31 replies to this topic

[jimhudson]

Just heard on the news that one of the so called "Discount" Airlines, Spirit, is fixing to raise their "Carry-On" Baggage Fees to $100!!! No word on When, or what Flights etc. but they seem like they want to emnulate Ryan Air by Charging the Most Outrageous and Unconciousable Fees in the Industry!! Southwest Airlines looks better all the time, but of course Amtrak is still the King of the way it ought to be!!!

Edited to reflect "Carry-On", not Checked! Thanks for the correction!

Edited by jimhudson, 03 May 2012 - 06:01 PM.

[PRR 60]

Just heard on the news that one of the so called "Discount" Airlines, Spirit, is fixing to raise their Checked Baggage Fees to $100!!! No word on When, or what Flights etc. but they seem like they want to emnulate Ryan Air by Charging the Most Outrageous and Unconciousable Fees in the Industry!! Southwest Airlines looks better all the time, but of course Amtrak is still the King of the way it ought to be!!!

The $100 fee is for carry-on bags paid at the gate (yes, if you show up at the gate with a carry-on bag not pre-paid, you pay $100 to carry it on). A checked bag paid when the flight is booked is $30. Paid at check-in is $40. Paid at the airport counter or kiosk is $45.

[johnny.menhennet]

Just heard on the news that one of the so called "Discount" Airlines, Spirit, is fixing to raise their Checked Baggage Fees to $100!!! No word on When, or what Flights etc. but they seem like they want to emnulate Ryan Air by Charging the Most Outrageous and Unconciousable Fees in the Industry!! Southwest Airlines looks better all the time, but of course Amtrak is still the King of the way it ought to be!!!

Saw this on this morning's news. I'm glad that Spirit does not have a large presence at San Diego.

[afigg]

The $100 fee is for carry-on bags paid at the gate (yes, if you show up at the gate with a carry-on bag not pre-paid, you pay $100 to carry it on). A checked bag paid when the flight is booked is $30. Paid at check-in is $40. Paid at the airport counter or kiosk is $45.

So the point of the $100 fee is to make the rest of the carry-on fee levels look reasonable! Yikes.

[Texan Eagle]

The $100 carry-on fee is more media hype than anything else. You can call it a dumbness-fee if you will. Spirit clearly mentions at the time of booking that their base fares are low and everything else is charged and asks you in big bold text if you would like to purchase carry on bags and check-in bag fee online at the time of booking. If you are booking with half a brain turned on, you would not miss it. If you decide to act smarty pants and head to the gate without paying the fee hoping your bag will go through for free, sorry you are out of luck!

I don't find this outrageous because Spirit indeed offers very low base fares to start off with. What I do find unacceptable, on the other hand, are the so-called full-service legacy carriers also charging similar fees in spite of their fares being much higher. I have flown on variety of domestic airlines in the US and in economy class I don't see any difference whether it is a low cost carrier or a legacy carrier. They are all metal tubes that cram people in and fly them from A to B. Nothing more. Given a choice I would happily choose Spirit and pay for only the things I want rather than choosing a much higher priced "legacy carrier" and still pay baggage and seat assignment charges.

Also crib about Spirit as much as you want to, but guess which is the airline that is turning a profit, unlike some others going bankrupt

[Anderson]

The issue I have with Spirit on this particular front is charging for carry-ons. The $100 fee being a "dumbass fee", so to speak, doesn't bug me (and neither does a nasty checking fee if you try to pack a far oversized bag into the overhead bin and it won't fit) on its own.

As to Spirit's profitability (and Southwest's, for that matter), what is their union situation? I know that with most of the older carriers, a large part of the problem was (and continues to be) a combination of bad union deals and the size of the companies at those times. With Southwest, the carrier has only been a "major" carrier for about 20 years or so (I don't think it was nearly its current size in the late 1980s), meaning that it simply hasn't been big enough for long enough to acquire legacy costs on the scale of some other airlines even assuming identical union deals. With Spirit, this goes double since it's only come onto the scene in the last few years.

My point in this is that Spirit, and to a lesser extent Southwest, are able to toss around a lower cost structure because they don't have to throw off as much revenue to cover old (bad) union contracts and the like. From what I can tell, the other airlines are to a very real extent suffering from more of a problem on the expense side than on the revenue side.

[Texan Eagle]

The issue I have with Spirit on this particular front is charging for carry-ons.

If the airline is charging for carry-on but offering a dirt-cheap base fare, I would not complain one bit. It's not like the other airlines are angels, they also factor in the cost of flying a carry-on baggage but tag it into the base ticket fare for everyone, whether you are taking a carry-on or not.

