Tiger Airways to fly from Melbourne’s Avalon Airport
April 20th, 2010 by Tim Uden
Low-cost carrier Tiger Airways Australia (the Australian branch of Singapore-based Tiger Airways) has announced that it will start flying from Melbourne’s smaller Avalon Airport in addition to Melbourne International Airport (Tullamarine).
Tiger Airways is the focus of the Australian TV show Air Ways, which is very similar to the UK television series Airline. It is the most budget orientated of Australia’s low-cost airlines. It is strict about late check ins and follows the budget airline model of cheap seats sold online with a yield-management pricing structure with additional charges for luggage, food and advance seat selection. But up till now it hadn’t been big on using secondary airports (although it did start flying into Newcastle and the Gold Coast before Sydney and Brisbane).
I’m surprised it took Tiger so long to start flying from Avalon. True budget airlines like to cut corners by choosing an out-of-the-way airport to save money, even though the cost for passengers to get to the airport may be considerably more.
One of the worst examples is Ryanair’s alternative to Frankfurt Airport. Instead of Frankfurt, Ryanair flies into Frankfurt-Hahn, which is 125km from Frankfurt and probably as you far as you can get from a train station in Germany. Ryanair’s alternatives to Barcelona are airports at Reus (near Tarragona) and Girona. Add on the additional cost of getting to one of these airports and it can often work out cheaper taking a more expensive airline directly into Barcelona.
Not all secondary airports are bad, though. London’s Luton Airport is less congested than Heathrow, and train connections mean that it’s only half an hour from central London. In the United States, Southwest has a hub at Chicago Midway and JetBlue flies to Long Beach: both less congested alternatives to Chicago O’Hare and LAX.
Avalon Airport is around a 45-minute drive southwest of Melbourne, just north of Geelong. That’s about twice as far from the city centre as Melbourne International Airport. The bus to the airport costs $4 more if you’re going to Avalon, so while it saves the airline money (hopefully resulting in lower fares) it will cost you a little extra to get there.
Avalon Airport is currently used by Jetstar (the low-cost airline owned by Qantas) and regional carrier Sharp Airlines.
Tiger will base two new Airbus A320 aircraft at Avalon, however their press release announcing the new base doesn’t say which destinations will be served from Avalon. Tiger will instead put a voting button on their website asking customers where they want to fly to from the airport.
Tiger will continue to operate from its base at Melbourne International Airport, although at Melbourne Airport it uses the frugal Terminal 4 (aka the Tiger Cage), which has a more low-cost image to Avalon’s relatively new terminal.
Although it’s not huge news, it is good to have more flights from Avalon and competition from a secondary airport means that Melbourne is generally a cheaper airport to fly from than Sydney.
The problem with car sharing
April 7th, 2010 by Tim Uden
Last year I blogged about car sharing and said it was a viable alternative to car rental. When I visited the USA in September and October I had the chance to try it out and I discovered a major flaw in the car sharing concept.
I signed up for a Zipcar membership and used the service twice. First off I rented a Mini for four hours to visit and review the HI – Marin Headlands hostel near Sausalito. My second rental was in Palo Alto, where I intended to visit a hostel in the Los Altos Hills. I was planning on using Zipcar extensively on the east coast and also planning to make a video blog post demonstrating Zipcar’s new iPhone app. It was after the second rental that I learnt a very expensive lesson about a major issue with the car sharing concept and ended up renting from Hertz instead of getting a Zipcar on the east coast.
Around a week after my second rental I received an email from Zipcar accusing me of damaging the car and I was subsequently charged a USD $500 fee for the damage. I guess I’m lucky this didn’t happen in the UK where the damage fee is £500.
It is appalling customer service to be accused of doing something I clearly didn’t do, even though Zipcar may have every right to charge the damage fee. It could have been handled differently, without implying that a customer was wrong (I know I didn’t damage the car and don’t appreciate being told otherwise).
This whole experience soured my view of the car sharing concept by highlighting a serious flaw in the system. The car lives on the street or in a public car park and the person renting it is responsible for any damage that occurs to the vehicle until the next person takes the car. Unlike a traditional car rental company, there is no employee to check the car when you return it. The car just sits unattended in a public car park where anyone can damage it after it has been returned and the last person to use the car gets the blame (and a USD $500 damage fee).
