Spirit's $100 carry-on fee starts next month

[SteveCostello]

It may seem that way to you "by all appearances," but nothing could be further from the truth.

Which is why I stipulated in earlier posts that my desires were framed around not being intimately familiar with the business operations of airlines. I was simply stating my desires for an airline to step up and start treating their customers more like a person and less like a sheep, and the fact that I would be willing to pay more for that... but not rape my wallet more.

Besides... I am not the only one out there who thinks that what I posted up in #98 there is reality. In fact, I'd wager that most of the flying public (except, perhaps, those that frequent Business/First) feels that way. That perception may not be the way things really are... but the fact that the perception exists at all should be concerning.

I should mention that this does not extend to most of the actual people that I interact with when flying. For the most parts the pilots, desk agents, and flight attendants I come in contact with during trips are at the very least courteous, and more often than not are downright friendly and go out of their way to help make the experience at least seem a bit better.

But on the whole... the experience is still severely lacking. Mooooo....

 

[FlyPurdue]

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.

I am flying it too. Call it 'Artisan Airlines.' These people that stay at the W when they travel, book veranda suites when they cruise, and eat at sustainable restaurants. However, these airlines do exist. I flew in coach from JFK to HKG on Cathay, and it was great. Comfortable seat, ample leg room, and quite tasty and filling meals. They even had a galley set up with fresh sandwiches, fruit, noodles, and other snacks and drinkes that where available throughout the flight. The difference in cost between Cathay and Cal (at the time) was ~400, return. Worth it so much. When spending that much already, whats an additional 400? On board was a much more festive atmosphere, outstanding service with no FA's yelling at me about my bag size. Yet Cathay's DE pilots, (iCadet a whole different story) have the highest compensation in the world, and Cathay continues to have huge annual profits.

Before anyone says that they are government subsided - that is false. It is not a Chinese national carrier, in fact, they are a airline owned by the English conglomerate - Swire Group.

I can only hope that someday, as previously mentioned, that this race to be the cheapest, becomes the race to be the best!

 

[jrwit]

I think that in recent times, there has been way more a focus on 'harvesting' of company wealth than building the best business it can be.

 

[exneophyte]

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.

Have been thinking exactly this for years regarding the no middle ground thing. I don't need an onboard shower, with sushi, and a bidet. I just wish there were a step up that would allow me to be a little more comfortable in flight.

 

[MQAAord]

MaxJet?

That was an "upper crust" carriers who marketed a premium product.. and failed. There have been others that have tried the "better service!" thing, and they failed. What people SAY and what they DO are two different things. For all the people who say they'd pay more for a premium product, not enough people did.

AA's "Luv Bird" service of early 2001? It was a really awesome premium product. I loved working those flights. All first class seats (50 seats of course, Wright Agreement) on a F-100, food, linens, all first class service. The flights were rarely more than half-full. It was an amazing product! And few people bought it.

As for the massive price differential between coach & 1st, remember most of the people you see sitting in first class did not pay the published first class fare. By and far most of them are using upgrades and/or rewards miles to be there.

 

[FlyPurdue]

Check out the very successful Air New Zeland premium economy - very different then the current offerings on UA and DL.

http://www.airnewzealand.com/new-premium-economy

 

[amjon]

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.

I think they're called JetBlue. They have the most leg room in coach I've seen, televisions in all the seats, and drink and snack service (not sure about meals on longer flights). If the price is slightly more I would go on JB over another carrier.

 

[SteveCostello]

MaxJet?

As for the massive price differential between coach & 1st, remember most of the people you see sitting in first class did not pay the published first class fare. By and far most of them are using upgrades and/or rewards miles to be there.

I knew about the fact that most people up front are upgrades. But I shouldn't need to fly 1,000,000 miles a year to qualify for a better experience.

As far as the failures go, what kind of market share did MaxJet have? If they were a fairly small carrier in a small market, then yeah, I can see why that would have been a bust. What prices were these premium carriers charging as compared to their non-premium competitors? If it was double, then yeah, I see why they may have not been successful.

 

[SteveCostello]

I think they're called JetBlue. They have the most leg room in coach I've seen, televisions in all the seats, and drink and snack service (not sure about meals on longer flights). If the price is slightly more I would go on JB over another carrier.

After looking at their route map, I clearly need to move out of this flyover state...

 

[MQAAord]

I knew about the fact that most people up front are upgrades. But I shouldn't need to fly 1,000,000 miles a year to qualify for a better experience.

As far as the failures go, what kind of market share did MaxJet have? If they were a fairly small carrier in a small market, then yeah, I can see why that would have been a bust. What prices were these premium carriers charging as compared to their non-premium competitors? If it was double, then yeah, I see why they may have not been successful.

I have no idea what Maxjet's prices were, I wasn't in the market to buy a ticket on them.

 

[rframe]

I could care less about some feel good airline that strives to make the middle class feel a little bit better about their purchasing decisions.... what I want to see is this:

Anesthesia AIR!

For a low price, you'll be injected with a mild general anesthetic and placed in a convenient "passenger tray" where you'll securely rest without the inconvenience of listening to some old woman rant about her daughter, have some half-drunk middle aged business man stare at the FA's boobies and then pass out on your arm rest, or have to witness the painful ritual of in-flight beverage service yet again.

