January 2009 Archives

It is somewhat unfortunate that interesting web innovations seem to have stupid or nerdy names. One that is mounting a rousing chorus is Twitter.

I've got to confess I'm new to this game, but I'm told by the web savvy types in our team at Flightglobal.com (largest aviation portal in the world OK) that Twitter is an up and coming thing. Airline Business will be Tweeting soon (I kid you not).

What is Twitter? Who does it? Why do they do it? Does anyone care?

We'll explore these questions ourselves in the coming weeks.

For now, I will share with you the airlines that are busy Tweeting today:

The bird boys at British Airways;

The Texan hens of Southwest;

The JetBlue eagles;

The doves of Delta;

and the chirpy chaps at Virgin America.

Do you know of any others? Is your airline planning the join the club?

Of the above, JetBlue is sqwarking the loudest it seems. It has over 17,000 "followers". Now that's rather a large number of individuals interacting with this brand.

So, is this a powerful web medium that allows brands to connect to their customers? Or a gimmick?

 

"I know it looks like a baaji but it's in custard Richard, custard."

This is just one of the priceless lines in a complaint letter sent to Virgin Atlantic chairman Sir Richard Branson from a disgruntled passenger who was far from impressed with the culinary fare that was put in front of him on a Virgin flight from Mumbai to London.

The letter makes for hilarious reading, and is accompanied by photographic evidence to show the bearded one exactly what the dishes referred to in the letter actually looked like.

Along with the custard, which actually turned out to be "a sour gel with a clear oil on top", the passenger was served mashed potato, which he/she describes in the following way: "The potato masher had obviously broken and so it was decided the next best thing would be to pass the potatoes through the digestive tract of a bird."

UK newspaper The Daily Telegraph, which published the letter, took the trouble of calling Virgin's director of corporate communications, Paul Charles, who confirmed that Branson had read the letter.

He then went on to say that while he was sorry the passenger had not enjoyed the food, it was "award-winning food, which is very popular on our Indian routes".

And this is why I don't work in PR - can you imagine saying that with a straight face after reading that letter?

I've had some pretty abysmal airline food in my time, but nothing that's prompted me to write a letter of complaint, let alone one as good as the one from the Virgin passenger.

Has anyone else had airline food that was as bad as the food described in the letter sounds?  

If you want to have a giggle and reminisce about what it was like to take a flight 75 years ago, check out this article from a 1934 issue of Airline Business sister publication, Flight International.

Pointing to a United Airlines flight he took between New York and Chicago, a Mr Gordon England makes the point that "we in Great Britain have something to learn from the other side of the Atlantic concerning the running of air lines".

Mr England was particularly impressed by the "hostesses, their very attractive green uniform, and the fact that they were always ready to do everything for the convenience and comfort of passengers". Read into that what you will.

Cigarettes were also handed out to passengers "free of charge" to smoke during the flight.

Fast forward 75 years and you can read a very different review of the differences between US carriers and their counterparts on the other side of the Atlantic.

In this blog, Brendan Sobie describes United Airlines' new business class as "still one step behind" its rivals in Europe, the Middle East and England. How times have changed!    

So embarrassed was Aeromexico about a string of circumstances "beyond the airline's control" that occurred during one of its flights from Mexico City to Seattle last week that it felt compelled to put out an apologetic media statement.

And it does sound like it was a nightmare flight. To cut a long story short, Flight 670 on 20 January left the Mexican capital for Seattle but had to divert to Portland due to heavy fog. Once on the ground at Portland, it was discovered that there were no customs officials present to process the passengers.

After a four hour wait on the aircraft, the decision was taken to fly the passengers all the way back to Mexico City. I'm so glad I wasn't on that flight.

Needless to say, Aeromexico, which "prides itself on service to its passengers", is carrying out a review to "determine if the circumstances could have been handled in a more effective way".

I've an idea - how about contacting Portland before landing there to make sure there'd be some customs officials available to stamp people's passports? Just a simple thought.