Look at it this way- one airline offers a $50 base fare and option to add everything as per your requirement- $20 for carry-on bags, $5 for on-board soda and peanuts, $5 for in-seat TV screen, and another airline offers $80 ticket with one carry on, soda and peanuts and a TV screen included, which is better? Neither, they are both charging the same, but in the case of former, now I have the option to take only what I want. For example, next week I am flying to Philadelphia for NTD and will have only a college backpack with me, so in that case I would prefer paying $50 base fare and declining the rest (I can keep my backpack under my seat, for which there is no charge on Spirit). For a 2 hour flight I don't care about half a can of soda and a TV screen, so why pay the extra $30 for things I don't want?

Spirit is like make your own pizza.. decide what are your requirements and pay just for that, simple. As costs go on increasing and economy continues to be the way it is now, this approach is the only one that will probably make business sense. Flying today is only a means to get from A to B, the glory days of Pan Am when flying used to be a privilege and an event to look forward to are long gone.

[Anderson]

The issue I have with Spirit on this particular front is charging for carry-ons.

If the airline is charging for carry-on but offering a dirt-cheap base fare, I would not complain one bit. It's not like the other airlines are angels, they also factor in the cost of flying a carry-on baggage but tag it into the base ticket fare for everyone, whether you are taking a carry-on or not.

Look at it this way- one airline offers a $50 base fare and option to add everything as per your requirement- $20 for carry-on bags, $5 for on-board soda and peanuts, $5 for in-seat TV screen, and another airline offers $80 ticket with one carry on, soda and peanuts and a TV screen included, which is better? Neither, they are both charging the same, but in the case of former, now I have the option to take only what I want. For example, next week I am flying to Philadelphia for NTD and will have only a college backpack with me, so in that case I would prefer paying $50 base fare and declining the rest (I can keep my backpack under my seat, for which there is no charge on Spirit). For a 2 hour flight I don't care about half a can of soda and a TV screen, so why pay the extra $30 for things I don't want?

Spirit is like make your own pizza.. decide what are your requirements and pay just for that, simple. As costs go on increasing and economy continues to be the way it is now, this approach is the only one that will probably make business sense. Flying today is only a means to get from A to B, the glory days of Pan Am when flying used to be a privilege and an event to look forward to are long gone.

As a rule, I would (assuming a longer flight, at least) consider the second to be measurably better insofar as not having to screw around with breaking things out. However, I would also point out that in a lot of cases it is easy to run afoul of the fee structure if you're not careful...so assuming your example, if there were a "tripwire fee" (i.e. something like this $100 baggage fee thrown in) of $40 that could go on top of the $80 fare, that would be a big negative. Likewise, if I am pitched the $50 fare and then there's another $20 in "minimum" fees (i.e. Spirit's seat selection fees, their "unintended consequences" fee, a mandatory "reservation fee" [and yes, I know that even the railroads were guilty of this one], etc.) that cannot be avoided, I don't care if both options come to $70...the fact that I was, in essence, sold the $50 fare and then given a $70 one bugs me.

[amtrakwolverine]

The $100 carry-on fee is more media hype than anything else. You can call it a dumbness-fee if you will. Spirit clearly mentions at the time of booking that their base fares are low and everything else is charged and asks you in big bold text if you would like to purchase carry on bags and check-in bag fee online at the time of booking. If you are booking with half a brain turned on, you would not miss it. If you decide to act smarty pants and head to the gate without paying the fee hoping your bag will go through for free, sorry you are out of luck!

I don't find this outrageous because Spirit indeed offers very low base fares to start off with. What I do find unacceptable, on the other hand, are the so-called full-service legacy carriers also charging similar fees in spite of their fares being much higher. I have flown on variety of domestic airlines in the US and in economy class I don't see any difference whether it is a low cost carrier or a legacy carrier. They are all metal tubes that cram people in and fly them from A to B. Nothing more. Given a choice I would happily choose Spirit and pay for only the things I want rather than choosing a much higher priced "legacy carrier" and still pay baggage and seat assignment charges.

Also crib about Spirit as much as you want to, but guess which is the airline that is turning a profit, unlike some others going bankrupt

Spirit is turning a profit on fees alone why do you think they charge so much. what next want a window seat thats a couple hundred more want to actully look out the window then drop 75 cents into the coin slot below for 1 minute of view time.

