I was pretty pleased these past few days, hearing about the U.S. Department of Transportation's plans to strengthen air passengers' rights when it comes to getting bumped from a flight, being compensated for lost luggage, suffering through delays on the tarmac and so on. Then I remembered I am facing eight domestic flights in the next two weeks - only two of which, nonstops on Virgin America - are likely to be pleasant, and my mood darkened.
Now, reading over the list of changes, I'm thinking not hip, hip hurrah for the DOT, but just hip, hip - hold the hurrah. The rules-changes are definitely a step in the right direction, but do they go far enough?
No. Especially in a time when air traffic controllers - zonked on the job from lack of sleep - fall into deep slumber or chill out by watching a movie rather than direct pilots how to land. Even U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama's pilot was given inaccurate information from an air traffic control tower last week. The First Lady! And that was a military ATC, too.
I'm all for boosting compensation when a bag is lost and the airline is culpable. Ditto if a traveler is involuntarily bumped from an overbooked flight. Have you flown in the United States lately? If you do manage to wedge yourself into the plane, you may find - as I did this morning when I tried to book a seat on a flight departing 10 days from now - that every seat is taken. Airlines are also supposed to become more transparent about listing ancillary fees that brought them $2.5 billion USD in revenue last year; that, too, is devoutly desired, as it can be hard to know the true total cost of a flight at the time of booking.
People in civil aviation reflexively - and understandably - say that safety is their highest priority. In line with that, DOT should understand that boosting an ATC's time away from the tower to nine hours from eight - one of the rules-changes scheduled to take effect in late August, after the busy summer flying season - is not enough. These people are exhausted. (So, incidently, are many pilots.) Treating people who control the movements of planes and the lives of millions of travelers like sleep-deprived hospital interns is not a good idea. (Having sleep-deprived hospital interns is not a good idea, either.) Adding a second ATC to the lone worker pulling duty overnight at 28 U.S. airports is a good, and long overdue, move.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told the PBS "NewsHour'' that his department and Federal Aviation Administration administrators will make additional changes in American air travel if necessary. Get ready to make them, Mr. Secretary. It's necessary.
Showing posts with label Virgin America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Virgin America. Show all posts
Monday, April 25, 2011
Saturday, April 9, 2011
SFO's Terminal 2 is Back, and Way Better
Back in 1954, San Francisco International Airport opened what is now terminal 2. For years, it served as SFO's international terminal - a gateway to and from the great world. When, in December 2000, SFO, the San Francisco Bay Area's major airport, opened a beautiful new international terminal, terminal 2 morphed into an airport version of the Arabian peninsula's Empty Quarter - vast, sparsely inhabited (a few offices operated there), unused by travelers.
That was then. This week, a drastically revamped terminal 2 finally reopened to passengers, as a domestic terminal, for the first time in just over a decade. Designed by the architectural firm Gensler and rebuilt for $383 million USD, it is stunning - airy, spacious, welcoming, high-tech to the max, stocked with first-rate food and beverage outlets like the Bay Area company Peet's Coffee & Tea and studded with power outlets and work stations.
I traipsed through a community open house Saturday, and the experience took me back to childhood when air travel was considered fun, even glamorous. It says something about my childhood entertainment options that my parents, little sister and I used to go to our local airport on the East Coast and watch the planes take-off and land. We didn't fly then but we could dream. San Francisco International Airport Director John Martin, who I chatted with at the open house, said he used to do the same thing. "In high school, my girlfriend and I did that,'' he grinned. A suitable past-time for a future airport director. I'm not sure what my excuse was.
In any case, the new terminal is as handsome as any domestic air terminal in the United States - and it is the first domestic U.S. terminal to win LEED Gold certification, thanks to its extensive recycling program, energy efficency, water-reduction measures and other steps. Martin says the terminal - which opens to flights on Thursday, 14 April - came in "on time and under budget.'' Some 5.5 million passengers are expected to use it annually. SFO has three other terminals.
The reborn T-2 will be home to San Francisco-based Virgin America, which will operate seven gates, and will be used for domestic flights by American Airlines, which will operate another seven. For American, it is something of a homecoming.
AA flew from T-2 from 1954 until its shutdown. In the reconfigured space - largely unrecognizable to us longtime fliers who remember how it used to look - American will operate an Admirals Club passenger lounge awash in natural light, graced inside with small living pine trees, hotel-lobby-like seating and great runway views. The new lounge - the only one in the reinvented T-2 - is about twice the size of the old Admirals Club in T-3, which AA is vacating. The T-2 lounge has LEED Silver status.
"We built this terminal to put some of the romance back into air travel,'' Martin says. "It's a facility that sets the standard for passenger comfort. It's a dream terminal.''
On the basis of design alone, the romance is back. Of course, workaday aviation hassles such as security inspections and baggage-handling systems will remain as operational realities - nothing too romantic there. But airport officials are justifiably proud of the new terminal, and had smiles on their faces as thousands of camera-toting locals wandered happily through the bright new space, while singers sang and bands played and little kids ran around, laughing.
That was then. This week, a drastically revamped terminal 2 finally reopened to passengers, as a domestic terminal, for the first time in just over a decade. Designed by the architectural firm Gensler and rebuilt for $383 million USD, it is stunning - airy, spacious, welcoming, high-tech to the max, stocked with first-rate food and beverage outlets like the Bay Area company Peet's Coffee & Tea and studded with power outlets and work stations.
I traipsed through a community open house Saturday, and the experience took me back to childhood when air travel was considered fun, even glamorous. It says something about my childhood entertainment options that my parents, little sister and I used to go to our local airport on the East Coast and watch the planes take-off and land. We didn't fly then but we could dream. San Francisco International Airport Director John Martin, who I chatted with at the open house, said he used to do the same thing. "In high school, my girlfriend and I did that,'' he grinned. A suitable past-time for a future airport director. I'm not sure what my excuse was.
In any case, the new terminal is as handsome as any domestic air terminal in the United States - and it is the first domestic U.S. terminal to win LEED Gold certification, thanks to its extensive recycling program, energy efficency, water-reduction measures and other steps. Martin says the terminal - which opens to flights on Thursday, 14 April - came in "on time and under budget.'' Some 5.5 million passengers are expected to use it annually. SFO has three other terminals.
