Southwest Rapid Rewards - Southwest isn't too "maverick" after all...

http://www.tnooz.com/2009/10/15/news/southwest-airlines-more-myth-maker-than-maverick-on-ancillary-services/

The fees are there, they are just moved around...

http://www.tnooz.com/2009/10/15/news/southwest-airlines-more-myth-maker-than-maverick-on-ancillary-services/

The fees are there, they are just moved around...

Uh. This line, from the article, is 100% in contrast to the rest of the article:

Thus, just like its peers, Southwest is keen on charging passengers for services which formerly were free.

That is blatantly false. Southwest is not charging passengers for services which were previously free. They're charging passengers for services which previously did not exist (Pets, EBCI, WiFi).

The difference is that Southwest only charges fees for non-essential services (UM, oversized bags, pets, priority boarding, beer), but for a longer trip especially, checked bags become increasingly necessary. So in practice, other airlines charge more than Southwest or jetBlue by default, when even a single bag goes in the hold.

Southwest is not charging passengers for services which were previously free. They're charging passengers for services which previously did not exist (Pets, EBCI, WiFi).

Yeah...most of what they're charging for are things that simply didn't exist before.

As for the "baggage fees" on Southwest...give me a break. Someone wants to whine about the fact that they charge for a 3rd bag? Stop packing so much crap. You don't need it.

And the fee for Unaccompanied minors? The airline isn't a babysitter.

They're still pretty maverick considering the avalanche of fees that have been created by other airlines.

Seriously, Spirit charges for carry on bags and you get a "pre-reclined" seat. I'm sure Spirit would charge for a "reclining seat" if they could figure out a way to do it.

That is blatantly false. Southwest is not charging passengers for services which were previously free. They're charging passengers for services which previously did not exist (Pets, EBCI, WiFi).

Um, no, the article's statement is correct.

Previously: Southwest didn't charge for Unaccompanied Minors or Pets.

Now: Southwest charges for Unaccompanied Minors or Pets.

Um, no, the article's statement is correct.
Uhm, no, it's not.

Previously: Southwest didn't charge for Unaccompanied Minors or Pets.

Now: Southwest charges for Unaccompanied Minors or Pets.

Wrong.

Previously, Southwest charged $25 for Unaccompanied Minors. Now it charges $50.

Previously, Southwest didn't allow Pets. They were not "free", as the article states.

Previously, Southwest charged $25 for Unaccompanied Minors. Now it charges $50.

Previously, Southwest didn't allow Pets. They were not "free", as the article states.

Ok, so the semantics were wrong, but the point is still there...

Southwest now charges more for things it didn't before. Regardless of whether you could bring pets or not... if you want to now, you have to PAY.

And you have to PAY MORE for a minor to travel... By the way, what is that about? $50 for a child traveling alone in addition to their ticket? Ouch.

Also, I didn't start this thread to cause an argument or start yelling at each other. FlyerTalk is a great site when it's used for "INFORMATIONAL" purposes. Revealing the "complete story" to everyone is what I am trying to do here.

A fully-informed traveler is a happier traveler.

Ok, so the semantics were wrong, but the point is still there...

The point is there, but it's completely wrong.

This is the entire difference between Southwest's fees, and other airlines' fees. And that difference is a big one. And it is why I don't mind Southwest's new fees, but am very offended by the others'. Paying for something I never had before is not a big deal. Paying for something I used to get for free is.

Southwest now charges more for things it didn't before. Regardless of whether you could bring pets or not... if you want to now, you have to PAY.

And if you wanted to before, you couldn't.
Before, your options were: 1) Leave your pet at home, 2) Take another airline, 3) Don't go on vacation at all.
Now, your options are: 1) Leave your pet at home, 2) Take another airline, 3) Don't go on vacation at all, 4) Pay a fee.

That's MORE flexibility. Not less.

And you have to PAY MORE for a minor to travel...

Again, false. You have to PAY MORE for a minor to travel ALONE. That's a large difference.

By the way, what is that about? $50 for a child traveling alone in addition to their ticket? Ouch.

What it's about is that you're not just paying for his plane ticket, you're paying for the baby-sitting service. That's an additional service that adults and accompanied minors don't require.

Also, I didn't start this thread to cause an argument or start yelling at each other.

Of course you did.


