres is their financing. After so many years of heavy capitalization for airplanes, routes, and infrastructure, legacy carriers do not have the nerve, nor the flexibility to develop new business models. Unfortunately, they fall into a cycle of &quot;re-trenching&quot; using past financial strategies, and just dig a deeper hole.&lt;br&gt;That mold needs to be broken. Some have gone the route of bankruptcy, with mixed results. The solution needs to be developed between the carriers and finacial institutions. Airlines need to develop a new business model, and as stated in the post, possibly more than one that can operate concurrently. Then the financiers need to give the carrier an opportunity to put the plan(s) into motion and (hopefully) generate the promised returns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I agree with everything in this post, I believe that the biggest problem with legacy carrieres is their financing. After so many years of heavy capitalization for airplanes, routes, and infrastructure, legacy carriers do not have the nerve, nor the flexibility to develop new business models. Unfortunately, they fall into a cycle of &#8220;re-trenching&#8221; using past financial strategies, and just dig a deeper hole.<br />That mold needs to be broken. Some have gone the route of bankruptcy, with mixed results. The solution needs to be developed between the carriers and finacial institutions. Airlines need to develop a new business model, and as stated in the post, possibly more than one that can operate concurrently. Then the financiers need to give the carrier an opportunity to put the plan(s) into motion and (hopefully) generate the promised returns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pierreduval</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-2704</link>
		<dc:creator>pierreduval</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:46:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-2704</guid>
		<description>Well, when you use these &quot;new carriers&quot; a bit, you rapidly become a lot desillusioned about their customers oriented performances compared to &quot;elephants&quot;. I tried to use Ryanair &amp; EasyJet several times for business or family trip in 2007/2009 and I&#039;m back to Air France, Lufthansa, United and the like: not really more expansive on the long run, a lot friendlier and a lot more reliable as far as schedule goes...&lt;br&gt;The &quot;old&quot; model is not dead, it just impoves bit by bit...and new airlines become &quot;old&quot; quite rapidly when their personnel is fed up with short term business pressure (which does not go well with safety and service on the long run...)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, when you use these &#8220;new carriers&#8221; a bit, you rapidly become a lot desillusioned about their customers oriented performances compared to &#8220;elephants&#8221;. I tried to use Ryanair &#038; EasyJet several times for business or family trip in 2007/2009 and I&#39;m back to Air France, Lufthansa, United and the like: not really more expansive on the long run, a lot friendlier and a lot more reliable as far as schedule goes&#8230;<br />The &#8220;old&#8221; model is not dead, it just impoves bit by bit&#8230;and new airlines become &#8220;old&#8221; quite rapidly when their personnel is fed up with short term business pressure (which does not go well with safety and service on the long run&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Walter Adamson</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-2696</link>
		<dc:creator>Walter Adamson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 01:37:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-2696</guid>
		<description>Hey we&#039;re all experts on airlines, here&#039;s my bit. I think that the legacy airlines AND many of their start-ups are dinosaurs. I could use Qantas and Jetstar as examples, trouble is they are financially very profitable and &quot;well performing&quot; in any sense within the world of airlines. The issue that I see is exactly the &quot;stuck on stupid&quot; but within the whole airline industry. So if we measure QF and JS against the other &quot;stuck in stupids&quot; they come out quite well.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In the real world the &quot;success&quot; of JS is all about low price. The &quot;success&quot; of QF is all about still controlling is it 70 or 80% of the Australian market, and neverending protection on key other routes. It appears to my untrained eye that they have used that route protection to close down their full service flights, not face any competition because they had the slots locked up, and then introduce their low price carrier e.g. Japan.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But that&#039;s not my big issue, that&#039;s just taking commercial advantage of government stupidity, at both ends.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The big issue is that their brands stink and their brand promises are trash and the brand behaviour is so far from stupid it is idiotic. Anyone travelling QF on any day of the week will have the same stories, some parts good, some parts bad, some parts appalling, all completely unpredictable except that noone will be at the jetway to open the door when you land on the last flights into Melbourne or Sydney - you&#039;ll wait 10 minutes for that.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Both JS and QF are all about what&#039;s good for them, keep hammering the passengers, keep letting them know how lucky they are to be allowed to be a customer, keep telling them what you won&#039;t do for them, keep restricting and taking things away and cutting out everything and then putting it back with a fee.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;So in this &quot;competitive&quot; commercial world, why hasn&#039;t Virgin cleaned up, if QF and JS are such a mess? Actually it is the same reason - the brand promise is great and on the surface it&#039;s happy and bright. But the brand depth and brand behaviour is the same trash. Try with any of them to change or amend bookings, or to do something a little different, or to even ask questions about what options might be available, or to find out when and if your luggage might arrive. It&#039;s all the same for all of them - appalling. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Let&#039;s face it - air travel these days is mostly a pain in the butt.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Consumers are hostages to bad service whereever they turn. So price is the driver - but also apathy prevails and people stick with QF and its offspring as it has a kind of patriotic ring.  I&#039;d predict that QF has measured and reported on a high level of &quot;satisfaction&quot; among its travelers and FF members, and this is taken to mean loyalty which it absolutely is not.