Comments on: The cost of inflight connectivity… https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2013/11/10/the-cost-of-inflight-connectivity/ Satellites, spectrum and other stuff Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:36:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Airlines eyeing whether complementary inflight Wi-Fi is feasible | Runway GirlRunway Girl https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2013/11/10/the-cost-of-inflight-connectivity/comment-page-1/#comment-27049 Airlines eyeing whether complementary inflight Wi-Fi is feasible | Runway GirlRunway Girl Fri, 02 May 2014 15:47:20 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=4656#comment-27049 [...] does not provide pricing details, which leaves the market open to speculation. Industry analyst Tim Farrar, for instance, has suggested that Panasonic’s costs are somewhere in the 12 cents/megab…. And speaking about Bruner’s most recent claims Farrar was somewhat skeptical. He believes that [...]

]]> By: timfarrar https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2013/11/10/the-cost-of-inflight-connectivity/comment-page-1/#comment-6250 timfarrar Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:08:41 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=4656#comment-6250 I agree that there will start to be more use in the 1000-1500 mile flight category as more people see the value. But if 33% of devices accessing the Gogo network are laptops (http://blog.apex.aero/ife/infographic-apple-devices-reign-supreme-clouds/) then very likely >50% of usage is from laptops, which will be largely unaffected. That might be a bit less on Row44 (because of more leisure travelers and shorter flights on Southwest). If you get a bunch more paying customers then that's a good thing. If existing customers use more data and pay the same or you offer service for free and get a higher take rate then that's a bad thing, unless there really is a worthwhile boost to customer satisfaction, or a competitive differentiator for the airline with satellite connectivity vs competitors using ATG. I agree that there will start to be more use in the 1000-1500 mile flight category as more people see the value. But if 33% of devices accessing the Gogo network are laptops (http://blog.apex.aero/ife/infographic-apple-devices-reign-supreme-clouds/) then very likely >50% of usage is from laptops, which will be largely unaffected. That might be a bit less on Row44 (because of more leisure travelers and shorter flights on Southwest).

If you get a bunch more paying customers then that’s a good thing. If existing customers use more data and pay the same or you offer service for free and get a higher take rate then that’s a bad thing, unless there really is a worthwhile boost to customer satisfaction, or a competitive differentiator for the airline with satellite connectivity vs competitors using ATG.

]]> By: Wandering Aramean https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2013/11/10/the-cost-of-inflight-connectivity/comment-page-1/#comment-6240 Wandering Aramean Mon, 11 Nov 2013 20:23:57 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=4656#comment-6240 Yes, the take rate is higher on longer flights. But much of that is due to the fact that consumers aren't willing to pay for the service when they only get 30-40 minutes online. As that time online window grows - a 500 mile flight now potentially has 60-90 minutes rather than 30-45 - it becomes quite a bit more compelling for customers to consider buying. A 1500 mile flight would have ~150 minutes online. With the new rules (and assuming G-t-G WiFi) a 1000 mile flight now has that same online window. More people are going to see value in the buy at that point. I certainly don't see it as a linear increase in data consumption (and I was pretty clear about that in my post, I think) but I do think that consumption will increase notably, both in terms of the take rates and the consumption per passenger as the time online grows per flight. Yes, the take rate is higher on longer flights. But much of that is due to the fact that consumers aren’t willing to pay for the service when they only get 30-40 minutes online. As that time online window grows – a 500 mile flight now potentially has 60-90 minutes rather than 30-45 – it becomes quite a bit more compelling for customers to consider buying. A 1500 mile flight would have ~150 minutes online. With the new rules (and assuming G-t-G WiFi) a 1000 mile flight now has that same online window. More people are going to see value in the buy at that point.

I certainly don’t see it as a linear increase in data consumption (and I was pretty clear about that in my post, I think) but I do think that consumption will increase notably, both in terms of the take rates and the consumption per passenger as the time online grows per flight.

]]>