Everyone is knocked out cold for the length of the flight, nobody is annoyed, everyone exits the airplane rested and happy.

Just think...

Unexpected delays? Who cares! You'll be sound asleep and none the wiser.

Turbulence? Who knew!

Is some green pilot-mill FO stalling your RJ and plummeting you to your imminent death? No anxiety for you! Just sleepy sleep until that tunnel of light calls you on home!

 

[Krystal]

Im coming in late in the game.

Yall are probably going to pelt me with Jepps, CG wheels, fuel testers and the like but its just my opinion

I am all for charging for carryons. There I said it.

Granted, I was a FA for less than 2 years but some of my worst flights were caused by lack of space in the overhead bins. Anyone who has ever had to work a flight knows the feeling of having 16, 22" rollaboards sitting in your galley and no place to put them and all 16 owners of said rollaboards stressing that they "CANT" check their bag because its "Fragile" or they"Need It" I once witnessed a full on fist fight in First Class because there was no more bin space right over the FC seats (there was plenty of room, however, further back. Guess they didnt want their bags to get Coach Cooties or something) It makes the FA look like the bad guy when you finally have to say "Im sorry sir but youll either have to check it or stay behind with it." Ive even taken to storing pax items in empty galley carts and bins that normally hold extra catering equipment because they genuinly ARE fragile and checking them would destroy them (a large hat box for a brand new hat that wouldnt fit under the seat, for example)

Carry-on baggage is one of the biggest causes of non-wx or non-mx delays. At least once per day, I will get a delay report in dispatch for handling pax carry ons. They are also a huge headache for FA's and ground personell. Large and overweight carryon bags are probably the biggest cause of FA injuries, right up there with turbulence. Its completely needless. In my opinion, I think most PAX pack WAY more crap than they need to travel and in an age of exess and materialism, it will only get worse.

So frankly, I say charge for carry on bags and make cargo checked bags free. I dont mean charging for brief cases, diaper bags or purses and unique items like blueprint tubes, but rather roller bags, large garment bags (particularly the hard sided ones) and big duffle bags. I say, anything bigger than one of those rolling computer bags (the kind that will usually fit under your seat) charge $50 to bring on board. Suddenly, rather than everyone trying to bring their house through security, through the terminal and on board (a practice that skyrocketed with the advent of checked bag fees) pax would return to the days of just bringing necessities on the flight. Security lines would move faster (no more pax unloading steamer trunks) and boarding time would be cut in half. Needless delays would be reduced.

Of course that would never happen, because it makes too much sense and pax would complain anyway

 

[Krystal]

some green pilot-mill FO

teehee! Its only funny to me because a certain weasel Captain I know was one of those pilot-mill FO's.

 

[WacoFan]

So...let me get this straight - the airlines woes are all caused by third-party travel sites, and customers. Obviously you can't get rid of customers - even an airline executive or Solyndra investor would no this simple truth. BUT - rather than go through the trouble of re-regulating the airlines, which would be difficult - why don't we just outlaw businesses like Xpedia and Travelocity and such?

 

[HRDiva]

Im coming in late in the game.

Yall are probably going to pelt me with Jepps, CG wheels, fuel testers and the like but its just my opinion

I am all for charging for carryons. There I said it.

Granted, I was a FA for less than 2 years but some of my worst flights were caused by lack of space in the overhead bins. Anyone who has ever had to work a flight knows the feeling of having 16, 22" rollaboards sitting in your galley and no place to put them and all 16 owners of said rollaboards stressing that they "CANT" check their bag because its "Fragile" or they"Need It" I once witnessed a full on fist fight in First Class because there was no more bin space right over the FC seats (there was plenty of room, however, further back. Guess they didnt want their bags to get Coach Cooties or something) It makes the FA look like the bad guy when you finally have to say "Im sorry sir but youll either have to check it or stay behind with it." Ive even taken to storing pax items in empty galley carts and bins that normally hold extra catering equipment because they genuinly ARE fragile and checking them would destroy them (a large hat box for a brand new hat that wouldnt fit under the seat, for example)

Carry-on baggage is one of the biggest causes of non-wx or non-mx delays. At least once per day, I will get a delay report in dispatch for handling pax carry ons. They are also a huge headache for FA's and ground personell. Large and overweight carryon bags are probably the biggest cause of FA injuries, right up there with turbulence. Its completely needless. In my opinion, I think most PAX pack WAY more crap than they need to travel and in an age of exess and materialism, it will only get worse.

So frankly, I say charge for carry on bags and make cargo checked bags free. I dont mean charging for brief cases, diaper bags or purses and unique items like blueprint tubes, but rather roller bags, large garment bags (particularly the hard sided ones) and big duffle bags. I say, anything bigger than one of those rolling computer bags (the kind that will usually fit under your seat) charge $50 to bring on board. Suddenly, rather than everyone trying to bring their house through security, through the terminal and on board (a practice that skyrocketed with the advent of checked bag fees) pax would return to the days of just bringing necessities on the flight. Security lines would move faster (no more pax unloading steamer trunks) and boarding time would be cut in half. Needless delays would be reduced.

