Spirit Charging for Carry-ons. Will AA Follow? (Speculation)
Apr 6, 2010, 11:59 pm
#31
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SFO
Posts: 67
This make business sense to me. I've flown on 70+ different carriers around the world in the past few years, and it takes 3 times longer to fully board a plane in the U.S. than it does a similar sized plane overseas. That's because Americans carry so much cr*p on the plane with them, have to find space to cram it, haul it down the isle bashing people already seated as they go, etc. Spirit is probably trying to shave 10 minutes off the boarding time. Do that on 4 to 5 short flights per day, and you might be able to squeeze in an extra flight with the aircraft in your schedule, thus maximizing revenue.
Apr 7, 2010, 3:50 am
#32
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: AA EXP, 1 MM, AC, HH Diamond, Marriott Silver, Hertz 5*
Posts: 4,010
And I'm not sure Spirit's fleet is large enough to see any huge benefits from shaving a few minutes off boarding time, if that does actually happen. IMO, it's a revenue generator, pure and simple.
Apr 7, 2010, 4:43 am
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: FTFOE
Programs: TalkBoard: We discuss / ad nauseum things that mean / so very little
Posts: 10,225
At some point, airlines will start weighing passengers. (Passenger + baggage) weight allowance.
Apr 7, 2010, 8:09 am
#34
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,234
Probably a somewhat silly question, as I realize this is doubtless intended for rollaboards and the like, but the issue of who/what decides which bags require a fee and which are free, is a very real one. There can be quite a fine line. I have a travel bag which is clearly not a computer bag, briefcase, or tote - it's a real overnight bag, but can easily fit under a seat. I could see someone arguing that as it's not a "personal item," it would require the fee.
Apr 7, 2010, 8:36 am
#35
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: AAdvantage PP
Posts: 13,913
My take is if Spirit can get away with less with no real backlash (other than lots of bad media) and oil continues its slow but steady upward price one of the legacies will go with this and then of course all the legacies will. That $20-$45 per bag will start to look like very attractive to airlines if oil hits over
$90, bad press be damn.
Apr 7, 2010, 9:05 am
#36
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: RDU
Programs: AA LTP, Bonvoy Titanium; AA CK before I retired
Posts: 1,597
I wouldn't be surprised if the legacies eventually adopt this, although I'd expect AA to exempt Plat/ExPlat and anyone in F or C.
Meanwhile WN seems to be going nicely without charging to check a bag, and as a result they seem to have fewer problems with carry-on's... which helps them turn around aircraft faster.
Meanwhile WN seems to be going nicely without charging to check a bag, and as a result they seem to have fewer problems with carry-on's... which helps them turn around aircraft faster.
Apr 7, 2010, 12:42 pm
#37
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: BOS
Programs: AA PLT, MR Gold, HH Silver
Posts: 61
Nickeling and diming your customers is not a sustainable business model. Spirit will probably be out of business in a few years. Have you ever check the cost of their flights? They are not cheap by any means. Case in point, R/T between BOS and LAX on Spirit is $581 vs $504 on AA. Tack on the charges for baggage, $50 R/T and you have to start questioning why even fly Spirit.
Apr 7, 2010, 1:02 pm
#38
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
Er, they offer more than one class of service, lounges, intercontinental flights?
As for domestic coach, it never was what some crack it up to be; I was there when it was invented. (Shoot, even the so-called "First Class" cabins in the so-called old days were uncomfortable for most - better food, etc. but costs were kept artificially high and were rigidly controlled by the government, so meal and cabin services were the differentiating factors.
The people voted with their wallet again and again - they don't want service, or MRTC - they want cheap. Now airlines are unbundling what people thought was the flight experience, and the only question is how far the legacies will go. FR certainly leads the way - the unbundled a la carte stuff can cost much more than the actual so-called fare.
How far will AA go? It will depend on this current "I'll look at you whilst you look at me" method of airlines proceeding to change fares and service concepts, and what passengers will allow. The day when the DOT will step in like the CAB of old and regulate to a fine point is probably - over.
Fortunately, I can use the LCCs on some shorter routes, and use AA (or other legacies) for intercontinental and longer routes - as an FF I personally do prefer them to WN/VX/B6 with their better Y cabin (well, in many cases) and limitations. (Not to mention, have you noticed unbundling at WN? Fees for preferential boarding and early seating, etc. Guess what else is coming?)
As for domestic coach, it never was what some crack it up to be; I was there when it was invented. (Shoot, even the so-called "First Class" cabins in the so-called old days were uncomfortable for most - better food, etc. but costs were kept artificially high and were rigidly controlled by the government, so meal and cabin services were the differentiating factors.
The people voted with their wallet again and again - they don't want service, or MRTC - they want cheap. Now airlines are unbundling what people thought was the flight experience, and the only question is how far the legacies will go. FR certainly leads the way - the unbundled a la carte stuff can cost much more than the actual so-called fare.
How far will AA go? It will depend on this current "I'll look at you whilst you look at me" method of airlines proceeding to change fares and service concepts, and what passengers will allow. The day when the DOT will step in like the CAB of old and regulate to a fine point is probably - over.
Fortunately, I can use the LCCs on some shorter routes, and use AA (or other legacies) for intercontinental and longer routes - as an FF I personally do prefer them to WN/VX/B6 with their better Y cabin (well, in many cases) and limitations. (Not to mention, have you noticed unbundling at WN? Fees for preferential boarding and early seating, etc. Guess what else is coming?)