The reborn T-2 will be home to San Francisco-based Virgin America, which will operate seven gates, and will be used for domestic flights by American Airlines, which will operate another seven. For American, it is something of a homecoming.
AA flew from T-2 from 1954 until its shutdown. In the reconfigured space - largely unrecognizable to us longtime fliers who remember how it used to look - American will operate an Admirals Club passenger lounge awash in natural light, graced inside with small living pine trees, hotel-lobby-like seating and great runway views. The new lounge - the only one in the reinvented T-2 - is about twice the size of the old Admirals Club in T-3, which AA is vacating. The T-2 lounge has LEED Silver status.
"We built this terminal to put some of the romance back into air travel,'' Martin says. "It's a facility that sets the standard for passenger comfort. It's a dream terminal.''
On the basis of design alone, the romance is back. Of course, workaday aviation hassles such as security inspections and baggage-handling systems will remain as operational realities - nothing too romantic there. But airport officials are justifiably proud of the new terminal, and had smiles on their faces as thousands of camera-toting locals wandered happily through the bright new space, while singers sang and bands played and little kids ran around, laughing.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Review: Virgin America's Main Cabin Select
If you're interested in Virgin America - the 3-year-old start-up out of San Francisco that is 25-percent owned by British billionaire Richard Branson - check out my review of the carrier's Main Cabin Select (biz class) in the August issue of Global Traveler magazine. It's on page 19 if you've got the print edition, and posted under GT tested at www.globaltravelerusa.com if you don't.
I won't repeat all the details here. Suffice it to say Main Cabin Select is a superior U.S. domestic business class product - which is to say, it combines features of a full-out biz class and aspects of premium economy. I'm flying with Virgin America again tomorrow, again in Main Cabin Select, and looking forward to it - at least as much as one can when flying domestic. The airline is stylish, and none of its flight attendants has skipped out from completing a flight, as far as I know, though a few may be auditioning for TV's "Fly Girls.'' Of course, it is as subject to antiquated U.S. air traffic control systems and outdated airports as any other airline.
Actually, it's good to see Virgin America (not Virgin Atlantic, the U.S. carrier licenses the Virgin brand from Branson) flying at all. It took all of 2006 and most of 2007 to convince U.S. aviation regulators that Branson doesn't run the company - which would be a violation of U.S. law restricting majority ownership and operational control to U.S. citizens. Many countries have such laws and they are about as relevant in a globalized age as the latest regulations on buggy whips. Continental Airlines led a calvalcade of complaints from competitors and the new airline almost didn't get off the ground. Relative sanity prevailed and Virgin America launched in August 2007.
Here's to it.
I won't repeat all the details here. Suffice it to say Main Cabin Select is a superior U.S. domestic business class product - which is to say, it combines features of a full-out biz class and aspects of premium economy. I'm flying with Virgin America again tomorrow, again in Main Cabin Select, and looking forward to it - at least as much as one can when flying domestic. The airline is stylish, and none of its flight attendants has skipped out from completing a flight, as far as I know, though a few may be auditioning for TV's "Fly Girls.'' Of course, it is as subject to antiquated U.S. air traffic control systems and outdated airports as any other airline.
Actually, it's good to see Virgin America (not Virgin Atlantic, the U.S. carrier licenses the Virgin brand from Branson) flying at all. It took all of 2006 and most of 2007 to convince U.S. aviation regulators that Branson doesn't run the company - which would be a violation of U.S. law restricting majority ownership and operational control to U.S. citizens. Many countries have such laws and they are about as relevant in a globalized age as the latest regulations on buggy whips. Continental Airlines led a calvalcade of complaints from competitors and the new airline almost didn't get off the ground. Relative sanity prevailed and Virgin America launched in August 2007.
Here's to it.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Virgin America's "Fly Girls'
Flying back to the West Coast from the U.S. East Coast early this week, I called up Virgin America's in-flight entertainment system, Red, and trolled through the menu. Among the many games, TV shows, musical genres, movies and news on tap were the first four episodes of "Fly Girls,'' a reality TV show launched this spring that follows the lives and loves of five young flight attendants who work for none other than Virgin America.
As it happens, I had already seen an episode of "Fly Girls,'' which appears weekly on The CW cable channel. It's a clever idea for a show, but for me, once was enough. Like most reality TV, the show is more TV than reality, and its focus on partying, sobbing, flirting and gossiping overshadows scenes of flying, although some do appear.
I did a quick look around. None of the FAs on my flight looked familar. Guess they aren't on the show. That's just as well, as the episode I saw depicted the women as ditzy, preoccupied with hanging out and meeting hunky guys and juggling their busy social calendar with the frequent flying required of FAs. And they are all women. Thirty percent of the airline's FAs in real life are men, but no men are among the featured five cast members. Many male flight attendants, by their own account, are out-and-proud gay men, but the show's producers may just have decided not to go there. Controversy, you know. Muddies the storyline, too.
Actually, reality of the day-to-day kind did show itself briefly on the show I saw. One FA is a single mother trying to be a good parent to her young son, but the demands of an on-the-go job make it tough. Another Fly Girl is at a big party of her extended Vietnamese American family, where a brother, a sister and her father admonish her to get serious and get an education instead of jetting around the country seeing cute guys. Hurt, she feels they are judging her too harshly. Preoccupied with herself, she drops a drink on a passenger she's serving from the food and beverage cart, and retreats to the washroom, emerging in tears, while a fellow FA hugs her and assures her it'll all work out. Will it? I guess you'd just have to watch "Fly Girls'' to find out.
As a former movie and TV critic for a San Francisco daily newspaper, I didn't find the 30-minute episode I saw to be compelling entertainment. The show can be coarse, and it's hard to care much about what happens and get past the melodrama. A cool house near the beach - where the five young flight attendants live for filming purposes - doesn't provide enough glam to make up for the show's flaws.
I suppose Virgin America - a generally stylish company and one of a handful of U.S. carriers I actually like - belongs to the just-spell-my-name-right school of media exposure. This is the school that teaches that any publicity is good publicity, especially for a still-small, new company. (Virgin America, based at San Francisco International Airport, took off in August 2007.)
Even so, nothing is for certain. In its initial review of "Fly Girls','' the Washington Post misidentified the airline, even though its livery and trademarks are all over the show. The Post identified the FAs' employer as Virgin Atlantic, the British airline run by Richard Branson, who owns 25 percent of Virgin America and leases the use of the Virgin brand to the U.S. carrier. Oops, sorry about that. The paper printed a correction.
