What will air travel look like in the metaverse?

What will air travel look like in the metaverse?

In a famous interview in 1995, Bill Gates explained the Internet to Dave Letterman, the host of a TV show. Letterman argued that he could listen to the news on the radio and wasn’t sure why would someone need the Internet. Today, we can listen to the radio on the Internet.

As the metaverse is getting a lot of attention, including in a recent article by Johnny Thorsen, many are wondering if it’s another technology looking for problems to solve, if it’s going to be more successful than Second Life (the first attempt at a virtual world) and if it may have an impact on air travel (you can’t fly virtually, can you?).

Let’s understand first what the metaverse entails then let’s have a look into the current trials and a longer look into the future.

 

What is the metaverse? How does it relate to Web3?

My personal understanding of the metaverse is a term that covers computer-generated virtual worlds and the tools to navigate them. As such it is more than AR/VR tools, it is really a graphical interface layer on top of the internet, pioneered by developers of video games such as Minecraft and Fortnite.

In a related space, Web3 is the blockchain-based iteration of the Web, which was built originally on the internet. If you consider blockchain as a secured and decentralized evolution of the internet, designed to handle digital assets or tokens, your navigation layer is called Web3.

If you mix the two concepts – metaverse and Web3, you can visit a virtual world and handle digital assets in this virtual world. By digital assets I mean virtual properties, virtual currencies and other virtual goodies. Following this simplistic presentation of the new concepts, where is the link to physical travel and tourism?

 

Current air travel initiatives with the metaverse

The most recent example of current initiative is the airline Vueling that announced testing the metaverse to support customers will trip planning and to sell (real) tickets. They partnered with NextEarth, a platform in the metaverse, and Iomob, a mobility platform helping with the integration.

Another example is Qatar Airways presenting a virtual cabin crew, inspired by the avatars in the virtual world. This initiative focuses on giving the customers a taste of the inflight experience.

More airlines are exploring the technology based on their priorities: trip planning, product review, etc. Looking at the current initiatives gives us a hint to the future: the metaverse will be a new sales channel for travel and tourism, including air travel – like the internet enabled 25 years ago online sales, and 10 years later mobile phones enable mobile sales. Get ready for “meta sales”!

 

Looking into the future

The future of “meta sales” is two-fold: 1) reaching customers where they are and 2) showing the product to the customers.

As hundreds of millions of customers spend time in the virtual worlds they will come across people and brands, including travel and tourism brands.

In the case of a virtual world that represents the real world – like a digital twin of our world, think Google maps or Google Earth – the navigation in this world will lead to the digital twin of a hotel or of an airport. Airlines may want to offer a visit of their aircraft.

 

Next steps

It is difficult to predict how long it will take before we feel that it is normal to pay a virtual visit to a hotel and to an airline before making a purchase, like it is normal today to visit their website.

This exploration of the metaverse may seem to be a stretch as some airlines still need to fix the basic features of their mobile app. History shows us that new technologies don’t wait for everyone to master the old ones.

Most people and companies will probably adopt a “wait & see” attitude, while watching the pioneers who experiment and commenting from the side lines. As we’ve seen above, some players have already adopted the “test & learn” attitude. Indeed, the best way to predict the future is to build it.

5 questions airlines should ask about their transition to Order management

5 questions airlines should ask about their transition to Order management

When low-cost carriers designed their business models to simplify their business and reduce costs, they went ticketless. But why do legacy network carriers need tickets (now e-tickets) after all? Will they still need to issue tickets to customers who accepted their NDC offers? What are the steps for airlines to move to Order management?

 

Would we invent airline tickets today?

If you ask the question “what is an airline ticket, and can airline live without tickets?” pundits may argue that it is critical to many airline processes (which is correct), and it makes no sense to get rid of tickets. But if you ask the question differently “if we invented network airlines today, would we invent tickets?”, the answer will certainly be different.

In today’s world, network carriers are selling through travel agencies and through airline partners, they are operating at shared airports, and they are doing business like retailers, making offers to customers and delivering their orders. Indeed, they don’t need to issue tickets. Being ticketless and moving to orders is a goal shared by other modes of transport, like railways.

