The Cranky Flier » Continental

This Week on BNET (July 28 - August 1)

CF — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 12:35:13 +0000

I have more from NBTA on BNET this week including discussions with both ANA and Lufthansa.

Frontier Receives DIP Financing from Perseus
I never thought we’d see it happen, but I’ve now been proven wrong. Frontier picked up $75 million to help them restructure and exit bankruptcy.

Continental’s Flat Seat Business Decision
It’s a large investment, so it has to be done right. Continental took a lot into account when deciding how to go flat in BusinessFirst.

Delta and Air Canada CEOs Talk to the Crowd at NBTA
NBTA had its big airline CEO roundtable yesterday, and Air Canada’s Montie Brewer combined with Delta’s Richard Anderson to talk shop and answer questions.

Emirates and the A380
Emirates picked up its first A380 this week, and with 57 more in the pipeline, the airline has big plans for the future.

Chatting with Star Alliance Members ANA and Lufthansa
I had the chance to sit with both ANA and Lufthansa at NBTA this week. What do they have in store for the US market?

NBTA: Continental Goes Flat in BusinessFirst

CF — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:17:41 +0000

It was an action-packed day at NBTA today. I think I talked to enough people and sat in enough seats to really have a couple weeks of posts here. Unfortunately, as you might expect, the focus is almost entirely on the premium cabin experience. So, much of this won’t be useful for many of you (including me), but it’s still fun to see what’s going on. Let’s just forget about how crazy it seems that airlines spend a ton of money on their NBTA booths while they bleed and instead just talk about the news.

The big news from yesterday was Continental’s announcement that it was installing a lie-flat seat in BusinessFirst . . . unless you’re flying on a 767. The 777s will get the new seats first starting in fall of next year. Then they’ll move on to the 757s. And of course, when the 787s show up, they’ll get the new seats as well.

So why not the 767s? It’s a matter of space. On the 777s, they’ll keep 50 seats up front and lose only one row of coach. The 757s won’t lose any seats at all, but the 767s are a different story. CEO Larry Kellner was clearly very proud of the fact that their seats are wide. (This seat is 25″ wide with the armrests down in the fully flat position.) They are currently set up with 2-1-2 abreast on the 767s and they don’t want to go 2-2-2 and reduce space. So, these seats don’t work for them in that configuration. When I asked Larry about it, he said they plan to keep looking, and they expect they’ll find a lie-flat solution soon.

Let’s forget about all the boring stuff and let’s talk about the seat itself. It’s nice. After sitting in United’s seat yesterday as well, I realize that the seats seem similar with a couple differences. First, Continental gives you a little less privacy, but you have a LOT more storage. You can see the Continental seat above left and the United seat at right. Continental also seems to have a bigger screen in the seatback. Oh yes, and half United’s seats face backwards while Continental’s all go the same way.

But back to that storage thing. Behind the headrest, Continental has put a ton of stuff. Besides being a storage area, there is a universal power outlet, a USB port, and the headphone jack. They’re calling it the Tower of Power (at left), and I think it’s a smart place to put everything, because it’s not in your way. Unfortunately, they’re not sure if the storage area will be usable during takeoff and landing yet, but they’re trying to make that happen. I’d say it needs to happen for it to really be useful. At the very least, there is storage underneath the seat in front of you that can be used at all times.

Oh, and about that area in front of you . . . there isn’t much room for your legs (at right). With shoes on, my feet barely fit and I have small size 9 feet, but without them, it should be ok if not a bit cramped. They say that it will accommodate a 6′ 6″ tall person, and apparently CEO Larry Kellner was the model used to make sure it worked.

Larry is not a small man.

They also ran this by a bunch of frequent fliers in Houston and Newark to make sure they liked it. Apparently they did, but I still have one concern. If you see the picture at left, you can see that getting out from the window to the aisle is not easy. You’re going to have to climb over someone, and you better be limber.

The response to that? Mark Bergsrud, SVP of Marketing Programs and Distribution for the airline, said that they weren’t willing to reduce the number of seats, and this was the best solution available considering the constraints. Their customers wanted a lie-flat seat and while it isn’t the easiest thing to climb over, it’s actually easier to get out of than it is to get out of their current BusinessFirst seat. So they’re pretty happy with it despite its drawbacks. It will be interesting to see if that causes a lot of problems in production.

Other than that, the seat was impressive, comfortable, and quite wide. They’ve done a very good job here, considering the constraints.

Boarding Pass Ads and Privacy Worries

CF — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:35:07 +0000

Am I the only one who thinks this whole boarding pass advertising thing is a little creepy? It’s not the concept that bothers me. You want to throw some ads on my boarding pass? Go ahead. It’s the fact that they’re using my demographics to target ads that makes me nervous.

