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

[jskibo]

As a passenger, I really resent the "nickle and diming" that air travel has become. That said, however, a return to the "regulation era" isn't the answer. That era, good or bad, is gone. Forever. Asking the government to step in and "fix" something is a recipe for disaster.

If airlines want to make a profit, they're going to have to do what Apple does. Somehow, they've convinced a lot of people that while there are less expensive products out there that do exactly the same thing their products do, it's better to buy what they are offering.

OH NO....The iPlane!

"Can I get a drink please?".......Sir, you'll have to download our drink app and use that to order.

"How come the bathroom door is locked?"........Sir, do you have the Potty App?

Still nickel and diming, they just smile more while they do it!

 

[SeanD]

The fact that people actually believe they can get a $26 one way fare free and clear is scarier to me then the addition of a $100 bag fee.

 

[jrwit]

In your guys' opinion, do you think that if airlines did start acting like apple...offering service that was indeed just a notch or two higher, but three notches more expensive (I say this typing on a Macbook haha) there would be a significant market that would go for it?

 

[ShyFlyer]

Offering a better product/service and charging more $$ for it isn't enough. You have to convince potential customers that they should shell out more $$ for your product/service. Apple isn't a perfect example as they have somewhat of a cult following that helps with their marketing.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

Hold your horses gents. Don't lay all of this on the consumer. Because the airline is the enabler. Instead of trying to cater to every Joe Sixpack out there, airlines need to actually post prices that they CAN make a profit with. Those who can afford to fly, will; those who can't, won't. Airlines have perpetuated this problem by trying to "fix" a problem that isn't theirs to begin with, and thus have sunk themselves in trying to do to. More or less creating their own "race to the bottom".

Well, partially true. Air carries had much lower load factors in the past. Then in the 80's, they figured out "yield management" - that selling seats below cost was still more profitable than flying otherwise empty seats. Don't think you can every get away from that model without going to much smaller airframes. The market for those money-losing seats is pretty elastic - it disappears quick when prices go up. Flatter ticket fares only really work on very lucrative routes that are dominated by business travelers, and there is enough competition that it is getting hard to protect those gates from a SWA or Virgin.

The fees are a game that does work well. My employer, the one buying me tickets, REQUIRES ME to buy the lowest fare. They don't look at fees, because they aren't disclosed and are difficult to compare, so they ignore them. I'm not allowed to pay more than $20 for a different carrier. With 2 checked bags, one carry on, and needing to stand by on the return, that's easily $500 in extra revenue for the "cheaper" airline.

 

[rframe]

Airline travel is a commodity service, sorry pilots, that's the reality. Those customers who dont think that way have enough money to fly private jets. People will complain about poor service, but they aren't going to drop another $200 for a 2 hour flight to pay for a better airline.

 

[SeanD]

In your guys' opinion, do you think that if airlines did start acting like apple...offering service that was indeed just a notch or two higher, but three notches more expensive (I say this typing on a Macbook haha) there would be a significant market that would go for it?

Yes, I do. I think the airlines should do something to bring back customer loyalty. Im happy to pay a little extra for good service consistantly. They can start by treating their employees with a little more respect.

 

[jrwit]

Offering a better product/service and charging more $$ for it isn't enough. You have to convince potential customers that they should shell out more $$ for your product/service. Apple isn't a perfect example as they have somewhat of a cult following that helps with their marketing.

So how do you go about convincing them. Apple did it. Just look at them prior to the 1980's, they were losing solidly against Msoft but turned it around and developed that cult following. I know this will probably all never happen, but I bet some innovative company could come up with a way...

 

[SteveCostello]

I, for one, would GLADLY pay for a better level of service and more leg room. In fact, we tried to do just that on our trip to France. But there was such a massive difference between coach and business/first class that there was just no way. It's like coach is the Chevrolet and First Class is the Bentley of the airways. I'd like something along the lines of an Audi... not barebones, and not ultra-luxury. I'd happily pay more for that. Just not 4 times more (which would have been the cost of an upgrade on the AA767 we took over).

It would be interesting to see a comparison between today's version of coach and yesteryear's version. Seat comfort, pitch, and other amenities.

 

[killbilly]

So how do you go about convincing them. Apple did it. Just look at them prior to the 1980's, they were losing solidly against Msoft but turned it around and developed that cult following. I know this will probably all never happen, but I bet some innovative company could come up with a way...

This is one of those topics that I could start getting into and quickly burn an entire day on it.

Comparing Apple, Inc to airlines is...well...comparing apples and oranges, if you'll pardon the expression. The only comparison you can make is one in terms of brand cache and value perception. Real or imagined, Apple's stock and trade is in being different and thus creating exclusivity. Apple was not the explosive, pervasive, MAINSTREAM cult until it launched the iPod, and it was able to do that by giving previously shrieking design nerds a toy made for them...and they timed it right about the time that the nerds were suddenly making all the money in the dotcom.