To Zipcar’s credit they at least have acknowledged that this is an issue and several months after I used their service (several months too late in my opinion) they implemented a damage fee waiver. For USD $50 per year you can reduce the damage fee to USD $250 and for USD $75 per year you can reduce it to nothing. Anyone signing up for the service really should pay the additional fee because it is a lot cheaper than being charged USD $500 for damage that occurs after the car is returned.
Ideally occasional users should have the option of paying a smaller fee per month or per use (rather than per year), although Zipcar’s damage fee waiver is still a step in the right direction. In the UK, this is how City Car Club charge their damage fee waiver, which is a more cash-flow-friendly £5 per month to reduce the damage fee from £500 to £100.
Update
8 May 2010Zipcar has since refunded my $500 damage fee (plus a free day credit).
Although it may seem that they speeded things up because I blogged about the problems I was having, it has become quite clear to me that they do have systems in place for dealing with issues like this. Basically I fill out a form (I remember filling out a form months ago, but can’t remember if I sent it in) explaining the situation, then they look into the case and possibly give a refund.
In my case, I knew I was right but couldn’t prove that I didn’t cause the damage. I returned the car early and neither myself nor Zipcar could tell whether the damage occured during my rental period. In this case it was a matter of my word against Zipcar’s, and they had every right to charge the damage fee (even though I may not have felt it was fair). Even though I wasn’t responsible for the damage, I couldn’t prove that to Zipcar. The car would have been off the road for a day or two while they repaired it meaning that they would have lost money on it, so it was nice that they refunded the entire fee.
I really didn’t expect this. I thought that if anything came from this, they may have come to some sort of compromise where part of the fee was refunded as driving credit, with Zipcar keeping enough to compensate them for the time the car was off the road. Anyway this refund has changed my opinion about Zipcar and I look forward to driving one of their cars again in the future (and using their iPhone app), although I’m currently living around a 16-hour flight from their nearest location so I won’t get a chance to do this until I’m either back in London or when I next visit the USA.
Despite Zipcar resolving this issue for me, the prospect of a renter being held responsible for damage caused after a car has been returned still exists – although that is the case with all car sharing services.
Virgin improves its frequent flyer programme
April 7th, 2010 by Tim Uden
Virgin’s Australian and US-based airlines have now joined forces so members of Velocity (the frequent flyer programme of Virgin Blue, Pacific Blue, Polynesian Blue and V Australia) can now earn points when they fly on Virgin America and members of Elevate (Virgin America’s frequent flyer programme) can now earn points with Virgin Blue, Pacific Blue and V Australia.
By the end of the year, members of either airline’s frequent flyer programme will also be able to redeem points on any participating Virgin-branded airline.
At this point Elevate members can not yet earn points on Virgin Atlantic, even though Virgin Blue’s Velocity members have been earning points on Virgin Atlantic flights for years. In addition to Virgin’s own airlines, Velocity members can also earn points with Airlines PNG, Delta, Emirates, Hawaiian Airlines, Malaysia Airlines and Skywest.
The Virgin Group’s other airlines: Air Asia and Nigerian Eagle Airlines (formerly Virgin Nigeria) do not participate in either programme.
InterCity Coachlines launch $1 fares for New Zealand travel
December 16th, 2009 by Tim Uden
From today, InterCity Coachlines is selling NZD $1 coach fares for travel throughout New Zealand.
This is most likely to counter competition from upstart Naked Bus, which has been offering $1 coach fares since 2006.
Every InterCity coach service will have at least one $1 fare. However the announcement from InterCity indicates that this promotion will only run for the next 12 months.
It is great that competition from Naked Bus has pulled prices down so now New Zealand’s two main coach operators have cheap fares for travellers who are organised enough to book ahead.
I searched InterCity’s site to see how easy it was to find the cheap fares and it was no problem at all. Generally if I was to book a few weeks in advance I would have a pretty good chance to score a $1 ticket, which is similar to my experience with Naked Bus.
InterCity also have the advantage of no booking fee (Naked Bus charge $1), but once the bargain $1 fares have been sold Naked Bus still work out at around half the price of InterCity.
InterCity Coachlines New Zealand coach travel
Zipcar – a different type of car rental
September 26th, 2009 by Tim Uden
This week I drove my first car rented from Zipcar, a car sharing agency that is an alternative to a traditional car rental company.
