William P. Hobby Airport

[VicMan]

Poor Gordon Bethune... He built Continental back up and his "Work Hard, FlY Right" campaign was pure genius. Continental has stood apart from the pack for years. Now, like the other legacy carriers, they seem to be caught up in the race to the floor.

Continental was trying to hold on to the freebies (it was one of the last to apply 1st checked bag fees, and it is the last to drop free food) - but the U.S. domestic market has changed to a point where price is the main determining factor for selecting flights.

It started with outsourcing commuter flights away from ExpressJet.

Are you referring to when Continental spun off ExpressJet into a separate company? Or are you referring to an increase in the share of ExpressJet flights? Or are you referring to Continental deciding to allow Chautauqua to be a regional partner?

Continental is rarely the cheapest option. In the past though, they could offer certain things that made you feel like it was worth it, and yes, a free meal can go a long way. Consider this... you're flying from Guatemala City to Boston on Continental but your connection is way too tight and immigration is backed up so you can't manage a meal in the terminal. In the past, you'd be guaranteed two light snacks for free without hassle on your 8 1/2 hour journey. Now, you're gonna have to whip out your credit card in midair and spend $7 for Twizzlers, peanuts, and other trash and be told it's a "meal."

The airline will likely consider Guatemala City to be a "business" international destination, so the free food will remain on that flight. The international destinations in North America that get mostly tourists will have the paid meals.

Also Continental could possibly introduce good buy on board options (on other forums people said they like Virgin America's, seen here: http://www.virginamerica.com/va/travelInfo.do?pageName=meals&rightBar=food_and_beverages_right_bar ) - Also one could have additional options available that would have to be booked before the flight

Edited March 16, 2010 by VicMan

[Hartmann]

Ultra-competitive pricing is great for the consumer (strictly in terms of dollars) but bad for the airlines. In order for Continental to compete with a Southwest or a JetBlue (competition which Priceline, Orbitz and Cheaptickets forces with their itemization), they have to remove a ton of amenities. Most people couldn't care less about inflight food or even the skill level of their pilot if they can save $30 on their roundtrip.

Anyhow, my point about the food not actually being "free" is that if the food is left on the menu at no additional cost, the airlines would have to cut costs elsewhere in order to remain competitive. While I realize the price of the ticket won't go down, they probably won't now have to lay off any maintenance staff or tenured pilots.

I'm not disagreeing with your point about the food being built into the ticket prices, I was just pointing out that people shouldn't expect prices to go down because the food is no longer free. Continental just sees this as another possible way to generate revenue. The same with the charging of non-elites for exit row seats.

However, I still do not see your point with the low cost websites. The only way their prices are "cheaper" than what you'll find on airline websites is if they bundle with a hotel or cruise package, or at the peril of the customer, sell tickets between two airlines who do not have alliance or ticketing ties. All of the big airlines, except for Southwest, share their inventory with the different travel websites. Meaning, the price you find for IAH-ORD on Orbitz should be exact with the different airlines. Where the difference comes in is where IAH-ORD is on Continental and the return is ORD-ATL on Delta and ATL-IAH on Continental. The different websites take the cheapest available one-way fares from each carrier and build the itinerary. The issue is occurs when your O'Hare to Atlanta flight is late and you end up missing Atlanta-IAH. In some cases, Delta has no knowledge of the through flight on Continental and will tell passengers that they are not responsible. Continental will say that it was your fault for missing the flight since they cannot see the Delta flight and they'll put you on STBY until you clear. Of course, there are ways around this, you just have to know what is going on.

The other time that you'll see the cheap website's prices actually lower than continental.com is when you are on an international itinerary and there is an issue with calculating the fuel surcharges and taxes. This usually happens when you're connecting through a U.S. airport to somewhere in Latin America.

[Hartmann]

The airline will likely consider Guatemala City to be a "business" international destination, so the free food will remain on that flight. The international destinations in North America that get mostly tourists will have the paid meals.

Unless it's over six hours, I doubt they'll continue free meals in coach, even to Guatemala City. I can also see them getting rid of the dinner options on the Houston-Lima flight for coach passengers.

[kylejack]

I'm sure its just a coincidence that Southwest has cheaper prices than Continental and also doesn't serve a meal.

[Hartmann]

I'm sure its just a coincidence that Southwest has cheaper prices than Continental and also doesn't serve a meal.

??

