Dave Noble

It is perfectly possible to get a fare without change fees as long as you are prepared to pay for them. I cannot see any justification to using the cheap fares and then complaing about "nickel and diming" when the fare rules state it

Dave

vrbaba

huh? I am arguing the same fare rules are unreasonable. I am perfectly willing to pay the fare difference, but charging an extra $100 or $150 is unreasonable to me. People book flights in advance to secure these low fares, now if uncontrollable things happen in life, they are willing to pay whatever fare it is right then, but having to deal with the change fee which is nothing more than pure profit for AA to increase their margin, is a bit unreasonable to me.

jw713

I have to agree with change fees. I can see charging the difference in fare and maybe a small fee for the agent's time ($25?) but $100 for a 5 minute phone call?

I travel probably 50% business and 50% personal. I know my job won't pay a change fee and fortunately I've never had to change a business flight. I have needed to change personal flights but have only paid the change fee once. The rest of the times I just adjusted my schedule but it sure would've been nice to be able to change. They're still getting our business--I really don't get it.

Dave Noble

Why is it unreasonable? If you need flexibility then they offer flexible fares but at a premium. If you want to take a cheaper fare then there is a penalty for doing so; it is up to you to determine whether the lower cost plus risk of change fees if wanting to make changes outweighs the cost of purchasing a ticket with flexibility

There may be uncontrollable events, and for that there is insurance or self-insurance by allowing for fees

Dave

cstead

no doubt UA has done its homework, and my guess is the homework says that the majority of change fees are paid for by business travelers who will pay the fee regardless of the price. Of course, I'm since I'm an armchair CEO, I'll bet that the fact that we are in a tight economy with lessening travel budgets, that it won't be long before the accountants notice the big jump in change fees being expensed, and they clamp down, which means a) less travel; b)stricter rules on expensing change fees; and c)a shift to carriers with lower fees like DL and AA, or no fees like WN. I just don't see this as a means of driving more people to buying refundable fares and full Y, even though I know they're hoping it does

TA

Isn't an expensive change fee still better than what some other airlines do, which is no changes allowed at all on cheap fares -- you don't use it, you lose it?

moman

I remember back in the day not so long ago when it was possible to change ANY fare without a change fee. That's why I feel so abused now as a customer. Let's say I pay AA to fly TPA-ORD for $200. I get sick and need to fly the next day, so I now I pay $200-100+fare difference. I basically lost $100 of a service I puchased because of a stupid rule.

Any airline that does this will NEVER get my business. I remember this argument well - that airline tickets are like movie tickets, and once you miss the show that's it. Major problem: Movies are $9 and not $200.

I am not against non-refundable tickets, only tickets requiring change fees to use MY own money.

MiamiAirport Formerly NY George

USAir tried this a few years back when it was in bankruptcy and the outcry from paxs was so great they pulled it back (USAir used the movie or broadway show argument but to no avail).

Sure, airlines would love to raise fares. But then how will they get a bunch of butts into those seats, particularly with Ma and Pa Kettle feeling the heat of soaring gasoline and food prices (not to mention most of them are up to their eyeballs in credit card debt). And if fares keep going up and business revenues down, the first budget that gets slashed as most of us know is the travel budget. No more attending conferences and being forced to do more interactive communication.

So the airlines are left trying to get it on the other end whether it be additional baggage fees, higher change fees, or a fee for seat assignments. USAir recently began offering the first few rows in Y at an additional cost to non elites.

Until capacity can be cut, you can expect more of this. Interestingly, Robert Crandall in a 4/21 NYTimes editorial speaks to how over capacity will never be solved by mergers (IMHO he is probably right) but only by regulation (IMHO he is also probably right, but also IMHO re-regulating this industry brings on a new crop of problems and issues.)

JoeBagodonuts

now that business travelers are conditioned to fares without the Sat night stay requirement, i think that many will be forced to move to LCC's by their firms if the route exists if the fare differential is great enough

Firewind

Yes, it's like these were giftwrapped and special delivered to Southwest.

How could it have been more inept?

moman

Amen to that. Southwest would love to have the $10,000 I spend on air travel each year. Based on recent experiences with AA, they might get it.

I'm willing to give biz select a chance, but since I don't drink (much), the drink coupons are worthless.

Blumie

AA is more than willing to sell you a ticket that you can change at any time for no fee. They also are willing to sell you a ticket at a discount, as long as you're willing to live with the rules that come with that discount. They get to set the rules. You get to decide whether you can live with them or not. If not, you can pay the higher fare for more favorable rules, or you can switch to WN. It's totally your choice. I'd rather be subject to AA's rules than fly WN. YMMV. It's a fairly simple choice.

brp

What incentive would anyone have to book a changeable fare if they all became changeable (the upshot of your proposal)? Changeable fares have no penalty, but they must pay any fare difference. You're saying that even the deep discount fare should have this same policy. If the airlines can't sell some of the higher-priced flexible fares they will either:

a) raise the base (changeable) fare quite a bit higher
b) die

Hint: They would not willingly opt for b).

Note that WN used to allow changes for no fee at the original fare. There is still no fee for the change, but you now must pay full fare for the routing if you make a change. Even their model is morphing.

Cheers.

tismfu

Not exactly. With WN, you can change your routing, timing, etc., fee-free, and you are only subject to pay the difference between your original fare paid and the current lowest-available fare. So, for example, if something cheaper opens up, you can have the difference refunded to your credit card. Edit: The difference is applied to the record locator as a CREDIT, good for use on WN travel for up to a year from date of original purchase. Sorry for the misinformation.

The requirement to pay full fare only comes into play when you are flying standby.

brp

Excellent point, and thanks for the distinction. I guess I fall back to Blumie's statement then- fly WN if the rules of AA (and the other majors) don't suit.

I have a feeling that WN's model (basically making even the cheapest fare flexible) may not be sustainable long term...but more power to them now.

Cheers.