Here's Aeromexico's statement in full:

AeroMexico statement about Flight # 670,

08:45 AM PST on Thursday, January 22, 2009

Media Statement About Flight # 670, 1-20-09

AeroMexico deeply regrets that our passengers on flight #670, bound from Mexico City to Seattle-Tacoma, were inconvenienced by an unfortunate set of circumstances on Tuesday, January 20, that were beyond the airline's control.

Before the flight departed from Mexico City, the pilots had received authorization from Seattle to proceed. Heavy fog conditions developed later in the Seattle-Tacoma area, which forced Seattle-Tacoma International Airport to close its operations for all arrivals and departures. Due to these circumstances which were outside the airline's control, the plane had to divert and went to Portland, which was the closest international airport. Passenger safety is AeroMexico's number one priority and diverting the flight was both the required and prudent action to take in this situation.

When the plane landed in Portland, there were no U.S. Customs and Immigration agents available to handle the passengers so they were required to remain on the plane, which was also outside the airline's control. Federal regulations do not allow international flights to be completed unless all passengers go through U.S. customs.

The plane was parked at the airport for approximately four hours. When it became apparent there would be no customs agents available in Portland to process the passengers and the weather in Seattle-Tacoma was not improving, it was decided that the best alternative that would minimize additional time for passengers was to return to Mexico City.

On the flight back to Mexico City, the pilots and crew members were operating within the legal limits for hours on duty at all times. Food was brought on board in Portland for this return flight.

In Mexico City, new crew members boarded the plane for its flight back to Seattle-Tacoma on Wednesday, January 21. The flight reached its final destination without further incident.

AeroMexico is reviewing the incident on January 20 to determine if the circumstances could have been handled in a more effective way. We will seek an explanation about why the customs agents were not available to assist the plane and its passengers in Portland.

Our airline prides itself on service to its passengers. While the airline was dealing with several circumstances beyond its control, we intend to take all steps necessary to help avoid an incident of this nature in the future. We will also take appropriate steps to thank the passengers who were inconvenienced by this situation for their patience and understanding.

To read our earlier cover interview with Aeromexico chief executive Andres Conesa, click here.

Some satisfaction being felt in Scotland this morning no doubt, after Flyglobespan announced a small group profit for the year ending October 2008. Preliminary figures show the carrier turned round a loss in 2007 to post a £1.2 million profit for the last 12 months during what by anyone's standards has been a tough year.

Flyglobespan was spitting feathers last autumn when amid a the frenzy of airline collapses it was included in bookmaker PaddyPower's controversial - and ultimately outlawed - list of odds on the next airline to collapse. It throughout maintained it would be profitable in 2008 and so it is difficult to begrudge Flyglobespan boss Tom Dalrymple some satisfaction in announcing the provisional profit today. Here's a quick taste of what he's had to say..

 

"Despite difficulties caused by the unprecendeted increase in the cost of aviation fuel, we have turned round the problems of the previous year and are back into profit. I said that 2007 was a blip - a one-off year in what had been over 30 years of successful trading, and one that wouldn't happen again. And I was right.

"Our outlook for the future is positive. Globespan has no debt, we have cash reserves built up from nearly 35 years of trading and we also have significant property assets."

Ooh bitchy - Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary has once again sharpened his talons to have another stab at Aer Lingus (which he was yesterday prevented from acquiring by the Irish government).

O'Leary's comments about Aer Lingus have been getting more and more scathing, and this press release put out by Ryanair yesterday is definitely worth a read for a bit of Friday entertainment.

Referring to yesterday's announcement that Aer Lingus has extended its transatlantic partnership with United Airlines, in a press release entitled "Ryanair congratulates Aer Lingus on finding a partner which is even weaker and in worse shape than Aer Lingus" O'Leary spits out: "After months of trawling around looking for partners, it is a sad reflection on Aer Lingus that the best they could come up with is one of the weakest and biggest loss makers in the US airline industry."

He goes on: "This so-called 'partnership' with another 'loser' like United shows that Aer Lingus has no independent strategy, and no prospect of remaining independent."

That's fightin' talk where I come from. I'm planning to speak to Aer Lingus later today, so I'll see if they've got any equally scathing rebuttals.

