I find myself in the same position as SAT Lawyer. I have a number of trips each year to MFE and other locations in TX from SAT. My disagreement with the quoted posted above is that my flying is not only the SAT-IAH-MFE route, but also MIA, SAL, LIM and other routes. If flyers like me leave because we no longer get a 500 mile minimum, we will also take our longer routes with us.

AA still remains a strong intra Texas alternative with 500 minimum eqm and no half eqm on cheapo fares. This latest CO devaluation suddenly changes the differential between qualification for 75K for plat on co and 100K for EXP on AA change considerably. While CO still, at least for now, has segment qualification, the mileage, and resultant free ticket qualification bennies of Plat have been downgraded for a big portion of CO's flyer base.

Eight roundtrips on WN means a free ticket. 6.5 SAT-DFW-MFE trips on AA means a limited availability free ticket on AA and 13 gets an unrestricted domestic ticket. Either CO is doing a trial balloon to see if this will stick or it is supremely confident that those passengers who have mixture of short and long haul segments will not take ALL their business to the other two Texas competitors of CO. Run enough RJ's and 735's with no and next to no upgrade possibilities, suddenly both AA and WN look a whole lot better, because without upgrades, what keeps the frequent flyer from going to the competitor?

So, while your statement that CO might not want my business on intra Texas flights may be true if that is the only business the passenger brings to CO, I am not so convinced that it would be happy if the intra-Texas flyers took ALL of their business (long and short haul) to the other two Texas competitors.

See, the problem with CO's calculation is how can we not? Even if I keep purchasing and flying full-fare and not-quite-full-but-still-fairly-lucrative-refundable-fare short-haul flights on CO, I'm now going to have an extremely hard time reaching even the Gold elite threshhold. And if I start taking my short-haul business elsewhere, I'm going to be even further removed from any meaningful elite status on CO. So once CO starts losing me as a short-haul travel customer, it makes even less sense to continuing frequenting it on longer trips.

This whole change, at least in my case, is very short-sighted. The component of my travel, if any, CO should want to shed -- or alternatively, should not be terribly concerned about keeping -- is my deeply discounted medium and long-haul leisure travel dollars. The part it desperately should want to keep is my full-fare and nearly full-fare short-haul business travel dollar. Instead, it has chosen to keep the incentive structure in place for the former, while providing an inexplicable disincentive to the latter. Bad, bad move, CO.

Hey, I was explaining about their thinking. I agree with you - they're going to lose more than just intra-TX shorthaul traffic. It's a bad move for them, which I agree with most of you.

This has been the last straw. I used to redeem all my miles on the TLV line. Redemption was better than AA/LY or DL. Now it's worse. Next year I will only requalify as silver so 25% ain't worth the bother. With the new LY/AA partnership I will move to AA and redeem on LY. Anyone needs 150K miles?

The DL and NW losses are the result of impairments of goodwill. This was a non-cash accounting charge necessitated by the drop in their stock price after exiting from bankruptcy. Both would have otherwise posted profits.

So no, CO is not doing "just fine" compared to their competitors. And even were they doing as well as you think, they still lost money. I would hope that they would be aggressive in trying to rectify that.

I'm in the same boat as you, since I fly many EWR-BOS and EWR-DCA routes. However, you should still be able to make Plat with the same amount of flights since you're earning 4 segment points on that one stop r/t and possibly 6 or 8 segments if one or both legs are Y fare. That's potentialy Plat in just 12 r/t's. Base miles is a completely different story though.

As for me, I won't be going out of my way to stay loyal to CO anymore. There had been many instances where I paid a premium or took a less desirable flight just to fly on CO. Those days are over.

I have to agree with ssullivan on this one, Larry did inform us that we did not see a influx of customers from the other airlines that were charging the fee so thats why we decided to charge. But we did not let everyone know that we were not charging. We take for granted (Or used to ) that the customers knew that we were different but sometimes we need to speak on it.

Sfogate I know for sure in IAH some airport agents and other individuals were monitering AA to see how they were fairing with the bag charge and the feedback was that they were not having really any terrible issues with it. I am not sure about EWR or CLE.

I am not a person at HQS with all the numbers and resouces but when I was by a full fare Business First customer the other day to London and he heard us briefing agents about the bag charge that is fourth coming he looked at us and said your not talking about Continental are you?" I stated yes, and he said "thats disgusting, I never have to pay it because I am plat but Continental is starting to be like everyone else." Honestly I love my company but I could not disagree with him at all.

Same question-how are we supposed to argue the fee with ticket counter agents with no CO.com documentation of the policy to allow elite companions to check bags for free when the elite member was split off the PNR to get an EUA?

On the baggage fee:

If AA or UA charge $300 RT for a ticket from X to Y, plus the $30 RT baggage fee - then they are getting $330 RT for the ticket. Say 50% of the people check a bag - then this is a huge increase in revenue for all the flights they fly in a day.

If CO has a competitive fare of $300, but no baggage fee - then CO is only getting $300 RT for the ticket.

