And it begins: Airline to start charging for carry-ons

[miles01110]

Well southwest apparently pulled it off.

They have cheaper tickets, no fees and better customer service.

They also pay their employees less than the industry average and work them longer. Their planes are old and of the same type. They typically don't fly to major hubs.

Southwest is great if they fly to an airport near you. Personally I'm not driving from northern Virginia to Baltimore to save a few dollars.

 

[djellison]

every major airline, save for Southwest and JetBlue, charge for the first bag.

United didn't charge me for the first bag LAX-LHR in Jan, or this week.

Virgin didn't in March 2009.

 

[dmr727]

Just one more reason I'm in favor of high speed rail.

If you like rail, you should fly Southwest.

Both have trouble stopping in less than two miles.

 

[aethelbert]

United didn't charge me for the first bag LAX-LHR in Jan, or this week.

United waives the first bag fee for most international travel. Second is waived for Star Alliance silver members as well as first and business class passengers. Third is waived for Star Alliance Gold members.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Southwest pulled it off with fuel hedges. Those don't last forever.

And yes, WN has stated that they are exploring additional fees for luggage. Don't worry, it's coming.

Again I ask. Why does south west have such high custmor satifaction and good customer service and American Airlines has such piss poor and complete lack of customer service (and logic for that matter) and with many of there piss poor policies making long time customer walk away.

Take for example this link about american airlines http://joelcomm.com/american_airlines_customer_ser.html the store sounds stupid but it is very true and I know for a fact they pull off this crap less than a year ago as my girlfriend was on the receiving end of it. She wanted to cancel her out bound flight and just have the return flight. Of course they charged her a $150 fee and that was 100% pure profit and gravy money, Hell it was more than 100% profit since the flight she was on was over book so they did not have to bump some one so her canceling the flight made them over $200 and then another $150 on top of that (and they kept the cost of her out bound flight)

Take the flip side if you call south west they answer is sure NO PROBLEM. and even give you credit for what the out bound flight would of been. Make a last minute change again NO PROBLEM. As long as the tickets were the same price and they have the room they have zero issue of doing it.

Sorry your argument does not add up and does not explain why southwest customer service is so good and american is so crappy.

 

[dmr727]

Sorry your argument does not add up and does not explain why southwest customer service is so good and american is so crappy.

Southwest's employees on the whole are a lot happier than American's. This trickles down to customer satisfaction, and the management at Southwest seems to be the only executive group in the industry that understands this.

However keeping your employees happy costs money, and that goes back Southwest's advantage, which, as akonradi mentioned, is the fuel hedging.

 

[aethelbert]

Sorry your argument does not add up and does not explain why southwest customer service is so good and american is so crappy.

Southwest scores well in surveys because they don't charge similar fees. They don't charge the fees because they're doing alright with their hedges for now and because they're heavily invested in a huge marketing campaign about the lack of fees.

Citing articles from the blogosphere is useless here. people moan and groan on the internet whenever they get pissed off. There are rants about every airline out there. And AA isn't their only competitor; Continental, laden with fees as well, has scored pretty close to Southwest in recent years. In some instances, their numbers have been better.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Southwest scores well in surveys because they don't charge similar fees. They don't charge the fees because they're doing alright with their hedges for now and because they're heavily invested in a huge marketing campaign about the lack of fees.

Citing articles from the blogosphere is useless here. people moan and groan on the internet whenever they get pissed off. There are rants about every airline out there. And AA isn't their only competitor; Continental, laden with fees as well, has scored pretty close to Southwest in recent years. In some instances, their numbers have been better.

That blgosphere rant about american you should read. It is great example of how stupid some of american policies and action are. I have personally been on the receiving end of american lack of customer service and I can promise you that blogged I link to is pretty much the exact same crap I dealt with.

It shows you the compete illogical crap that american runs.

Southwest's employees on the whole are a lot happier than American's. This trickles down to customer satisfaction, and the management at Southwest seems to be the only executive group in the industry that understands this.

However keeping your employees happy costs money, and that goes back Southwest's advantage, which, as akonradi mentioned, is the fuel hedging.

Even with out the hedging part. Happy customers means less completes and more repeat business which = more money in the long run.

Take what I pointed to in american. They charge an insane fee and poor service which in the short run means more money but because they piss off people they leave. American pissing me off translated into thousands of in losses because no only will I never fly on them again I told some family members who use to make a lot of fights each year with american and now they complete refuse to flight american. It hurts the bottom line. Short run American made 400+ per easy profit. Long run (less than 1 years time) they lost over 10 grand in revenue.

 

[aethelbert]

That blgosphere rant about american you should read. It is great example of how stupid some of american policies and action are. I have personally been on the receiving end of american lack of customer service and I can promise you that blogged I link to is pretty much the exact same crap I dealt with.