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Their TV ads, take the latest QF campaign, promises that travel on business with Qantas is &quot;a breeze&quot;. That is the whole message. I mean really, that&#039;s as bankrupt as advertising can get and I thought that the world had moved on. There is no hope of delivering on that promise, and the behaviours during any customer engagement cycle simply destroy the message completely. The others live in the same yesterworld of fake advertising that proves your point yet again - &quot;stuck on stupid&quot; legacy or not in Australia.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Walter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey we&#39;re all experts on airlines, here&#39;s my bit. I think that the legacy airlines AND many of their start-ups are dinosaurs. I could use Qantas and Jetstar as examples, trouble is they are financially very profitable and &#8220;well performing&#8221; in any sense within the world of airlines. The issue that I see is exactly the &#8220;stuck on stupid&#8221; but within the whole airline industry. So if we measure QF and JS against the other &#8220;stuck in stupids&#8221; they come out quite well.</p>
<p>In the real world the &#8220;success&#8221; of JS is all about low price. The &#8220;success&#8221; of QF is all about still controlling is it 70 or 80% of the Australian market, and neverending protection on key other routes. It appears to my untrained eye that they have used that route protection to close down their full service flights, not face any competition because they had the slots locked up, and then introduce their low price carrier e.g. Japan.</p>
<p>But that&#39;s not my big issue, that&#39;s just taking commercial advantage of government stupidity, at both ends.</p>
<p>The big issue is that their brands stink and their brand promises are trash and the brand behaviour is so far from stupid it is idiotic. Anyone travelling QF on any day of the week will have the same stories, some parts good, some parts bad, some parts appalling, all completely unpredictable except that noone will be at the jetway to open the door when you land on the last flights into Melbourne or Sydney &#8211; you&#39;ll wait 10 minutes for that.</p>
<p>Both JS and QF are all about what&#39;s good for them, keep hammering the passengers, keep letting them know how lucky they are to be allowed to be a customer, keep telling them what you won&#39;t do for them, keep restricting and taking things away and cutting out everything and then putting it back with a fee.</p>
<p>So in this &#8220;competitive&#8221; commercial world, why hasn&#39;t Virgin cleaned up, if QF and JS are such a mess? Actually it is the same reason &#8211; the brand promise is great and on the surface it&#39;s happy and bright. But the brand depth and brand behaviour is the same trash. Try with any of them to change or amend bookings, or to do something a little different, or to even ask questions about what options might be available, or to find out when and if your luggage might arrive. It&#39;s all the same for all of them &#8211; appalling. </p>
<p>Let&#39;s face it &#8211; air travel these days is mostly a pain in the butt.</p>
<p>Consumers are hostages to bad service whereever they turn. So price is the driver &#8211; but also apathy prevails and people stick with QF and its offspring as it has a kind of patriotic ring.  I&#39;d predict that QF has measured and reported on a high level of &#8220;satisfaction&#8221; among its travelers and FF members, and this is taken to mean loyalty which it absolutely is not.  </p>
<p>Their TV ads, take the latest QF campaign, promises that travel on business with Qantas is &#8220;a breeze&#8221;. That is the whole message. I mean really, that&#39;s as bankrupt as advertising can get and I thought that the world had moved on. There is no hope of delivering on that promise, and the behaviours during any customer engagement cycle simply destroy the message completely. The others live in the same yesterworld of fake advertising that proves your point yet again &#8211; &#8220;stuck on stupid&#8221; legacy or not in Australia.</p>
<p>Walter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: oussama</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-2686</link>
		<dc:creator>oussama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:00:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-2686</guid>
		<description>I can not agree more with your assessment, Legacy airlines on the whole have proven that they do not have a single ounce of innovation. They have handled every crisis since 9/11 until now in the same way, not that they did any better in the pre 9/11 era. They whine and then they cut staff, ground aircraft, close routes and blame all their problems on someone else. They have constantly raised charges and surcharges and then wonder why passengers go elsewhere. All is done to preserve share holder equity and top management jobs and to hell with the customer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can not agree more with your assessment, Legacy airlines on the whole have proven that they do not have a single ounce of innovation. They have handled every crisis since 9/11 until now in the same way, not that they did any better in the pre 9/11 era. They whine and then they cut staff, ground aircraft, close routes and blame all their problems on someone else. They have constantly raised charges and surcharges and then wonder why passengers go elsewhere. All is done to preserve share holder equity and top management jobs and to hell with the customer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chitlins &#124; Gadget Look</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-2684</link>
		<dc:creator>Chitlins &#124; Gadget Look</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 07:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-2684</guid>
		<description>[...] Unions, legacy systems, government bureaucracy, old planes, old workforce, high costs, bankruptcy&#8230; these are all words that can be easiRead more at http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-... [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Unions, legacy systems, government bureaucracy, old planes, old workforce, high costs, bankruptcy&#8230; these are all words that can be easiRead more at <a href="http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-.." rel="nofollow">http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-..</a>. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Twitted by zkiraly</title>
		<link>http://simpliflying.com/2009/reality-check-three-reasons-why-legacy-airline-brands-are-dead-and-who-to-look-out-for/comment-page-1/#comment-2683</link>
		<dc:creator>Twitted by zkiraly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 05:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simpliflying.com/?p=1542#comment-2683</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was Twitted by zkiraly [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was Twitted by zkiraly [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