Fly on, Fly Girls. Just spell the name right: Virgin A-m-e-r-i-c-a.
As it happens, I had already seen an episode of "Fly Girls,'' which appears weekly on The CW cable channel. It's a clever idea for a show, but for me, once was enough. Like most reality TV, the show is more TV than reality, and its focus on partying, sobbing, flirting and gossiping overshadows scenes of flying, although some do appear.
I did a quick look around. None of the FAs on my flight looked familar. Guess they aren't on the show. That's just as well, as the episode I saw depicted the women as ditzy, preoccupied with hanging out and meeting hunky guys and juggling their busy social calendar with the frequent flying required of FAs. And they are all women. Thirty percent of the airline's FAs in real life are men, but no men are among the featured five cast members. Many male flight attendants, by their own account, are out-and-proud gay men, but the show's producers may just have decided not to go there. Controversy, you know. Muddies the storyline, too.
Actually, reality of the day-to-day kind did show itself briefly on the show I saw. One FA is a single mother trying to be a good parent to her young son, but the demands of an on-the-go job make it tough. Another Fly Girl is at a big party of her extended Vietnamese American family, where a brother, a sister and her father admonish her to get serious and get an education instead of jetting around the country seeing cute guys. Hurt, she feels they are judging her too harshly. Preoccupied with herself, she drops a drink on a passenger she's serving from the food and beverage cart, and retreats to the washroom, emerging in tears, while a fellow FA hugs her and assures her it'll all work out. Will it? I guess you'd just have to watch "Fly Girls'' to find out.
As a former movie and TV critic for a San Francisco daily newspaper, I didn't find the 30-minute episode I saw to be compelling entertainment. The show can be coarse, and it's hard to care much about what happens and get past the melodrama. A cool house near the beach - where the five young flight attendants live for filming purposes - doesn't provide enough glam to make up for the show's flaws.
I suppose Virgin America - a generally stylish company and one of a handful of U.S. carriers I actually like - belongs to the just-spell-my-name-right school of media exposure. This is the school that teaches that any publicity is good publicity, especially for a still-small, new company. (Virgin America, based at San Francisco International Airport, took off in August 2007.)
Even so, nothing is for certain. In its initial review of "Fly Girls','' the Washington Post misidentified the airline, even though its livery and trademarks are all over the show. The Post identified the FAs' employer as Virgin Atlantic, the British airline run by Richard Branson, who owns 25 percent of Virgin America and leases the use of the Virgin brand to the U.S. carrier. Oops, sorry about that. The paper printed a correction.
Fly on, Fly Girls. Just spell the name right: Virgin A-m-e-r-i-c-a.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
David Cush: "A Bad Rule'
Come April 29, a U.S. Federal Aviation Administration rule will require airlines at domestic airports to allow passengers whose plane has been sitting on the tarmac for at least three hours awaiting takeoff to leave the plane. Airlines that don't comply with the forthcoming rule face fines of nearly $30,000 per passenger on affected flights.
Airlines hate this rule. American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and JetBlue Airways have already applied to the FAA for a waiver at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, where runway reconstruction is expected to lead to more delays at an already notoriously congested airport in the months ahead. In a recent speech, Continental Airlines' new CEO, Jeff Smisek, said his airline will simply and necessarily cancel flights rather than knuckle under to the new rule or pony up the money for large fines.
The latest voice condemning the rule comes from David Cush, the CEO at Virgin America. Cush told me in a wide-ranging interview this week that while Virgin America has not asked for a waiver at JFK, the pending rule is "a bad rule, with unintended consequences.''
Cush was in a senior position with American before taking the top job at Virgin America, a San Francisco start-up that began flying in August 2007. Speaking of the pending rule, he said that, at a minimum, "delaying the rule 30 or 60 days'' would be a good idea.
"We are a small player at JFK,'' Cush told me. "American, Delta and JetBlue are the elephants.'' Nevertheless, he added, "We're all going to have a huge problem the first time thunderstorms roll into JFK in July or August, and there are 60 or 70 airplanes tied up at JFK.'' At such times, he said, Virgin America will accept delays of up to 2 hours and 15 minutes and then decide - 45 minutes before the new limit kicks in - whether or not to scrub the delayed flight.
Virgin America - minority-owned by British billionaire Richard Branson's Virgin Group - had a nightmarish experience on March 13, when VA flight 404 bound for JFK from Los Angeles International Airport was forced by bad weather on the East Coast to land 90 miles from New York and bus passengers to JFK. They got there at 3 a.m., 16 hours after departing LAX on a scheduled 5-hour flight. Cush wrote letters of apology to every passenger on the plane, and the airline refunded their fares and gave out $100 vouchers for future Virgin America flights.
"Flight 404 was unfortunate, but passengers had two opportunities to get off the plane,'' Cush averred. As for the new rule, "Taking away the discretion of the captain to make the decision is short-sighted. Ultimately, it is passengers who will decide'' if the rule will be effective, he said.
Asked if he expects consumer unhappiness about the new rule once flights are cancelled in compliance with it, Cush was blunt:
"Absolutely, and it won't take long.''
It's going to be an interesting spring and summer in the sky.
Airlines hate this rule. American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and JetBlue Airways have already applied to the FAA for a waiver at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, where runway reconstruction is expected to lead to more delays at an already notoriously congested airport in the months ahead. In a recent speech, Continental Airlines' new CEO, Jeff Smisek, said his airline will simply and necessarily cancel flights rather than knuckle under to the new rule or pony up the money for large fines.
The latest voice condemning the rule comes from David Cush, the CEO at Virgin America. Cush told me in a wide-ranging interview this week that while Virgin America has not asked for a waiver at JFK, the pending rule is "a bad rule, with unintended consequences.''
Cush was in a senior position with American before taking the top job at Virgin America, a San Francisco start-up that began flying in August 2007. Speaking of the pending rule, he said that, at a minimum, "delaying the rule 30 or 60 days'' would be a good idea.
"We are a small player at JFK,'' Cush told me. "American, Delta and JetBlue are the elephants.'' Nevertheless, he added, "We're all going to have a huge problem the first time thunderstorms roll into JFK in July or August, and there are 60 or 70 airplanes tied up at JFK.'' At such times, he said, Virgin America will accept delays of up to 2 hours and 15 minutes and then decide - 45 minutes before the new limit kicks in - whether or not to scrub the delayed flight.
