Putting Egalitarianism Before Convenience — And Revenues
from the stay-off-our-turf dept
Stories about airlines trying to use technology to improve their boarding process pop up from time to time, and while other airlines tinker with how they put passengers on their planes, Southwest sticks to its simple technique of unassigned seats and mass boarding. It says it does this to save time, and therefore money, but it’s also a nod to the image of egalitarianism on which Southwest thrives. It’s successfully created the perception that it’s an airline of the people, democratizing air travel for everyone and sticking it to the man — in this case, its full-service rivals with their snooty upper-class passengers in the front of the plane. The strategy’s worked very well, too, as Southwest’s track record indicates, so it’s not surprising to see it move to maintain that image. It’s now moving to shut down sites that let customers “cheat” its online check-in procedure so as to secure a boarding pass in the first of three groups, allowing them to get the seat they want. Southwest customers can check in online up to 24 hours before a flight’s departure; these services log on to the airline’s site at the 24-hour mark and take care of it for a customer. While the Web 2.0 crowd is probably wowed at this awesome mashup, Southwest isn’t amused and says the sites violate its site’s terms of service — even though it says it’s okay if you give a family member your information to log on and get a boarding pass for you. The issue, though, isn’t Southwest’s petty objection to the technology, but rather putting its egalitarian image above its business. Plenty of people, business travelers in particular, don’t like Southwest’s boarding process, and it likely costs the carrier more customers than it attracts. Additionally, the fact that some people were actually willing to pay for these services points out an opportunity for Southwest to generate some incremental revenues — something most low-cost airlines would jump on. It could sell the ability to be in the coveted group A, or guarantee frequent fliers early boarding, like many other airlines do to reward repeat customers, but also to keep their business. While Southwest’s (relatively) low fares and customer-equality streak are admirable, it’s worth wondering to what degree its egalitarian bent hamstrings its business.
Comments on “Putting Egalitarianism Before Convenience — And Revenues”
If it ain't broke...
Southwest isn’t doing too bad. If their methods are working, and the airline is doing well financially, the the people complaining must be wrong.
It’s not like you couldn’t choose to fly on another airline if the seating arrangements bother you that much.
Can anyone say Streisand?
If it works ...
It sounds to me like you’re implying that Southwest should compromise its basic brand distinction, not to mention its principles, in the name of possible short term gain.
Doesn’t sound too good to me.
Yehuda
Why not a seat lottory?
It seems to me they should award seats by a draw. In any event, this cattle-call approach to boarding passengers is fast. What’s fast is a method that (generally) boards the window seat passengers first, then middle rows seats followed by aisle seats.
Now if only we could get people to exit the plane more efficiently.
Note to Southwest: Ignore Techdirt and continue...
…with your successful business model. I don’t care about technicalities and details of their online boarding pass system. I just know that Southwest has a very simple unassigned seating policy and it’s their right to do what it takes to keep it that way. The blog entry tries to claim that Southwest is hurting their revenue. This is an unbelievably short-sighted claim. If Southwest wanted to start down some slippery slope towards being a bankrupt major carrier, they should take your advice. If not, stick with what works.
Re: Note to Southwest: Ignore Techdirt and continu
Let me double-check, but I don’t think I was trying to deny Southwest the “right” to run its business in any way it sees fit, and you might also notice I point out that Southwest is very successful. I’m not trying to claim they’re hurting their revenue, merely wondering if, or to what degree, their principles can impact their business.
Re: Re: Note to Southwest: Ignore Techdirt and con
Carlo,
You may not have been trying to deny Southwest the “right” to run it’s business in anyway it sees fit – but it came across that way to me as well.
Southwest’s principles impact their business every day – and by impact I mean profitable when so many other airlines are not. These are the same airlines who have spent a ton of money on computer simulations to determine the best boarding process. I wonder how much that type of “Let’s hire a consultant to do a study to find the best way to fix this problem” thinking contributed to their current financial situation?
Southwest meanwhile, went ahead with their low-tech approach, while everyone else was standing around trying to figure the best way. Turns out, Southwest has the 2nd most efficient system in the business. The most efficient is a boarding system that relies on a computer program which uses a combination of ‘outside in’ and a ‘pyramid’ approach. However, I don’t think any airline is utilizing this system, yet. (I believe it was designed for use with the new Airbus 380 behemoth.)