Now that Ryanair has been prevented from acquiring Aer Lingus, surely it would make more sense to stop telling the world how rubbish they think the Irish carrier is. If I had shares in a company, I probably wouldn't go round telling the whole world that the company I had invested in was hopeless and dreadful in case I some day wanted to sell my shares.

Isn't it kind of like trying to sell your house and saying things to interested buyers like "it's got a terrible damp problem", and "the neighbours are really noisy and unpleasant"...? 

"Cost control is like brushing your teeth every day," Swiss chief executive Christoph Franz says a colleague at partner Lufthansa once told him. "You have to do it every day even if you don't like doing it."

Franz says cost control is one of the keys for tackling the current challenging environment. But he also stresses aviation is a long-term growth sector and that the carrier must continue to invest in the future and stick to its budgets. This perhaps is not surprising from the chief executive of an airline which has just unveiled its new first class product and which to have first class across all its long-haul flights. 

So how does Franz and marketing chief Christoph Beckmann feel about rolling out a new first class product at a time of slumping global premium demand? Here is the piece I wrote for our sister online news service Air Transport Intelligence on it, after unveiling its new product to the media in Zurich:

 

Swiss upbeat on new first-class cabin despite premium slump

As for the product itself, you can read more detail here about the "contemporary yet warm" Swiss design approach, but one of the most trumpeted features is an impressive guest seat featuring back and arm rests enabling passengers to dine or work with fellow travellers.

New airline premium products seem to be all the rage in the FlightGlobal blogosphere right now. Click here for Brendan Sobie's blog about United Airlines new business class and click here for the low-down from Runway Girl on Singapore Airlines's new business class.

Mexicana has flown its first service to London, marking the carrier's first foray into transatlantic operations (see picture).

The carrier now operates two flights a week between Mexico City and London Gatwick, but this will increase to four flights a week on 17 February.

Here's what Mexicana chief executive Manuel Borja had to say about the new service in a press release:

"The decision to fly to London reaffirms our commitment to our passengers and illustrates how Mexicana is taking steps to address the challenges posed by the airline industry. It also positions us as an innovative international airline, concerned about the development and consolidation of the commercial aviation industry."

As I wrote here, Mexicana also plans to launch flights to Madrid in February, taking on rival Aeromexico head-to-head. As Mexicana announces additional flights to Europe - and I'm told by the carrier's senior vice-president customer service and communications, Adolfo Crespo, that this is the plan - it will be interesting to see how Aeromexico responds.

Airline Business has been following the Latin American market closely - if you haven't already seen the daily newspapers we published at the Latin American Airline Leaders' Forum in November, check them out here. 

Here's something you don't see very often - an airline chief executive speaking out against plans to build a third runway at London Heathrow.

In an interview with UK newspaper The Daily Telegraph, Monarch Airlines managing director Tim Jeans says the decision to expand Heathrow "will affect countless people living under the flight path".

He adds that "environmental concerns must be taken seriously and decisions that may seem unpalatable for business need to be taken".

But before you start to see Jeans as some kind of environmentalist who happens to work in the aviation industry, I should point out that later in the interview he says expansion at London Gatwick (one of Monarch's bases) would be preferable.

This sounds like the opposite of nimbyism - while many anti-Heathrow expansion lobbyists are against the third runway because it will quite literally be in their backyards, Jeans seems to be saying airport expansion is OK as long as it is in Monarch's backyard. (Lets out exasperated sigh.)

Well easyJet has certainly cashed in big style on the move to travellers paying for checked bags in the past year. In its last quarter, the UK-based low-cost player made a huge £105 million out of ancillary fees (quarter to 31 Dec 2008). That is up from £57 million in the same quarter in 2007 and driven, says easyJet, by the increase in its checked bag charge.

It just goes to show how fantastic the whole shift to paying for checked bags has been for so many carriers.

Ancillaries, such big news everywhere, represented 23.5% of easyJet's revenues in that quarter. In the 2007 quarter the percentage was just 15.7%.

