All the excited chatter about today’s LUV-ly Row 44 deal

, , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to All the excited chatter about today’s LUV-ly Row 44 deal

  1. Camino Cielo August 22, 2009 at 4:06 pm #

    Just what, pray tell, is the news part? Yes, it would seem that media and bloggers are falling all over each other to make buzz out of the one release that they all cite. But what substantive is different today that we didn’t know a few days ago? The release says that it will happen “sometime” in Q1 of 2010, that is, it’s still “by and by” (see several similar ones these many months) and that pricing isn’t known.

    Meanwhile, other airlines are in the same boat, as a result — AirTran and Virgin. And others with other technology are passing Southwest in droves.

    Net-net: If you really read what’s being said, it’s that theirs is being pushed back, but Southwest wants us to stay tuned. Or maybe, if THEY see this as news, then they were actually a whole lot less confident than they would have had us believe in the many releases that preceded this one. Southwest and Row 44, please, no more “news” until it happens.

  2. alloycowboy August 23, 2009 at 1:52 pm #

    Hey Mary,

    I wonder if anyone has considered the security implications of having a commercial airliner constantly transmitting a radio signal which says “here I am” as it flies through the friendly skies.

  3. Mary Kirby August 25, 2009 at 8:25 pm #

    Hmmm…now that’s something to think about!

  4. Mary Kirby August 25, 2009 at 8:28 pm #

    There is a lot of non-press-release stuff in here (my chat with Row 44, LUV and Michael Planey):

  5. Bob August 27, 2009 at 12:22 pm #

    An aircraft transmitting a signal? Holly crap, Batman, this changes everything! Alert DHS! Not.

  6. mike August 27, 2009 at 11:22 pm #

    just go to or or many of the other sites out there that show real time flight positioning, this is not an issue.

  7. Mary Kirby August 28, 2009 at 7:48 am #

    I think the issue of safety is not so much that a flight can be tracked (for presumably a shoulder-launched missile attack, etc) because, as Mike points out, flights are tracked each and every day. Rather, regulators are looking at how terrorists could use connectivity to carry out some sort of attack (coordinate with their terrorist friends in-flight or on the ground, for example). Regulators’ security concerns in various countries have held up more than one request for authority to offer in-flight connectivity. I don’t recommend plugging “terrorist attack” into Google while at 30,000ft.