That was a perfect storm for a brand and a radical shift for consumers. It was an incredibly rare window they jumped through and they got damned lucky nailing the dismount.

It's hard enough to create brand-loyalty and value perception for an airline when they're flush with money, (much less bankrupt or nearly so) because the deliverable to the consumer is already so standardized. I think Airtran did the concept laudable justice with their reasonably-priced business class fares in the 717 early on in their inception, although being in Concourse C at ATL really ruined some of that value.

SWA has also done a really good job of this by embracing the flexible-full-fare concept, which is lost on most people but known by heart to every regular business flier. Plus, SWA is good at REINFORCING that loyalty with little things like the Fly-By lanes and the Rapid Rewards program. They're both really good systems.

But to create that "hip", emotional connection to the airline that Apple has gotten with its products is impossible.

 

[Roger Roger]

Or you know, we could let business Darwinism run its course and kill off the companies that refuse to sell their product at a price point that makes them money (or at least breaks even). Maybe also institute capital punishment for executives and boards of directors that run their companies into the ground e.g. Phil Trenary at Pinnacle. (I think jynxyjoe has already established dibs on flipping the switch)
The current system of government-enabled corporate irresponsibility is at least partly responsible for many of the industry's problems.

 

[jrwit]

To me it just feels like the airline industry is a few steps behind everyone else. It may be totally unjustified, but it's like I just want them to be able to innovate rather than try and always play catch-up. People will (barring some sort of disaster) always need to fly.... like SteveCostello said, it'd be nice if there was an Audi of flying. Or some way to compromise or something.

Obviously a lot of what you're saying is true killbilly, it's just unfortunate.

 

[jskibo]

Or you know, we could let business Darwinism run its course and kill off the companies that refuse to sell their product at a price point that makes them money (or at least breaks even). Maybe also institute capital punishment for executives and boards of directors that run their companies into the ground e.g. Phil Trenary at Pinnacle. (I think jynxyjoe has already established dibs on flipping the switch)
The current system of government-enabled corporate irresponsibility is at least partly responsible for many of the industry's problems.

Hasn't worked for farmers for 50 years......

First higher airfares, then higher cornflakes! We won't stand for this!

 

[X-Forces]

Why not just just charge whatever needs to be charged for a ticket and be done with it, and quit nickel and diming evryone. I would like to be able look around and find the best price without having to figure out all the hidden costs and surcharges.

Because then you couldn't offer $19 tickets online.

 

[HRDiva]

We flew to DTW for the weekend in July and purchased tix on NK (because it is impossible to non-rev as the flights are always full). Since it was summer and we were going out on Friday night and returning on Sunday morning, we didn't need luggage. So, why would I want to pay more to have the cost of checked bags or overhead bags included in my ticket? So, the roundtrip ticket with taxes was $48.30.

Second, they beat you over the head with reminders about the fees. Before you can hit submit, you are presented with a reminder that it costs $XX to check your bag or buy the overhead option at the airport, click here to buy it now. You have to work to proceed to booking the flight without it.

Then, two days prior to the flight, we got an email reminding us of the ability to save money now by booking the bags. The morning of the flight, we got another reminder. An hour before the flight we got a final reminder.

Now there are always people like my sister who decided to fly out that weekend and take the train back. She paid $38 to check her bag at the airport. I asked her why she didn't pay $19 to do it when she booked her ticket and why she ignored the follow up reminders. She said she doen't pay attention to "those things".

 

[WacoFan]

To blame the consumer for the woes of a business is the absolute height of impotence. Stunning.

 

[jrwit]

To blame the consumer for the woes of a business is the absolute height of impotence. Stunning.

Who is doing this??

 

[killbilly]

Who is doing this??

People who say that the airline experience is lousy because passengers only pay for the cheapest possible fare.

 

[amjon]

The fact that people actually believe they can get a $26 one way fare free and clear is scarier to me then the addition of a $100 bag fee.

$26 to where? The cheapest I have ever seen to anywhere that is not really within driving distance was $80 round trip and that was ONCE. It was usually $100-$300. $100 to carry your bag on is crazy!

 

[HRDiva]

$26 to where? The cheapest I have ever seen to anywhere that is not really within driving distance was $80 round trip and that was ONCE. It was usually $100-$300. $100 to carry your bag on is crazy!

We paid less than $26. Yes, we could have driven the 500+ miles, but it would not have been possible to leave on Friday night and return on Sunday morning if we drove. And it would have cost far more than the airfare to drive!