No, their prices are cheaper due to fuel hedging (that's expired now though right?), point-to-point operations, and a single aircraft type (cheaper maintenance). If you're suggesting that Continental will lower ticket prices due to this change, I won't hold my breath.

On the same point, Southwest has been fairly expensive for a lot of domestic stuff where they compete with Continental. I was actually surprised to see Houston-Los Angeles at $400.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Hartmann

[VicMan]

In this USA Today article http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/item.aspx?type=blog&ak=83427.blog:

In Central America, Continental says it will keep free meals on routes to business-heavy markets like Mexico City or Managua, but that routes to leisure destinations like Cancun or Puerto Vallarta will be subject to the new meal charges.

So the airline will keep food on some Latin America flights, even though they are under six hours.

Unless it's over six hours, I doubt they'll continue free meals in coach, even to Guatemala City. I can also see them getting rid of the dinner options on the Houston-Lima flight for coach passengers.

[kylejack]

??

No, their prices are cheaper due to fuel hedging (that's expired now though right?), point-to-point operations, and a single aircraft type (cheaper maintenance). If you're suggesting that Continental will lower ticket prices due to this change, I won't hold my breath.

On the same point, Southwest has been fairly expensive for a lot of domestic stuff where they compete with Continental. I was actually surprised to see Houston-Los Angeles at $400.

Continental lost $290 million last year while SWA made $143 million and you're begrudging them for making changes to get back to profitability. I consider the meal a total waste. Any time I eat food that doesn't taste very good I think of all the better more interesting food I could have had.

Edit: Woops, forgot to add up both ways.

Edited March 16, 2010 by kylejack

[Hartmann]

Continental lost $290 million last year while SWA made $143 million and you're begrudging them for making changes to get back to profitability. I consider the meal a total waste. Any time I eat food that doesn't taste very good I think of all the better more interesting food I could have had.

I just picked a random roundtrip Houston-LA for April 16-20. $258 on Continental, $129 (!) on SWA.

And now I'm actually considering going to see my friend.

Where did I say that I am mad that they are taking the meals off? I actually said the opposite, I see the paid meals as a good thing. I just don't think it will lower ticket costs. Smisek is about the bottom line. He'll keep ticket prices where they're at and try to squeeze some extra revenue out of the meals.

Not having a free meal on Continental isn't going to keep me from flying them.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Hartmann

[Trae]

I'll continue to eat my meal in the terminal and sleep on the flight. Thanks.

[skwatra]

SW has not been cheaper than Continental as of late. I recently booked tickets to Chicago, Denver, and SF on Continental all with competitive pricing to SW. For the first two, it was actually cheaper (all booking well in advance), for SF it was a little bit more than flying SW to OAK, but the timing was much better (plus getting miles and probably getting upgraded) and the delta was only $20.

From Wiki on Southwest Fuel hedging:

2009 is over 50% hedged at $51/barrel; 2010 is over 25% hedged at $63/barrel; 2011 is over 15% hedged at $64/barrel; 2012 is 15% hedged at $63/barrel.

Explains why their prices have slowly been creeping up year by year. In 2007 they would beat any other major carrier for point to point flights, but that's not the case anymore.

Anyways, I agree with Hartmann that the consumer is not going to see a change in pricing other than market trends, and I'm ok with them getting rid of food- this isn't going to change my flight preferences. As long as their service remains the same as it has been.

[AtticaFlinch]

I'm not disagreeing with your point about the food being built into the ticket prices, I was just pointing out that people shouldn't expect prices to go down because the food is no longer free. Continental just sees this as another possible way to generate revenue. The same with the charging of non-elites for exit row seats.

However, I still do not see your point with the low cost websites. The only way their prices are "cheaper" than what you'll find on airline websites is if they bundle with a hotel or cruise package, or at the peril of the customer, sell tickets between two airlines who do not have alliance or ticketing ties. All of the big airlines, except for Southwest, share their inventory with the different travel websites. Meaning, the price you find for IAH-ORD on Orbitz should be exact with the different airlines. Where the difference comes in is where IAH-ORD is on Continental and the return is ORD-ATL on Delta and ATL-IAH on Continental. The different websites take the cheapest available one-way fares from each carrier and build the itinerary. The issue is occurs when your O'Hare to Atlanta flight is late and you end up missing Atlanta-IAH. In some cases, Delta has no knowledge of the through flight on Continental and will tell passengers that they are not responsible. Continental will say that it was your fault for missing the flight since they cannot see the Delta flight and they'll put you on STBY until you clear. Of course, there are ways around this, you just have to know what is going on.