[Texan Eagle]

As a rule, I would (assuming a longer flight, at least) consider the second to be measurably better insofar as not having to screw around with breaking things out. However, I would also point out that in a lot of cases it is easy to run afoul of the fee structure if you're not careful...so assuming your example, if there were a "tripwire fee" (i.e. something like this $100 baggage fee thrown in) of $40 that could go on top of the $80 fare, that would be a big negative. Likewise, if I am pitched the $50 fare and then there's another $20 in "minimum" fees (i.e. Spirit's seat selection fees, their "unintended consequences" fee, a mandatory "reservation fee" [and yes, I know that even the railroads were guilty of this one], etc.) that cannot be avoided, I don't care if both options come to $70...the fact that I was, in essence, sold the $50 fare and then given a $70 one bugs me.

Have you tried booking on the Spirit website? Let's go through this example step by step-

Step 1- At the Choose your flight page, it very clearly states right on top that what you are seeing here is NOT the final price. At this point if you are feeling you will be flying to Las Vegas for $88, it is your fantasy, not Spirit's fault.





Step 2- Right after you have decided which flight to take, Spirit tells you in no uncertain terms the charge for each type of baggage and what is allowed free. If you decide to walk to the gate without paying the bags fee in spite of such in-your-face warning, you deserve to be charged $100 baggage fee.




Step 3- Before you actually PAY for the ticket, Spirit explains you the exact breakup and the total amount that will be charged to your card.




I don't see anything hidden or trying to deceive the passenger in this entire procedure. It is clear as glass, you know what you are paying for.

By the way, the so-called legacy carriers are not much different from Spirit. I am booked on American Airlines to travel from Philadelphia to Dallas later next week and they won't let me select seats unless I am willing to pay additional $24 for some randomly selected "preferred seats".

PS: I do not work for Spirit nor does Spirit pay me anything to defend them. I am just trying to negate a widespread hatred against an organization with facts.

[Anderson]

First of all, I'll give you plenty of thanks for giving me a look "behind the curtain" (and no, I don't mean that in any way to insinuate diabolical plotting on anyone's part...the need to log in to go further was an issue).

Second, and I'm asking this honestly, where do some of the more "interesting" fees (the "Unintended Consequences" one jumps to mind) show up? I did get a breakout of some things as "Government's Cut" (and the fare got a strange division between what amounted to a "fare fare" and an accommodation charge applied to each seat...that was strange to see), but that particularly infamous item didn't show.

Also, on the fuel charges: Do those lock into place? I can't tell, and a lot of companies took to making those...interestingly variable.

[Devil's Advocate]

I'm asking this honestly, where do some of the more "interesting" fees (the "Unintended Consequences" one jumps to mind) show up? I did get a breakout of some things as "Government's Cut" (and the fare got a strange division between what amounted to a "fare fare" and an accommodation charge applied to each seat...that was strange to see), but that particularly infamous item didn't show. Also, on the fuel charges: Do those lock into place? I can't tell, and a lot of companies took to making those...interestingly variable.

First you were claiming that the total wasn't clear enough. Now you're concerned that the total is too simple and isn't itemized enough?

[AlanB]

I don't see anything hidden or trying to deceive the passenger in this entire procedure. It is clear as glass, you know what you are paying for.

Actually I have to disagree at least in part. Yes, eventually things are laid out quite clearly. However, one is well into the booking process by the time it becomes quite clear just how much that flight is going to cost you. And that I see as totally unfair, and the airlines all know this trick. They know that people make the initial choice based upon the first fare that they see when doing a search. This is why extra fees have become so prevalent in the industry.

By the time you get to that second screen showing the baggage charges, etc., the odds are quite good that most people have already made the decision to fly with Spirit, or whatever airline in question. So if someone were comparing things to say Amtrak, they'd have looked at that first price on the first page and decided that it was cheaper than Amtrak, so they decide to fly.

Again, it's not until they're well into the booking that it suddenly becomes clear just how much the flight will actually cost. And by that point, many will no longer remember what the alternatives had cost, or if they do then they figure "well I'm already here and half done now, might as well just finish things."

[Anderson]

I'm asking this honestly, where do some of the more "interesting" fees (the "Unintended Consequences" one jumps to mind) show up? I did get a breakout of some things as "Government's Cut" (and the fare got a strange division between what amounted to a "fare fare" and an accommodation charge applied to each seat...that was strange to see), but that particularly infamous item didn't show. Also, on the fuel charges: Do those lock into place? I can't tell, and a lot of companies took to making those...interestingly variable.

First you were claiming that the total wasn't clear enough. Now you're concerned that the total is too simple and isn't itemized enough?