Of course that would never happen, because it makes too much sense and pax would complain anyway

Im coming in late in the game.

Yall are probably going to pelt me with Jepps, CG wheels, fuel testers and the like but its just my opinion

I am all for charging for carryons. There I said it.

Granted, I was a FA for less than 2 years but some of my worst flights were caused by lack of space in the overhead bins. Anyone who has ever had to work a flight knows the feeling of having 16, 22" rollaboards sitting in your galley and no place to put them and all 16 owners of said rollaboards stressing that they "CANT" check their bag because its "Fragile" or they"Need It" I once witnessed a full on fist fight in First Class because there was no more bin space right over the FC seats (there was plenty of room, however, further back. Guess they didnt want their bags to get Coach Cooties or something) It makes the FA look like the bad guy when you finally have to say "Im sorry sir but youll either have to check it or stay behind with it." Ive even taken to storing pax items in empty galley carts and bins that normally hold extra catering equipment because they genuinly ARE fragile and checking them would destroy them (a large hat box for a brand new hat that wouldnt fit under the seat, for example)

Carry-on baggage is one of the biggest causes of non-wx or non-mx delays. At least once per day, I will get a delay report in dispatch for handling pax carry ons. They are also a huge headache for FA's and ground personell. Large and overweight carryon bags are probably the biggest cause of FA injuries, right up there with turbulence. Its completely needless. In my opinion, I think most PAX pack WAY more crap than they need to travel and in an age of exess and materialism, it will only get worse.

So frankly, I say charge for carry on bags and make cargo checked bags free. I dont mean charging for brief cases, diaper bags or purses and unique items like blueprint tubes, but rather roller bags, large garment bags (particularly the hard sided ones) and big duffle bags. I say, anything bigger than one of those rolling computer bags (the kind that will usually fit under your seat) charge $50 to bring on board. Suddenly, rather than everyone trying to bring their house through security, through the terminal and on board (a practice that skyrocketed with the advent of checked bag fees) pax would return to the days of just bringing necessities on the flight. Security lines would move faster (no more pax unloading steamer trunks) and boarding time would be cut in half. Needless delays would be reduced.

Of course that would never happen, because it makes too much sense and pax would complain anyway

I have been defending this since they started it. The results have been ontime departures with less hassles! And, I hear passengers admit that, while they hated the idea at first, it works well and they now embrace it.it! And it is cheaper to check a bag than buy the overhead.

 

[pete2800]

Agree with you....and I dont understand this logic that pilots here use.....blaming some stupid search engine for the woes of their own management. Expedia, Orbitz, travelocity, etc, would not exist if the airlines themselves didn't create the environment that allowed them to operate and do what they do. Let the bottom-feeder airlines BE bottom feeder airlines; the legacy carriers shouldn't try to stoop to that level of service, amenities, etc; because 1) they can't compete with cheap, and 2) they shouldn't have to. Let the cheap ass pax ride the cheap carriers and get what they pay for.

That's fine and dandy until the cash flow comes to a screeching halt. Then the urgent backpedaling begins. An airline won't hold their ground with higher prices and wait for people to realize their service is better.

99% of pax are the 'cheap ass' pax. The rest use NetJets.

 

[Krystal]

I say we start an airline with a bunch of E 1-70's, Tear out the 69 seats and go to a 39-seat, all first class configuration. Send the flight attendants to REAL service training, (Dunno how it is at every other airline, but my "service" training was on the job!) Do not allow infants or toddlers, instill a dress code and provide a real meal service (or a hot and cold appetizer service on short flights) and bring back champagne and cookies. Then charge accordingly.

Then, there would be lawsuits complaining that we are discriminating against poor people (or people with screaming babies, or people who dont wear shoes, or purple people eaters) and complain that EVERYONE should be "entitled" to fly first class, regardless of whether they can or will pay for it.

We'd be out of business in a week.

 

[MQAAord]

That's very similar to what AA's Luv Bird service was. The airline didn't NOT allow kids on those flights, but the nature of what those flights were meant that there were few (if any) kids on those flights. I can't remember seeing any kids on those flights at all.

The service did not last long. Though it was a very high-service, high quality product.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

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?

Yep, that's what I'm telling you. It's been over three decades of trial and error, market research, focus groups, polling, yield management, etc., and this is the best that can be done in a deregulated market place. Management isn't incompetent. The business just isn't well suited for a deregulated environment. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[MikeD]

That's fine and dandy until the cash flow comes to a screeching halt. Then the urgent backpedaling begins. An airline won't hold their ground with higher prices and wait for people to realize their service is better.

99% of pax are the 'cheap ass' pax. The rest use NetJets.

If that's the case, then why do airline pilots complain that they make crap wages? If the airline can't make money, where are they going to get the money to pay the pilots (and everyone else) anything more than paltry wages (save for the exec's golden parachutes). If this is truly the case, then pilots need to quit bitching and complaining about how much they don't make, because the money to pay them high six figures, obviously isnt there, nor is it going to ever be.