Travel

Say Goodnight Gogo

 

By Robert McGarvey

 

 

The news is what I did not do on my last three flights: I did not connect to Gogo, did not go online, and did not regret that I didn’t. In fact I exited the planes feeling better and smarter than if I had been online.

 

I have been compulsively going online inflight essentially since the service debuted. But I have been online with the Internet since 1985 (and had the 300 baud modem to prove it, even owned an acoustic coupler).  I won’t stay at hotels with bad Internet – and yes there are still some – this is just part of my expectations wherever I go.

 

My inflight Internet addiction was abetted by a stack of free passes, acquired with the purchase of various Chromebooks.  I rarely – maybe never – paid for inflight Internet access.  

 

But now I am out of free Gogo passes and, faced with shelling out my own cash (as little as $16 for a day pass), I am keeping my wallet in my pocket and not signing in.

 

It’s not about the money. It’s about the speed, or lack thereof, of inflight Internet. I love this WIRED headline: “American Airlines Sues Gogo Over God-Awful Inflight Internet.”

 

Yep.  

 

Message boards are overrun with laments about Gogo.  That just is fact.

 

American withdrew its suit but only after Gogo told the airline it could sign with a faster, better provider if it found one.

 

I am still waiting.

 

As are you, I’m sure.

 

But, meantime, I surrendered to the reality that the Gogo service sucks and so on a roundtrip to Las Vegas (short flights from Phoenix), I read the delightful The Millionaire and the Bard, about Henry Folger’s obsessive – but so important – collection of Shakespeare first folios and his later construction of a library to house his vast collection of Shakespeare related materials.

 

Yesterday on a flight from Phoenix to Newark, I read Get Carter, the noir British novel that spawned the Michael Caine film.

 

Call this throwback.  Before I had Gogo – and the river of the emails it brought me inflight – I always packed good reading matter for a flight.  And then I stopped. I began handling dozens of emails. I even responded – probably because I had the time – to emails I never would have answered had I been at my desk.  

 

On the flight back to Phoenix I am considering my options for reading – and, fortunately, I have hundreds of unread books on my Kindle app on a Nexus tablet.

 

I don’t think I am alone.  On the flight to Newark I looked at what other passengers were doing. Some were playing games on tablets or phones. Others were watching movies on tablets or laptops.  Some were reading, on Kindles or tablets.

 

I did not seeing anyone connected to the Internet.  

 

I’m sure some were – but just maybe the novelty has worn off and the thrill is gone. Five years ago it was fun to think, I am at 30,000 feet and sending this email.  Now that seems so, well, compulsive.

 

When I land I find I am more relaxed and – at least after reading the Folger book – more thoughtful, than if I had waded through so many emails, most of which I honestly don’t need to read, no less respond to.  But inflight I do both when I am connected. Snip the cord and I don’t miss it.

 

Will we pick up Internet usage if speeds improve? No question about that.  When inflight speed rivals that of the typical home or office, we will flock back to it (or to it for those who have managed to ignore Gogo so far). Already, Virgin America has announced inflight WiFi speeds that rival home Internet.  

 

Of course that is tempting.

 

Except maybe we shouldn’t succumb.

 

There may be other – compelling – reasons to avoid inflight connectivity besides slow speeds. Read this reporter’s chilling account of getting hacked while using Gogo.  Is this possible? You bet. Any public WiFi – the kind found in hotels and also, apparently, inflight – is a hacker’s playground and Gogo, it turns out, recommends that if accessing sensitive stuff, always use a VPN, which may well impose even slower access speeds when connecting inflight.

 

Or maybe the simpler thing is, don’t go online inflight, not until both speed and security improve.

 

Why You May Want to Book Your Next Hotel Room Directly – @TheStreet http://bit.ly/1SPbxAh My reporting

 

By Robert McGarvey

 

Suddenly the world’s press is full of stories about Isis and the possibility of a “dirty bomb” – a crude nuclear weapon – detonated in Europe.

 

Britain has loomed especially large in that conversation and anybody who has been in London at rush hour can easily picture the horrific result.

 

Understand this: the probability is low.  

 

Very low because security services are in high gear to anticipate and prevent.

 

And of course we also understand that low does not mean nil.  And that possibility should scare the hell out of you.

 

The question: should you alter your travel plans to reflect new, more profound worries about travel and terror?

 

Is your career in jeopardy if you decline travel orders issued by your superiors? There’s a worry we have not much had since September 2001 but it is back and it is real.

 

More business travelers now are asking themselves exactly that question.

 

Indications are that business travelers definitely are concerned about terror and travel.  A new poll via the Association of Corporate Travel Executives found 67% of executives said there was a “toll” on them, or their families, when they went to a place they deemed unsafe.

 

Most interesting is what is unsafe.  According to the data, executives rank France a tad more worrisome than Turkey which is a bit more worrisome than Belgium.

 

They expressed little concern about Tunisia, I’m guessing because they have no plans to go there. The US State Dept. has expressed – loudly for it – concerns about Tunisia and, no, personally I would not go right now, even though I have never been and it houses some terrific Roman ruins I would love to see. But I would not put that on my dance card in 2016.

