Virgin America application expecting rejection

i found this from reuters

Virgin America Inc., a low-cost airline with a name made famous by British entrepreneur Richard Branson, expects the U.S. government to reject its application to start flying,

Link
i find this a bit of a shock to be honest. what are they going to do with the planes if it is rejected. to be honest if it is rejected it isnt fair becuase VA have spent millions on getting it to work and to have it taken away at the last minute isnt fair imo.

[preiffer]

While I'd support VA's application personally, just because a company has SPENT a lot of money on something doesn't make it right to automatically approve it...

i was leaning more on the fact that the DOT could have told them from the start if the application had a good chance of being passed.

[mcmbenjamin]

I too support VA but solely on the basis of a fan of the Virgin brand. On a total need basis I think the US has way too many empty planes flying around.

Originally posted by mcmbenjamin
I too support VA but solely on the basis of a fan of the Virgin brand. On a total need basis I think the US has way too many empty planes flying around.

I agree that there is certainly excess capacity in the US and industry consolidation is desperately needed. But any new airline that is willing to give it a go and take on the incumbents is fine by me. There may be too many planes flying around, but the service on most of them is absolutely lousy. So if a new airline with great service can put an old airline with trashy service out of business - then I'll support them all the way. [y]

I agree that there is certainly excess capacity in the US and industry consolidation is desperately needed. But any new airline that is willing to give it a go and take on the incumbents is fine by me. There may be too many planes flying around, but the service on most of them is absolutely lousy. So if a new airline with great service can put an old airline with trashy service out of business - then I'll support them all the way. [y]

That's what I believe too. You've got to realize that lots of transcontinental flights are just as long, or almost as long, as transatlantic flights, yet the flights are on old aircraft with uncomfortable interiors, and I'm not happy giving my money to the legacy carriers who are all going bankrupt. I like carriers like jetBlue and Frontier that treat their passengers with actual respect.

[Bazz]

If the application is rejected is that it? Do they fire everyone, cancel building leases and the airbus orders and go home? Surely that is not the end of the road is it?

Originally posted by VS-EWR

I agree that there is certainly excess capacity in the US and industry consolidation is desperately needed. But any new airline that is willing to give it a go and take on the incumbents is fine by me. There may be too many planes flying around, but the service on most of them is absolutely lousy. So if a new airline with great service can put an old airline with trashy service out of business - then I'll support them all the way. [y]

That's what I believe too. You've got to realize that lots of transcontinental flights are just as long, or almost as long, as transatlantic flights, yet the flights are on old aircraft with uncomfortable interiors, and I'm not happy giving my money to the legacy carriers who are all going bankrupt. I like carriers like jetBlue and Frontier that treat their passengers with actual respect.

I agree with both of you. I was looking forward to flying VX, as I've had it with many of the US carriers as it is. I'd rather go on a long-haul than 1500 miles in my own country! (sad, isn't it?)

All I want is: a seat which won't leave me in agony, a friendly face who actually notices I'm on board, a water/diet soda, (if I check them) bags which arrive when I do on my flight, undamaged, arriving within an hour of my scheduled time, and a fair and reasonable fare for the flight. If the carrier can do all of the previous 5, it doesn't have to have the lowest fare. I'll pay more if I can get the other 5.

It's amazing how many US carriers can't do any of the above... I have a little pile of FF cards which are now going unused for the rest of eternity because the carriers have forever lost my business.

I do wish AA and CO would shut up!

Originally posted by Bazz
If the application is rejected is that it? Do they fire everyone, cancel building leases and the airbus orders and go home? Surely that is not the end of the road is it?

Most likely, they may try to rebrand it under a name other than Virgin and cut all ties, which then might have a chance, but I have a feeling they're just going to pack up their bags and go home. I'm hoping such an event doesn't occur. Even if it doesn't fly under the Virgin name, it would still be a good idea for an airline.

[Pete]

Originally posted by VS-EWR

Originally posted by Bazz
If the application is rejected is that it? Do they fire everyone, cancel building leases and the airbus orders and go home? Surely that is not the end of the road is it?

Most likely, they may try to rebrand it under a name other than Virgin and cut all ties, which then might have a chance, but I have a feeling they're just going to pack up their bags and go home. I'm hoping such an event doesn't occur. Even if it doesn't fly under the Virgin name, it would still be a good idea for an airline.

Damn. That would be a sad day for US domestic aviation. A real case of cutting off its nose to spite its face. Virgin America had promised some real revolution to air travel, and that would have jolted the competition into action (just like a certain transatlantic carrier did to BA in the early 80s!) - and that would have benefited everyone in the long run. Sure, there would have been some fall out of the dead wood, but as it is, CO & AA killing off Virgin America before it gets a chance to "spread its wings", will just mean the domestic market will continue to stagnate. Many US carriers are in trouble, and are cutting service and standard to the bone in order to compete with the more nimble LLCs. Is that really what the US consumer wants? Or is that just out-and-out protectionism from corporate dinosaurs who want to ekk out their own personal gravy train as long as possible?

Pete

Absolutely agree with you Pete. Isn't the point of open economies to foster competition to the benefit of the customer? Sadly, what the US has in terms of aviation is a jurassic industry, riven with regulation and protection, and propped up by government. Sure, a shake up would be negative for some (many perhaps), but ultimately good for all. I hope this news doesn't transpire to be reality. If it does, then look forward to Virgin tying up a relationship with one of the good, contemporary carriers with lots of options (and FCMiles)!

Seeing as though the thread in the VX forum was locked, I'll just post it here that the application was denied by the DOT. According to VK's website this doesn't necessarily mean the end and it will still try to meet the DOT's requirements. A very sad day..

[Nottingham Nick]

Please see this (now unlocked) topic in the Virgin America forum posted by AerJohn.


Seeing as this story has moved on somewhat from this post, it will be better to continue the debate about the future of VX in the Virgin America Forum thread. [8D]

Nick

[ChuckC]

Originally posted by slinky09
Absolutely agree with you Pete. Isn't the point of open economies to foster competition to the benefit of the customer? Sadly, what the US has in terms of aviation is a jurassic industry, riven with regulation and protection, and propped up by government. Sure, a shake up would be negative for some (many perhaps), but ultimately good for all. I hope this news doesn't transpire to be reality. If it does, then look forward to Virgin tying up a relationship with one of the good, contemporary carriers with lots of options (and FCMiles)!

A tad unfair, that post, Slinky. I appreciate your frustation and share it, as I was looking forward to seeing what VX would put together in the USA. IMHO suggesting that the US airline industry is "jurassic" and that it's all propped up by the government misses the mark, however. From what I've heard the VX situation was driven by politics (in the form of lobbying by American carriers). Had VX known when it was forming that the friendly political climate it had been led to expect would welcome the fledgling carrier would not in fact be there, wouldn't VX have organized in a different fashion? I think so.

Chuck-