It was reported elsewhere on this board that Spirit (at least, I think it was Spirit) assesses a $2 "unintended consequences" fee due to the limits on runway waiting times and so forth...but I cannot find that fee in the mix. The total "being clear" means that:
1) I can figure out what I am being charged (i.e. the total amount, as well as a reasonable breakdown); and
2) I can figure out why I am being charged that amount (i.e. What each fee going to the total is, and/or what is affecting it).

For example, on the fuel surcharge: Let's say that it lists at $49.88 (which is what it lists for several of the flights listed in your example). I can't clearly tell how it calculates, and that particular price may vary. Spirit's pains to break that amount out seems, quite frankly, to be "priming" people for that amount to move up without it actually involving a change in the fare. Again, I've seen this mentioned with respect to cruises.

And Alan hit on what was going on in my mind: While the ad I cited was old, there is a general tendency for folks to look at the stated fare and not the pile of fees that doesn't show up in the ad in question. "Additional fees apply" is exceedingly (and I would argue, purposefully) vague...particularly if one line has higher fees than others (which Spirit certainly tends towards the high end of)...and it is misleading when I'm showed a price of $XX.XX* and then when I get to the end of booking, I see a number substantially higher than $XX.XX

To be fair, I'm willing to allow that there aren't many saints left in this regard...but that doesn't mean that Spirit isn't a particularly nasty abuser of this. I would also note that some airlines take efforts to keep their fare/fee prices off of comparison sites (Spirit falls in this vein...note that the login function certainly serves to complicate bottom line comparison shopping). Also as noted, I can't get to a "total cost" for my flight without logging into their website in some fashion...again, making it hard to know what a flight is actually going to cost aside from "additional fees".

[saxman]

The issue I have with Spirit on this particular front is charging for carry-ons. The $100 fee being a "dumbass fee", so to speak, doesn't bug me (and neither does a nasty checking fee if you try to pack a far oversized bag into the overhead bin and it won't fit) on its own.

As to Spirit's profitability (and Southwest's, for that matter), what is their union situation? I know that with most of the older carriers, a large part of the problem was (and continues to be) a combination of bad union deals and the size of the companies at those times. With Southwest, the carrier has only been a "major" carrier for about 20 years or so (I don't think it was nearly its current size in the late 1980s), meaning that it simply hasn't been big enough for long enough to acquire legacy costs on the scale of some other airlines even assuming identical union deals. With Spirit, this goes double since it's only come onto the scene in the last few years.

My point in this is that Spirit, and to a lesser extent Southwest, are able to toss around a lower cost structure because they don't have to throw off as much revenue to cover old (bad) union contracts and the like. From what I can tell, the other airlines are to a very real extent suffering from more of a problem on the expense side than on the revenue side.

Just thought I would point out that just about everyone of Southwest's employees are unionized, and they are some of the highest paid in the industry. Crews flying a 737 at WN make more than all the legacies crew members flying a widebody 767.

Spirit pilots just had a strike about a year ago or so, and pretty much got what they wanted in the end.

[Devil's Advocate]

Again, it's not until they're well into the booking that it suddenly becomes clear just how much the flight will actually cost.

Which airline do you envision is undercutting Spirit? Which airline are Spirit's customers unable to find because they're too lazy and clueless shop around before making a purchase? I doubt they're competing with Amtrak, especially to places like Central America and the Caribbean.

And by that point, many will no longer remember what the alternatives had cost, or if they do then they figure "well I'm already here and half done now, might as well just finish things."

I honestly don't understand who you think is being taken advantage of or why you feel they should be protected from their own ignorance. If they're really that clueless then that's their problem and not Spirit's.


---------------------

It was reported elsewhere on this board that Spirit (at least, I think it was Spirit) assesses a $2 "unintended consequences" fee due to the limits on runway waiting times and so forth...but I cannot find that fee in the mix.

Maybe you should ask the member who made the original claim.

Alan hit on what was going on in my mind: While the ad I cited was old, there is a general tendency for folks to look at the stated fare and not the pile of fees that doesn't show up in the ad in question. "Additional fees apply" is exceedingly (and I would argue, purposefully) vague...particularly if one line has higher fees than others (which Spirit certainly tends towards the high end of)...and it is misleading when I'm showed a price of $XX.XX* and then when I get to the end of booking, I see a number substantially higher than $XX.XX

The rules have changed since 2008. What part of that is still confusing you?

To be fair, I'm willing to allow that there aren't many saints left in this regard...but that doesn't mean that Spirit isn't a particularly nasty abuser of this.

