ursine1

For anyone coming in late and wondering what's going on, the original thread title, "Southwest raised prices using points," suggested a points devaluation may have occurred, hence the discussion. (It didn't.)

ursine1

Maybe this will help:

When you say things like "those that like..." or "...some use" when referring to the 78/$1 formula, you're perhaps not understanding that what we're discussing is the exact formula that Southwest uses.

We're not trying to figure out how much value you or I or anyone else got for their points on any particular booking. Because that varies, based on a lot of different things.

We're trying to figure out if Southwest has changed their formula.

Does that make sense?

Boraxo

I read this as WN is going to gouge me for another $5 when I fly from OAK, and maybe $5 from SFO if other airlines match. Supposedly they did but I have not checked individual routes and not sure I would notice $5 anyway.

Just makes my points even more valuable as I can cancel and rebook without penalty if fares drop. Disincentive to buy paid tickets except for flights you are certain to fly and that you know will increase in price.

ricktoronto

OK, change to: what a silly long thread about a silly $5.

ursine1

"It's a lot for $5."

"It's not about $5."

"Well it's a lot for $5."


(Again, for those in the back: Original thread title suggested that Southwest had made another RR points devaluation. We discussed how to calculate this, which showed that there was not.)

Cledaybuck

I don't gouge is the right word for those in California. Some of the best deals in the WN system are out there.

nsx

Because of competition. Alaska, JetBlue, and worries about new entrants. 80% to 90% of the best CA deals are initiated by Alaska these days.

Boraxo

Considering I often see $49 fares on many carriers for SFO to LA area, I consider WN's $79+ fares from its hub fortress at OAK to be a gouge based on lack of competition at OAK. Millions who live in east bay pay extra not to cross the bridge so they are ripe for gouging. Fares are usually $100+ for Friday/Sunday except for 6am flights.

NoStressHere

Gouging?

I don't think so. Maybe those $49 fares are too low?

nsx

The OAK-SFO price differential is consistently larger than I've seen it before, and I've been buying these tickets for over 20 years. Alaska needs to start OAK-LAX service because it looks like nothing short of that will bring OAK fares down to the hyper-competitive levels of SFO-LAX.

I fondly recall the day in 2009 I bought a $29 fare SFO-LAX for next day travel, courtesy of a Virgin America-initiated fare war.

Cledaybuck

Why would AS want to do that? This route routinely goes for $64 with $75 on Friday's and Sunday's according to WN's low fare calendar. Those are not high fares by any stretch of the imagination for AS to start a route that they are going to be at a disadvantage to WN on.

pinniped

OAK hardly qualifies as a fortress hub for anyone.

$79 hardly qualifies as a gouge fare, even on a 350-mile route.

There's a lot of NorCal-SoCal competition with many different airlines running different specific airport combinations. I'm usually quick to be critical of the lack of competition and cartel-like behavior around real fortress hubs, but this particular situation isn't it. I envy the competition you have out there, as well as the different smaller-airport choices you have depending on exactly where you want to go in those regions.

If you want to find gouging thanks to a lack of competition at a fortress hub, there are lots of short-haul routes to/from DTW and CVG that are never $79 and often 3x-4x that amount.

jkenn

The OAK-SAN route went up this year from a baseline of $59 to $74. That's a > 25% increase. It's not much for the leisure flyer but I fly this route RT three times a month.

NoStressHere

Though I would agree that is a big hike......

One could also say the big discount is no longer available.

All in how you look at it.

Boraxo

it is a big deal for the family of four flying RT. An extra $200