Transaction Mode: Danger For Brands

Mark Di SommaSeptember 18, 20143 min

The response by airlines to customers’ demands for lower and lower fares has been to do exactly that, lower seat costs, but at the same time to strip more and more of what is included in the fare out of the price.

This process – referred to by Time as “the unbundled skies” – points to a business model that I see becoming more prevalent, and not just in the heavens, as price-sensitive brands lower entry points in order to get customers to commit, and then use “upgrades” to restore margin and, according to the article, add another 50% or so to the real price. Pay less, get less. Want more? Pay more. Ryanair have even suggested, somewhat controversially, that “more” could include access to the toilet. In fact, according to one consultant quoted, there are up to 35 add-ons available when you fly, ranging from baggage and food fees to flight-delay insurance and keeping the middle seat empty. You literally get what you pay for.

This seems like an expedient answer to customers’ demands for cheaper goods. Lure them in – then trick them into paying more. It’s not exactly customer-friendly but at least, some would argue, it’s a way to compete.

True, but changing the competitive model this way is not without its consequences. One is that as the product itself becomes less valuable and valued, service now comes not just at, but with, a price. That in turn shifts the emphasis from what customers get to what do they not get, and what shortfalls they are prepared to do without.

For the moment what’s happening in the aviation sector amounts potentially to a complete economic rebalance of the product at that end of the market. As the article points out, “In the unbundled world, airfare is merely the price of admission to get on a jet. If you crave comfort, convenience, less stress, decent food — what was once called good service — expect to pay up.”

In time, the service itself, not the seat, will become the real competition point, as customers look to ‘build their own flights’ made up of base product and services that they are prepared to ‘add to cart’. Staff meantime will find themselves being judged on their ability to up-and cross-sell services in order to make targets.

We shouldn’t be surprised. As sectors continue to fill with competitors, radicalization of branded business models is inevitable, with all-included at one end of the market and not-included at the other, and increasingly little between them.

While the model has far wider applicability than the airline industry, the dilemma for brands in such a scenario is that when you uncouple what people get from how you want people to feel, you reduce every part of the experience to a transaction, and every element of loyalty to the same level.

Everything becomes “do I or don’t I?”

As to where this might go, well that seems fairly predictable too. As the fight for seats gives way to loss leader seat strategy, and a squabble over a la carte services and the quality and profitability of those services, medium-term we’ll probably see airlines respond by using a mix of lower fares, bundled services and loyalty incentives to adjust and respond to value perceptions.

The Blake Project Can Help: The Brand Positioning Workshop, the Brand Storytelling Workshop Series and Brand Strategy and Customer Co-Creation Workshops

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

Mark Di Somma


  • Ed Roach

    September 18, 2014 at 12:15 pm


    We all know it’s essentially a shell game with airlines. Lower base fares then nickle and dime you back up to where they were before. In Canada I hate when they advertise fares as one way. Other than terrorists who goes one-way? The airlines and homeland security have sucked all the pleasure out of flying. Now I read that they’re drawing back on leg room 1″.

    In Toronto there is one regional airline (Porter) who seems to get service and branding. They have food included, and it even includes the food in their terminal lounge with big cushy chairs. Believe it or not the stewardesses wear those pill box hats from the 50’s.

    It’s too bad first class is double the cost. They’re the only one getting the airline’s love, the airline has only contempt for the rest of us. It’s as if they resent us flying on their planes. A necessary evil. If there is one industry that needs a brand shakedown it’s the airlines.

  • Bruce H. Anderson

    September 18, 2014 at 5:03 pm

    I fly for business, and mostly on one airline. The fares are basically competitive, but with my status (I fly a lot) I prefer one airline over others. Things like early boarding, free snacks, complimentary upgrades, and a more pleasant Customer Service experience make a difference. But I am not the typical flyer, and most people I assume are looking at price only, so a Wal-Mart mentality seems to be the order of the day.

  • Mark Disomma

    September 19, 2014 at 2:30 pm

    Bruce and Ed – thank you both for your comments. As I say in the piece, radicalization of this business model seems to me to be inevitable. On the one hand, there will continue to be a volume model (based on low entry fares, crammed spaces and buy-if-you-want services). At the other end, frequent fliers and those with valuable corporate accounts will be treated to more extras. We’re already seeing that with limousine transfers airside etc. The difficulty with branding this new norm is that airlines are increasingly offering this dichotomy on the same flight. Branding either end risks diluting the P&Ls at the other end. Thank you both for your thoughts.

Comments are closed.

Connect With Us