Please explain your statement. What does AA do that is "significantly" different from the likes of WN and B6?
Your right AA differs significantly so much that a couple weeks back I started the thread of "why should non FFs choose AA in Y"
. Most responses came back with sadness for the demise of AAs Y product domestically speaking.
Your right AA differs significantly so much that a couple weeks back I started the thread of "why should non FFs choose AA in Y"
. Most responses came back with sadness for the demise of AAs Y product domestically speaking.
Apr 7, 2010, 2:56 pm
#39
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: PDK/ATL/TNG (ex-MIA)
Programs: DL Platinum, AA Platinum, Marriott Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 664
...part of the reason the coach and non-elite experience sucks on AA (and many other pre-deregulation airlines) is because of the existence of elites and loyalty programs. You have to have something to distinguish them from hoi polloi, so the argument becomes a case of socking the infrequent/less frequent traveler first...
How have frequent flyers reacted to changes [re unbundling], thus far?
Positively. Now that there is a price tag associated with many of the services that our most frequent flyers receive for free, it is becoming easier to place a value on maintaining loyalty to a single carrier. Unbundling has given us a new way to reward customers for their loyalty, and I think that has paid off for both them and us.
Positively. Now that there is a price tag associated with many of the services that our most frequent flyers receive for free, it is becoming easier to place a value on maintaining loyalty to a single carrier. Unbundling has given us a new way to reward customers for their loyalty, and I think that has paid off for both them and us.
Apr 7, 2010, 3:51 pm
#40
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: DFW
Programs: AA,DL
Posts: 575
!!!!!
Last edited by elpi; Apr 7, 2010 at 4:16 pm
Apr 7, 2010, 3:53 pm
#41
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: AA EXP, 1 MM, AC, HH Diamond, Marriott Silver, Hertz 5*
Posts: 4,010
In an interview linked in this thread by miamigrad, Cory Garner, AA's Director of Merchandising Strategy, says:
(emphasis added)
Quote:
How have frequent flyers reacted to changes [re unbundling], thus far?
Positively. Now that there is a price tag associated with many of the services that our most frequent flyers receive for free, it is becoming easier to place a value on maintaining loyalty to a single carrier. Unbundling has given us a new way to reward customers for their loyalty, and I think that has paid off for both them and us.
(emphasis added)
Quote:
How have frequent flyers reacted to changes [re unbundling], thus far?
Positively. Now that there is a price tag associated with many of the services that our most frequent flyers receive for free, it is becoming easier to place a value on maintaining loyalty to a single carrier. Unbundling has given us a new way to reward customers for their loyalty, and I think that has paid off for both them and us.
Still, I don't see AA going with Spirit's charge for carry-ons. If it was an airline besides Spirit starting it, I might have a different opinion.
Apr 7, 2010, 3:55 pm
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: Oceanic Airlines Gold Elite
Posts: 20,391
Well, I have to say that seemed pretty self-evident to me. Part of the way to reward elites is to spare them from the crappy experience you dole out to everyone else.
The problem is, if you fly a legacy that punishes you for not flying them frequently... what's the incentive to fly them frequently? Which leads to...
The thing is, though, that WN and B6 may be demonstrating the lower bounds of the coach experience, by consciously going "nope, this far, but not farther", and may well be profiting by it. (For reference, B6 has implemented MRTC, and succeeded with it... they just didn't bother with the F cabin.)
Also: yes, indeed, AA does provide intercontinental service. The problem is a lot of that service depends on them competing with WN/B6/VX et. al. in the domestic market, and thus they have to provide a domestic coach product. I guess the question is: how far can you degrade it before you lose so much domestic traffic to competitors who offer better coach experiences you're in a death spiral?
The problem is, if you fly a legacy that punishes you for not flying them frequently... what's the incentive to fly them frequently? Which leads to...
How far will AA go? It will depend on this current "I'll look at you whilst you look at me" method of airlines proceeding to change fares and service concepts, and what passengers will allow. The day when the DOT will step in like the CAB of old and regulate to a fine point is probably - over.
Also: yes, indeed, AA does provide intercontinental service. The problem is a lot of that service depends on them competing with WN/B6/VX et. al. in the domestic market, and thus they have to provide a domestic coach product. I guess the question is: how far can you degrade it before you lose so much domestic traffic to competitors who offer better coach experiences you're in a death spiral?
Apr 7, 2010, 4:12 pm
#43
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: DFW
Programs: AA,DL
Posts: 575
I hope AA will follow with fee like 99 dollars.
Apr 7, 2010, 4:13 pm
#44
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5
I agree, I am an exec plat., it's great not to have to worry about anything relative to that. Loyalty should be rewarded!!
Apr 7, 2010, 6:11 pm
#45
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,916
As for domestic coach, it never was what some crack it up to be; I was there when it was invented. (Shoot, even the so-called "First Class" cabins in the so-called old days were uncomfortable for most - better food, etc. but costs were kept artificially high and were rigidly controlled by the government, so meal and cabin services were the differentiating factors.
I would say your take is more reflective of the early 707s and DC8s in the 60s. It was definitely much better in Y in the 70s than today. And of course the airport experience was a breeze for the most part.