Ancillary revenue per seat is now £8.68 compared to £5.06 in the 2007 quarter.

Low-cost carriers have generally been the best at tapping the ancillary revenue stream. As we reported recently network carriers find it a little harder to move.

And in the US too, carriers are seeking to cash in on the trend.

Here is easyJet's Q1 management statement issued today.

 

This past weekend I flew through Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport twice and I struggled to find any signs of DFW's recent double-digit drop in traffic. In fact, two things occurred which would normally point to growth rather than contraction.

Yesterday we had to wait 15 minutes for a gate to open up after my American Airlines flight landed from Austin. And we were not alone - a couple of Boeing MD-80s were directed to taxi to some out of the way holding point until a gate opened up at one of American's concourses.

Given all the capacity cuts implemented at American last year, how is it possible that there aren't enough gates available? In November, the most recent month in which statistics are available, American's traffic at DFW was down 12%. As American has a whopping 86% share of the DFW market (pictured below is an American aircraft near one of DFW's three control towers), total traffic has been down a similar amount in recent months.

 

You would think one silver lining of the downturn is airlines don't have to worry anymore about gate crunches at their hubs. Having more flights than available gates is costly as more fuel is burned and crews have to be paid while an aircraft waits for a gate to open up. It also has a ripple effect on an entire operation, causing delays to escalate.

Another silver lining of the downturn you would think would be an increased availability of spare aircraft. US majors last year removed hundreds of narrowbodies from their active fleets as they cut capacity by about 10% in response to rising fuel prices and a slowing economy.

This should have given airlines an opportunity to improve their reliability by utilising aircraft less and having more spares on hand. But on Friday my flight from DFW to Austin was cancelled after one of the engines wouldn't start and a spare aircraft could not be found.

The flight was being operated by an MD-80, the most common aircraft at American and at DFW. In fact DFW, which is one of the world's 10 busiest airports, is by far the largest MD-80 base in the world. It is also the largest hub for American (which until the Delta-Northwest merger was the largest airline in the world). So how come American couldn't find a single spare MD-80?

I asked the pilots and they said while American removed about 30 MD-80s from the schedule last year (about 12% of the total MD-80 fleet) all the extra aircraft have been moved to the desert. So it seems American didn't take the opportunity to increase the pool of spare aircraft and therefore improve their reliability.

In fact, according to the US DOT's Bureau of Transportation Statistics, American cancelled 1.08% of their flights at DFW in November 2008. In November 2007 the cancellation rate was 0.98%, which indicates the roughly 12% fleet and capacity cut implemented over the last year has had no positive effect on American's reliability at its main hub.

On Friday a spare aircraft would have really come in handy as the flight was full and most of the roughly 150 passengers ended up in DFW for six hours waiting for the next available flight to Austin. DFW, which is the host for our annual Network conference in six weeks time, is a relatively pleasant airport. But no one wants to spend six hours in any airport waiting for a 30-minute flight covering a distance which could easily be driven in less time.

I'm sorry for those workers at Alitalia who just want to get on with their jobs as we watch the latest antics of those who feel strike action is the way forward.

As we comment in the latest print edition of Airline Business, this hardy carrier has finally found a strategic investor willing to take a big gamble on its future. It's a precarious future too, what with the industry recession and competitors from all sides biting chunks out of the Italian market every day.

So, to those taking strike action, the message has got to be give it a chance and give your fellow workers a chance. Your current action is selfish and I believe totally futile.

 

Ryanair has shown its power to stimulate the market by revealing that it has just has sold more tickets in a week than ever before - a cool 1.5 million between Friday 9 January and Thursday 15 January.

It also had its best ever sales day, with 350,000 tickets being flogged on Monday 12 January.

Of course many of these tickets are at rock bottom prices, but they do prompt people to get flying. For example, a friend of mine told me of a group from a local rotary club he is taking to Bergamo with Ryanair for the princely sum of just a few Euros each. The lunch in Bergamo for the day trip will cost seriously more than the flight.

But the seats are occupied with travellers willing to pay for Ryanair's myriad of other services, which is just what the carrier wants of course.

