Aviation Week - Although Airbus has yet to firmly commit to reengining the A320 narrowbody family, EADS CEO Louis Gallois suggests that the aircraft maker is unlikely to reverse course.  Read More>>

WSJ - Fliers who feel they have been mistreated by airlines may soon be in for a bit of relief. New government rules go into effect next month that will give travelers more rights—and maybe even more recourse—when travel goes awry. Additional passenger protections may be coming later this year.  Read More>>

Portfolia.com - Airlines have their NyLons in a knot about the state of the New York-London route. One of four customers has disappeared in recent years, the fares that remaining flyers pay have plummeted, and competition on the so-called NyLon run has become a fight-to-the-last-customer battle for the five major American and British combatants.  Read More>>

IATA Press Release - We can start to see the future with some cautious optimism, but better volumes do not necessarily mean better profits. Passenger yields are still 15% below peak. And we expect 2010 losses to be US$5.6 billion,” said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO.  Read More>>

USA Today - There is bad news for those of us who live and die by frequent traveler points and programs. Around this time of year, I always look forward to learning which programs have been highest rated by frequent travelers in the annual Freddie Awards competition. Sadly, it appears there will be no Freddie Awards this year, or perhaps ever again.  Read More>>

Recent experience leaves me wondering about the applicability of the $150 change fee charged by most airlines under certain circumstances. There are times when for one reason or another you just want to buy up in class or fare category but are NOT changing flights at all--in such cases I do NOT think the change fee should apply--but it does. Seems to me that airlines are leaving money on the table. Here are two scenarios, both of which have applied to me on one occasion or another:

1. Your company requires you to purchase the lowest fare available, but by doing so you are disqualified from one or more perks (such as companion upgrades). You buy the original ticket to get the receipt then decide to move up to the next fare class so you would be eligible for the perk...as long as the fare class is available, you should only be charged the difference in my opinion as you are NOT changing flights. The airlines don't see it that way...they want the $150 change fee on TOP of the fare difference. So rather than pick up an extra $50 or $75, they want $200 or $225, and get NOTHING...money left on the table.

2. Again you have to buy the lowest available fare in a market but the instant upgrade fare is reasonable. You buy the original ticket to get the receipt and are willing to shell out the extra out of pocket to guarantee a seat in first. Again, they want the change fee on TOP of the fare difference.

I have spoken to some folks at the airlines about this, and they are working on a solution but to me it can't come soon enough. I think there are many of us who, if given the opportunity, would shell a little out of pocket to have a better experience.

Seems to me they are just leaving money on the table...... what do YOU think????

FFOCUS is cautiously optimistic about the DOT's newly announced rule requiring US airlines to allow passengers to disembark after 3 hours on the tarmac. While we had hoped that the airlines would have adopted some proactive measures on their own, we hope this action motivates airlines to make those changes so that incidents like this are few and far between. We remain concerned, however, that by focusing on adherence to this new rule new problems will arise which will further inconvenience airline customers and add unecessary cost and complexity to airline operations.