The other time that you'll see the cheap website's prices actually lower than continental.com is when you are on an international itinerary and there is an issue with calculating the fuel surcharges and taxes. This usually happens when you're connecting through a U.S. airport to somewhere in Latin America.

Those websites make instant the price shopping, and as price is often the decisive factor in consumption these days, regardless of quality, those sites in turn instantly make more amenity-laden choices less attractive. I don't know how to make more clear what I'm saying, though I admit maybe I'm at fault for expressing my point less than adequately. It's like having a McDonald's, a Burger King, a Wendy's, a Jack in the Box and a Beck's Prime all on the same block, and you really want a burger but your only factor in making a decision as to where to eat is based on price. If all you want is a burger, and if one of those places is as easily accessible as the next, you probably won't shop at Beck's Prime. More to the point, if Beck's has trouble communicating to the general public that their product is superior, or worse, if the public couldn't care less about quality over cost, then Beck's had either downsize and devote themselves to a smaller, appreciative group of consumers or start mass-producing crappy hamburgers. In that example, the ease of access to all those burger joints is those travel websites, and considering Continental doesn't want to downsize, they're now mass-producing crappy burgers. I realize the prices are the same from the travel websites to the airline websites, but the big thing is that all those prices are in one place.

[mfastx]

This doesn't really affect me much. In my experience, Continental's meals have been pretty crappy. The last meal I had on Continental was this soggy "pig in a blanket." Yuck.

Usually, I eat my meals in the terminal. Just today I had great food at Chile's in St. Louis.

Edited March 16, 2010 by mfastx

[Hartmann]

Those websites make instant the price shopping, and as price is often the decisive factor in consumption these days, regardless of quality, those sites in turn instantly make more amenity-laden choices less attractive. I don't know how to make more clear what I'm saying, though I admit maybe I'm at fault for expressing my point less than adequately. It's like having a McDonald's, a Burger King, a Wendy's, a Jack in the Box and a Beck's Prime all on the same block, and you really want a burger but your only factor in making a decision as to where to eat is based on price. If all you want is a burger, and if one of those places is as easily accessible as the next, you probably won't shop at Beck's Prime. More to the point, if Beck's has trouble communicating to the general public that their product is superior, or worse, if the public couldn't care less about quality over cost, then Beck's had either downsize and devote themselves to a smaller, appreciative group of consumers or start mass-producing crappy hamburgers. In that example, the ease of access to all those burger joints is those travel websites, and considering Continental doesn't want to downsize, they're now mass-producing crappy burgers. I realize the prices are the same from the travel websites to the airline websites, but the big thing is that all those prices are in one place.

Ahhh, I get what you are saying now. My apologies, I thought you were implying that all of the different websites have access to different inventory. On your point, I completely agree, CO is now pretty much exactly like the other guys in the business, especially in coach.

[foxmulder]

??

No, their prices are cheaper due to fuel hedging (that's expired now though right?), point-to-point operations, and a single aircraft type (cheaper maintenance). If you're suggesting that Continental will lower ticket prices due to this change, I won't hold my breath.

On the same point, Southwest has been fairly expensive for a lot of domestic stuff where they compete with Continental. I was actually surprised to see Houston-Los Angeles at $400.

I found a CO price last year 2 months in advance to LA for 900 bucks. I booked with southwest for 224 round trip. I have a trip Tuesday for the same price. You must be looking at "business" class. 440 with tax for 2 non stop round trip tickets.

[skwatra]

Right now flying to LA on April 23 is $277.90 on SW. The price on Continental is $278, with more options. If you can an eye out this price will go down for both airlines, though the amount of flights on SW will be very limited. The good thing about Continental or any other major carrier that shares their inventory is that you can use sites like Kayak to set up a fare alert and tell you as soon as the price goes down, while SW you have to check manually every day.

For any flight over 800 miles, I've found Cont to be competitive with SW lately, which was not that case a year ago.

I just booked a ticket to Cincinnati for $148 total on Cont, cheapest ticket I've booked in years...

[barracuda]

I'll pay a little more to fly CO over SW. Part of my reason is that I have Elite status, so the seating and luggage arrangements are definitely better on CO. But there's also the matter of frequent flier miles that don't expire after a year like rapid rewards and are good for international travel on CO and its partners. CO is also more likely to have direct flights.