We've written about Michael O'Leary's desire for ancillary revenues to outrank flight revenues in importance and about the spate of New Year ticket sales.

So are you taking a cheap flight anywhere which you wouldn't otherwise take if the price wasn't so pitiful? And what would you spend on board or at the airport?

US majors are slowly closing the gap with their overseas rivals when it comes to business class products but don't expect them to win any awards.      

Last week I flew in the new United Airlines business class (pictured), which was put in service just over one year ago and is now on eight inter-continental routes.

While the new United business class seat is several steps above the old United seat it is still one step behind the leaders in Europe, the Middle East and Asia. And by the time the last United widebody gets the new seat United could be an entire generation or two behind.

United's lie-flat seat and large video screen (15.4 inches) finally matches the recline and IFE on leading Asian and European carriers. The old United business class seat, which as of today is still on three-quarters of the carrier's widebodies, doesn't recline fully and doesn't even have on-demand video.

But the new seat isn't as wide or as long as the new seat offered by some Asian, European and Middle Eastern carriers. I also noticed United's headphones fall way short of the state-of-the-art noise cancellation headphones provided by many other carriers.

The service overall is also way below European or Asian standards. Little things, like the thinness of the hot towels handed out before meals and the lack of snacks offered in the galley between meals, show United is still skimping on business class.

Over the last few weeks I also had the opportunity to fly the long-haul business class products of Lufthansa, Swiss and Singapore Airlines and the service overall was clearly better than United. And I wasn't even on the new Singapore business class, which features the widest business class seat in the industry today, but had a product that is several years old.

Of course the fact US carriers still lag behind their Asian and European counterparts is no surprise. In late 2007 I had the opportunity to fly the new American Airlines international business class product and made similar comments on this blog. Last year Delta introduced a similar lie-flat business class seat and I expect the new seats that will be introduced by Continental later this year will be on par with Americana and United rather than meet the standards of leading foreign carriers.

With that said, US majors should be applauded for investing in new business class products during difficult times. While United hasn't found money to buy any new aircraft in a decade (and they clearly can use new generation widebodies to replace their ageing 767 and 747 fleets) and aren't investing in upgrading economy (which is in as much need of a facelift as business), at least they are doing something to improve their business and first offering.

Now only if United would accelerate the project and be more reliable in sticking to their published schedule. Washington Dulles-Zurich is one of eight routes United has introduced the new seat on but on the outbound flight I got onboard to find the old product. Clearly this is not a way to please smart business class travellers who select their flights based on the product.

EasyJet chief executive Andy Harrison has bravely, or stupidly, gone head-to-head with UK newspaper The Guardian's environmental warrior George Monbiot in a web video interview. And by the look on Harrison's face by the end of the interview, I think he might have regretted it!

For those of you unfamiliar with Monbiot, he's a regular contributor to The Guardian website's "Comment is free" section and his focus is man's impact on climate change. Yesterday he was railing against the evil of Agas and today he is challenging Harrison about easyJet's environmental record - in particular the viability of the Ecojet design it unveiled last year and its carbon offset scheme.

I couldn't help thinking that Harrison looked more than a little uncomfortable with the line of questioning, and could perhaps have been better prepared. After all, you only have to read some of Monbiot's opinion pieces to see what his agenda is and what line his questioning will take.

But kudos to Harrison for going ahead with it anyway. I'd pay to see a similar interview between Monbiot and Ryanair's Michael O'Leary! And as for Monbiot, I admire his passion for a cause but can't help being turned off by his earnest pomposity. 

Singapore Airlines, the first carrier to put the Airbus A380 into service, is getting ready to welcome the one millionth passenger onto its super jumbos. That's a serious number and shows that on some routes the aircraft is becoming a familiar sight.

And what a reception that passenger will get - the lucky punter will be greeted with the news at check-in and what prize they've won, which includes a three-night stay at a luxury hotel at their destination, a limo ride to the hotel, top-class restaurants and other goodies, says SIA.

Travellers in all three classes on the same flight be be served with champagne and special SIA giveaways.