Virgin America - minority-owned by British billionaire Richard Branson's Virgin Group - had a nightmarish experience on March 13, when VA flight 404 bound for JFK from Los Angeles International Airport was forced by bad weather on the East Coast to land 90 miles from New York and bus passengers to JFK. They got there at 3 a.m., 16 hours after departing LAX on a scheduled 5-hour flight. Cush wrote letters of apology to every passenger on the plane, and the airline refunded their fares and gave out $100 vouchers for future Virgin America flights.
"Flight 404 was unfortunate, but passengers had two opportunities to get off the plane,'' Cush averred. As for the new rule, "Taking away the discretion of the captain to make the decision is short-sighted. Ultimately, it is passengers who will decide'' if the rule will be effective, he said.
Asked if he expects consumer unhappiness about the new rule once flights are cancelled in compliance with it, Cush was blunt:
"Absolutely, and it won't take long.''
It's going to be an interesting spring and summer in the sky.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Like a Virgin
They play hardball in the travel biz. Ask anyone at Virgin America, a San Francisco-based, low-fare, high-style airline that launched commercial passenger service more than two years ago - and hasn't stopped fending off legal challenges ever since.
I don't know if Virgin America - which licenses its name from minority owner Richard Branson's UK-based Virgin Group - ever truly expected a smooth ride, but if so, I imagine the carrier has lost its innocence by now.
First, the fledgling airline's application to the U.S. Department of Transportation to begin service was held up when several mainline U.S. competitors, led by Continental Airlines, charged it wasn't in compliance with U.S. laws that restrict foreign ownership of any U.S. airline to a minority share. The application was approved, but only after the airline jettisoned its founding CEO, Fred Reid, who the DOT thought was too close to Branson. Branson tapped Reid, a former Delta and Lufthansa executive, to get Virgin America off the ground. Virgin America's first flight finally took off in August 2007.
Then, in early 2009, the Alaska Air Group Inc., which operates Alaska Airlines, similarly charged that Virgin America was not U.S.-owned and controlled. After renewed deliberation, DOT ruled last week that it is, while prompting several changes in the stakes of investors and the appointment of the airline's current CEO, former American Airlines executive David Cush, to the board of directors. This expands the board to nine members from eight, with seven of the directors being U.S. citizens.
As if all that wasn't enough, U.S. aviation legend Chuck Yeager, the former aircraft-test pilot - a main figure in Tom Wolfe's book "The Right Stuff'' and the 1980s movie adaptation of the same title - has sued Virgin America. Yeager claims the airline used his name "maliciously, oppressively and fraudulently,'' in promotional material, according to Andrew S. Ross's The Bottom Line column in the Jan. 8 business section of the San Francisco Chronicle. Virgin America, according to the Chronicle, praised Yeager in passing in an e-mail sent to its frequent fliers to ballyhoo on-board Wi-Fi, which it has pioneered among U.S. airlines.
"Not unlike Buzz Aldrin or Chuck Yeager, you have the opportunity to be part of a monumental moment in air travel,'' the e-mail reads, as quoted in Ross's reporting. Yeager says the airline didn't ask permission to use his name, and is asking for "the revenue and profits'' derived from its use, as well as "exemplary and punitive charges.'' The Chronicle's headline on the column: "Yeager's Suit - the Wrong Stuff.''
Jeesh.
Virgin America might prefer the exposure it will be getting on a new reality TV show, "Fly Girls,'' premiering on the CW network. "Fly Girls'' follows five young, not-average-looking female flight attendants who fly a lot and party a lot. The FAs work for Virgin America. That should be a boost to brand awareness.
As for Branson and foreign ownership, I can only say this: Most countries, convulsed by national security fears and worried about potential job losses, limit foreign ownership and control of their airlines. But, why? Business is global now, and the airline business is the main mode of transport for global commerce, especially travel and tourism. As much as any industry, civil aviation makes business more international than it's ever been. (I'll revisit this subject, and argue that such ownership rules are outdated and mercantilist, in another post.)
The British? Speaking as an American, I daresay the Brits haven't harmed the United States since they burned the White House during the War of 1812. You'd think we'd be over it by now. They're mainly a good lot. Of course, the British did give us Slade, Princess Di and Madonna faking a lady-of-the-manor English accent, so maybe it's OK to fear them after all. Probably not in aviation, though.
Virgin America, which flies to 10 U.S. cities and has ambitions to fly to 50, deserves a break. It's a good airline, a leader in in-flight technology, and a spur to much-needed competition in the U.S. domestic market. Allowing the airline to operate on that level playing field that everyone keeps nattering on about wouldn't be such bad thing.
I don't know if Virgin America - which licenses its name from minority owner Richard Branson's UK-based Virgin Group - ever truly expected a smooth ride, but if so, I imagine the carrier has lost its innocence by now.
First, the fledgling airline's application to the U.S. Department of Transportation to begin service was held up when several mainline U.S. competitors, led by Continental Airlines, charged it wasn't in compliance with U.S. laws that restrict foreign ownership of any U.S. airline to a minority share. The application was approved, but only after the airline jettisoned its founding CEO, Fred Reid, who the DOT thought was too close to Branson. Branson tapped Reid, a former Delta and Lufthansa executive, to get Virgin America off the ground. Virgin America's first flight finally took off in August 2007.
Then, in early 2009, the Alaska Air Group Inc., which operates Alaska Airlines, similarly charged that Virgin America was not U.S.-owned and controlled. After renewed deliberation, DOT ruled last week that it is, while prompting several changes in the stakes of investors and the appointment of the airline's current CEO, former American Airlines executive David Cush, to the board of directors. This expands the board to nine members from eight, with seven of the directors being U.S. citizens.
As if all that wasn't enough, U.S. aviation legend Chuck Yeager, the former aircraft-test pilot - a main figure in Tom Wolfe's book "The Right Stuff'' and the 1980s movie adaptation of the same title - has sued Virgin America. Yeager claims the airline used his name "maliciously, oppressively and fraudulently,'' in promotional material, according to Andrew S. Ross's The Bottom Line column in the Jan. 8 business section of the San Francisco Chronicle. Virgin America, according to the Chronicle, praised Yeager in passing in an e-mail sent to its frequent fliers to ballyhoo on-board Wi-Fi, which it has pioneered among U.S. airlines.