I fly all the time for business and my preference is for Southwest. With very (and I mean very) few exceptions, I find the people who work for Southwest enjoy their jobs and take pride in their company.
I know a few people who do not like to fly Southwest because of its ‘cattle call’ boarding, but they are usually the same one complaining about late flights, indifferent service, rude flight attendants, etc., etc.
I always seem to arrive on time and in a good mood – I usually have one story every trip about a Southwest employee who made me laugh or took the time to ask if I needed anything.
All of this is beside the point – does the boarding process really matter when you are going to be crammed into a seat with no leg room?
Re: Re: Note to Southwest: Ignore Techdirt and con
So, merely wondering warrants a fairly ignorant piece of work like the submission of yours regarding Southwest? Were you bored in a terminal today, or something?
“Plenty of people, business travelers in particular, don’t like Southwest’s boarding process, and it likely costs the carrier more customers than it attracts.”
Back that up. Thanks.
Re: Re: Re: Note to Southwest: Ignore Techdirt and
It’s really not that difficult a statement to digest. There are some/plenty/quite a few/whatever that dislike not having an assigned seat, having to line up early, and so on (for instance, ask people in the C group next time you fly). This is a given, and is often used in marketing messages by airlines trying to compete against Southwest. If I said “lots of people love the boarding process and think it’s the best thing ever” and so on, would you be here crying “back that up”? Doesn’t sound like it.
So, there are people who choose to fly other airlines because of their dislike of this process… but then few who choose to fly Southwest solely because of it.
Again, as I pointed out, Southwest is very successful. And when an airline is operating at very high load factors, these sorts of concerns may not have much impact. Sorry for offending your sensibilities so badly, I’ll be sure to start running all my posts past you for approval in future.
Re: Re: Re:2 Note to Southwest: Ignore Techdirt
Nothing like getting caught with a poor piece of journalism then retreating into rationalization and sarcasm.
Give it up Carlo. Most of the stuff you write is good. Put your hands up & walk away. You’re too good a blogger to resort to sarcasm.
Re: Re: Re:2 Note to Southwest: Ignore Techdirt
It’s really not that difficult a statement to digest. There are some/plenty/quite a few/whatever that dislike not having an assigned seat, having to line up early, and so on (for instance, ask people in the C group next time you fly).
It’s really not that difficult to spew something like that either. No need to digest, it’s already digital vomit.
I fly plenty, on many different airlines, and I have to say I’ve been in the C group before. Not sure how you’re having such a difficult time understanding that Southwest is doing well BECAUSE of the differences in how they run their airline. Seating is just one of those differences.
So, there are people who choose to fly other airlines because of their dislike of this process… but then few who choose to fly Southwest solely because of it.
So, we go from “some/plenty/quite a few/whatever” to just “few”? Great way to make your arguement.
Again, as I pointed out, Southwest is very successful.
OK.
And when an airline is operating at very high load factors, these sorts of concerns may not have much impact.
What’s the point of your article/blog again?
Sorry for offending your sensibilities so badly, I’ll be sure to start running all my posts past you for approval in future.
Hate to burst yer bubble, but you didn’t offend me in the least. And, I doubt you could afford to have me proof articles, I charge double for stupid.
I just started reading techdirt.com fairly recently, and thought the place wasn’t too bad, until I read this blog. Please do better next time, for the sake of the domain name you share with other intelligent people.
Re: Re: Re:3 Note to Southwest: Ignore Tech
Schlingblade, Moneyguy:
Southwest to Test Assigned Seating
Re: Re: Re:4 Note to Southwest: Ignore Tech
http://www.blogsouthwest.com/2007/09/19/to-assign-or-not-to-assign-that-is-the-question/
http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/checkin.html
Yeah, I was bored and checking on some older bookmarks tonight. Ran across this gem, and figured I’d give it another update.
Hold up...
“Plenty of people, business travelers in particular, don’t like Southwest’s boarding process, and it likely costs the carrier more customers than it attracts.”
Source? Or is this just an opinion piece, with anecdotal evidence thrown in to support a (flimsy) argument?
Optimization
I don’t think the egalitarian boarding system causes Southwest to lose many passengers. And that’s not to say that any business, including Southwest’s, couldn’t use continuous improvement. I do agree that the egalitarian model is a core differentiator for them and should be protected.
