Note: This is a cross-post from Steven Frischling’s Flying with Fish blog. Steven Frischling, aka: Fish, is a self employed photographer, and founder of The Travel Strategist, who has flown approximately 1,000,000 miles since he began to track his mileage 2005.
————————————-

Throughout the past year airlines have suffered massive financial losses due to record high fuel prices, a weakening global economy and declining demand for airline seats.

In an attempt to increase their financial stability many airlines in the United States, and around the world, turned to the ancillary revenue generated by charging passengers for their baggage.   As angered as passenger have been regarding the checked baggage fees they have helped major airlines in the United States collect more than US$1,145,385,850 in revenue during 2008…and baggage fees weren’t even initiated by most airlines in the United States until the middle of the second fiscal quarter of 2008.

The fourth fiscal quarter of 2008 saw airlines pull in US$498,600,000 alone!

Checked baggage fees have always provided a significant revenue source for airlines, however prior to the past year this revenue was for excess baggage and overweight baggage. Airlines that do not allow any free-checked baggage, such as American Airlines, now consider all …

Continuing with the ancillary revenues special this March, I’d like to explore the issue whether ancillary revenues are good for the airline brand, or detrimental. We all know they’re good for the balance sheet, but what about the brand? To answer this question, let me segment ancillary revenues in two bands – charging for value addition, and un-bundling current product and services.
Charging the passenger for value-addition
A comment on the hotly debated article I wrote on RyanAir’s competition for charging passengers got me thinking. Here’s what Shyrose had to say:
“RyanAir should link up with the local taxi companies of the detination airports and agree a deal with them, whereby flyers can book their taxi on the plane so it’s ready and waiting for them the other side. Taxi companies give Ryannair a referral fee, and Ryanair will be positioned as offering greater value service for customers.”
And I think Shyrose is bang-on-target. Customers don’t mind paying for additional services they value. And this is especially true when the offer is in-sync with the brand expectation. There are ample examples of such value addition. Travel insurance and car rental are popular ones. The intelligent …

The recent spate of airline mergers – or merger talks – begs the question: Is it better for the industry if two airlines merge or one of them goes bankrupt. Verdict: It’s better if an airline goes bankrupt.

Here’re three reasons why bankruptcies are good for the industry overall.

Increases industry revenues. Many airlines are not making money because fares are too low, compared to costs. More bankruptcies mean less price competition for the remaining airlines. They can then raise fares with less fear of undercutting. This would help them cover costs, and increase profits for the industry overall. Cathay Pacific was able to optimize flight times between Hong Kong and Vancouver after Oasis HongKong went bust.By contrast, in mergers, the new combination of airlines takes long to rationalize routes, and when they do, they still charge low rates since fares never really increased the way they could have, due to sudden disappearance of competition from a route.
Dramatically lower costs. When airlines close for business, they lay off a large number of people. These people increase the labor supply in the market, and are hired by other airlines at lower wages. This reduces the overall wage component of the costs. When airlines go bust, they also get rid of their planes at very low prices. They are sold to other airlines, which can then put them on their under-serviced routes. Again, reducing the cost of the equipment. AirAsia is a great example of an airline, which inherited two planes with just a $0.50 down payment, and  was able to tap on the abundance of cheap labor, right after 9/11.