"Not unlike Buzz Aldrin or Chuck Yeager, you have the opportunity to be part of a monumental moment in air travel,'' the e-mail reads, as quoted in Ross's reporting. Yeager says the airline didn't ask permission to use his name, and is asking for "the revenue and profits'' derived from its use, as well as "exemplary and punitive charges.'' The Chronicle's headline on the column: "Yeager's Suit - the Wrong Stuff.''
Jeesh.
Virgin America might prefer the exposure it will be getting on a new reality TV show, "Fly Girls,'' premiering on the CW network. "Fly Girls'' follows five young, not-average-looking female flight attendants who fly a lot and party a lot. The FAs work for Virgin America. That should be a boost to brand awareness.
As for Branson and foreign ownership, I can only say this: Most countries, convulsed by national security fears and worried about potential job losses, limit foreign ownership and control of their airlines. But, why? Business is global now, and the airline business is the main mode of transport for global commerce, especially travel and tourism. As much as any industry, civil aviation makes business more international than it's ever been. (I'll revisit this subject, and argue that such ownership rules are outdated and mercantilist, in another post.)
The British? Speaking as an American, I daresay the Brits haven't harmed the United States since they burned the White House during the War of 1812. You'd think we'd be over it by now. They're mainly a good lot. Of course, the British did give us Slade, Princess Di and Madonna faking a lady-of-the-manor English accent, so maybe it's OK to fear them after all. Probably not in aviation, though.
Virgin America, which flies to 10 U.S. cities and has ambitions to fly to 50, deserves a break. It's a good airline, a leader in in-flight technology, and a spur to much-needed competition in the U.S. domestic market. Allowing the airline to operate on that level playing field that everyone keeps nattering on about wouldn't be such bad thing.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Copenhagen, Global Warming and Travel
The Copenhagen talks on climate change ended Friday not with a bang but a whimper.
The talks resulted in a watered-down pact, no emissions targets and no serious guidance for how the travel industry should go about reducing its contribution to global warming. This is not unexpected after two weeks of posturing and bickering by the world's political leaders, but it is a pity, as it only delays the inevitable changes we need to make to reduce harm to the planet.
Heading into the long-planned talks in the Danish capital, industry figures, politicians and environmentalists speculated that an emissions tax on civil aviation and commercial shipping - which together account for 8 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions - could be part of a deal. The tax would be levied on countries that don't meet emission-reduction targets. This, in turn, was envisioned as a way of generating up to a third of the $100 million annually that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said is needed in the form of subsides from rich countries to poor countries, helping the developing world to reduce its share of emissions.
"This is a two-fer,'' said Lou Leonard, director of U.S. climate policy for the World Wildlife Fund, as quoted in the Los Angeles Times on Dec. 18. "We can close a loophole in greenhouse gas controls, and we can also unlock the climate finance deadlock.''
Didn't happen.
Many travel industry leaders think it shouldn't have happened, although there is now a broad consensus that emissions need to be reduced, and a widespread belief that the travel industry needs to do its share. Aircraft, cruise ships, buses, cars and to a lesser extent trains contribute to global warming.
The travel-biz, hard-hit by the Great Recession, supports targets but not taxes. A prominent point man for this position, Richard Branson, head of the Virgin Group - which owns Virgin Atlantic Airways and has a 25 percent stake in the U.S. carrier Virgin America - put it this way in a Dec. 17 interview with the British Web site Airwise.com:
"The airline industry wants to see targets set ... so that we know where we stand and we can get on with it and make sure this world is back on track again.''
"The problem with a tax is where does the money go?'' Branson said. "And if you strip money from the airlines, then they will have less to invest in new planes and new technology.''
Branson advocates the development of biofuels to replace oil-based jetfuel and supports construction of airplanes made from light composite plastic material instead of metal; such planes burn less fuel and thus generate less CO2 and other greenhouse gases.
The airline industry, though often vilified for its highly visible role in emitting emissions, has reduced its pollution per plane since the 1990s. Problem is, passenger air travel is growing so fast around the world, the aviation industry's pollution total is still going up. Civil aviation produces 2 percent of today's greenhouse gases, according to the International Air Transport Association, the global airline-industry trade group. In a decade or so, that percentage will rise to 3 percent unless something is done.
Airlines and aircraft-makers are jetting out ahead of cruise-ships, tour buses and other modes of travel when it comes to reducing emissions. Air New Zealand, Virgin Atlantic, SAS and others have carried out test flights with biofuels, though such experiments are in the early stages.
"At the moment, you only have OPEC to buy your fuel from,'' said Branson, referring to the heavyweight cartel of oil-producing nations. Such states are often led by by petro-dictators, like those in Iran, the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia and Russia. "That's it, there's no competitor. If you develop a clean fuel made of algae or butanol, then there is a clean alternative,'' Branson told Airwise.com.
Absent a decision in Copenhagen, emissions reduction targets - and maybe carbon taxes - could still be introduced next year. Follow-up climate talks are scheduled for 2010 in Mexico City. Targets could also be set by bodies such as the International Maritime Organization and the International Civil Aviation Organization.
Even then, I suspect the travel biz would prefer reducing emissions to paying an extra tax that sounds good but may not be anything of the sort.
Consider another remark by the WWF's Leonard, quoted in the L.A. Times:
"Aviation is an industry that serves the upper classes. So, placing a global cap is appropriate, so long as the finds are used to help poor countries.''
Reading that, I wondered if Leonard has taken an airplane in the last few decades. Far from being the preserve of the upper classes - as it assuredly was back in the early days of commercial flight - flying is a form of mass transportation in much of the world. You are just as likely to have a schoolteacher or a postal clerk sitting next to you as a banker or socialite; many of the latter now fly in private planes, not on commercial airlines.
Lacking leadership from the world's heads of state, there are things travel biz types can do.