FlyerTalk is a great site when it's used for "INFORMATIONAL" purposes. Revealing the "complete story" to everyone is what I am trying to do here.

A fully-informed traveler is a happier traveler.

In that case, you should be thanking me for supplying the correct information, as the article you posted was incorrect.

Of course you did.

No reason to be rude or sarcastic. Wow. You are just grumpy, aren't you?

Also, $50 for a minor to travel alone? Um, that is one expensive baby-sitting service. If you could put your BLIND ALLEGIANCE aside for a moment, you can agree that $50 for a minor to travel alone IN ADDITION to their ticket is a pretty high, isn't it?

Have to laugh that the OP comes here to stir the pot with 6-month old article full of half-truths and misinformation. What is the purpose of posting this?

Here's another "shocker": Southwest also has a cargo service where one can put a package on a plane that one has no intention of flying on! The conniving profit-seekers that Southwest are, they actually dare to charge for this service! :eek: Very sneaky...

Just wait until you see the article about the 9/11 security fee and the US govt taxes that Southwest "tack on" to their fares as well. Southwest - they're just like all the rest... :rolleyes:

No reason to be rude or sarcastic.

You have my sincere apologies for the rudeness. I regretted that one the second I hit "send".

(as for the sarcasm, well, you're at least as guilty of that as I am. Just look at the title of this post.)

Wow. You are just grumpy, aren't you?

No more so now than usual...

Also, $50 for a minor to travel alone? Um, that is one expensive baby-sitting service. If you could put your BLIND ALLEGIANCE aside for a moment, you can agree that $50 for a minor to travel alone IN ADDITION to their ticket is a pretty high, isn't it?

Yes it is. Where, exactly, do you think I stated otherwise?

My responses in this thread have been refutations to false statements, and answers to direct questions.

You stated that the Unaccompanied Minor fee was a new fee for something that was previously free. I said that it wasn't. It's an increase of 100% over the original fee.

You asked what the reason for an Unaccompanied Minor fee was in the first place. I answered that it's the charge for the airline being responsible for your kid.

Not once did I state that the $50 was a reasonable amount for this service.

If you could turn off your BLIND HATRED for a few moments, maybe you'd be able to stop inserting words into my mouth.

Um, no, the article's statement is correct.

Previously: Southwest didn't charge for Unaccompanied Minors or Pets.

Now: Southwest charges for Unaccompanied Minors or Pets.

I've pondered the logistics of stuffing our Pug in an *approved* carrier and bringing her, but at $75 OW / $150 RT seems a bit spendy.

Heck thats about the same or less than booking a seat for a person on the same flight.

Guess if we're flying RR and CP for free, the DCA works out well.

*shrug*

Also, $50 for a minor to travel alone? Um, that is one expensive baby-sitting service. If you could put your BLIND ALLEGIANCE aside for a moment, you can agree that $50 for a minor to travel alone IN ADDITION to their ticket is a pretty high, isn't it?

Depends on what price your anchoring to:

Current WN fee for unaccompanied minor ($50) vs. regular over 18 passenger ($0) :td:

Current WN fee for unaccompanied minor ($50) vs. previous WN fee for unaccompanied minor ($25) :td:

Current WN fee for unaccompanied minor ($50) vs. Delta fee ($100) vs. AA fee ($100) vs. United fee ($99) ^

Current WN fee for unaccompanied minor ($50) vs. additional full fare for an adult accompanying the minor ($???) ^

Current WN fee for unaccompanied minor ($50) vs. actually hiring a babysitter in your home for 3-5 hours ($20-50 depending on the locale) ;)

Southwest is not charging passengers for services which were previously free.Actually they are, assuming we can use this forum to examine history inserted by me are thread start dates:WN has instituted an unaccompanied minor fee.[29-May-09] Unaccompanied minor fee increases to $50 effective 4/23[22-April-10]So before sometime in May, 2009 there was no UM fee; for less than a year it was $25; now it is $50. (Why such lack of granularity?)

As far as the amount charged relative to competitors:Depends on what price your anchoring to...Yes it does. Ironically the same article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36693677/ns/travel-tips/) cited in [B]indyscott's thread notes:Alaska and Horizon said April 22 that they will lower the fees they charge for accommodating unaccompanied minors — passengers ages 5 to 12 traveling without an adult (optional for children ages 13 to 17). Customers will pay a $25 fee per child for direct flights and $50 per child for connecting flights within the Alaska/Horizon network. This is a reduction from the current $75 fee.I was surprised nobody mentioned that on the other thread. SWA now charges as much for a direct flight as Alaska/Horizon does for a UM on a connecting flight, a service SWA doesn't even offer.

Edit: moved my "broader theory" to a thread where it is a better fit.

Not that I think it makes sense to start a new thread to hype such an old article...

Ok, so the semantics were wrong, but the point is still there...

Southwest now charges more for things it didn't before. Regardless of whether you could bring pets or not... if you want to now, you have to PAY.

And you have to PAY MORE for a minor to travel... By the way, what is that about? $50 for a child traveling alone in addition to their ticket? Ouch.

Oh, it's the get revenge on DL's competitor thread? Puh-leeze.

I don't fly WN, but do enjoy many benefits from when they open up a market. I applaud their free two bags, and the way you can change tickets and retain the value.

I've paid $125 or more for a pet in a cabin. I find WNs fee schedule to be a lot more logical and honest than many other airlines.

Also, I didn't start this thread to cause an argument or start yelling at each other.

Whatever. I thought this was a site "to give advice". You slam me for starting a couple of threads criticizing Delta, then you post silly articles like this on the WN board. Come on, now, let's practice what we preach.

Actually they are, assuming we can use this forum to examine history [bracketed dates] inserted by me are thread start dates:So before sometime in May, 2009 there was no UM fee; for less than a year it was $25; now it is $50. (Why such lack of granularity?)

Fair enough. I was going only by what the Wiki says. It didn't contain the date the fee was originally instituted. My bad.

The author has an axe to grind and publishes inaccurate articles to make his point. Here's another, more recent example:

http://www.tnooz.com/2010/05/03/data/southwest-airlines-tops-continental-united-northwest-in-ancillary-fee-revenue/

The author has an axe to grind and publishes inaccurate articles to make his point. Here's another, more recent example:

http://www.tnooz.com/2010/05/03/data/southwest-airlines-tops-continental-united-northwest-in-ancillary-fee-revenue/

Good God, that's a mentally disabled column.

So, while Southwest is picking up market share from its “Bags Fly Free” campaign, the reality is that Southwest is a fee-hungry airline, collecting bags full of ancillary revenue from third-bag fees, EarlyBird Check-in, pet transportation, unaccompanied-minor fees and other services.

Is it not completely obvious that the VAST majority of WN's "ancillary revenue" is from the sale of RR credits? Anyone who claims otherwise is not paying attention, or is being disingenuous in order to (a.) stir up trouble, (b.) draw people to his/her blog, or (c.) trying to grab attention/tick people off on an internet message board.

Seriously, Marriott sells 80 of them at a time in travel packages. Avis, Budget, Alamo and Dollar are tripping all over themselves trying to give away more and more credits for rentals. Chase is giving 32 for opening a credit card. And I can guarantee you, due to the acceptable-if-not-great availability of awards, WN is not selling those credits cheaply.

Whatever. I thought this was a site "to give advice". You slam me for starting a couple of threads criticizing Delta, then you post silly articles like this on the WN board. Come on, now, let's practice what we preach.

If the facts in the article are incorrect, ok... but I am just passing along information.

Other posters in this exact thread have shown that yes, Southwest is ADDING FEES WHERE THERE USED TO BE NONE...

1 year ago, the fee for an unaccompanied minor was 0.... then it was $25.... now it is $50.

If you want to just keep yelling "but there are no bag fees!!!!" then fine, but you have to admit when you think about it, Southwest is adding some less publicized fees that the average flier doesn't really notice or think about.

You're comparing pet fees (rare) and unaccompanied minor fees (they're babysitting/keeping your flesh and blood safe for cripes sake) to bag fees and CHANGE FEES... I will take a rare turn towards diplomacy and call it merely a "rather dishonest" comparison.

And you have to PAY MORE for a minor to travel... By the way, what is that about? $50 for a child traveling alone in addition to their ticket? Ouch.

And how much does Delta charge for UMs? Talk about ouch...

Uhm, no, it's not.



Wrong.

Previously, Southwest charged $25 for Unaccompanied Minors. Now it charges $50.

Previously, Southwest didn't allow Pets. They were not "free", as the article states.

Until WN charged $25, they did not charge for UM service, and it DID exist.

If you want to just keep yelling "but there are no bag fees!!!!" then fine, but you have to admit when you think about it, Southwest is adding some less publicized fees that the average flier doesn't really notice or think about.

Agreed with one caveat - add three words to the end of your last phase:

Southwest is adding some less publicized fees that the average flier doesn't really notice or think about or ever use

i've been traveling pretty extensively for the last 15 years and I've NEVER used the unaccompanied minor or pet transportation service of ANY airline. Sure there are some people that need these services, but I think it would be a gross overstatment to say the "average" traveler experiences these fees on a routine basis.

Agreed with one caveat - add three words to the end of your last phase:

Southwest is adding some less publicized fees that the average flier doesn't really notice or think about or ever use



Exactly. The statement that WN fees are similar in nature to legacy fees, especially by experienced travelers/travel writers, is disingenuous or delusional. Take your pick.

If you were to look at the percentage of customers affected by a given fee, I would guess it would look something like this:

1st checked bag fee - 60%
2nd checked bag fee - 20%
3rd checked bag fee - <1% (that is actually a number from WN they posted here when the fee on the third bag was implemented)

Change fees - 15%

Pet fees - 1%
UM fees - 1%

I'm not saying it's unreasonable to have fees for any of these things, they are services not every passenger uses. But Southwest has decided for the fees that passengers are most likely to use, 1st and 2nd checked bag fees and change fees, that they are not going to charge for them, which is different than most of their competitors.

I think most reasonable people recognize that a pet fee is hardly comparable to the 1st checked bag fee because of the percentage of customers it will impact.

Southwest is adding some less publicized fees that the average flier doesn't really notice or think about or ever use


I think most reasonable people recognize that a pet fee is hardly comparable to the 1st checked bag fee because of the percentage of customers it will impact.

I think "Maverick" is the wrong word (as I don't really want my 737's flying upside down and flipping the bird at A320's)...

...but perhaps a cooler, kinder, gentler WN will be one that won't charge for UM and pet fees as so few people use those services anyway.

I think "Maverick" is the wrong word (as I don't really want my 737's flying upside down and flipping the bird at A320's)...


I'd pay a FEE if we could really do that! :) Could we have a fly-by of the tower too?

"Southwest CFO Laura Kelly"... Really? The author of that article didn't even bother to fact check names. Southwest's CFO is Laura Wright

I'd pay a FEE if we could really do that! :) Could we have a fly-by of the tower too?

Oooh, an inversion fee! @:-)

I suppose if this were possible, the Star Mega-Do planners would have done it already.

Uhm, no, it's not.



Wrong.

Previously, Southwest charged $25 for Unaccompanied Minors. Now it charges $50.

Previously, Southwest didn't allow Pets. They were not "free", as the article states.

That is incorrect, Southwest did not charge minor fees. They only started within the past few years. I flew my son for years with no fee.

That is incorrect, Southwest did not charge minor fees. They only started within the past few years. I flew my son for years with no fee.

Which fact was already pointed out and acknowledged by me.

That is incorrect, Southwest did not charge minor fees. They only started within the past few years. I flew my son for years with no fee.
Which is a shame. I remember flying UM to vist my grandparents for Christmas when I was in 5th and 6th grades. The latter year, I had my 3rd grade sister with me.

No fees...the only time I had to bother the agents was figuring out where we would stay when STL got shut down because of snow. And even then, I had to be proactive. Today, we're raising our kids to be weenies.

Whether its $25 or $50 (at Southwest) or $50, $100 or more at a legacy carrier for the UM fee, it is not like Southwest is making a lot of money from that. The PAWS fee is cheaper than the pet fee at other airlines. It is a rare and minor fee, at least for me. I've never taken the dog on vacation and haven't let my 7-year-old daughter fly alone.

OTOH, I have checked at least one bag every time I have flown since 2001. Since the legacy carriers started charging bag fees (what was that, about 2008?), that IS A BIG DEAL.

And, since SWA came to Denver in 2006, I have consistently given them my business because of the no change fee. If you get a customer to switch from the "hub" airline of Denver (UA or F9) to Southwest, because of the no change fee rule, that IS A BIG DEAL.

They are maverick enough to make me switch airlines. Isn't that maverick enough?