Basically Zipcar’s target market are people who live in big cities and only need a car occasionally. Rather than buy a car, they become a Zipster (a Zipcar member) and rent a car by the hour when they need it. It’s not really a service designed for the traveller, but in some instances it can work out a better option than a regular rental car.
Here are the main differences between car rental and car sharing (à la Zipcar):
- Traditional rental cars require that you rent the car from the rental car office, but they usually let you return the car to a different city; car sharing agencies like Zipcar let members reserve over the internet and pick the car up from reserved parking spaceslocated at strategic points all over the city. Cars from a car sharing agency must be returned to the same car parking space.
- Traditional rental car agencies let anyone walk in off the street and rent a car, but car sharing services like Zipcar only let members rent and it can take several days for a membership application to be processed. It costs USD $75 to sign up as a member in the US or £50 if you sign up in the UK.
- The process of picking up a regular rental car can take around 15 minutes. With a car sharing service like Zipcar you can be driving within a minute or two.
- You rent by the day with traditional car rental companies, but with car sharing services like Zipcar you can rent by the hour (although there is also a daily rate).
- Traditional rental car companies usually have no problem if you want a car for a month or longer, but it is difficult to get a car from a car sharing service like Zipcar for longer than four days (mainly because other members may have previously reserved that car).
- With car sharing agencies you get the exact same car you asked for, none of being ‘upgraded’ to some big ugly car that you didn’t ask for.
- Traditional rental car companies may charge you additional fees for insurance, but car sharing agencies like Zipcar include insurance.
- You are responsible for paying for petrol if you rent through a regular car rental company, but fuel is included with car sharing. In the United States Zipcar includes the first 180 miles (300km) per day free of charge and there is a fuel card provided with the car so you can top it up at Zipcar’s expense.
- Most rental car companies won’t rent to you if you’re aged under 25 and if they do, they will charge you extremely high fees for the privilege. Zipcar only require that you are aged over 21 and they don’t charge you any extra if you only just turned 21.
There are quite a few differences between Zipcar’s service and a regular rental car and it isn’t for everyone, particularly if you’re planning a longer trip. However it is worth considering if you are travelling between big cities by some other form of transport (such as plane or train) and need a car for a few days at a time to explore a specific region, and it may be your only option if you’re aged between 21 and 25.
Because fuel is included and there aren’t any additional charges for insurance, Zipcars and cars from other car sharing services can work out much better value than regular rental cars (as long as you average less than 300km per day).
In the United States most car rental agencies seem to specialise in big ugly boring cars (usually the Hyundai Ascent – which I previously blogged about as being too big an unweildy – is the smallest car on offer). However Zipcar has quite a nice range of small cars, such as the Mini, Honda Jazz and the Mazda 3. Unfortunately like most US-based rental agencies, all North American Zipcars have automatic transmissions, so you’ll feel like an old age pensioner driving without being in full control of your car (however most Zipcars in London are manuals).
My experience with Zipcar
I signed up for a Zipcar membership a few days before flying out to the USA. However my member application meant that I needed to provide a copy of my driving record, which I needed to order a week earlier from Vicroads in Australia (if you’re planning to rent a Zipcar you definitely need to plan in advance). The day I arrived I recieved an email saying I was approved and a couple of days later I picked up my new Zipcar membership card (my Zipcard) from Zipcar’s San Francisco office.
I reserved my Zipcar online on my iPhone (this was around a week before Zipcar was due to release their new iPhone app so I did it through the phone’s built in browser) and was given directions to where the car was parked.
After finding the car I held my Zipcard to the windscreen and the doors unlocked. Then I hopped inside and started the car using the keys attached to the driving column (well it would have been that easy if I was able to work out how to start the car but a combination of not haven driven an automatic in around 15 years and being unfamiliar with starting a Mini – press the start button – meant that it took me a while to work things out, but that is not any fault of Zipcar.
There were a few little quirks that will take a little getting used to (such as leaving the keys in your car when it is parked and refueling using the fuel car under the sun visor) but I think it is worth it for the freedom that Zipcar offers, not to mention the option of having a nice small car instead of the big ugly things that most US rental car companies offer.
My problems trying to start the car notwithstanding, I found Zipcar an easy alternative to a regular rental car and I look forward to using them again; which incidentally will be tomorrow when I pick up a car in Palo Alto in Silicon Valley.
Greyhound to start running coaches in the UK next month
August 20th, 2009 by Tim Uden
Starting on September 14, Greyhound coaches will start operating from London to Portsmouth and Southampton.