Writing in the San Francisco Chronicle on Nov. 17, David Cush, the president and CEO of Virgin America, addressed needed changes in U.S. aviation. Writing with think-tanker Mindy Lubber, Cush observed:
"A congressional upgrade of our aging air-traffic system with the Federal Aviation Administration's NextGen program would effectively create high-occupancy vehicle lanes in the sky. More technologically advanced airlines that can be more effiiciently operated should not have to wait behind older, less sophisticated jets on approach or takeoff. It is estimated that this move could save almost 1 billion gallons of fuel, cut massive amounts of CO2 emissions, and reduce delays by one-third at our nation's most congested airports by 2018.''
It would be a start.
The talks resulted in a watered-down pact, no emissions targets and no serious guidance for how the travel industry should go about reducing its contribution to global warming. This is not unexpected after two weeks of posturing and bickering by the world's political leaders, but it is a pity, as it only delays the inevitable changes we need to make to reduce harm to the planet.
Heading into the long-planned talks in the Danish capital, industry figures, politicians and environmentalists speculated that an emissions tax on civil aviation and commercial shipping - which together account for 8 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions - could be part of a deal. The tax would be levied on countries that don't meet emission-reduction targets. This, in turn, was envisioned as a way of generating up to a third of the $100 million annually that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said is needed in the form of subsides from rich countries to poor countries, helping the developing world to reduce its share of emissions.
"This is a two-fer,'' said Lou Leonard, director of U.S. climate policy for the World Wildlife Fund, as quoted in the Los Angeles Times on Dec. 18. "We can close a loophole in greenhouse gas controls, and we can also unlock the climate finance deadlock.''
Didn't happen.
Many travel industry leaders think it shouldn't have happened, although there is now a broad consensus that emissions need to be reduced, and a widespread belief that the travel industry needs to do its share. Aircraft, cruise ships, buses, cars and to a lesser extent trains contribute to global warming.
The travel-biz, hard-hit by the Great Recession, supports targets but not taxes. A prominent point man for this position, Richard Branson, head of the Virgin Group - which owns Virgin Atlantic Airways and has a 25 percent stake in the U.S. carrier Virgin America - put it this way in a Dec. 17 interview with the British Web site Airwise.com:
"The airline industry wants to see targets set ... so that we know where we stand and we can get on with it and make sure this world is back on track again.''
"The problem with a tax is where does the money go?'' Branson said. "And if you strip money from the airlines, then they will have less to invest in new planes and new technology.''
Branson advocates the development of biofuels to replace oil-based jetfuel and supports construction of airplanes made from light composite plastic material instead of metal; such planes burn less fuel and thus generate less CO2 and other greenhouse gases.
The airline industry, though often vilified for its highly visible role in emitting emissions, has reduced its pollution per plane since the 1990s. Problem is, passenger air travel is growing so fast around the world, the aviation industry's pollution total is still going up. Civil aviation produces 2 percent of today's greenhouse gases, according to the International Air Transport Association, the global airline-industry trade group. In a decade or so, that percentage will rise to 3 percent unless something is done.
Airlines and aircraft-makers are jetting out ahead of cruise-ships, tour buses and other modes of travel when it comes to reducing emissions. Air New Zealand, Virgin Atlantic, SAS and others have carried out test flights with biofuels, though such experiments are in the early stages.
"At the moment, you only have OPEC to buy your fuel from,'' said Branson, referring to the heavyweight cartel of oil-producing nations. Such states are often led by by petro-dictators, like those in Iran, the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia and Russia. "That's it, there's no competitor. If you develop a clean fuel made of algae or butanol, then there is a clean alternative,'' Branson told Airwise.com.
Absent a decision in Copenhagen, emissions reduction targets - and maybe carbon taxes - could still be introduced next year. Follow-up climate talks are scheduled for 2010 in Mexico City. Targets could also be set by bodies such as the International Maritime Organization and the International Civil Aviation Organization.
Even then, I suspect the travel biz would prefer reducing emissions to paying an extra tax that sounds good but may not be anything of the sort.
Consider another remark by the WWF's Leonard, quoted in the L.A. Times:
"Aviation is an industry that serves the upper classes. So, placing a global cap is appropriate, so long as the finds are used to help poor countries.''
Reading that, I wondered if Leonard has taken an airplane in the last few decades. Far from being the preserve of the upper classes - as it assuredly was back in the early days of commercial flight - flying is a form of mass transportation in much of the world. You are just as likely to have a schoolteacher or a postal clerk sitting next to you as a banker or socialite; many of the latter now fly in private planes, not on commercial airlines.
Lacking leadership from the world's heads of state, there are things travel biz types can do.
Writing in the San Francisco Chronicle on Nov. 17, David Cush, the president and CEO of Virgin America, addressed needed changes in U.S. aviation. Writing with think-tanker Mindy Lubber, Cush observed:
"A congressional upgrade of our aging air-traffic system with the Federal Aviation Administration's NextGen program would effectively create high-occupancy vehicle lanes in the sky. More technologically advanced airlines that can be more effiiciently operated should not have to wait behind older, less sophisticated jets on approach or takeoff. It is estimated that this move could save almost 1 billion gallons of fuel, cut massive amounts of CO2 emissions, and reduce delays by one-third at our nation's most congested airports by 2018.''
It would be a start.
Monday, September 7, 2009
More Fall Travel Deals and Discounts on Offer
The travel deals that have characterized most of 2009 are rolling right along, heading deep into the fall, as industry vendors continue to try to pump up business during the recession - and this traditionally slow time of year.
Here's a line on some interesting deals that have filled my inbox in recent days. As always, be detail-oriented and check the terms with providers if you consider booking.
*American Airlines is offering double elite-qualifying miles for various levels of its AAdvantage frequent-flyer program for travel on American through Dec. 15 (www.aa.com/elitestatus). Book with the promotion code DBLEQ.
* United Airlines, Virgin America and others are offering discounted fares to and from the San Francisco Bay Area for fall and winter travel. Deals center on San Francisco International Airport and Oakland International Airport, as reported by the travel bargain Web site TravelZoo.com. Sample fares - one-way, based on round-trip purchases, before taxes and fees - include San Francisco-Las Vegas from $49 and Oakland-Boston from $109. For more information, go to www.virginamerica.com, www.united.com or www.travelzoo.com/Newsflash).
* Speaking of airfare sales, Continental Airlines has a good business-class fare from its U.S. hubs in Newark, Cleveland and Houston to prime locales in Europe (www.continental.com). The catch: Deals are for travel during the U.S. Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays. Prices are as low as $1,130 roundtrip and nonstop from Newark to Europe from Nov. 21-Nov. 27, and back to Newark from Nov. 26-Dec. 4. Slightly higher but still good fares obtain on the same routes for those willing to fly over the Christmas holiday.
