A brand is much more than the livery an airline decides to put on their planes.
Yesterday, Brett Snyder, on his blog Cranky Flier, wrote an interesting piece worth sharing on airlines, their fees and branding.
Airlines made $5.7billion in fees last year and it has caused many to feel airlines are ripping off the consumer to make big profits. Snyder looks at even with the fees, many airlines barely made any money last year. Then he explores why other large companies in the US can make way more profit, but do not get the harassment (or hatred) that airlines seem to receive.
Snyder hypothesizes that an airline’s brand can have a lot to do with perception and how consumers react to airlines. Could airline,s through advertising, set an unrealistic expectations for customers to have the best flight ever, yet get disappointed when reality hits?
There is a fine line. An airline should be able to state they offer a great service, but can an airline go too far with bringing up the ideals of the “way things used to be?”
It is a very solid perspective and definitely worth the read.
Frontier Airbus A320 in the snow at Denver.
A pilot with Frontier Airlines, denied a quadriplegic passenger from taking his flight stating there were safety concerns. John Morris, 24, had recently flown from Denver to Dallas for a family wedding with no issues. It was when he was trying to make his way home that the disabled passenger and his family were told the captain would not allow him to take his flight.
His mother states that when a flight attendant saw John strapped in, using a seatbelt extension to secure his legs and chest, she stated she would have to have the captain’s approval. When the captain was informed of the situation, he explained that John would not be able to fly. Even after protests from John’s family and other passengers seated around him, the airline called the police and three officers boarded the aircraft. The mother states the police were sympathetic, but did nothing because he was not posing a threat to the plane or passengers. John and his family were then removed by the airline.
“The pilot did what he thought was best for the safety of this disabled person and the party, as well as the airplane, there was no wrong done here,” Frontier spokesman Peter Kowalchuk told 7News in Denver. “I don’t believe that his rights were violated. We’re in the process now of conducting an investigation.” He stated the pilot had concerns that the seatbelt extensions could be used to safely restrain the passenger and made the call to not let him fly. “The pilot is the CEO of that aircraft, if you will,” said Kowalchuk.
John and his family were allowed to take the next flight since the captain had no safety issues. In the Department of Transportation policy on disability and air travel it states (thanks to 7News for finding this):
“If the carrier’s reason for excluding a passenger on the basis of safety is that the individual’s disability creates a safety problem, the carrier’s decision must be based on a ‘direct threat’ analysis. This concept, ground in the Americans with Disabilities Act, calls on carriers to make an individualized assessment (e.g., as opposed to a generalization or stereotype about what a person with a given disability can or can’t do) of the safety threat the person is thought to pose.”
The guidelines also state that a captain is, “in command of the aircraft and crew and is responsible for the safety of the passengers, crew members, cargo, and airplane. Taken together, this means that a carrier has the legal authority to refuse to transport an individual on the basis of safety. However, this does not mean that an airline, including the pilot or other airline staff, can discriminate on the basis of disability. If the Department finds that an airline’s decision to refuse to transport an individual with a disability was not related to safety, then it will take action against the carrier. The Department will also review the airline’s actions to see if the carrier followed the required process/procedures by providing the person who was refused transportation a written statement of the reason for the refusal within 10 days.”
When asked if the airline followed the rules, Frontier’s spokesperson stated, “I’m not going to assume that it wasn’t, but we’re investigating that.” More recently Frontier has released a statement saying, “We’re sorry for the incident and are investigating its handling. In this situation we had a well-intentioned pilot who was seeking to do the right thing to ensure the safety and compliance of all involved.”
It is disturbing to see an airline not treating a person with a disability with the respect they deserve. It is extremely inconsistent for one pilot to deny a person with a disability where two others have no issues at all. It seems like the pilot in question might have had a power trip and instead of connecting with corporate to get a second opinion on the matter, he decided to call the cops. I am still having a hard time finding how John is a bigger safety issue than a child, especially when family is there to care for him. It is bad when one pilot can tarnish the image of an entire brand, but even worse for an airline to back up his actions.
I have posed questions to Frontier Airlines about their policies letting pilots remove passengers with disabilities and the inconsistencies with a captain’s ability to remove passengers. At the time of posting this, I have not heard back from them.
UPDATE: I realized that I wrote my email to the wrong email address and to be fair, they haven’t had the opportunity to reply. Will be trying with the new email soon.
-
-
A380 winglet left in building.
-
-
A380 wing hit building in Paris.
-
-
The A380 winglet is left behind.
-
-
Aerial shot from damaged wing. Photo by Reuters.
-
-
A Korean Air A380 was used instead. Photo by apgphoto/Flight Global.
-
-
Side shot of the damage on the Airbus A380. Photo by Niek van der Zande.
Click any photo for larger version. Photos by Niek van der Zande, via FlightBlogger and Reuters.
Airbus flew a double-decker Airbus A380 to the 2011 Paris Airshow to put on display and to hopefully attract additional customers. However, while taxiing, the world’s largest airliner’s wing clipped a building ripping off the right winglet and putting the aircraft out of service and unable to fly.
Luckily an A380 owned by Korean Air came to the rescue and flew one of their A380s t0 the Paris Air Show. Being the largest airliner has its benefits and challenges — this is not the first time the A380s size has been an issue. Recently, an Air France A380 struck the tail of a CRJ 700, causing it to spin out.
A spokesperson for Airbus told AirlineReporter.com that the A380, “took the taxiway it was instructed by ground control to take.”
-
-
This will be China Southern’s first Airbus A380
-
-
Airbus A380 with China Southern Airlines livery
The first China Southern Airline Airbus A380 has rolled out of the paint shop in Hamburg Germany. This is one of five A380s that have been ordered by China Southern and the airline should take delivery of their first during the second half of 2011.
Both photos from Airbus. Click either for much larger version.
Fun, cool and trendy Peach Airlines livery on an Airbus A320.
Soon, Japan will have another Low Cost Carrier (LCC) option for passengers: Peach Airlines. The airline will operate out of Kansai International Airport (KIX) in Osaka, Japan. Peach plans to start operations no later than March 2012 between Sappora and Fukuoka and to Seoul in May 2012.
The airline has three major share holders: All Nippon Airways (ANA), Innovation Network Corporation of Japan and the First Eastern Investment Group. Although ANA holds a slightly larger share than the other two investors, I am told the airline will operate independently from ANA.
According to the airline, the name “Peach” was chosen to symbolize energy and happiness across Asian countries. ’œThe name Peach was chosen to reflect our mission of becoming a completely new type of airline that links destinations in Japan and Japan with Asia,” Peach Aviation CEO, Shinichi Inoue stated. “Our promise is to provide safe, low cost travel 365 days of the year, making air travel easier and more accessible. Our airline will also reflect the smart sophistication that has come to represent the words ‘Cool Japan’.”
Although the name might be “Peach,” their livery will be made up of purples and pinks. The colors are supposed to represent “cuteness, coolness and happiness.” Okay, we can go with that. At this point, the airline only has graphical representations of the livery, but an airline spokesperson said we should be able to see the livery an an aircraft sometime in the fall. The airline planes to lease brand new Airbus A320 aircraft in an all economy 180-seat configuration.
The airline has shown some possible concepts of their flight crew’s uniform and they look very trendy, laid back and young.
Interior mock up for Peach Airline's Airbus A320.
You might not realize that P.E.A.C.H. is also an acronym. According the website it matches up to the type of experience you should expect: Pan ’“ Asian, Energetic, Affordable, Cute & Cool, Happy.
The airline explained to me over email that they, “are targeting a wide range of people, but much of our focus is targeting young females.”
Is Japan ready for a low cost airline targeted at the younger and more female population? I am not sure, but it sure seems like ANA and other investors sure thing so.
EDIT: I had originally stated Peach would be Japan’s first Low Cost airline, that is incorrect, I have updated the story. Thanks.