The basic idea is that right now, when you print your boarding pass at home, it’s just a boarding pass. So, American, Continental, Delta, Northwest, United, and US Airways have now all partnered with a new company called Sojern that will sell ad spots on your boarding pass and mask it by offering weather information. Of course, the spin is that this makes life easier for the traveler. Whatever. I’ve never had trouble clicking on Weather Underground to get my own weather, but if you want to put it on there . . . fine.

None of that bothers me. What bothers me is something that I haven’t really seen talked about. Yes, the company admits that it’s targeting based upon where you’re going, and others have mentioned that. Well duh, that makes sense, and I don’t mind them sharing that information. But, if you click on the sample boarding pass (PDF), it states “Sojern’s new media delivers tailored advertising messages based on travelers’ unique itineraries and demographics.”

Hold on here. How are you getting my demographic information? Is the airline sharing it with you if I’m logged in to an account when I check in? I don’t like that at all.

A Warning About Mobile Phone Check-In

CF — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:56:16 +0000

It seems like airlines all around the world are racing to allow passengers to check in for flights using only a mobile phone. I wrote about Air Canada rolling it out last year, and lately both Continental and Delta have put out tests of their own. Delta just put out a blog post on their test as well. It sounds great in theory, but you might want to think twice about it if earning miles is really important to you.

Fellow airline geek and aviation consultant Roy Rosales brought up a good point in an email yesterday. If for some reason miles don’t get credited to your account, you usually have to send in your boarding pass for credit. If you use your cell phone . . . there is no paper boarding pass to send.

In Roy’s case, he flew on a Hawaiian Airlines flight and expected to get Continental miles. They never showed up, and he called Continental to see what happened. Roy was told that an original boarding pass was required in order to get credit. He was curious so he asked what would happen if he had checked-in online and the airline kept the boarding pass, as some do. The agent said it didn’t matter - no pass, no credit.

So, until the airlines decide to somehow alter those policies and email you a PDF that can be used for redemption, you might want to consider keeping a paper record, especially if you’re flying on one airline and trying to earn miles on another.

Continental’s Star Alliance Move

CF — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 14:39:39 +0000

You likely won’t be surprised to hear that I had a great time at the bachelor party this weekend, but that means I had very little time to write. So, since every travel blogger on earth has written about the announcement that Continental will be leaving SkyTeam, joining Star Alliance, and instituting a very tight partnership with United, I thought I’d just point to a couple of the more interesting posts I’ve seen.

Make no mistake, this is more than just a codeshare and frequent flier mile deal. Continental will join United, Lufthansa, and Air Canada in a joint venture for all transatlantic flying. Latin and Asia joint ventures will be developed as well. There will be broad systems integration as well.

In terms of routes, the rest of the Star Alliance will be happy to finally have a big international presence in New York. Dan Webb takes a look at route compatibility here.

If you’re a member of United’s Mileage Plus or Continental’s OnePass programs, this will certainly mean changes. Take a look at View From the Wing’s effort to breakdown what this may mean, despite the fact that we have very few details so far. His take? Well, it’ll be a good thing for Continental fliers, but it’s a little less clear for United loyalists.

We don’t know what this will mean for US Airways right now. Is three a crowd when it comes to the Star Alliance in the US? They say they aren’t going anywhere, but they also haven’t had talks with Continental about cooperation either. Could they partner with American now that CO/UA and DL/NW are getting together? Maybe. Or maybe they’ll try a different tactic, as Holly suggests here in PlaneBuzz.

For American fliers, this could be decent news as well. Strange, I know, but it could theoretically mean that getting antitrust immunity with British Airways would become easier, as Terri Maxon discusses on the Airline Biz blog.

There are a lot of different angles to this partnership with a ton of potential ramifications throughout the industry when it develops. I’ll keep you posted as I learn more.

Is This the End of the ExpressJet Brand?

CF — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 13:35:57 +0000

I would be remiss to not mention the major cuts Continental announced yesterday. The airline will retire 67 aircraft by the end of 2009 that were not previous planned to go. I decided not to write much about that here, because the customer impact is simply fewer flights and I don’t have much other insight. If you’d like to read more, you can see what I wrote over at BNET about the impressive way they’ve gone about dealing with their employees. Over here, however, I’m writing about a situation that’s near and dear to many of my readers’ hearts . . . ExpressJet.

Just a couple days after ExpressJet said it would renegotiate its contract with Continental, the two airlines came to a wide-ranging agreement that has a lot of good news for both sides. Who are the losers here? SkyWest may be since they don’t get to buy the airline, but that may also have been fortuitous. Also, it won’t surprise me at all if the ExpressJet brand loses out completely, but nothing has been announced. Oh, and the shareholders may end up losing since the stock is still well below the $3.50 per share offer.

