WacoFan
Bigly
Pretty certain I could do a better job than Arpey did. Or Bill Compton. Or Arpey's predecessor (can't think of his name off the top of my head - but the idiot that paid the bonuses to execs shortly after 9-11).
Spirit's $100 carry-on fee starts next month
- Thread starter Oxman
- Start date
Pretty certain I could do a better job than Arpey did. Or Bill Compton. Or Arpey's predecessor (can't think of his name off the top of my head - but the idiot that paid the bonuses to execs shortly after 9-11).
Muff3n
Well-Known Member
100 bucks just sounds like a whole lot for a carry on bag. I am no math wiz, but If jet A was $5.75 a gallon then that would translate into 17.39 gallons of fuel that the bag would pay for. Does it cost 17 gallons o fuel to fly a 25 pound bag? I know the distance of the flight would vary but considering spirit has no super long haul flights it would be easier to calculate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
Think of it more as a penalty for being stupid and not booking the bag earlier in the process. If you get through all of the hoops, as described above, and still have not let the airline know you are bringing a bag, that is a stupidity tax for that person. Also, added revenue to the airline from the stupid person.
I have never booked on Spirit, but just taking what was said above as how the process is. If they hid the fees, then I can see getting upset about it. It sounds like they do their best to inform the passengers, though.
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
SteveCostello
My member is well-known.
Marketed properly, I think a more upscale approach to flying would be a great move for one or two of the legacies to approach - hell, they could get into an upscale war... who's upscaleness is better than the other (as opposed to who's prices are "lower").
Here's why: an awful lot of people are sick and tired of the airport hassle, security lines (with free groping!), and crappy old terminals with no where to charge your laptop/mobile device without sitting in some filthy corner on the floor where the carpet hasn't been cleaned in 20 years, next to a 30 people trying to do the same thing (alright... who didn't shower??), only to spend time a few hours in an aluminum can with crammed overhead storage, crappy coffee, food that would insult a homeless person, windows you can't see out of because either a.) they are absolutely filthy with the last month's worth of head grease (
), or b.) they are scratched to hell, seat pitch suitable only for pygmies, and the guy in front of you who slams his seat back the very second he can with no warning at all, spilling that crappy hot coffee all over your lap.There are people out there willing to pay a bit more for at the very least the perception of increased value, and preferably a legitimately more upscale experience. There are people out there buying iPhone 5s, Galazy S3s, 72" Panasonic VT50 3D televisions, BMWs, Audis, Lexus, Stickley furniture, organic food, GAP for Babies, Patron, Louis Vuitton, Breitling, etc etc etc, when they could be buying Pantech Breeze IIIs, LG A340s, 32" Sceptre TVs, Chevrolets, Hyundias, Toyotas, IKEA, Chef Boyardee, hand me down kids clothes, Jose Cuervo, Wal*Mart brand, Casio, etc etc etc.
These folks are not a niche market. I'm in that market, and I know there are an awful lot of us out there (middle to upper middle class, or value-seeking upper class). I don't want to pay several times as much for a better experience, but I will gladly pay a reasonable amount more. Using our trip to France as an example, one round trip ticket was about $1,200. The next step up was over $8,000. One step. There is no level between the unwashed masses in coach and the pampered bourgeoisie in business/first. (And no... I don't count paying $80 extra PER FLIGHT for an aisle seat closer to the front a step up...)
Given that there would be very little ROI on splitting aircraft into yet another class, I just want an airline that aspires to be better, period, coach included. They'll need to charge a little more for that. Some people will refuse to pay that higher price, based on their Priceline searches. That's fine. Let them fly in the cattle cars.
You have to market honestly. I would LOVE it... LOVE IT, if a legacy like Delta or AA decided to run with this, change their business model, and put out advertisements that basically say:
"You know what? We know you are tired of (see my paragraph above, crammed seats, bad food, etc.). We know you are tired of extra baggage fees. We know you are tired of... well... flying. And we are sorry for being a part of that. Today is a new day, though. <Insert promises of a better experience, etc.> And you know what? That is going to makes us just a little more expensive than the other guy. But we're pretty sure you'll be okay with that. <Split screen, showing a person squished in their seat on one side, and a person far more comfortable, looking quite relaxed, and enjoying a nice light meal with fresh food on the other.>"
I'm sold, and I'm flying that airline.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
Marketed properly, I think a more upscale approach to flying would be a great move for one or two of the legacies to approach - hell, they could get into an upscale war... who's upscaleness is better than the other (as opposed to who's prices are "lower").