* The designer boutique hotel Opposite House, in Beijing (www.oppositehouse.com), is offering a third night free for guests who book two previous consecutive nights. Rates start at $337 U.S.
Offer is good through Dec. 31, and includes add-ons such as breakfast for two on weekends and a guided cultural walk around Beijing on Saturdays.
* Another American Airlines promotion: Selected destinations in the Caribbean, Mexico, the Bahamas and Bermuda are on sale through Sept. 15, good for travel to and from the United States till Nov. 19. There are no advance purchase requirements and no embargo dates. The terms include a minimum 2-day and maximum 30-day stay. Sample fares - one-way based on round-trip purchase, before taxes and fees: Washington, D.C.-Kingston, Jamaica, $95; Chicago-Montego Bay, Jamaica, $100. (www.aa.com).
* Some 75 California winemakers, hotels and restaurants are rolling out special deals throughout September, dubbed California Wine Month in the Golden State. Deals encompass the prime winemaking regions in northern California's Napa and Sonoma valleys and southern California's productive Paso Robles area (www.visitcalifornia.com).
Here's wishing you a fabulous fall.
Footnotes:
I'll be departing late tonight to Asia, to experience and write about "voluntourism'' - the giving-back by travelers to communities in need.
I'll also be blogging frequently about the high points of some great Asian destinations. You'll be hearing more about the latest happenings in Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong and Bangkok, among others, as well as impressions of my airline journeys (I'm booked on Cathay Pacific Airways and Dragonair) and no fewer than six Shangri-la hotels and resorts in east Asia.
Here's a line on some interesting deals that have filled my inbox in recent days. As always, be detail-oriented and check the terms with providers if you consider booking.
*American Airlines is offering double elite-qualifying miles for various levels of its AAdvantage frequent-flyer program for travel on American through Dec. 15 (www.aa.com/elitestatus). Book with the promotion code DBLEQ.
* United Airlines, Virgin America and others are offering discounted fares to and from the San Francisco Bay Area for fall and winter travel. Deals center on San Francisco International Airport and Oakland International Airport, as reported by the travel bargain Web site TravelZoo.com. Sample fares - one-way, based on round-trip purchases, before taxes and fees - include San Francisco-Las Vegas from $49 and Oakland-Boston from $109. For more information, go to www.virginamerica.com, www.united.com or www.travelzoo.com/Newsflash).
* Speaking of airfare sales, Continental Airlines has a good business-class fare from its U.S. hubs in Newark, Cleveland and Houston to prime locales in Europe (www.continental.com). The catch: Deals are for travel during the U.S. Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays. Prices are as low as $1,130 roundtrip and nonstop from Newark to Europe from Nov. 21-Nov. 27, and back to Newark from Nov. 26-Dec. 4. Slightly higher but still good fares obtain on the same routes for those willing to fly over the Christmas holiday.
* The designer boutique hotel Opposite House, in Beijing (www.oppositehouse.com), is offering a third night free for guests who book two previous consecutive nights. Rates start at $337 U.S.
Offer is good through Dec. 31, and includes add-ons such as breakfast for two on weekends and a guided cultural walk around Beijing on Saturdays.
* Another American Airlines promotion: Selected destinations in the Caribbean, Mexico, the Bahamas and Bermuda are on sale through Sept. 15, good for travel to and from the United States till Nov. 19. There are no advance purchase requirements and no embargo dates. The terms include a minimum 2-day and maximum 30-day stay. Sample fares - one-way based on round-trip purchase, before taxes and fees: Washington, D.C.-Kingston, Jamaica, $95; Chicago-Montego Bay, Jamaica, $100. (www.aa.com).
* Some 75 California winemakers, hotels and restaurants are rolling out special deals throughout September, dubbed California Wine Month in the Golden State. Deals encompass the prime winemaking regions in northern California's Napa and Sonoma valleys and southern California's productive Paso Robles area (www.visitcalifornia.com).
Here's wishing you a fabulous fall.
Footnotes:
I'll be departing late tonight to Asia, to experience and write about "voluntourism'' - the giving-back by travelers to communities in need.
I'll also be blogging frequently about the high points of some great Asian destinations. You'll be hearing more about the latest happenings in Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong and Bangkok, among others, as well as impressions of my airline journeys (I'm booked on Cathay Pacific Airways and Dragonair) and no fewer than six Shangri-la hotels and resorts in east Asia.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Heads Up: 7 New Travel Deals
News about travel deals - for airlines, hotels and resorts, theme parks, car rental agencies - flood my inbox and cross my desk all the time. Here are seven new travel deals you might be interested in, most of them designed to get people back out on the road this Fall. As always, caveat emptor. Read the fine print, and if it looks good, go.
1. AirTran Airways launched a fare sale today through midnight EDT Thursday, offering one-way fares starting at $39 for travel from Aug. 18 through Dec. 16, with blackout dates around Thanksgiving. Cheapest fares are on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. Samples: $39 from Baltimore-Washington International to Charlotte, $54 from Orlando to Atlantic City. (http://www.airtran.com/ or 1.800-AIR-TRAN).
2. The Bermuda Department of Tourism is offering up to 40 percent off participating Bermuda hotels in honor of Bermuda's 400th anniversary. Sale ends Wednesday, Aug. 5 and is good for travel from Aug. 21 through March 31, 2010. (http://www.bermudasale.com/).
3. The Epic Hotel, a stylish boutique property in Miami with a good restaurant, called Area 31, and a happening waterside bar, is offering rooms from $129, valid for Thursdays through Sundays. This is a cool, modern hotel - I stayed there a few months ago and liked it. This sale ends Friday and is good for travel from today through Sept. 30. (http://www.kimptonhotels.com/)
4. Virgin America, the 2-year-old airline based in San Francisco, is putting tickets on sale now through Aug. 11 for travel from Aug. 18 through Nov. 18. Sample fares: Boston-San Francisco, starting at $119 one-way before taxes and fees, and New York-Las Vegas, also starting at $119 one-way. (http://www.virginamerica.com/ or 1.877.FLY.VIRGIN).