SIA was the winner in the operations category of the 2008 Airline Achievement Awards for its introduction into service of the A380.

Interesting piece on the BBC's website today if you haven't already seen it - apparently a Greenpeace coalition has bought some of the land earmarked for the construction of London Heathrow's third runway.

The coalition, which includes UK actress Emma Thompson, is hoping that buying up the land will throw a "massive spanner" in the works, should the proposed third runway get the go-ahead.

This is a great example of the phrase "putting your money where your mouth is", and whatever your feelings about the controversial third runway, you have to respect the obvious strength of people's feelings towards this proposal.

It's going to be a hell of a battle!

If the reports in today's newspapers are correct, the UK government will give the proposed third runway at London Heathrow the go-ahead any day now.

This debate has been rumbling on for a long time and it finally looks set to be decided, although this will not be without a fight. Protestors who are against the third runway are reported to be planning more demonstrations at Heathrow, so be prepared for yet more delays if you're flying out of the airport in the coming days.

My colleague David Learmount has written a good blog on the whole will they/won't they build a third runway saga - you can read it here if you haven't already done so.

I've always been a sucker for whacky airliner paint schemes. They can be used to promote events or to lobby or sell.

Here is a new one from Etihad, which has painted one of its Airbus A340-600s in a special Formula 1 grand prix livery to promote the Abu Dhabi race on 1 November.

Travellers will see it on Etihad's services from its Middle East base to New York, Toronto, London and Sydney.

Here's today installment in the Ryanair/Aer Lingus takeover battle. The two have been in a war of words again since Ryanair renewed its attempt to takeover its fellow Irish carrier before Christmas. Ryanair has since extended the deadline for acceptance of its offer, after securing only neglible formal take-up of its offer as of the original 5 January cut-off - an offer Aer Lingus describes as "fundamentally undervaluing the airline, its robust financial position, substantial competition issues" and which is therefore "not capable of completion".

Ryanair has already challenged as misleading the assertion the offer is not capable of completion by lodging a complaint with the Takover Panel and has today published a letter sent to Barrington questioning the carrier's arguments over its ability to remain independent.

Here's what they say:

 

Mr Colm Barrington

Chairman

Aer Lingus Group plc

Head Office

Dublin Airport

8 January 2009

 

Does Aer Lingus Really Have A Viable Independent Future?

 

Dear Chairman,

 

      We refer to your 22 December letter to all Aer Lingus shareholders in which you (wrongly) claimed that European airline consolidation is not really happening and that Aer Lingus' "independence" strategy is a viable alternative to airline consolidation. Since we believe these claims are patently untrue perhaps you could explain to your shareholders why you are ignoring the following facts:

 

1.                  Airline consolidation is accelerating across Europe. Air France has in recent years acquired (among others) Cityjet, KLM, VLM, Martinair and is now in talks to consolidate with the merged Alitalia/AirOne combine in Italy. Likewise, Lufthansa has acquired or agreed to acquire substantial stakes in Swiss, Austrian, British Midland and SN Brussels. Lufthansa has also expressed its interest in consolidating with Alitalia/AirOne and is currently in talks with SAS. BA has a significant stake in Iberia and both airlines are in active merger discussions. Why then has Aer Lingus been bypassed and ignored by this pan-European airline consolidation?

 

2.                  Aer Lingus' own advisor (Goldman Sachs) doesn't believe it has an independent future. In its latest airline research paper (3 Dec. 2008) Goldman Sachs confirmed its belief that "it seems inevitable that all European carriers will belong to one of the big three groups (BA, Lufthansa and AF-KLM) either through direct ownership or deeper alliances". Is there any independent expert outside of Aer Lingus who has any faith that your independence strategy will be successful?

 

3.                  Aer Lingus' Chairman doesn't believe it has an independent future. In your interview with the Irish Times (12 Dec. 2008) you "vowed to find a friendly investor who will take a majority stake in the airline". You also went on to claim that from a "consumer point of view" and a "country point of view", Air France-KLM "would be a better option than Ryanair" but "I haven't got a call yet". Aer Lingus' shareholders are entitled to a progress update on your "vow" to find a friendly majority investor and an explanation as to how a friendly majority investor reconciles with a strategy of "independence"?