Here's why: an awful lot of people are sick and tired of the airport hassle, security lines (with free groping!), and crappy old terminals with no where to charge your laptop/mobile device without sitting in some filthy corner on the floor where the carpet hasn't been cleaned in 20 years, next to a 30 people trying to do the same thing (alright... who didn't shower??), only to spend time a few hours in an aluminum can with crammed overhead storage, crappy coffee, food that would insult a homeless person, windows you can't see out of because either a.) they are absolutely filthy with the last month's worth of head grease (
There are people out there willing to pay a bit more for at the very least the perception of increased value, and preferably a legitimately more upscale experience. There are people out there buying iPhone 5s, Galazy S3s, 72" Panasonic VT50 3D televisions, BMWs, Audis, Lexus, Stickley furniture, organic food, GAP for Babies, Patron, Louis Vuitton, Breitling, etc etc etc, when they could be buying Pantech Breeze IIIs, LG A340s, 32" Sceptre TVs, Chevrolets, Hyundias, Toyotas, IKEA, Chef Boyardee, hand me down kids clothes, Jose Cuervo, Wal*Mart brand, Casio, etc etc etc.
These folks are not a niche market. I'm in that market, and I know there are an awful lot of us out there (middle to upper middle class, or value-seeking upper class). I don't want to pay several times as much for a better experience, but I will gladly pay a reasonable amount more. Using our trip to France as an example, one round trip ticket was about $1,200. The next step up was over $8,000. One step. There is no level between the unwashed masses in coach and the pampered bourgeoisie in business/first. (And no... I don't count paying $80 extra PER FLIGHT for an aisle seat closer to the front a step up...)
Given that there would be very little ROI on splitting aircraft into yet another class, I just want an airline that aspires to be better, period, coach included. They'll need to charge a little more for that. Some people will refuse to pay that higher price, based on their Priceline searches. That's fine. Let them fly in the cattle cars.
You have to market honestly. I would LOVE it... LOVE IT, if a legacy like Delta or AA decided to run with this, change their business model, and put out advertisements that basically say:
"You know what? We know you are tired of (see my paragraph above, crammed seats, bad food, etc.). We know you are tired of extra baggage fees. We know you are tired of... well... flying. And we are sorry for being a part of that. Today is a new day, though. <Insert promises of a better experience, etc.> And you know what? That is going to makes us just a little more expensive than the other guy. But we're pretty sure you'll be okay with that. <Split screen, showing a person squished in their seat on one side, and a person far more comfortable, looking quite relaxed, and enjoying a nice light meal with fresh food on the other.>"
I'm sold, and I'm flying that airline.
This world you describe. I want to go to there. The world with the slightly better airline.
The only problem I see in your logic is that there aren't enough of you out there to sustain the model reasonably. Business travelers, as mentioned upthread, are the bread and butter, right? And most companies put fare restrictions on their people.
It's not as bad for me as it is for some people - I have a lot of discretionary authority on what I spend on airline tickets, but I try to be reasonable. I'm not allowed to fly 1st class, and I have to get approval when a fare is really large, depending on the length of the trip and the duration.
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but this is why I will pay a few bucks more on SWA. Flexibility. I think if airlines relaxed some of the fare restrictions they could retain more business flyers. As it is, business people end up in the trenches with the vacation fliers on Expedia.
falconvalley
Absentee Dad of the OOTSK, Runner, Cat Frustrator
Yeah, the constant filing for bankruptcy is nearly a direct byproduct of deregulation, but carriers still came and went before 1980. Carriers still struggled. The difference was "Regulation", which makes some factors more predictable. What won't change with a return to regulation is how volatile fuel prices are and how difficult the RLA is. You may remove the internet's ability to whipsaw the airlines (relatively speaking), but that is just one factor. I don't think it will make things a whole lot better. It will immediately raise fares and increase revenue, which will lead to other adjustments in the market. Carriers will spend money on other things to draw a customer base. We will lose some efficiency in route structure overall as passengers and that will decrease productivity in the economy. But, YES, airlines will increase revenue from the fare increase. You and I both know that won't necessarily mean that cash flows will rise on average over 20 years. All that depends on how the airlines and associated companies react and adjust their business plans. It won't be "food on every table", though.