Still, I must admit, I’m surprised to see that ExpressJet has found its way out from between a rock and a hard place. How did they do it? Well, here’s what happens now:

Continental guarantees to keep the same amount of planes (205) that ExpressJet currently flies for the airline for one year, and they get it for a lot cheaper (after one year, they can ditch 15 planes)

Continental will take back 39 of ExpressJet’s 50-seaters that currently don’t fly for Continental and replace the more costly (on a per seat basis) 37-seaters, which will be grounded

ExpressJet gets more flexibility in being purchased and in flying for other carriers

Continental loses the right to terminate the agreement without cause

All outstanding disputes between the two are settled

So, where does this leave us? Well, for Continental customers, nothing changes. You won’t have any more of those 37 seaters to fly around, but you’ll still be on ExpressJet for most of the Continental Express flights you take. For the customers that fly on the ExpressJet brand, however, it’s much less clear.

Currently, the airline flies 205 aircraft for Continental, 23 for Delta, 23 in Corporate Aviation, and 23 for the ExpressJet brand, according to an employee communication reposted here. ExpressJet will now return 39 of those non-Continental aircraft to Continental. So where will they cut? Where things aren’t performing well, of course. ExpressJet assumes all the risk of flying those 23 ExpressJet aircraft as well as 13 of the Delta planes. I have to think those will go away while the remainder will come from the Corporate Aviation group. In case you were wondering, at the end of 2007, there were . . . 39 planes flying under the ExpressJet brand.

From the airline perspective, Continental will save a bunch of money and be able to eliminate flying on jets with less than 50 seats, but they haven’t quite eliminated as many 50 seaters as they might like here. ExpressJet lives to see another day as an independent company and gets some security, but with the share price closing yesterday at only $1.95 (well below SkyWest’s $3.50 offer), shareholders may not be so thrilled. The airline is free to pursue deals with other airlines now, but unless someone else shuts down, I’m not sure who would really be looking for more 50 seaters right now.

My guess is that we won’t see any big changes until the Fall, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear an announcement about their plans in the very near future. Expressjet is going to have to prove that this was, in fact, the right decision for everyone involved.

SkyWest and Continental Put the Screws to ExpressJet

CF — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:34:46 +0000

An interesting little merger attempt popped up on Friday that, as Holly Hegeman says, looks like a squeeze play. SkyWest has announced that it wants to buy ExpressJet for $3.50 a share.

The airline was hovering just over the $2 a share mark before the announcement, so this is a nice little premium. ExpressJet, however, thinks it’s worth more than that and has turned the offer down. It got more interesting on Friday afternoon when it came out that Continental is also behind this thing.

Continental hasn’t been happy with the relatively hight costs of the ExpressJet contract, and it has apparently told ExpressJet that it will remove 51 of the aircraft under contract beginning in December 2009. At the same time, it went and cut a deal with SkyWest on a broad new deal that will only go into effect if the takeover occurs. So, SkyWest buys ExpressJet and offers to fly for Continental for less. Continental tells ExpressJet that they either do it or they’re going to start walking. Wow, it sucks to be ExpressJet.

I have to think that if SkyWest wins, the ExpressJet standalone operation will probably be toast. That’s really too bad, since I’ve always thought it was a good idea. But with oil where it is right now, those 50 seat jets (and really, any plane in general) don’t look very good anywhere. And SkyWest probably will want to remain focused on the feeder operation, I’d think.

But why does SkyWest want a bunch more 50 seaters? No matter what the reason, I’m sure the ExpressJet guys are feeling very, very somber right now.

Continental’s Not Here to Start No Trouble . . .

CF — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:43:50 +0000

. . . they’re just here to do the terminal shuffle.

Ok, maybe that joke is about 20 years too late, but someone out there will get it.

Anyway, thanks to Today in the Sky for pointing out that Continental has announced that they’ll be doing a little terminal shifting over at their Newark hub. Here you can see the current layout.

Between now and June, all those Continental flights in Terminal A going to Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas/Ft Worth, and DC will come back into Terminal C. Meanwhile, all the Continental Express flying in Terminal C will come over to Terminal A.

Wait, that doesn’t seem balanced does it? How can all those little CoEx flights move into a spot that seems like it would be much smaller. Did they get a bigger chunk of Terminal A? Anyone have a clue?

No matter what, it should open up some more gates for Continental in C, assuming they hold on to all those C gates for themselves. Between now and June, it’s anybody’s guess where your flight may actually be. Just remember two things. If you’re outside security and need to switch terminals, head to the AirTrain. If you’re beyond security, definitely take the bus between gates C71 and A28.