In September 2016 IATA published a report that studied the transition to order management, meaning retiring tickets from all airline processes and replacing them by orders. The report was drafted by Travel in Motion, on behalf of IATA’s airline distribution standards team. What are the key questions for the transition?

 

1 – Cost benefit analysis

The customers benefit from order management because they can easily create their own order and modify it before or during the trip. The airlines benefit from the increase in ancillary revenue, including for interline flights, and from the reduction in costs related to customer servicing and IT systems. Of course each airline has a different mix of customers and product offering, which will influence their analysis of the costs and benefits of order management.

 

2 – Impact on stakeholders

The report explores the vast impact on stakeholders of such a transition. Within each airline, customer service will access orders, ground and inflight staff will deliver orders, revenue accounting will process and settle orders, reservations will create and modify orders, digital channels will display orders, sales teams will notice the satisfaction of customers, revenue management will create offers than can be fulfilled in orders. Outside of airlines, interline partners, travel sellers, ground handlers, and payment providers will handle orders and benefit from them.

The PNRgov message containing Advanced Passenger Information, sent by airlines to governments prior the flights, will be based on Orders instead of PNRs.

 

3 – End state Architecture

The report recommends an architecture based on an “Offer and an Order management system” that support sales channels and rely on internal delivery and accounting systems. This architecture is free from any legacy record or message, such as PNR, E-ticket and EMD.

The alternatives include the “encapsulate” option, where the legacy records and message are encapsulated into orders, and the “on-top” option, where the core functions remain in the PSS and the new management functions are built “on-top” of the PSS.

 

4 – Approaches to transition

The report recommends the “staged” approach, as opposed to the “shadow” or “big bang” approaches. Indeed the approach that takes place in phases or stages help minimize risks. The steps can be defined by channel or by product or by function, which progressively cutover from the PSS to the new Order Management System.

Each airline may start the transition with a different configuration, either a PSS and a website, or already a merchandizing platform creating offers and an NDC API distributing offers. Each airline may have a different end state architecture in mind, which generates as many possible transition paths.

 

5 – The right transition

The report argues that different profiles of airlines may choose different paths, which find the best compromise for them. At a high-level, the three airline profiles are network airline, hybrid airline or low-cost airline, and within those profiles there are innovative or follower airlines. The decision criteria include cost/benefit, architecture, transition approach, impacts and risks.

 

Conclusion

In summary, the air travel industry has moved from asking “if” to “when” to “how” the transition will take place. In the “how”, the 5 questions to ask are: What are the costs and benefits? What is the impact on stakeholders? What is the end state architecture? What are the possible transition paths? Which transition is right for my airline?

The airlines which will get this transition right will be the first to deliver a smoother travel experience to their customers.

5 points to watch for business travelers who pick rail as an alternative to air travel

5 points to watch for business travelers who pick rail as an alternative to air travel

While safety, on-time performance and cost effectiveness made air travel the preferred mode of transport for business travelers, the new priority is on sustainability and carbon emission levels, and air travel cannot compete with rail on this metric. As business travel is coming back after the pandemic, is rail ready for business travel?

If we take a simple example of a trip from Geneva to London. By plane, the journey takes 1 hour and a half, produces about 100kg CO2 and costs about EUR 100. By rail, it takes about 8 hours with 1 stop (change station in Paris), produces about 5 kg CO2 and costs about EUR 200. Let’s assume the environment-conscious business travel favors low CO2 emissions compared to time and cost. What are the other points to watch when traveling by rail?

 

The itinerary

 

Air journeys including connection use “Minimum Connecting Time (MCT)” which build a contingency when connecting between two flights. Rail journeys don’t include MCT, i.e. an itinerary may show a 3-minute time between the scheduled arrival of the train and the departure of the next one, which is barely the time to change platform. This may work with Swiss railways that operate like clockworks, but not in other countries. Railways don’t track on-time performance of trains, in the same way FlightRadar tracks flights. Railways don’t check if passengers are on board and won’t wait for connecting passengers, unlike airlines. Railways don’t provide assistance in case of missed connections like IATA airlines do. These differences mean that it is safe to add contingency in the rail itinerary compared to what a website may suggest.