jrwit
Looking to Ride-Along
I think using the model that SteveCostello mentions would be awesome and I think in the grand scheme of things the workarounds for this kind of issue (losing business travellers who need to pick the lowest fares) could be found. I think almost everyone would pay just a tad bit more for a bit better service. Not first class fancy shmancy with admirals club etc. but a bit more for a tad bit more leg room, cleaner everything, etc.
SteveCostello
My member is well-known.
It would be interesting to see if there are. I was willing to pay up to 30 or 40% more on our trip to France for an improved experience. Not nearly 400% more. And that is about the amount I'd be willing to pay for better digs for a flight from STL to SFO, a trip that we make at least once a year to see family.
According to Kayak, a United flight departing STL for SFO at 1908 on 07NOV and returning by 1814 a week later is $270, and it is A320 all the way. First class is $2,675.60... nearly 10 TIMES the cost of coach tickets. 10 times. Certainly no middle ground there, eh?
30% more than makes the ticket $351, $81 extra. That is still reasonable to me, and I would gladly pay that if there was better overall service. 50% more makes it $405, or $135 more. That's getting a little pricier, but for a nearly 5 hour trip, I would certainly consider it if the cost/benefit ratio was good. $2,675? That's crack pipe territory. As in I'd have to be smoking crack to pay that much.
There have got to be enough people out there willing to pay ~30% more for an overall better experience. I know there are, in fact. Case in point: here in St. Louis we have three major grocery chains: Shop-n-Save, Schnuck's, and Dierberg's, in increasing order of level of service, appearance, and product selection. Shop-n-Save is packed with everyone from very low income to middle-ish class. Schnuck's is packed with people from lower middle to upper middle class and value-seeking upper class. And Dierberg's is packed with people from middle to upper middle, as well as upper class. There is another, more niche market here called Straub's that is typically populated with upper middle and upper class. Each of them are consistently full of the people they cater to.
EDITED: Adding the fact that prices in the higher-end stores tend to be ~30% more for similar (and sometimes the very same...) products. Produce is the standout, however... the produce selection and quality (and price) is consistently higher at the nicer stores. And the folks with the money are okay with that.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
These are all good numbers, but I think you have to stop comparing your vacation ticket-buying-reasons with BizTraveler reasons; they're two different rationales.
All of those look like solid numbers, by the way. Now - if all of the fares for that city pairing were not only 30% more, but within 10% of each other - then this could work. Because a BizTraveler can show his VP/CFO/BoD that he was being fiscally responsible by going with "market" rate or slightly lower; they have cost-justification built in.
SteveCostello
My member is well-known.
Good point. I'll readily admit to not knowing the business side of aviation very well. I'm just coming at this from a common sense, quality-driven consumer level. From everything I've seen, business travelers are the airlines' bread and butter. Makes sense. So, offer tangible benefits to those business travelers and the businesses they work for (and I don't just mean the First Class folks... they are already set).
Free in-air wifi. Quality, healthy meals. Comfortable seats. More legroom. Power ports. Clean, relaxing terminals. All of those things would make the business traveler more efficient, more rested, and more productive. You don't need to provide them with First Class level service (i.e., two-wide instead of three-wide plush leather seating, drinks before the doors shuts, etc.). Just upgraded service. Better seat pitch. Fresh veggies and fruits instead of crappy snack crackers or mass-produced sludge in a tray. A nicer way to travel that doesn't cost quadruple the cost of flying.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
So, as a regular BizTraveler, these are the things I want - most of them either will earn or retain my repeated patronage:
Standardized Fare Ranging - I realize that market/seasonal demand dictate fares, but wide swings make it difficult for me to plan my territory visits. If I know that a fare is going to be roughly $350-450 regardless of when I book it then I will book regularly as part of my regular business planning. The inability to force my customers into needing me with at least 14 day or 21 day notice hurts my business.
Clear, Concise Fare Structure - none of this nickel/dime, hidden fee, extra perk BS. Just tell me how much the fare is and then charge me that with the applicable taxes.