This is sort of like when an airline raises ticket prices $10 others match, and when some do not match they have to roll back. Basically the majors up'ed the ticket prices by $30 RT for most - and CO needs to raise as well. If AA and UA roll back the baggage fee - so will CO.

It wouldn't have helped. I mean, who is going to choose to fly CO because of one free checked bag? The casual flyer may not really be aware or differentiate, and the FF or business traveler will either be elite or charging to a company or doesn't check bags or all three. I fail to see a major market for holding the line on checked bag fees.

And it is more than just attracting customers. Loads remain high and capacity cuts will likely keep things that way for a while. Increasing traffic is of minimal value, particularly given the high marginal costs today.

What CO needs to do is drive revenue. To do that, you would have to get people to pay more for their tickets because you don't charge for the bags. But what rational person would do that? If CO increases their fares to match a competitor's fare + surcharge, then the consumer should be indifferent between the two options. If CO increases by something less than that, then they are leaving money on the table. I know that some people here proudly claim that they would prefer to see it all bundled in, but who is really going to pay more (or even the same) to save themselves 30 seconds of arithmetic?

And bundling actually increases the expected cost of your ticket. With the surcharge system, your cost of travel is, say, $300 + {[(probability of checking a bag) * $30] * time value of money} Bundling the cost means your cost is $330. Therefore, the expected bundled cost is higher any time your probability of checking a bag is = 1, and where there is no time value of money.

Looks like CO's changes will be good for your clients. I continue to be amazed by folks who somehow justify overcharging clients so that THEY can earn more miles and higher status.

Maybe there's more to the story...but on its face it would seem that WN is a much better choice for both parties.

Like a lot of other NWA plats, I'm sitting on the sidelines waiting for everthing to shake out before I make the decision to stay with the combined NW/Delta or go elsewhere. Without putting a whole lot of thought into it yet (still too many unknowns) I had put CO at the top of the list I will consider. The reduction of bonus miles will certainly play a significant role in my upcoming decision.

By your equation then, how much does still having pillows, blankets and meals bring people to CO, which they do advertise, including running expensive TV ads? How many more would’ve come in had CO started a newer campaign that included these plus no 1st checked bag fee? I don’t know the answer to the 1st, but I’m curious to find out, and we’ll never know the answer to the 2nd. The first group has to cost CO money per ticket sold in provision, cleaning, etc. I guess you are arguing that not charging a 1st bag fee is that straw for the camel, but CO never gave the proposition a true test.

I also wonder how much of an accounting goodwill charge CO will be taking in the future, let alone if there’s a drop in passengers, because of the rising discontent from previously loyal fliers over the downgrading of OP and over rising nickle and dime fees.

Lastly, if Easyjet and Ryanair can offer a reduced fee for people who know they will check a bag when they book a ticket online, why can’t CO? Make it non-refundable, so if you decide not to check your bag when you’re at the airport, CO keeps the money; a little 21st birthday Vegas thing in your own home. If you do check the bag, you’ve saved $5, or whatever the discount is. Isn’t the whole idea of things like online check-in and buying a ticket on the web supposed to save CO money and save time and manpower at the airport? Wouldn’t having the bag thing done online do the same?

Instead of having agents take time to process bag fees, the kiosk could ask something like, “Did you bring the bag(s) you already paid the checked bag fee for?”, and the tag(s) would just come out, and people would be on their way much faster.

I’d really be curious to find out how much longer it takes to

1 - clear a plane, both domestic and international (especially), through the check-in process when checked bag fees are added to the processing time;

2 - as I’ve written before, get a plane away from the gate because of too many gate-checked items.

This checked bag fee issue really isn’t one for me at all, forgetting about my status. The last time I checked a bag was right after LGW imposed their one carryon only rule and I was caught unawares of it; from that point on when I traveled to the UK, I made a point of leaving the laptop backpack at home and carrying the laptop in its cushioned sleeve inside the bag I can fit overhead, with the chargers, etc. in one of its pockets.

However, as I wrote previously, I’ve already been held up, especially on international flights, by last-minute gate-checking of bags brought on board, so it’ll be “interesting” to see what happens with the new fee in place.

I think this would certainly be a smart idea. Passengers could add and pay for checked bags to their reservation at any time after ticketing, up through the end of the online check-in period before the flight. Offering a small discount for paying up front would certainly speed things up at the airport, since payment wouldn't have to be processed on the kiosk.

OK, I have a real problem with this post. How could you ever have justified given CO your business? Regardless of CO's changes, it costs your clients more money and takes you twice as long door-to-door. That is quite evident from what you post above. The ONLY thing that is different with the new OP program changes is now you don't earn as many EQMs and RDMs for your personal FF account. NOTHING changes for your clients, except, oh, maybe (1) now you aren't ripping them off so you can get your free tickets, free booze and larger seat, and (2) maybe now you'll get there on time because you don't have to worry about missed connections.

I don't know why you would have been flying CO in the first place, it seems wholly irresponsible.