I also don't like the goofiness of the SW flight attendants that SW seems to encourage. I prefer my flight to be a quiet experience and don't want a wannabe comedian telling painfully bad jokes or singing over the intercom when I'm trying to sleep or read something. Maybe that sounds grumpy, but seriously, traveling by air is painful enough as it is.

[Fringe]

I fly SW just because they fly out of Hobby. Can't stand Intercontinental. 

[AtticaFlinch]

I also don't like the goofiness of the SW flight attendants that SW seems to encourage. I prefer my flight to be a quiet experience and don't want a wannabe comedian telling painfully bad jokes or singing over the intercom when I'm trying to sleep or read something. Maybe that sounds grumpy, but seriously, traveling by air is painful enough as it is.

I don't know. I kinda like it. Flying is such a mundane, prosaic task these days, I really don't mind a break in the monotony. For some reason, probably due to the intensity of the ambient noises associated with flying, I find it difficult to concentrate on a book, so I usually end up doing the sudokus in the in-flight magazine. That can only keep me entertained for so long, so if a wannabe comedian talling bad jokes or a wannabe Beyonce singing Boys II Men's "It's So Hard to Say Goodbye to Yesterday" takes a little time behind the intercom, it's ok with me.

I fly SW just because they fly out of Hobby. Can't stand Intercontinental.

Amen to that. Flying out of IAH makes me feel like cattle going to slaughter, while flying from Hobby makes me feel the same but in a much smaller abatoire.

[houstonmacbro]

I do wish Continental did what Hawaiian Airlines did and offered free meals in addition to extra buy on board options.

Maybe what Continental should do is try to sell distinctly Houston products (food products from Houston area chains and/or specialties from the Houston area, such as fajitas, Vietnamese sandwiches, etc) on flights to and from Houston. I also thought of the idea of including chips and salsa with meal packs as kind of a Tex-Mex touch...

This is a really good idea. And don't several of the Houston chains operate in the new terminal already?

I am sad to see them ditch their meal service. It was the one thing that made me fly them over other airlines (honest, I am not just saying that).

Anyhow, I also thought I heard somewhere that they are going to be charging extra for additional legroom. WTH?!?

[VicMan]

HAIFers, which of the following Houston chains would be a good fit for an airline buy on board service?

* Cafe Express/Taco Milagro

* Beck's Prime

* James Coney Island

* Pappas Family Restaurants (any)

* Luby's

* Goode Company (any)

* Kim Son

And of the ones you want, what menu items would you propose?

The food recipes will have to be prepared differently as airline food preparation is special and human taste buds react differently in the air, but hopefully Chelsea would be knowledgeable enough to duplicate the experiences of these chains as faithfully as possible.

In regards to the legroom, if someone tries to book specifically an exit row seat in economy, under most circumstances he or she will be charged. Also I believe a Pappas location has a location inside of Terminal E - I'm not sure.

This is a really good idea. And don't several of the Houston chains operate in the new terminal already?

I am sad to see them ditch their meal service. It was the one thing that made me fly them over other airlines (honest, I am not just saying that).

Anyhow, I also thought I heard somewhere that they are going to be charging extra for additional legroom. WTH?!?

Edited March 19, 2010 by VicMan

[Hanuman]

I don't know. I kinda like it. Flying is such a mundane, prosaic task these days, I really don't mind a break in the monotony. For some reason, probably due to the intensity of the ambient noises associated with flying, I find it difficult to concentrate on a book, so I usually end up doing the sudokus in the in-flight magazine. That can only keep me entertained for so long, so if a wannabe comedian talling bad jokes or a wannabe Beyonce singing Boys II Men's "It's So Hard to Say Goodbye to Yesterday" takes a little time behind the intercom, it's ok with me.

Amen to that. Flying out of IAH makes me feel like cattle going to slaughter, while flying from Hobby makes me feel the same but in a much smaller abatoire.

Abatoire? "Abattoire" (sp) ... 2, T's ... Flinch! What's all the hype over eating on flights? We should discuss the drinking on flights if you want a qantius aforbius! So, who's against a Bloody Mary on lift-off? Brings another question ... what is the plural of Bloody Mary? ... Flinch? Drunk ! ... got to go ... almost missed my flight!!!

[frheard]

This is a really good idea. And don't several of the Houston chains operate in the new terminal already?

I am sad to see them ditch their meal service. It was the one thing that made me fly them over other airlines (honest, I am not just saying that).