Security Line Bypass - the biz travel snob in me does not want to stand in line with the proletariat. The A-List program on SWA lets me bypass the lines in most of their base cities, which saves me VAST amounts of time in the airport.
Zero Baggage Fees - if the bag is checked, it's one less yahoo choking up the aisle trying to get a bag in a bin. This would translate into better on-time departures because the Self-Loading Freight isn't shuffling along at a glacial pace.
Flexible Ticketing Practices - just look at SWA's ticketing model regarding fees/changes. Enough said there. It's the best there is, in my opinion, although I'd just as soon eliminate "super discount" fares altogether in exchange for reasonable flexibility.
Solid Affinity Branding - want me to use your preferred rental car partner or credit card? Make it make sense both ways. The idea is good, but the airlines have diluted it. Put together a program with real teeth - make me want to rent ONLY with Avis, for example, because nothing else comes CLOSE. Delta and Amex figured this out. Don't dilute the relationships.
Cultural Respect - this is a huge problem for most airlines, and it will require a cultural shift to fix. The best CA on a flight I ever saw was an Airtran guy. I wrote a post about it here YEARS ago. Best cabin crews, in my opinion, tend to be SWA. What do these folks have in common, you may ask? (besides the merger/acq) By and large, they have treated me like a grown up. They don't talk to me like I'm a 5 year old. This last one, I know, is subjective, and it's awfully hard to enforce. But it starts with....DING DING DING....treating your workforce like people. They're not OBLIGATED to do that, but they should. It's good business.
Notice how none of these things involve adding or subtracting services to the flight?
SteveCostello
My member is well-known.
So why does this not exist, at least, not to my knowledge? That market is there... it has to be. There are people willing to pony up a bit more money for this experience, same as there are those willing to pay more for other goods and services. If there are enough people to fill business and first (on every flight I've been on in the past two year, those sections have been fully booked), there are surely enough people to fly a more civilized airline. SWA seems to come close, but is lacking in some of the comfort areas I described still, and while they are no Spirit, they still attract... shall we say... people that don't make great travel companions.
It won't take a massive amount of money to do this: no need to create a new airline. All it would take is for one of the legacies to take this market. It would be more difficult for a smaller airline to do this and be successful. You would need a fairly large market presence and a solid marketing campaign.
Again... I'm approaching this from a very simplistic point of view... I know that, and I'm probably missing an awful lot of the details that matter. That said, I don't see why this wouldn't work if planned and implemented in a common sense manner.
It won't take a massive amount of money to do this: no need to create a new airline. All it would take is for one of the legacies to take this market. It would be more difficult for a smaller airline to do this and be successful. You would need a fairly large market presence and a solid marketing campaign.
Again... I'm approaching this from a very simplistic point of view... I know that, and I'm probably missing an awful lot of the details that matter. That said, I don't see why this wouldn't work if planned and implemented in a common sense manner.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
You guys talk of these things like they're new ideas. I can assure you, they're not. You aren't smarter than hoards upon hoards of airline managers that have been around the industry for decades. They've debated these ideas, they've commissioned market research to test these ideas, and they've found that the ideas simply don't work. The market isn't there that will sustain such a business model. It doesn't matter what your "common sense" tells you, because the market research simply doesn't support it.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
That's like saying that I could be a better President than George W. Bush. You pick the absolute worst example of any profession, and a horse's ass could do the job better.
SteveCostello
My member is well-known.
By all appearances, it seems to me that the only thing that the airlines have "studied" in the past few decades is how to maximize profits through a very careful balance of cost savings... i.e., how little can we pay our employees, how little can we improve our aircraft, how crappy can we let our terminals get, and how pissed off can we make our customers before we cross the line. And... you know... even if we cross the line, another airline will think we had a great idea, and will cross the line with us. Soon, the rest will follow, and the line will move. Wash, rinse, repeat.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
It may seem that way to you "by all appearances," but nothing could be further from the truth.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
I am being sincere in my next question. No snark at all intended, though I know it will read that way. It's important that you know this.
Are you telling us that all of these hoards of airline managers, industry professionals and market research people have done all of their due diligence and this is the best business model that they can come up with?
Because I have a hard time believing that. I really do. If it's the truth, so be it.
