As I was reading through the most recent issue of BusinessWeek, I noticed a pretty sharp contrast in the approach taken by the airlines advertising therein. So, I thought it would be fun to put them all up next to each other and see what we can make of them. I went back a few issues to see what other ads have appeared lately, and came up with seven ads over the past month or so (just in BusinessWeek).

Take a quick look at the following 7 advertisements. Spend about a second or two looking at each one (if you click on an ad, a larger one will open up in a different window). Ready? Go:

So, what do you think? Can you tell me which 7 airlines you just looked at ads for? Which one did you find most appealing? Why? Least appealing? What did you take away from each ad? What do you think the airline wanted you to take away?

I have to say that, personally, I found the SIA (Singapore International Airlines) ad to be the most interesting/appealing to me. On the flip side, the first time I saw AirTran’s ad I couldn’t get myself to read all the text on the ad (which is really bad considering that I like this stuff). It took me a second to understood the message of Delta’s ad, but I’m not a gambler or card player at all. I found Korean Air’s ad visually interesting although I’m not really sure what the point was.

In an era when airline travel is increasingly commoditized, it’s interesting to see how airlines attempt to differentiate themselves through advertising.

I just finished reading From Worst To First and wanted to share my impressions. A quick disclaimer: this book was published in 1999, so there is nothing new or trendy here. That said, I found Gordon Bethune’s narration of his efforts that led to the successful turn-around of Continental Airlines in the mid-90’s to be a very worthwhile read even 8 years later. The problems Mr. Bethune faced and the strategies that he and his team formulated and implemented could apply to almost any business in any industry at any point in time. It is a tale of leadership. I was actually a bit disappointed that more than 95% of the book really isn’t specific to the airline industry, however I quickly came to realize that many (most?) of the problems airlines really face aren’t really that unique to the airline business anyway. Companies in every industry need a good product, they need to be strategic in how they employ their capital, they need to position themselves against their competitors, and they need good leadership. In this book, Gordon Bethune outlines the approaches he took on these topics after becoming the CEO at Continental which was in rather dire straits at the time.

Although the book could have been condensed fairly easily, I found this to be a good read that anyone who manages people should consider reading despite its age.

While searching for fares to go to Wisconsin to visit my wife over my October break, a certain airline, let’s call them “Top Left Airlines”, is offering a one-way ticket from Elmira, NY to Milwaukee, WI for $482. Being the genius that I am, I decided to check what that same flight would cost if I added a return flight. The answer: $158. Yes, you read that right. The one-way fare was more than three times the price of the round-trip fare. The outbound flights were identical.

I was working on something clever to say about that, perhaps something about how price discrimination usually works. However, I realized that the absolute stupidity of that pricing scheme will be obvious to anyone who might read this blog; therefore, there really isn’t anything more I really need to say.

I will add that it is generally a bad idea for businesses to insult the intelligence of their customers. It looks like I won’t be flying “Top Left Airlines” for this trip.

A concept that came up early in my marketing class at Cornell is that customers don’t by drills, they buy holes. The point being that no one really wants a drill because they want a drill, but that they want a drill because they need a hole in something. If something comes along that can make holes better than a drill, you can count on the market demand for drills declining.

This got me thinking about the analogy in the airline business. What are customers of airlines really buying? A plane ticket? A plane ride? Hospitality? It seems to me that customers buy plane tickets because they need to get from one place to another. But if you consider it for a moment, airlines don’t really fulfill that service. What do I mean? Well, when was the last time you said, “I think I need to go to O’Hare”, or “a trip to La Guardia sounds fun”? More likely, you needed to attend a conference in Schaumburg or make a business presentation in Manhattan. If you are sitting in Pittsburgh, that means that the airlines only provide a piece of the service that you really need. In other words, airlines don’t provide the service of moving passengers from where they are to where they want to go. Instead, airlines tell their customers to get their items together and be at an airport close to their origin 2 hours before flying out, and then they transport their customers to a an airport closest to the their destination. From a marketer’s perspective, airlines are focused on selling seats on airplanes instead of providing the service that customers are really looking for.