5. Walt Disney World is offering six packages, called Magic Your Way, available for travel through Dec. 17. Some variations go as low as $70 per night and includes entry to a Walt Disney World Resort and one Walt Disney theme park. Paackages are good for travel from Sept. 27 to Dec., 17, and tickets must be booked by Sept. 27. (http://www.disneyworld.disney.go.com/)
6. Traders Hotels, the well-regarded 4-star business-oriented hotels operated by Hong Kong's Shangri-la Hotels and Resorts, are offering a second night free from now through Sept. 30, to travelers who book between Aug. 6 and Aug. 15. Traders has hotels in a number of big Asian cities, including Kuala Lumpur, Yangon (Rangoon), Beijing, Singapore and Abu Dhabi. (http://www.shangri-la.com/).
7. Jet Airways, an internationally respected Indian carrier, is offering "boarding pass delights,'' along with its domestic low-cost unit, JetLite, that include discounts at participating hotels in India. For example, showing a Jet Airways or JetLite boarding card would get you a third night free at participating Marriott Hotels in India. (http://www.jetairways.com/).
1. AirTran Airways launched a fare sale today through midnight EDT Thursday, offering one-way fares starting at $39 for travel from Aug. 18 through Dec. 16, with blackout dates around Thanksgiving. Cheapest fares are on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. Samples: $39 from Baltimore-Washington International to Charlotte, $54 from Orlando to Atlantic City. (http://www.airtran.com/ or 1.800-AIR-TRAN).
2. The Bermuda Department of Tourism is offering up to 40 percent off participating Bermuda hotels in honor of Bermuda's 400th anniversary. Sale ends Wednesday, Aug. 5 and is good for travel from Aug. 21 through March 31, 2010. (http://www.bermudasale.com/).
3. The Epic Hotel, a stylish boutique property in Miami with a good restaurant, called Area 31, and a happening waterside bar, is offering rooms from $129, valid for Thursdays through Sundays. This is a cool, modern hotel - I stayed there a few months ago and liked it. This sale ends Friday and is good for travel from today through Sept. 30. (http://www.kimptonhotels.com/)
4. Virgin America, the 2-year-old airline based in San Francisco, is putting tickets on sale now through Aug. 11 for travel from Aug. 18 through Nov. 18. Sample fares: Boston-San Francisco, starting at $119 one-way before taxes and fees, and New York-Las Vegas, also starting at $119 one-way. (http://www.virginamerica.com/ or 1.877.FLY.VIRGIN).
5. Walt Disney World is offering six packages, called Magic Your Way, available for travel through Dec. 17. Some variations go as low as $70 per night and includes entry to a Walt Disney World Resort and one Walt Disney theme park. Paackages are good for travel from Sept. 27 to Dec., 17, and tickets must be booked by Sept. 27. (http://www.disneyworld.disney.go.com/)
6. Traders Hotels, the well-regarded 4-star business-oriented hotels operated by Hong Kong's Shangri-la Hotels and Resorts, are offering a second night free from now through Sept. 30, to travelers who book between Aug. 6 and Aug. 15. Traders has hotels in a number of big Asian cities, including Kuala Lumpur, Yangon (Rangoon), Beijing, Singapore and Abu Dhabi. (http://www.shangri-la.com/).
7. Jet Airways, an internationally respected Indian carrier, is offering "boarding pass delights,'' along with its domestic low-cost unit, JetLite, that include discounts at participating hotels in India. For example, showing a Jet Airways or JetLite boarding card would get you a third night free at participating Marriott Hotels in India. (http://www.jetairways.com/).
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Blogging and more at 37,000 feet
Skeptics maintain that air travelers won't pay up to$12.95 per session for the ability to Web surf, check e-mail, text-message or do other high-tech tricks in the sky, but U.S. domestic airlines- led by Virgin America, the airline I am on right now _ are rushing ahead to create wi-fi in the sky.
Virgin America, a stylish start-up that first took off from its home base in San Francisco in August 2007, this week became the first U.S. carrier to equip every aircraft in its fleet with wi-fi. I paid $12.95 for my 5-hour plus flight from San Francisco to New York to access gogoinflight, the system VA uses. Virtually every other U.S. airline - among them Air Tran, Delta, American and United - are also using gogo, an Aircell brand, or soon will be.
It works fine, if slightly more slowly than Web service on the ground, enabled by transmission towers scattered across North America. The system doesn't work over water, so it can't be used for overseas flights.
New York Times columnist Joe Sharkey reported last week that Aircell says its airline customers spend a hefty $100,000 per plane to make their aircraft wi-fi-friendly. That's a lot of money, especially in a deep recession, but carriers are evidently convinced that air travelers want to work and play online to pass the time and get things done. VA executives say about 25 percent of their customers go online en route, and from what I can see from my premium eocnomy seat in what VA calls Cabin Select, that seems about right. Of course, VA has perhaps the most tech-savvy passengers of any domestic carrier. This is a gadget-mad customer base.
Me, I'm happy to be online off the ground. Now, if they'll only keep voice communications, whether via Skype or personal handsets, off the planes, we'll have a cheery and productive time up here.
Virgin America, a stylish start-up that first took off from its home base in San Francisco in August 2007, this week became the first U.S. carrier to equip every aircraft in its fleet with wi-fi. I paid $12.95 for my 5-hour plus flight from San Francisco to New York to access gogoinflight, the system VA uses. Virtually every other U.S. airline - among them Air Tran, Delta, American and United - are also using gogo, an Aircell brand, or soon will be.
It works fine, if slightly more slowly than Web service on the ground, enabled by transmission towers scattered across North America. The system doesn't work over water, so it can't be used for overseas flights.
New York Times columnist Joe Sharkey reported last week that Aircell says its airline customers spend a hefty $100,000 per plane to make their aircraft wi-fi-friendly. That's a lot of money, especially in a deep recession, but carriers are evidently convinced that air travelers want to work and play online to pass the time and get things done. VA executives say about 25 percent of their customers go online en route, and from what I can see from my premium eocnomy seat in what VA calls Cabin Select, that seems about right. Of course, VA has perhaps the most tech-savvy passengers of any domestic carrier. This is a gadget-mad customer base.
Me, I'm happy to be online off the ground. Now, if they'll only keep voice communications, whether via Skype or personal handsets, off the planes, we'll have a cheery and productive time up here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)