Continental Channels JetBlue with TV, Email

CF — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:55:51 +0000

JetBlue lovers rejoice! In addition to their existing service, you can now fly JetBlue to hundreds of new destinations all across the US. When you get to the airport, it may look like you’re flying Continental on the outside, but it’ll be all JetBlue on the inside. Um, ok not really. What the heck am I talking about?

Continental announced yesterday that they’d begin equipping their domestic fleet with the same live television that JetBlue has. In addition, they’re going to roll out the somewhat-lame-but-still-useful-for-somebody Yahoo/Blackberry Email/IM service that JetBlue is testing on one aircraft right now. Ok, maybe this isn’t JetBlue, but it’s pretty close, and in some ways even better, as you can see below.

You won’t have JetBlue legroom, and you will have to pay $6 to watch TV (free in First Class), but you will get the best onboard product of any network carrier in the US. And yes, Continental will still serve you a meal on the long hauls. Take that, JetBlue.

Of course, this move isn’t squarely aimed at JetBlue, even though they do have a great deal of overlap in the New York area. At least, JetBlue must not think this is a direct shot at them, because they own the company that’s selling the technology to Continental. They must think that Continental is more focused on continuing in their role as the undisputed leader among network carriers in terms of overall experience. Continental usually wins awards for being the best (though we know how much I hate vague awards like that), and this should only help cement their standing.

The details of this are pretty simple. Unlike Delta, which is only outfitting some of each aircraft type with their live television system, Continental will put it on all next generation 737s (-700, -800, -900) and on the 757-300s. Since the 757-200s are now part of the international fleet, they will not have this product and neither will the 777 and 767 aircraft. That’s good, because this only works over land, so it would be a useless box over water. I believe the overwater fleet is getting audio/video on demand at some point.

Besides the Express fleet, the only ones left out are the 737-300s and -500s. To be fair, that’s a pretty big chunk of the fleet. Airfleets.net says that they have 108 that won’t be outfitted with the new system and 170 that will. Of course, the old generation 737s are used primarily on shorter routes while the next generation ones go on the longer runs, so that makes sense. The good news is that you will be able to look at your aircraft type when you book, and barring a substitution, you’ll know if you get it or not. ~~At least, that’ll be the case by next January. Until then, it’ll be luck of the draw as they work to outfit the entire fleet.~~Actually, you won’t have to worry about it until a year from now when they start installation.

I assume that the email/IM capabilities will be installed at the same time. It’s unfortunate that they haven’t decided to go with a full internet solution, but that’s what happens when you go with LiveTV. At least it’ll be free.

Really, the worst part of this whole announcement is that Continental doesn’t fly to very many places from LA, so we don’t get much of a chance to try them often. This definitely widens Continental’s lead at the top of the standings from a customer point of view. Nice work.

Baggage Check-In Times Part Deux

CF — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:41:50 +0000

As promised, here’s how those same airlines from yesterday fare when it comes to international baggage check-in times (except Southwest, which doesn’t fly internationally). The situation here is much cleaner than domestic.

As you can see, most airlines say you must check bags 60 minutes prior to departure regardless of airport. United gets the gold star for actually have a flat 45 minute rule instead. And then there’s Delta.

Delta easily gets the award for most painful rules here. They actually have five different times here, and two of the airports (Bogotá and Nassau) have different rules depending upon whether you use the contract of carriage or the website. Ugh. Why does Delta require two (or three) hours in Bogotá when American only requires 1 hour? No idea. This should really be cleaned up.

	Minutes
Airline	45	60	90	120	180	195
American (Conditions of Carriage)		Default
Continental (Contract of Carriage/Website)		Default
Delta (Contract of Carriage)		Default	OTP	ACC, BOG, NAS, PLS, UVF	SVO	IST
Delta (Website)		Default	OTP	ACC, PLS, UVF	BOG, NAS, SVO	IST
JetBlue (Contract of Carriage/Website)		Default
Northwest (Website)		Default
United (Website)	Default
US Airways (Website)		Default

If you don’t know these airport codes, you can look them up here.

Anything that is bold in the table means that the airline has differing rules for that airport on its website when compared to its contract of carriage. I would recommend obeying the more strict of the two, but if you find yourself stuck, you can try to fight for compensation from customer relations after the fact. (You’ll never get anything resolved at the airport.)

International travel includes all flights going from the US to another country or vice versa. Flights between the US and Canada do not count as international.

American and Northwest are the two airlines for which I could not find the contract of carriage. American has their conditions of carriage, but Northwest has nothing for international other than guidelines on the website.

Neither United nor US Airways actually specify this information in their contract of carriage. It looks like United just forgot to include international information in their combined Domestic/International tariff.

Whew. I’m glad I’m done with this exercise.