So the blogger gets a [restricted] award ticket, and then gets mad that that there's a change fee? It's in the fare rules for crying out loud. If you don't agree to them, don't buy the ticket. And no airline will honor later parts of a journey if you fail to board an earlier flight on the same PNR.

I hold an EXP membership with AA, and I've never had an issue with customer service. Granted, the status is supplied through appointment and not reaching the mileage/segment threshold each year, but I deal with them frequently enough.

They charge an insane fee and poor service which in the short run means more money but because they piss off people they leave.

Like most airlines, they couldn't care less about losing the business of relatively infrequent flyers. It is found that people that write nasty letters to customer relations departments about how they'll never return, blah, blah, blah, often do indeed come back when the fares are low. Not saying that this is the case with you, but it's common. If you really do provide them with significant revenue, then they'll go out of their way to make your experience enjoyable and reduce possible conflicts.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

So the blogger gets a [restricted] award ticket, and then gets mad that that there's a change fee? It's in the fare rules for crying out loud. If you don't agree to them, don't buy the ticket. And no airline will honor later parts of a journey if you fail to board an earlier flight on the same PNR.

I hold an EXP membership with AA, and I've never had an issue with customer service. Granted, the status is supplied through appointment and not reaching the mileage/segment threshold each year, but I deal with them frequently enough.

But you miss the part. You want to cancel the first leg of the trip but keep the return leg even if it is a non refundable ticket I would see the logic working out like this...

I the passenger can accept the loss of money on the first leg of the tip. No big deal. But I do not think I should have to pay a fee for the return leg of the trip. But american airlines thinks I should both loss the money for the first leg and then pay a $150 fee to keep my ticket on the EXACT SAME return flight.

Please tell me the logic in that. I see over 100% per gravy money in that.

Come on I am waiting for the logic in that and not the BS that it is in the 10 pages of fine print.

 

[aethelbert]

Please tell me the logic in that. I see over 100% per gravy money in that.

Ok, here you go. Round-trip fares are often much cheaper than one-way fares between the same cities, especially for extended lengths of stay. Some people will try to book the roundtrips and only use the second segment to save money. If you're flying in only one direction, you need a one-way ticket. They're not fared the same as round-trips, hence the need to re-fare and re-ticket the passenger. Depending on how long it had been since the ticket was booked, inventory in the original class of service may had disappeared thus requiring you to buy into a higher fare. It's all price discrimination and it's how they all stay in business.

Had the author decided to show up for the second segment after not taking the first, there would be no available reservation as the itinerary would have been already canceled.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Ok, here you go. Round-trip fares are often much cheaper than one-way fares between the same cities, especially for extended lengths of stay. Some people will try to book the roundtrips and only use the second segment to save money. If you're flying in only one direction, you need a one-way ticket. They're not fared the same as round-trips, hence the need to re-fare and re-ticket the passenger. Depending on how long it had been since the ticket was booked, inventory in the original class of service may had disappeared thus requiring you to buy into a higher fare. It's all price discrimination and it's how they all stay in business.

Had the author decided to show up for the second segment after not taking the first, there would be no available reservation as the itinerary would have been already canceled.

Does not explain it to me.

I buy round trip ticket and last min my plan change and I no longer need the first leg of the flight but I need the return flight.

I am out the money for the flight to location but I want to keep my return.

Airlines still gets the full amount of money for round trip but only fly me one way.

American charges me a $150 on top of the first leg lost. So you fail to explain the logic there. It basicly more proof the airlines are screwing everyone over or more so certain ones. There is a reason why american airlines is in trouble and some of the others. Their customer service is next to nothing.

 

[aethelbert]

Does not explain it to me.

I buy round trip ticket and last min my plan change and I no longer need the first leg of the flight but I need the return flight.

I am out the money for the flight to location but I want to keep my return.

Airlines still gets the full amount of money for round trip but only fly me one way.

American charges me a $150 on top of the first leg lost. So you fail to explain the logic there.

-A one way ticket may well have been more expensive than the roundtrip. They're certainly not making any additional money if you only fly one segment of the [likely less expensive] roundtrip.
-Almost 100% of people that don't take the first leg of a roundtrip will also not attempt at the second segment. Canceling your itinerary and allowing that seat to again be sold has the potential for generating a large amount of money off of a Y fare.
-What is there for them to believe that you'll show up for the second flight if you don't make the first?
-All roundtrip fare rules will state that your itinerary will be canceled if you don't board any given flight. Most likely either someone is trying to be clever and save money with a hidden city/roundtrip ticket when only one way is needed or they simply won't show up for the remaining segments.

I have a paper ticket from 2007 sitting on my desk right now, clearly stating "Void if one or more segments are not completed."

 

[miles01110]

Does not explain it to me.

...So you fail to explain the logic there.

Explain the logic of purchasing a ticket from an airline that more or less explicitly states their exchange/no-show policy, changing your itinerary, and then complaining when the policy is applied?