This concept has been bouncing around in my head for the past few weeks, and this evening I learned of a tiny movement in the direction of really providing true point-to-point transportation services. EL AL Airlines has recently introduced an early, at-home check-in service. The service is only available in Israel, though, and as such, only helps with connecting the dots on the point-of-origin side of the trip. But, it’s a start, and I’ll be curious to see how it pans out for EL AL and if anyone else copy-cats it.

Charles Revson of Revlon Cosmetics once said, “In the factory we make cosmetics, but in my stores we sell hope”. What are airlines selling? I would say most are just selling seats on an airplane.

I came across this piece of captivating journalism in “Consulting Magazine”, and was struck by Rick Garlick’s bold comment “Airlines are part of the hospitality industry”. Mr. Garlick would be happy to know that Cornell University’s “Airline Service and Management” graduate course is actually taught by Cornell’s renowned School of Hotel Administration. Despite the fact that Cornell’s Hotel School teaches the University’s sole class devoted to the airline industry, I doubt many firms on Wall Street are going to move their airline analysts out of their transportation departments any time soon. Still, I was intrigued by Mr. Garlick’s comments so I pushed onward with a little Googling and came up with the original news release on Maritz Research and was rewarded with this gem, also from Mr. Garlick: “Competing on price is no longer an option for airlines”.

Oh, Rick, I think you may have just done yourself in with that one.

If I were to give Mr. Garlick the benefit of the doubt, I would guess that what he really meant to say was “competing on price alone is no longer an option for airlines”. It would be hard to find much fault if he had just added one little qualifying word.

But lets move on and consider the more salient point that Mr. Garlick was attempting to make: airline passengers want more. They want more legroom, they want more quality in their food, they want more peace and quiet on their flights, and they want more flights that they can utilize their frequent flyer rewards for. I can not imagine one airline that would disagree with any of that, but most airlines would be quick to point that although passengers do want all of those things, not enough of them are often willing to pay enough for them to make it a profitable affair. As a 6′5″ passenger, I was thrilled when American Airlines introduced their extra leg room on all domestic flights. AA become my favorite airline over night and I was willing to pay more to fly with them. But AA soon found out that not enough of the flying population was like me and they eventually canned the service.

Ultimately, I’m afraid that the good folks of Maritz may not realize that they only cover about half of the problem. Finding out what customers want is obviously an important step in the process, but, ultimately, it is finding out what enough customers will really pay enough extra for such that the airline can increase their bottom line that really matters.

Oh, and telling potential clients that they don’t know what industry they are in is probably bad marketing, too.

I’ve been curious to see how Midwest Airlines would implement its change in strategy announced earlier this year to offer both “Signature” and “Saver” seats on all of its flights. Primarily, I’ve been wondering how they are going to price the seats, and today that question as been answered for me:

Seating Choice Available September 16
Our MD-80 aircraft will soon offer customers a choice of seating. Along with Saver seats, a limited number of Signature seats will also be available. Customers who prefer to sit in a Signature seat can pay a $60 per segment fee at the time of Web check-in or at the airport kiosk, ticket counter or gate.

At $60 per segment, I think the strategy may actually work. I have been wondering if, by having both types of seats aboard all aircraft in the fleet, Midwest would no longer be differentiating itself from its larger competitors. After all, having “1st Class” and “Coach” is hardly a novel idea. Midwest’s Signature Service, however, was innovative and is a pleasure to fly on. When I flew on Midwest’s Saver Service to Phoenix a few years ago, I did lament the fact that they seats weren’t as comfortable as I had become used to on their B717 flights. A $60 premium for their Signature service seats, however, makes them very competitive against the 1st class options available on other airlines. Choosing the seats at check in also helps with the differentiation, although I suspect that many who would happily pay the extra $60 will be unhappy that they can’t reserve those prime seats at the time they make their reservation. My guess is that that option will be available shortly.

Given that the Signature seats are better than many 1st class seats I’ve seen on competing airlines, an extra $120 for a round trip will likely be attractive to many fliers, at least on the longer flights like MKE to PHX, and having an additional choice is almost always a good thing as far as consumers are concerned. The real test, of course, will be to see if this leads to an increase in profitability.