 

4.                  Aer Lingus' Chief Executive doesn't seem to believe it has an "independent future". In his "keynote address" (to the ISTT Annual Conference (30 Sept-2 Oct 2008) in Dublin) "On the Future of the Travel Industry" Dermot Mannion suggested that by 2015, there could be just 5 large European airlines left, namely Air France-KLM, BA/Iberia, Lufthansa, easyJet and Ryanair. Can you explain to Aer Lingus shareholders why your Chief Executive believes that Aer Lingus may not exist as an independent airline in just 6 years time?

 

Perhaps this is why Mr Mannion has recently negotiated an agreement with Aer Lingus, which will allow him to trigger the payment of a "failure fee" of up to €2.8 million to himself if there is a change in control of Aer Lingus and he chooses to resign. Why would Aer Lingus or Mr Mannion discuss, negotiate or agree such a large "failure fee" if either you or Mr Mannion really believe that Aer Lingus has an "independent future"?

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Michael O'Leary

Chief Executive

 

 

A colleague has send me this amusing take on the trend from airlines to exploit every ancillary revenue opportunity under the sun from US satirical website The Onion.

These are some of the best lines from the piece:

Arpey went on to note that some additional charges would also apply, including a $15 fee for every piece of luggage customers have inside their bedroom closet, and a one-time payment of $40 for any American whose name is Greg.

JetBlue, a commercial carrier known for its thrifty rates, has come out ahead of the pack, however, and is being lauded for its decision not to charge non-passengers not to fly.

Here at AB we're keen on reporting about ancillaries seeing as they are so important.

We've reported about rock concerts on board, and how US carriers are jumping on the ancillary bandwagon, albeit not as much as The Onion suggests!

But remember ancillaries are hardly new. I wrote this up in AB in 2005.

BA's traditional New Year reception for the press was early this year. Yesterday in fact in a very frozen London at a warmer Langhan's Brasserie in Piccadilly.

 

The airline's ever chirpy chief executive Willie Walsh thanked the assembled media for the volume of column inches (web inches?) they devoted to the airline in 2008. His tongue was a little bit in his cheek as 2008 of course contained the London Heathrow T5 opening debacle, covered so eloquently by my colleague Kerry Ezard.

"I use to count up to it," said Willie, of the countdown to the opening of T5. "Now I count away from it." The countaway stands at something over 280 days.

The airline was "rightly criticised" for the T5 affair, but "it is now performed better than expected" and has handled some 16 million customers, said Willie.

T5 is rather cool in my experience, although I must confess I spent most of it in the BA lounge so I'm heavily biased. Here's what Kerry thought about it.

OUTLOOK

Willie is understandably downbeat about the prospects for this year: "2009 is looking like a difficult environment, not just for airlines but for all industries". It is however an environment when radical changes can take place. "We will use this as an opportunity to transform and strengthen BA," said Walsh.

Happy New Year everyone. It seems that Virgin Atlantic's New Year's resolution is to re-establish itself as the glamorous airline with the red hot cabin crew.

If you haven't seen the new ad campaign, have a look here and let me know what you think.

It seems to hark back to a bygone age when air travel was deemed sexy and glamorous, rather than the delay-prone, overcrowded means of getting from A to B that it has become today.

The brick-sized 1980s mobile phone in the ad is amusing - did people really did used to think they looked anything other than ridiculous with such clunky, oversized pieces of plastic clamped to their ears?

But will the ad have its desired effect? Will a bunch of attractive women in red stilettoes encourage people to forget their money worries and fly Virgin in these difficult economic times?

I'd be more interested in finding out what Virgin's plans are for this year in terms of being a standalone carrier in the midst of a frenzy of consolidation activity. Will the carrier end up in some kind of deal with Lufthansa over bmi? And if not, will some smart red uniforms be enough to help it navigate the choppy seas ahead?