 

[pukifloyd]

agreed...this is totally stupid...atleast one bag should be allowed.
well...the day isn't far when they'll start charging for international flights too

 

[Abstract]

Are the airlines flying to cities and countries that allow people to walk around naked in public? No? Then f*** them.

 

[mojohanna]

United didn't charge me for the first bag LAX-LHR in Jan, or this week.

Virgin didn't in March 2009.

It was an intl flight. They already charge a premium for that.

 

[djellison]

They already charge a premium for that.

No they don't. They charge for the second bag - but there is no explicit charge mentioned anywhere for the first bag. Of course they are 'charging' for it, in the same way every plane ticket also 'charges' you for the air you breathe, the dirt you put on their carpet, etc etc etc

 

[iOrlando]

but does the article mention if they are simply reducing ticket prices by $75 that way their ticket prices appear lowest around but the baggage fees even it all up?

All i know is flying is getting more ridiculous. Have you seen the amount of carry on baggage since airlines started charging for checked luggage? every flight is packed...with the final people having to check their baggage due to lack of room in those overhead containers.

 

[spice weasel]

Personally I prefer to drive on trips when they're short enough and I have yet to have reason to travel more than two states away... so the only time I've ever flown it was on someone else's dollar and the return trip was by car.

Not a big fan of seeing the world, or even the country, eh?

 

[bradl]

Southwest pulled it off with fuel hedges. Those don't last forever.

And yes, WN has stated that they are exploring additional fees for luggage. Don't worry, it's coming.

Don't buy that.

SWA has been touting their bags fly free in their ads at every airport I've been to in the past 5 months, plus their ads in the media. It's something they've had in their 30+ year business model, and Gary, Herb, and Co. have no intention of changing that anytime soon.

Keep in mind that there was an airline that tried to do exactly what NKS has done, and a bit worse: SKB (Skybus). Their business model: $10 fares (excluding tax), and charge for everything else at the gate. Bags? Charged. One carry-on allowed. Any others? Charged. No check through luggage, no routing to destinations. You flew to CMH, and if you were on your way to Florida, they wouldn't route your bags to that flight, nor hold that connecting flight for you. If you bought food from them, or prior to flying, you had to eat and dispose of it prior to boarding the plane.

With the bags.. sound familiar?

SKB folded in 11 months.

Also, note how other airlines who are nickel'n'diming for bags (UAL, COA, DAL, FFT, AAL, etc.) are all in a world of hurt. FFT just went Ch. 11 and was bought out by RPA! MEP was the same. SWA is doing this with much more than hedging. If it came to it, from the profits they had from the early 2000s due to their fuel hedges, they could eat the cost of the bags, whereas everyone else has been struggling to find extra revenue. In short, poor planning by the execs of the other carriers leads to their customers being nickel and dimed.

SWA has a firm head on their shoulders, and knows what their customers want. And they are giving it to them as the see it. I don't think you'll find any one flying with them today asking to be charged for checking their bags.

BL.

 

[leekohler]

Just one more reason I'm in favor of high speed rail.

That is the truth! I take Amtrak whenever possible. It's clean, comfy, friendly and fun. You can get out of your seat, walk around, talk on your phone, get drinks and dinner.

Does it take longer? Not necessarily. When you factor in travel to and from the airport, leaving enough time for check in, etc., it can actually take less time.

 

[dukebound85]

That is the truth! I take Amtrak whenever possible. It's clean, comfy, friendly and fun. You can get out of your seat, walk around, talk on your phone, get drinks and dinner.

Does it take longer? Not necessarily. When you factor in travel to and from the airport, leaving enough time for check in, etc., it can actually take less time.

Maybe I am clueless but does Amtrack run all the way cross country?

I may look into that if they do for my next trip as opposed to plane

Can you bring luggage?

Edit: google is helping me find these answers lol

 

[miles01110]

Amtrak is great if you're in the Northeast Corridor. Elsewhere...not so much (imo).

 

[Tilpots]

Does it take longer? Not necessarily. When you factor in travel to and from the airport, leaving enough time for check in, etc., it can actually take less time.

Your right about factoring in travel times to and from airports, plus you have to add the security check time in as well. I travel to see my family in MD from my home in Wilmington, NC quite often. It's a 400 mile, 6 1/2 hour trip by car. It's actually quicker to drive there then it is to fly... And it's only an 1 1/2 hour flight! Ridiculous. Plus for me and my wife to fly it's at the very least (without luggage) $300. Add on baggage fees and it's closer to $375. I can do it for $150 in gas and I drive a big 'ol gas guzzler.

My area is competing for stimulus funding for building out a high speed rail project and I just hope it gets done within the next ten years or so. It would link to Raleigh then could head North or South on the 95 corridor, or continue on to Charlotte and start a western trip. High speed rail would be the game changer in the travel industry. It wouldn't kill the airline business, it would just weed out a lot of the players and give travelers a respectable choice for getting from A to B. Some trips just don't make financial sense and aren't timely enough to be driveable.