The new coach service will feature complimentary newspapers, air conditioning, toilets, free wireless internet, power sockets at each seat and a frequent rider programme. Greyhound’s UK coaches will have leather seating that promise to be more spacious than rival coach companies with 41 seats to a coach as opposed to the usual 50 seats.
Greyhound UK will adopt a yield-management pricing model like those used by low-cost airlines and rival coach operator Megabus. If you book in advance you will be able to get fares with low prices starting at £1 (plus a 50p booking fee).
From what I have seen, it looks like it will be a top quality coach service with nice little extras that will make it a great travel option.
Services from Portsmouth to London will depart from the Hard Interchange in Portsmouth with a pick-up on Edinburgh Road in the city centre and then run express toBulleid Way near Victoria Station in London. The trip will take two hours with 10 services per day. Portsmouth to London services will run from 6am to 6pm and London to Portsmouth services will run from 9am to 9pm.
Coach services from Southampton to London will depart from Southampton Town Quay with pick-ups at Southampton West Quay and Southampton University and will run express to London, terminating atBulleid Way near Victoria Station. The trip will take two hours with nine services per day.
Greyhound’s new coach services will be timed to met Isle of Wight ferry services.
The relatively recent resurgence in coach travel in the UK started with Megabus, whose £1 fares forced Scottish Citylink and National Express to become more competitive. Now with Greyhound entering the UK coach travel scene, it looks like low cost UK coach travel will be with us for a while.
This is good news for travellers fed up with Britain’s expensive rail services, although with Megatrain and some inexpensive deals offered by the likes of Chiltern Railways, East Midlands Trains, London Midland and Virgin Trains it looks like competition from cheap coaches is also starting to bring down the cost of rail travel, particularly on more competitive routes.
I think it is great that there is more competition and more cheap travel options in the UK, but I don’t really think that the Greyhound brand is worth all that much. In Australia, Greyhound have a relatively good reputation but in the United States they have a reputation as transport for the lower classes (although I would suggest that the riff-raff that hang around some US coach terminals would have a lot to do with this image). Greyhound is trying to capitalise on their American heritage – and the livery on their coaches suggests that they are trying to recreate a nostalgic image. In my opinion, that image works well in the US where you want to ride an American institution to get the full American experience; but that’s not what you want when you visit any other country. Greyhound coaches in Australia have a much more modern image than in the US and they’re not trying to be American – and why should they, Greyhound Australia has been around longer than Greyhound in the USA.
Unfortunately I get the feeling that Greyhound UK is trying to be too American. That is not going to appeal to many international tourists that come here to experience British culture and I expect it won’t appeal to too many British passengers either. An article in The Times says that “each coach will have names based on classic American songs such as Barbara Ann, Jolene and Peggy Sue” and one of the first Greyhound coaches in the UK will be named Sweet Caroline. It all sounds too American for a coach that will be travelling down the M3 to Southampton. I would prefer to ride a coach named Fluorescent Adolescent, Wonderwall or Sorted for E’s and Wizz than a coach named Sweet Caroline.
I get the feeling that this American branding will plant an image in peoples’ minds about the old Greyhound from American films. That is an old coach with uncomfortable seats and broken air conditioning where you sit next to some smelly passenger who hasn’t showered since she got on the coach two days ago in Tuscon and after 20 hours on the coach you pull into some awful terminal that is inhabited by the homeless. It’s not a good image and it is something that Greyhound is working hard to dispel. In the north-eastern United States Greyhound have introduced some excellent new services that have been re-branded with names like Bolt Bus and Neon. This new branding is necessary to appeal to a younger market that is turned off by the Greyhound brand. It is a shame really as Greyhound does have a good product that has evolved beyond the image that most people have.
FirstGroup, who took over Greyhound in 2007, shouldn’t try so hard to play up on Greyhound’s American heritage. After all it is a British company that I would assume it looking to the future. Rather than slapping a retro 1950s paint job on a modern coach, they should adopt a more modern brand like Greyhound have done in Australia (note that Greyhound in Australia are not related to Greyhound in North America and the UK). From what I have read about Greyhound’s new UK service, I get the impression that it will more closely resemble theBoltBus and Neon brands. This is what Greyhound should be aiming for.