Price, price, price and convenience are still the biggest factors in airline business success, however, and they run a damn tight ship. One area they could stand to improve is routing, which is still somewhat inefficient. On a recent trip from Portland to Louisville, I had to fly first to Phoenix and then Chicago before arriving in Louisville. Go look at the map. You’ll laugh if you aren’t laughing already.They’re so married to hub and spoke (and Phoenix) that it’ll be a tough one for them to change anytime soon. And I’m not just talking about PDX to Louisville…. Any trip east or west more than about 800 miles will suffer from this same effect.
They’re still getting my business, however.
Flimsy argument. I award you no points.
But I clicked on one of your ads, so… mission accomplished!
Southwest has announced it is considering switching over to assigned seating, by the way.
I think they should shut those down
I have flown (mostly) Southwest for the last 6 years. Used to be, you come early, you get an A boarding pass. Last 2 times I came 1 hour early but still got a B
Sounds good to me...
EasyJet is our big no-frills airline, and they’re doing fine, except for problems with fuel costs.
Being so sick and tired of having to wait while first- and business-class gets on first, then having to sqeeze past the fuckers while they’re sitting and sipping champagne, THEN having to wait till they get their too-relaxed asses out of their comfortable leather seats and get off the plane — I applaud the unarranged seating assignments and such.
We’re all on an equal playing field, I’m less upset, and you’re less likely to have me kick you in the back. See? Everyone wins.
Personally, I love the southwest model
If you’re flying alone, the southwest model is perfect. You can easily be at the back of the B group and still get a seat in the front 6 rows 90% of the time.
This works because people always leave the middle seat open. And while, yes, the middle seat is pretty irratating, if you choose your seat after your seatmates are already seated, you get to choose who you sit next to! Never underestimate this advantage – I would far rather sit next to a couple of small women who are going to edge away from me because (gasp!) I’m a man and might be thinking naughty thoughts about them or something than one gargantuan fatass with a hygiene problem. When the seats are assigned, you don’t know what you’re gonna get. When its the “cattle call”, you get choice!
Don’t do it, southwest! Don’t change the model!
Time As A Stock In Trade
I’m one of those people who dislikes the SW boarding process. My main beef with it is that it encourages people to trade time for better seats. They do so by showing up at the airport extra early to be sure to get A seats.
And people trade time and comfort again half an hour or more before the flight by getting up from their seats in order to stand under the A, B, C signs or sit on the floor there.
Now here’s a problem. I value a nice seat in the airplane, but I also value my time a great deal, and I don’t like waiting in lines instead of sitting reading in a chair. So, I’m a perennial “C” seater on SW. I would trade a lot of things for an A seat, like money, coupons, loyalty… but I won’t trade away my time. I’m gonna show up at the airport at the last possible minute, and try to get on the first possible flight.
So SW doesn’t meet my seating preferences, but it meets most of my other needs. And, for the most part, the flights are short routes, and I can sit like Mork from Ork in a sardine can if it’s only a 60 minute jaunt from San Diego to San Jose. It’s a different matter to Heathrow. I won’t show up early, I won’t stand in line, and I don’t care what seat I have for a one hour flight.
Now, as for the most efficient way to load a plane, yes, it’s assigned seating with the ‘outside in’ approach. More doors (front and back) doubles the rate. However, that works ONLY in theory. Have you ever seen when the airlines ask for “Boarding Group one” only or rows “30-40 only”? Either people are clueless and can’t read, or they don’t care to listen, but either way it’s easy to see many people line up to board even though they are “Group 4”. The airlines don’t want to enforce their own request and stop the flow at the check-in spot, so they just let the people board out of the requested order. Which means the inevitable slow-down inside the plane.
And where does this animosity in the other comments against frequent flyers come from? You’re complaining about some airlines giving us perks to board early? Don’t you think an airline should give me a perk for delivering over $20k in revenue in a year? Do you really think I’ve got it better than you if I can board a few minutes earlier, but to earn that perk I have to spend about 200 hours a year on a plane, while you’re playing ball with your kids/dog back at your home? Wow! I’m so lucky.
Re: Time As A Stock In Trade
Now here’s the real problem. You see, some people value a nice seat in an airplane, but also value their money. If someone values their time much more than the money they save with unassigned seating, then maybe they should be flying one of the other airlines where they can buy the seat they want. It’s not that complicated. Some people though want to save both time and money and still get first choice seating. Good luck with that.