Anyhow, I also thought I heard somewhere that they are going to be charging extra for additional legroom. WTH?!?

Pappasitos, Pappadeauxs, and Pappas BBQ each have an outlet in Terminal E. All the other stuff, as I recall, is made up of national chains. Wendy's, Subway, Starbucks, etc.

As for the legroom deal, I'm not really clear on the policy. I guess if there is an open exit row seat, you can pay to sit there. Whooppee. What if you're the sucker that paid to sit there, then someone who did not pay sits in the other available exit row seat. Won't you feel like a sucker? You think the flight attendants are gonna kick them out? i doubt it.

[kylejack]

HAIFers, which of the following Houston chains would be a good fit for an airline buy on board service?

* Cafe Express/Taco Milagro

* Beck's Prime

* James Coney Island

* Pappas Family Restaurants (any)

* Luby's

* Goode Company (any)

* Kim Son

And of the ones you want, what menu items would you propose?

The food recipes will have to be prepared differently as airline food preparation is special and human taste buds react differently in the air, but hopefully Chelsea would be knowledgeable enough to duplicate the experiences of these chains as faithfully as possible.

In regards to the legroom, if someone tries to book specifically an exit row seat in economy, under most circumstances he or she will be charged. Also I believe a Pappas location has a location inside of Terminal E - I'm not sure.

Keep in mind that airline food has to be frozen and reheated in a microwave. That's a large part of why its so bad.

Edited March 19, 2010 by kylejack

[VicMan]

Keep in mind that airline food has to be frozen and reheated in a microwave. That's a large part of why its so bad.

That's part of what I alluded to in the phrase "The food recipes will have to be prepared differently as airline food preparation is special" - While that is true, airlines have been finding ways to get around the reality of having to use a microwave and the fact that human taste buds act differently.

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/science/news/article_1539215.php/Tomato-juice-irresistibly-good-at-32-000-feet-experts-confirm talks about why people like drinking tomato juice on airplanes.

The same article says: "The findings also showed that certain meals taste better under reduced-pressure conditions. Asian dishes were tastier to the test subjects than were the standard 'chicken or fish' airline meals. The scientists determined that chicken and fish dishes tasted bland under cabin conditions. They recommended those dishes be cooked with more herbs and spices."

It sounds like Continental could do well if it has BOB options with the Kim Son brand.

Edited March 19, 2010 by VicMan

[AtticaFlinch]

It sounds like Continental could do well if it has BOB options with the Kim Son brand.

Perhaps they could just put Maruchan Ramen Noodles on board and still provide it free. That stuff is way cheaper than a wilted lettuce sandwich.

[VicMan]

Perhaps they could just put Maruchan Ramen Noodles on board and still provide it free. That stuff is way cheaper than a wilted lettuce sandwich.

Continental might provide ramen as an option, but still ask people to pay for it. Air Canada has ramen as one of its snack options. http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/onboard/dining/na/onboard/snacks.html - Air Canada charges $3 CDN for each ramen pack.

The airline should offer ramen on shorter buy on board flights as well as longer ones.

Edited March 19, 2010 by VicMan

[houstonmacbro]

Perhaps they could just put Maruchan Ramen Noodles on board and still provide it free. That stuff is way cheaper than a wilted lettuce sandwich.

And salty. I know a lot of processed food HAS salt in it, but those noodles have salt and TASTE salty.

[VicMan]

And salty. I know a lot of processed food HAS salt in it, but those noodles have salt and TASTE salty.

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/science/news/article_1539215.php/Tomato-juice-irresistibly-good-at-32-000-feet-experts-confirm says:

"The researchers at Fraunhofer IBP came to the startling conclusion that reduced cabin air pressure enhanced human taste receptors for salt, sugar and tomato flavours, which are scarcely noticeable on the ground." - Perhaps this means that the ramen for airplane consumption could be made with less salt?

[Fringe]

http://www.monstersa...experts-confirm says:

"The researchers at Fraunhofer IBP came to the startling conclusion that reduced cabin air pressure enhanced human taste receptors for salt, sugar and tomato flavours, which are scarcely noticeable on the ground." - Perhaps this means that the ramen for airplane consumption could be made with less salt?

Maybe they need to serve Bloody Mary's in lieu of food. 

[AtticaFlinch]

Maybe they need to serve Bloody Mary's in lieu of food.

If that was free in coach, I'd never fly another airline.