Websites may not recommend the best itinerary if they don’t search the right websites. For example, I searched a solution to go from Bremen to Berlin in Germany. The Kiwi website recommended a combination of flights via Palma de Majorca on the way out and via London (7 hour self-transfer from Gatwick to Luton) on the way in, whereas the direct 3-hour train connection was available on DB website.

 

The ticket

 

Air travel has made electronic tickets and boarding passes a norm since 2010. For rail, electronic tickets exist at national levels but are not ubiquitous for international journeys. In a recent example I booked a train ride from Germany to France using the SNCF (French railways) website which required to collect the ticket for the DB (German railways) segment on a kiosk in a French train station! Not only the delivery of tickets should be completely electronic and mobile, but in case of changes the customer expectation is to receive the new document on the mobile phone.

Intermediaries such as booking sites could help by bringing transparency. Unfortunately, websites like Omio don’t make it clear whether the ticket is booked directly with the rail operator or with Omio. The Terms of Use say that it may vary. From a customer perspective it is important to know, at time of booking, who to deal with in case of changes or refunds. Especially if the change is due to the operator, the traveler needs to be notified and proposed with alternatives.

 

The travel experience

 

The longer the journey the more important is the travel experience, for the business travelers who’d like to be productive. Forward-facing seat, wifi on-board, plug for the mobile and laptop, spacious table are examples of attributes valued by a business traveler. Assuming that the train cabin is equipped, the traveler should be able to book the seat and access the attributes.

While airlines have designed products for business travelers (calling it business class), railways still operate first and second, with sometimes very little difference. In another example, the fare difference between a first and second class on SNCF is 2 euros on a 52 euro fare, or 4%. The ticket can be modified with conditions in both options, bags are included and electric sockets are available in both options.

 

The disruption management

 

The longer the journey and the larger the number of connections, the higher the chances of missing the last train and ending up in a station closed for the night. While IATA airlines accommodation for the travelers who missed their connection, railways don’t have procedures in place. This is simply due to the nature of the contract with the carrier: the airline commits to carrying a customer at a specific time to a destination, whereas the railway simply allows the customer to occupy the car.

In a recent example in Germany, after all trains to France were cancelled for the day, I ended in a German train station at night, with DB offering to sleep in a parked train. There are no alternatives by bus or no hotel accommodation. Although the cancelations are not the norm, the business traveler must know that in this case hotels will be full and the only option to stay warm for the night is the car reserved to refugees and homeless people.

 

The refund process

 

The airline refund process is not designed for simplicity and automation. The airline fare may not be refundable, but the government taxes and fees collected with the fare are not due in case of cancelled flight and should be returned to the customer. I’ve not seen yet an airline ticket which can clearly show the refund value in case of a customer decision to cancel or in case of airline decision. This would not only add transparency but also enable automation.

In the case of railways, the complication is augmented by the lack of real-time traffic information. In my example above, SNCF didn’t know that their train stopped in Germany and I received a confirmation that the train had arrived in Paris, while obviously it was blocked in Germany. In the case of DB, the refund process requires to fill an online form and send it by post. The claim request is not valid without a “confirmation of delay” which is not provided by the carrier, defeating the entire process. In this case, I eventually found a hotel room, at EUR 100 for the night, which is unlikely to be paid by DB or SNCF.

 

Conclusion

I love traveling by train and live in a country with excellent rail services, Switzerland. But rail is designed for mass local transit, not for internal business travel. This article looks at the gap between the modes of transport from a customer experience perspective, trying to use rail for business travel.

It shows that there is a clear opportunity for rail operators to capture business travel demand in a time of sustainability-consciousness, until air travel deploys massive fuel alternatives becomes competitive from a CO2 emission perspective. Adapting rail for business travel means addressing ticketing, itineraries, customer experience, disruptions and refunds.

If any rail operators have already implemented some of the changes suggested in this article, I encourage them to comment below and I will gladly feature them in a future article.

Have customers regained confidence in air travel yet?

Have customers regained confidence in air travel yet?

