4 ms·
>Airlines receive only about 60% of their revenue from passengers directly (the other 40% comes from selling frequent-flier miles to credit card companies). But
by Merrill 7y ago
>Airlines receive only about 60% of their revenue from passengers directly (the other 40% comes from selling frequent-flier miles to credit card companies). But of that 60% of passenger consumer revenue, the big money comes from business travelers – as opposed to those flying for leisure or personal reasons – in percentages that far outweigh their numbers. Business travelers account for 12% percent of airlines' passengers, but they are typically twice as profitable. In fact, on some flights, business passengers represent 75% of an airline's profits.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/041315/how-much-revenue-airline-industry-comes-business-travelers-compared-leisure-travelers.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/041315/how-much-rev...
I think that video conferencing and collaboration technologies have already curtailed business travel, the most profitable part of the airline business.
The high volume in terms of passenger numbers is dominated by leisure travel. Video conferencing is unlikely to affect this (although the family did a Hangout at Thanksgiving), but it might be affected by stronger environmental campaigns or by a significant economic downturn. In fact, I think an economic downturn could cause a fairly steep drop in leisure air travel.
- 0xffff2 7y agoWhen they say "business travelers", do they mean people traveling for business, or people traveling in business class? I am fairly certain that those are almost entirely disparate groups at this point.
- rconti 7y agoPeople traveling for business. And they're more profitable for reasons not relating to class of seat.
- ggm 7y agoPremium economy is profitable and robbing economy and business. We might see a return to a happy medium
- rconti 7y agoI would so love this. It seems like it shouldn't be too much to ask to spend 50% more and actually get an armrest and a seat that doesn't make my tailbone numb after a few hours. In percentage terms, it's not a lot of space. If a couple inches for an armrest is to wide to fit in an existing plane in a 3+3 config, maybe they should plan better for the next generation of planes.
- ggm 7y agoSome writers say the bombardier C has widened the middle seat in 3 abreast, which would be a significant thing if true. My personal view, (from the luxury of Business, now moving back south as I cease work travel) is that seat pitch, seat size, and seat density should be regulated. That removes competitive tension around "who suffers more for price" but at a socialized cost of travel costs more than bucket seat prices. I know thats anti-democratising in the specifics of who now will be able to afford routine travel, but the cram-them-in approach has got beyond acceptable.
- DrScientist 7y agoRegulated for what size person? The average ( then still too small for a good proportion ), or 60%, 70 or 80& of average? Also people are different proportions - length v body, top versus bottom part of leg etc. You might also deprive diminutive people one of their few perks - cheap and comfortable air travel :-)
- rconti 7y agoPresumably, anything better than what we have today would be... better.