 

Personally, too, I would gladly go to France or Belgium, and I do not believe I would go to Turkey, despite liking Istanbul a lot and Ephesus even more.

 

Who’s right, who’s wrong? That’s the thing: you have to make your own call. That’s the 2016 reality.  When Brussels – a city typically scorned as simply boring – turned into a charnel house, there’s a new reality at work and we all are piecing together our own responses.  That’s the way it should be. Literally it may be our lives at stake.  And if that’s how it is, I want to call my own shots.

 

What if your family is begging you to stay home? That’s your decision, too. I would not tell anyone to ignore the fears of a spouse, or a child.  In a world where old beliefs – old senses of security – have been shattered by terrorists, a child may know every bit as well as a wizened elder.  

 

I am writing this in a hotel room in Las Vegas – where I am attending a huge conference – and I admit I have no worries about terrorism in this town, which has some of the best security on the planet (maybe on any planet).  

 

Next week I am in the New York area and, nope, have no worries about security.

 

I used to travel often to Belfast when a civil war was flaring and, no, I had no real worries about my security even there.

 

The usual advice still holds: avoid large crowds, avoid tempting targets.

 

Would I go to London? Oh, yes, would love to.  I would avoid the tube in rush hour – especially the Circle Line – but I would do that without any threat alerts.  

 

Would I decline an order from a boss to go to, say, Cairo?  

 

Yeah, probably.  

 

Should you? Could you?  Indications are that rising numbers of executives are now chewing on these questions – especially as worries grow over destinations previously thought to be safe (Brussels for example).  Many believe their companies will respect their concerns but others wonder if their career growth will be slowed.

 

That boss question will not go away. We will be hearing more of it, as more destinations seem to be possible terror spots.  Who goes to Syria on business now? But in a global market, what US executives can shrug off all the cities on any terror watch, from Paris to Rome and Mumbai?

 

The decisions won’t be easy.  Careers may be at stake. So may lives. The calculus is grim but it is real.

 

Don’t ask me what to do.  It’s your life, your decisions.

 

 

By Robert McGarvey

 

Call Ed Markey the senator from La Mancha.  That is because he has launched an assault on airline fees, in legislation called the FAIR Fees Act, aka Forbid Airlines from Imposing Ridiculous Fees Act.

 

The backdrop of course is that airlines are getting fat imposing niggling fees on passengers.  They pulled in over $5 billion in fees – for things like bag check – in just the first three quarters of 2015.

 

It sets a bad precedent too. Greedy hoteliers of course are racing to slap us in the face with resort fees – even when you are staying at, well, a resort. Or – worse – when you are staying at a city hotel with no obvious resort features. They really just want the $20 to $40 per day they believe they can squeeze out of us, mainly because they are envious of the airlines profits.

 

Markey of course is following in the footsteps of Senator Claire McCaskill who has been driving legislation to end resort fees.

 

Markey – cleverly – is trying to leverage debate off the present Senate discussions about reauthorizing the FAA.  Some pro-consumer language already has made its way into the bill (e.g., requiring airlines to refund baggage fees when the gear arrives late).

 

But Markey wants more. His legislation’s intent: if enacted it “prohibits airlines from imposing fees, including cancellation, change and bag fees, that are not reasonable and proportional to the costs of the services provided.” The legislation also directs the Department of Transportation to review any other fees charged by airlines.

 

Markey stated his case: “Airlines fees are as high as the planes passengers are traveling on, and it’s time to stop their rapid ascent. In recent years, fees and ticket prices have gone up despite the fact that gas prices and airline choices have gone down. Airlines should not be allowed to overcharge captive passengers just because they need to change their flight or have to check a couple of bags. There is no justification for charging consumers a $200 fee to resell a $150 ticket that was cancelled well in advance. The FAIR Fees Act puts a stop to this fee gouging and will help ensure passengers are flying the fair and friendly skies.”

 

The text of the bill is here.  

 

Note: Markey is not going after the ridiculous fees charged by airlines for bad food and drink in coach.  Or the anemic WiFi. At least not now.

 

The bill very specifically states its targets: “(1) any fee for a change or cancellation of a reservation for a flight in interstate air transportation; (2) any fee relating to checked baggage to be transported on a flight in interstate air transportation; and (3) any other fee imposed by an air carrier relating to a flight in interstate air transportation.”

 

Nor does the bill say airlines cannot charge for such things. Just that charges have to be reasonable.

 

Markey by the way is not alone. His co-sponsor is Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut. Said Blumenthal, “This measure will ground the soaring, gouging fees that contribute to airlines’ record profits and passengers’ rising pain. With all the frills of flying already gone, airlines are increasingly resorting to nickel and diming consumers with outrageous fees. These runaway charges are anti-consumerism at its worst – in some cases doubling passenger fares despite plummeting fuel costs and soaring airline profits. A parent who wants to sit with his young child, a customer who wants to check or carry on a bag, or have Wi-Fi, or a traveler who needs to change or cancel a reservation should not incur exorbitant, unnecessary fees on the whim of an airline.”