JetBlue’s new travel pass: one month of unlimited flights for $599
August 13th, 2009 by Tim Uden
JetBlue have announced a brilliant new travel pass, although it is for a limited time only (9 September-8 October). The All-You-Can-Jet Pass lets you make unlimited flights anywhere on the JetBlue
network for one month for just USD$599.
It is good for travel on more than 600 daily flights to 57 cities on the jetBlue network. Domestic taxes and fees are included for travel within the United States, but you have to pay taxes for flights to Puerto Rico and to international destinations such as the Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Mexico, St Maarten and St Lucia.
To see what a great deal this is, just compare it with Amtrak’s USA Rail Pass, which costs USD$579 and only lets you travel on 12 travel segments within 30 days and the Greyhound Discovery Pass, which costs USD$399 for one month of coach travel in Canada and the US.
You need to be a member of TrueBlue, jetBlue’s frequent flyer programme, to use the pass. You earn 35 TrueBlue points when you buy the pass, but the flights you make with the pass aren’t eligible for any points.
This pass is only available for sale until 21 August 2009 (or while stock lasts), it is only valid for flights from 9 September to 8 October 2009, you must book your flights with jetBlue’s call centre at least three days before each flight and you must only book one flight per city per day (in other words just because your flights are free, don’t make multiple bookings you won’t use).
In Australia Rex has a similar pass, which has been running for years. Rex’s Backpackers air pass costs AUD$499 for one month unlimited air travel and AUD$949 for two months unlimited air travel on Rex’s Australian network. To be sure, the Rex air pass is cheaper than JetBlue’s pass, but Rex’s Australian network only covers the southwest corner of Australia while JetBlue’s pass in the United States covers the entire country and some international destinations, which makes jetBlue’s air pass much better value.
It would be great if Jet Blue’s pass became a permanent deal, like the Rex air pass in Australia. That would really kick-start tourism in the United States and put some pressure on Amtrak to reduce the price of their rail passes.
How five people can travel from Lübeck to Munich for only €37
August 1st, 2009 by Tim Uden
If you travel from Lübeck to Munich on the ICE high-speed train it will cost you €127 and take between 6½ and 7 hours. This comes to €635 for a group of five people travelling together.
You can also travel from north to south within Germany entirely on local trains (that is using the S-Bahn plus RB and RE trains). Travelling on local trains the trip from Lübeck to Munich will take around 14 hours and involve up to eight transfers.
Buying individual tickets on this journey will cost €90.10. However there is a much cheaper option if you’re travelling on a weekend.
DB’s Happy-Weekend-Ticket (Schönes-Wochenende-Ticket) is good for unlimited travel on weekends in Germany on all local trains for up to five people travelling together. This ticket costs €37 if you buy it online or €39 if you buy it from a ticket machine at the station. Split between five people that comes to only €7.40 each.
Five people travelling from Lübeck to Munich would save up to €598 if they travel with a Happy-Weekend-Ticket instead of the ICE train. That saving is enough for around 70 litres of beer at the Oktoberfest.
I don’t know about you but – as much as I enjoy travelling on a fast train – I would take the slow train and save my money for Munich’s beer halls.
Lübeck to Munich is pretty much the longest train journey you’re likely to make within Germany so this is an extreme example, but it illustrates what you can save if a group of five travellers want to save some money (but don’t mind spending an extra five or six hours travelling).
Free one-way car and campervan rentals in New Zealand
July 31st, 2009 by Tim Uden
Many travellers visiting New Zealand fly into Auckland, rent a car or campervan, drive to the South Island and fly out of Christchurch. This means that there is often an excess of rental cars and campervans in Christchurch that the rental companies would rather have in Auckland.
To help solve this problem rental companies sometimes offer free one-way rentals if you’re prepared to travel against the tide and pick up your campervan in Christchurch and drop it off in Auckland. This is a great deal, although you generally have a very tight time frame to make the delivery.
Rather than phone around all the rental companies trying to score a free rental, you can find a free one-way rental deals at transfercar.co.nz.
Bus & coach travel in North America
June 18th, 2009 by Tim Uden
The Wall Street Journal have an article on their site about bus and coach travel in the United States.
It basically says that the standard of coach travel in the United States has improved a lot in recent years, although I would add that most of the improvements have been in the Northeast where there are shorter distances, more customers and more competition between bus and coach operators like Greyhound, Megabus and the various Chinatown bus operators.
Here’s the video from the Wall Street Journal article: