danielonn

I have been watching Airline UK about Easy Jet online and would avoid LCC's as you pay for everything from food to carry-on bags etc.

By the time you add up the costs its better to fly the legacy carriers such as Lufthansa, British Airways for inter-Europe flights even if they are short haul flights.

By the time you add up all costs it just seems better for earning miles to fly on a major airline. Other airlines I know have problems but at least they offer more flights to the cities I wan't to travel to. Also if the flight is delayed or cancelled they will put me up in a hotel/offer a food voucher.

I wonder why people are so stuck on flying with Ryan Air/Easy Jet/Germanwings. When you see the price and factor in the extras it really makes no sense. I would rather book a First Class rail ticket than be subjected to the long lines of Easy Jet.Miss your flight you have to purchase a new ticket.

On Airline UK its not fair that they make an entire family pay for new tickets but then let a band artist get a discount if he sings a Happy Birthday song for one of their agents because he was late. These inconsistencies are very odd to me.

What is your opinion on LCC"s?

SpannerSpinner

Depends on what you value more, your money or your time/comfort. If you earn a reasonable salary, but are time-poor, it may make no sense, but if you are not so well-off that extra $50per leg is worth a lot more to you.

For short flights (<3hrs) if I only needed carry-on, and had low likelihood of schedule change (ie, pleasure travel, not work travel) I'd happily go with a LCC, and probably will for one 5hr leg of my trip early next year since the price difference is large enough to mean the savings (even after paying for two checked bags) will pay for an extra day or two of lying on beach enjoying the local beverages.

Its not that hard to ensure you get to the airport on time or early; throw a few snacks into a bag and download a movie onto the laptop/tablet/grab a book, and i'm not enough of a gastronomical over-achiever to need anything bigger than a 16" seat width (yet) for a short flight.

If you need flexibility, or want/need extra room and baggage, then by all means pay for it.

Tchiowa

I won't fly them. I value comfort over cost. But that's me. The majority disagree, that's why the LCCs succeed. And they are driving the big boys to reduce space and services so they can compete on price. It's a race to the bottom, but we have no one to blame but our penny-pinching selves.

callum9999

I think the fact that LCC's have exploded in popularity while the legacy carriers are largely scaling back or transferring routes to in-house LCC's show your opinion isn't the majority held one in Europe!

When I use LCC's I don't buy food/drinks and generally don't buy baggage so there are no added costs. Though if I was bothered about food then the LCC's offer a much better range than BA on short flights anyway. On BA I get a free bag of chips (with literally 4 or 5 chips inside it) whereas any LCC will sell a range of sandwiches, chips, biscuits and often some hot food. On the times where I have bought baggage I obviously compared the all-in price on the LCC with the other carriers. They're largely invariably still cheaper (though BA has become much more competitive over the last couple of years).

Where are these "long lines" you're talking about? I'm not sure basing your views on the entire industry on Airline UK (as entertaining as the show was!) is particularly wise. A first class rail ticket would cost far more than an Easyjet flight anyway so I'm not sure why you're equating the two.

will2288

With the the new seating on many full service carriers, they can no longer claim an advantage on comfort.

BuildingMyBento

In Malaysia, where the current MH flies to nowhere near as many destinations as it had in the past (but not too-distant past), AK comes in handy.

Not to mention, they help those of us interested check extra airports off the list...

HelloKittysMum

If you aren't flying from major city to major city then for direct flights you have no choice. I fly frequently on business from Manchester to Athens and Prague and can chose a direct flight on a LCC or go via Heathrow to go on a full service airline and add 6 or more hours to my journey. It's a no brainer.

ft101

Remember, the programs you are watching are at least 7 years old, and may be up to 15 years old, so a lot different from nowadays.

You pay for what you use - seems sensible.


For every example you can give of this, I'm sure someone could come back with ten similar ones proving the other point of view.


Your travel routings make no difference to anyone else. The law in Europe covers rights to hotel rooms and food. Some legacy airlines may go above and beyond these , but they are ample for most cases.


Same goes for legacy airlines on many (most?) fares. Easyjet have resue fares which may help out, depending on circumstances.


I'd much rather be in a limo to the airport, express check in then a premium cabin, but the LCCs offer a service that I also use often, and I'm happy to do so. Your lack of knowledge does not change that.

SIA747Megatop

In Singapore we have the option of three reputable LCCs: AirAsia (Malaysia, Indonesia & Thailand), Tigerair and Jetstar.

At the start of this decade I was taking vacations to nearby destinations twice a month, leaving on Friday evening returning on Sunday night as the fares were great. I never paid more than US$100 roundtrip including seat selection and on AirAsia I'd always pick up multiple hot meals 'cause they're cheap and tasty.*

Unfortunately at some point I noticed that check-in queues were getting ridiculously long and flights started getting cancelled or excessively delayed. I'm not sure if it was a sudden realisation or it had been the case all the while but it started to get stressful waiting in long queues and waiting for delayed flights.

I haven't had a reason to go back since the LCCs have increased their fares and SQ has introduced new lower fares. I'm willing to pay up to US$100 premium to fly SQ because my status gives me F check-in and lounge access where I recover some of the cost drinking cocktails. This combined with the increased reliability and far superior service on SQ has driven me away from LCCs.

This does mean that I can't travel as often due to budget constraints but hey, quality over quantity.

*When flying AirAsia into Jakarta, I recommend picking up 2 of the onboard meals (the max. they allow per passenger) to eat during your 1~3 hour drive into downtown. If you like spicy food the Nasi Lemak and Nasi Kuning are great!

florin

It very much depends. Sometimes the cost of a legacy airline can be several times more than the cost of an LCC. Intra-EU, legacies do have some offers, and are sometimes cheaper than LCCs, but I don't think that's the norm. I've paid €99 for a RT on OS, but I've also paid €40 RT for a 2 hour flight on an LCC.

In Asian markets, I find LCCs to be very good. I found AirAsia to be excellent, and on the same route (CGK-DPS) Garuda was 3 times the price at the time.

In the US, legacy carriers often have MORE fees than the LCCs (e.g. Southwest VS. Delta/United/American).

The important thing is to have the choice. I refuse to fly LCCs on business, but for personal travel I do fly LCCs for the right price. Sometimes an LCC can get you to your destination directly so you can end up paying less and also avoiding a connection.

STBCypriot

IMHO I would use/have used them for only very specific situations. My criteria is:

1. Flight MUST be less than 2 hours (I can't imagine listening to the RyanAir crap or sitting on a RyanAir plane for more than 2 hours).
2. Have only a carry-on bag.
3. Fare has to be really low.

So basically for me, this is for a really short-haul flight for a few days travel. When I lived in Slovakia, I used to flew to Germany once a month on Ryan Air for a long weekend. Fares were around 39 Euros rt and the buses to take me to various places in Germany were very convenient. It was an ideal situation. I was able to explore a lot of SW Germany quite inexpensively.

stut

I recently had to get from Malmo to Cambridge. I paid Ryanair £24 for a guaranteed front row seat, no luggage (I travel light) and all fees. I landed at Stansted, and took the direct train from there.

I could have got the (expensive) train over the bridge to Copenhagen, paid £150 for the flight to Heathrow, caught the painful Tube (or painfully expensive train) to central London, then the train from King's Cross to Cambridge. But why on earth would I do that?

If you're lucky enough to live and/or work near a major international airport with a load of direct services, then good for you. But if you just want to get wherever you're going as quickly as possible, the LCCs have managed to support routes that traditional airlines simply wouldn't make money on with their model. And this is a great thing.

Even then, I'm looking at going away at New Year and looking at prices. It's expensive, but would I really pay an extra £100 (yes, all-in) to fly BA over easyJet from the same airport? No.

Paul56

I will not fly LCC's and deal with all the restrictions and
other nonsense... mostly comfort issues.

iceblueshoes

I'll bite since I'm on the lower scale here and only travel for holidays (wouldn't mind a job that let me travel on occasion though!)

I've done the LCC in Europe, South America and Asia (more so in Europe) and have no complaints. Sure there have been flight delays (Ibiza to Belfast on easyjet) but I've also had a delay with a mainline (YYZ > Tokyo on AC) and personally I'd rather have an issue with the aircraft on the ground than in the air as I'm sure most people would!
FTR, StarPeru has been handsdown the BEST LCC i've flown.

In any case if you watch those airline shows a lot of the issues are because of the passengers. Sure there are def times on the show that the supervisors should be a bit more flexible, but it's not the airlines fault if you forgot your passport. Example the massive single check-in time, that thing is a mess and they should have had a bit of flex time. I mean if someone is 5mins late, check the poor guy in, if they don't make it to gate on time, well at least they tried, ya know? Only their fault.

In any case, if it's a shorter flight, I'd take an LCC, but if I need to check items I'd look into BA or Iberia and compare prices. If it's less than $50, I'd much rather go with BA than ryanair. At least BA's seats recline and give me a few points.
Really all depends on where you're going. If you're going to Paris and landing at Beuvais (I think that's the airport out in the middle of nowhere?) then it's likely not worth it when you factor in time and money spent to get into Paris. if you're landing at say Gatwick, then it's not a big deal (unless if you need to get out to Heathrow of course!)

lloydah

The proof that people choose them over legacy carriers is there for all to see. LCCs vary as much as legacy too. I wouldn't fly Ryanair for a gold pig but easyjet, no problem. The queues can be the same for a BA flight as an LCC in my experience, and although I prefer a bigger seat and more comfort generally - and fly up front - that's a choice I make with my pocket. Convenience wise I'd not put a decent LCC out of the picture for shorter flights.