 

The National Consumers League has weighed in on Markey’s side.  Said the NCL: “Industry consolidation, cheap fuel, packed planes, and a never-ending list of fees have combined to drive airline industry profits to historic levels,” said Sally Greenberg, NCL executive director. “Now it’s time for the full Senate to step in and ensure that the industry’s profits are not coming at the expense of consumers’ safety and pocketbooks.”

 

Will this bill be enacted into law? Not likely with the present Congress. But come January 2017 things may look different.

 

We can also hope for – and push for – more transparency in pricing.  I don’t want to tell a resort it cannot charge $25 for pool towels.  But what pretty much all travelers object to are surprise, undisclosed fees.  

 

The same principle applies to airline fees. Can airlines charge for a ticket change? Sure. But be transparent and keep the upcharge nominal.  We’ll all be happier.

 

And won’t that be a change for airplane passengers.

 

Trump Hotels Get Hit With Data Breach – @TheStreet http://bit.ly/1SAksQd My reporting

5 Safe Summer Travel Destinations You Want on Your List – @TheStreet bit.ly/1USPxF9 My reporting. From Japan to Monaco

5 Ways to Travel Safer in 2016

 

By Robert McGarvey

 

 

As a people we are busy crossing huge chunks of the world – just about all of the Continent – as simply too dangerous for 2016 travel.  Mistake.  The hunger for safety makes perfect sense of course, but there is no need to pull the blinds tight and declare the world a no go zone.

 

Five steps will make your travels safer.

 

And none of them involves crossing off Europe.

 

But some are hard and some – definitely – are new for 2016.

 

Such as?

 

Some countries are better at this than others.  You will hear from the optimists, “Belgium has to be a lot safer now.”  (Substitute name of the place of the latest atrocity.)  You won’t hear that from me.  When a country has utterly failed in its anti-terror and, in particular, when it has failed against predictable strikes, it will not raise its security performance to world class in a matter of short days. Nor weeks. Nor months.  It takes time to get good at security. London is very good but it has been at this for 40 years.  New York City is very good but it had 911 to deal with.

 

Don’t ask travel security people where they recommend not going. Most will mumble about North Korea, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and a few other places you have no interest in visiting anyway.

 

Ask them instead: where won’t you personally go?

 

And also ask: where wouldn’t you let your 15 year old daughter go?

 

You will get interesting responses. One consultant told me he had crossed off Argentina and Brazil (due to crime, not terror).  Another said to avoid Bali.

 

The long way to get these insights is to pore over the State Dept. travel warnings and alerts. Tips are there, although often buried.  The same from the British Foreign Office is also worth a look.

 

Consider this about Belgium from the Foreign Office: “There is a high threat from terrorism. Attacks could be indiscriminate, including on public transport and transport hubs and in other places visited by foreigners.

“Brussels hosts a number of international institutions (EU and NATO) and government and foreign embassy buildings which are sensitive locations.”

To me, that says stay away – and if you must go, steer clear of international government buildings.

Cross off the right countries to not visit and you will be that much safer.

In Europe now, to me that means avoid Belgium, France, Netherlands, and Bulgaria. Sorry. But that is how I read the tea leaves, at least right now.

 

Avoid public transit. I hate typing that. But it is clear that terrorists have identified mass transit – especially subways – as points of vulnerability.  

 

Buses are probably fine, although large bus depots are also high risk.

 

The safest way to get around: walk. It’s also good for your health and there is no better way to really see a city.

 

Watch for Patterns. In assessing real risk in a destination, don’t look for single incidents, hunt for patterns, that is, multiple terror incidents. See a pattern and you have a right to be creeped out.

 

Use Google News to search for terror incidents in any prospective destination.  See a pattern? A frequency? Don’t go.

 

Some experts point to Turkey and Bali as places where real patterns seem to be forming. That is not good news.

 

Stay in  modest hotels – or even better Airbnb.

 

Terrorists target hotels, especially branded, American upscale hotels.

 

That’s why there is greater safety in modest, locally owned properties.

 

But even better probably are accommodations found via Airbnb and similar sharing economy networks.

 

Bomb a five star hotel and there are headlines.

 

Another plus of local accommodations: there likely will be fewer Americans. That’s good because often we are in fact targets.

 

Get out of town.  Terror attacks have centered in big cities – occasionally at high end resorts – there is no interest in tiny towns.
Go there.  Not only will you get an authentic travel experience – I learned more about Ireland in a week in Donegal Town (population 2607) than I did in weeks in Dublin – but you are likely to be much safer, not just from terror but also street crime.

 

Don’t hide from Europe in 2016. Go. Just go with your eyes open.

After the Brussels Attacks, Should You Cancel Your European Vacation? – TheStreet http://bit.ly/1UOAria My reporting

6 Bargain European Destinations You Can Afford This Summer – @TheStreet http://bit.ly/1T4bD5N My reporting on faves such as Belfast

After Erin Andrews: How to Stay Safe in Hotels Now – @TheStreet http://bit.ly/1RM3eiq My reporting