You really have this all backwards. Unlike other airlines that waive rule W or fee X for passenger Y on flight Z (and dozens of other possible combinations) Spirit does not change the rules at any time for any person for any reason. On Spirit what you see during checkout is exactly what you get. Nothing more and nothing less. Compared to other airlines that apply different rules to different airports, different flights, and different customers, Spirit is about as clear as they come.

Your continued insistence on perpetuating information that is both heavily biased and extremely outdated is getting mighty old.

Edited by Texas Sunset, 04 May 2012 - 11:56 PM.

[AlanB]

Again, it's not until they're well into the booking that it suddenly becomes clear just how much the flight will actually cost.

Which airline do you envision is undercutting Spirit? Which airline are Spirit's customers unable to find because they're too lazy and clueless shop around before making a purchase? I doubt they're competing with Amtrak, especially to places like Central America and the Caribbean.

It's not a matter of someone undercutting Spirit of vice-versa. And shopping around implies that one compares prices; not that one has to do reams of research, register accounts, and do test bookings. If I shop around for a new TV, I need only go to one website to compare prices, once I've decided what TV I actually want to buy.

And by that point, many will no longer remember what the alternatives had cost, or if they do then they figure "well I'm already here and half done now, might as well just finish things."

I honestly don't understand who you think is being taken advantage of or why you feel they should be protected from their own ignorance. If they're really that clueless then that's their problem and not Spirit's.

If I run a store and advertise that I'm putting Lee Jeans on sale for $24.99 and then when you show up I tell you that you also need to pay me $4 for shipping fees, $2 for the bag to put the jeans in, $1 for folding them nicely as opposed to just shoving them into that bag, $3 for using the changing room, etc. I'm going to have a visit very quickly from some official people who are at a minimum going to fine me, if not do other things that are even worse, for unfair business practices.

Someone searching for airfares shouldn't have to, as I noted above, jump through hoops to compare prices. Save taxes, the price should be the price. This is not about people being clueless or ignorant.

[Devil's Advocate]

It's not a matter of someone undercutting Spirit of vice-versa. And shopping around implies that one compares prices; not that one has to do reams of research, register accounts, and do test bookings. If I shop around for a new TV, I need only go to one website to compare prices, once I've decided what TV I actually want to buy.

"Reams of research?" Please. Researching and buying tickets today is so much quicker and easier than what it used to be. Back when I was a child you still had to visit one or more travel agents, in person, and hope they were willing to go the extra mile without making any serious slip-ups so you could find a reasonable rate that would actually be honored by the airline. Those were the days when the customer was truly at the mercy of a system they could not hope to understand, let alone second guess.

If I run a store and advertise that I'm putting Lee Jeans on sale for $24.99 and then when you show up I tell you that you also need to pay me $4 for shipping fees, $2 for the bag to put the jeans in, $1 for folding them nicely as opposed to just shoving them into that bag, $3 for using the changing room, etc. I'm going to have a visit very quickly from some official people who are at a minimum going to fine me, if not do other things that are even worse, for unfair business practices.

Having worked retail I can tell you that it can be as easy as printing up a sheet of paper saying the advertised price was a typographical error and you are essentially home free. We did just that nearly every week for months at a time. Were the advertisements intentionally wrong? I honestly don't know, but either way the solution was exactly the same. At least that's how it worked here in Texas.

Someone searching for airfares shouldn't have to, as I noted above, jump through hoops to compare prices. Save taxes, the price should be the price. This is not about people being clueless or ignorant.

Again, you're bringing up outdated complaints. Today airlines and airfare aggregate sites are required by law to show you the full cost, including fuel surcharges and other arbitrary fees, right from the start. Luggage fees are not currently included in those rules, but they may be some day if airline passengers make a big enough push for it. If you want a simple process for a simple customer then Southwest is your airline. Spirit is for folks who want to try their hand at traveling as light as possible with as little interaction as possible and no safety net to speak of. If that doesn't sound like you then I would suggest you stay away from them.

[Anderson]

I think a "typographical error" excuse could work with something fairly benign such as a minor price difference, but I'm left to wonder what would have happened if someone had come in on several occasions to find different prices than advertised and raised the issue of a persistent pattern of differences between what was/is advertised and what was/is delivered. Put another way, if a customer comes in one week and you inform them of the error...they come in the next week and you inform them of the error...how many weeks would you (i.e. the company) have to remain in error for a case to be made that you were purposefully failing to correct the ad?

[jis]

Spirit is turning a profit on fees alone why do you think they charge so much. what next want a window seat thats a couple hundred more want to actully look out the window then drop 75 cents into the coin slot below for 1 minute of view time.

As long as there are sufficient numbers of customers willing to put up with it, why not?