Exactly two years ago, Switzerland, where I live, imposed a lockdown on the population, following the WHO announce of the COVID-19 pandemic. The sanitary measures and travel restrictions prevented people from traveling and damaged their confidence. Airlines introduced a series of measures and solutions dedicated to cope with the restrictions and resume flying during the pandemic, and to restore customer confidence, which I evaluated in my White Paper (see proposals #4 and #6).

Now that some countries, like Switzerland, have lifted all COVID-related travel restrictions, and although the pandemic is still going on in the world, it’s time to wonder what measures countries and airlines may keep or rescind. Let’s look at: demand forecast, information on travel restrictions, health declaration forms and travel health passes.

 

Demand forecast

The aggregation of signals of future demand have helped airlines plan for their future schedules and operations, in the absence of meaningful and relevant historical data. This kind of information will remain relevant because the uncertainty in the market is not only due to pandemics but to any shock impacting travel rights. The recent invasion of Ukraine, which caused the closure of airspaces, impacting routes and destinations, is an example of the shocks to expect.

I expect the data sources and analytics related to travel demand to remain critical indicators for airlines as long as the world – and customer confidence – remains uncertain and volatile, which seems to be the new normal. Providers like 3Victors and PredictHQ will need to keep finding new data sources and enhancing their algorithms, as airlines will need to anticipate the impact of events on demand and bookings.

 

Information on travel restrictions

The conditions of entry in a country (per nationality, vaccinations, PCR test, quarantine, etc.) and the local business conditions (availability of public transport, hotels, restaurants, etc.) have become relevant factors in the travel planning. This information will remain relevant at least until the end of the pandemic, some time in 2023, and may be updated into 2024, even if it shows completely green picture of the world.

I expect the tools collecting and displaying this information to remain effective post-COVID, as for example a local virus may break out which requires traveler warning. The tools may merge with other travel restriction information related either to immigration (visa) or to safety (political instability). Providers like Smartvel and Sherpa will need to keep updating and expanding their tools in the foreseeable future.

 

Health declaration forms

Border control authorities have augmented the list of criteria required to enter a country. The declaration forms now include questions about travel itineraries, health, residence, and other items. These forms, which used to be filled on paper on arrival, have become online, filled pre-travel, and ubiquitous during the pandemic. They represent a major source of information for countries. I don’t expect them to go away. However, they represent a significant additional burden for travelers, so I believe that tools will emerge that simplify the process for travelers, e.g. a personal travel wallet than can automatically fill any declaration form.

Providers like Travizory and SITA still have a lot of work to do to help make travel planning seamless again. Connecting their forms with traveler apps may streamline the filling process, e.g. to upload COVID certificates or passport copies. There are also synergies with the following topic, travel health passes.

 

Travel health passes

The UN had a paper certificate of vaccination for years, the yellow booklet. COVID transformed it into an electronic document and digital process, connecting testing labs with travelers’ ID and border controls. Airlines propose various passes that travelers to show a valid proof of test or vaccination on the screen of the phone. Like travel restrictions, passes will remain applicable for destinations requiring vaccines and tests but will decrease as the restrictions are progressively lifted.

While the implementation of travel health passes represented a major investment, I don’t expect the passes to remain in action, because they are designed for a use at scale. Countries requiring other vaccines (Yellow fever, etc.) may default back to the previous system of manual checks. Providers like VeriFLY and CommonPass will need to repurpose their knowhow in terms of customer ID and health verifications towards generic solutions that can be used by travelers beyond COVID.

 

Conclusion

In the coming two years, as the COVID pandemic fades away, we can expect the travel experience to evolve accordingly. Airlines will become better at anticipating travel demand and meet the needs of travelers. Airlines will provide travelers with comprehensive travel planning tools using relevant traveler data points (nationality, residence, vaccination). Declaration forms will be automated to expedite mandatory procedures and travel passes will merge into “ready-to-fly” procedure and boarding passes.

In summary, while the pandemic has added another layer of scrutiny in travel, over time this health layer will become automated and eventually seamless. Nobody wants health safety to become another travel pain point, like airport security checks after 9/11.

 

Disclaimer: the author may be an advisor but not a shareholder of any company listed in the article