TA

first, let me say that I do not have any strong reaction to whether this is a good or bad policy. There is nothing absolute that makes "2 bags free" the "right" number of free bags, versus if we had all along been comfortable with 1 bag as the historical norm. It is just that we know there is a difference now. It may be that passengers in the future who had no preconceptions, will find 1 bag just as acceptable as we found 2 bags. I'm sure all the airlines would like to carry less baggage.

2) This is in line with that conference call a year ago, saying that they would be seeking to encourage profit-generating behaviour and discourage profit-sapping behaviour. The airline is clearly aimed at infrequent/low-revenue fliers. These passengers may say "they'll never fly UA again", but magically, they (or replacements) reappear in great numbers merely depending on the fare. Is it wrong for UA to make some money off of them if it can be sustained and is adopted by others as standard policy?

3) it may not be so easy for people to "sneak" extra bags. They have to get them through security, and often may have an item in there that is specifically prohibited. This works to UA's favor in enforcing the policy. And it may not be really necessary -- every passenger has a large carryon allowance. If a passenger is able to take one as a carry on, fine. I think the purpose is not to penalize or trick passengers who have bags, but to discourage the processing and loading/unloading of space-occupying bags in cargo, which takes time/money, consumes cargo space, fuel, etc.

4) Other criticism here is that this disproportionately affects poor people, in that they can least afford the bag charge. But a poor family of four's extra bags take up the same cargo space that a rich family of four's does. And everything is disproportionately unfair/expensive for poor people. I don't understand this line of criticism.

5) As others have noted, it will be a large task at the gate to enforce this. And I'm sure they will need to come up with announcements to make passengers understand. Maybe something on the lines of, if you have an extra bag over your carryon allowance, you will be asked to pay the charge, or either you or it will not get on the plane.

All in all, I will reserve judgment on this one, and be curious to see how it works out for them. This particular policy is not going to make me take my business elsewhere.

das

Just curious, what else has UA done to copy Ryanair? They seem like very different carriers, even for a General Member.

And, just FYI, Ryanair charges for the first bag, so your comparison is confusing.

GimmeLegRoom

Fantastic. My 70 year-old mother who usually flies on my miles as saver awards, should now be heaving a larger 26" 30-40 lb. bag in and out of cars, shuttle, etc., instead of breaking it up as usual into a smaller rollaboard and soft duffel that rides on top? To save $25 (not much to some of us, but that is grocery money to others)? Ludicrous. I beg her all the time to check those bags instead of putting them above in bins because bad lower backs run in the family, but now I can see we'll have to add this wrinkle to the luggage strategy...

BayAreaPilot

1998 Oil: $10
2008 Oil: $100

yogi

I think this is a valid point. I don't know of any "zip together"/"binary" bags, but if this becomes a trend with the airlines I can see it being popular with the older set.

I often expand my legal sized wheeled carry-on to hold my coat and laptop pack so I can save my back and wheel them around the airport until I get to the gate where I unload it and shink it to size.

UA_SYD

Interesting.

Clearly the industry is moving towards a "bundled pricing model". AC being the best example of how this may end up looking like.

If we're looking at economy/ no status flying then from my perspective I'm now being hit with a extra charge for a second bag, on top of an already "high" priced fare.
I'm going to look for a LCC or simular carrier who can sell me a lower fare in the first instance. No problem with then paying for the extras I chose I may need.
UA are effectively lowering their economy proposition to compete with LCC. This is a market driven by lowest price, for the most part. Surely they will loose out there?

I still maintain they need to cut the complexities out of their systems and work practices and consequently costs. Not continuously increase fares through fuel, bag-check or other surcharges.

Time will tell. Its not clear what may transpire, too many factors at play.

FWAAA

Exactly. Flying heavy packages is really, really expensive at FedEx and UPS. Even 2d Day Air is very costly. Trucking them across the country in 3-4 days is only moderately expensive. Sorta like the difference between flying and Greyhound.

IMO, shipping them via UA on same-plane service shouldn't be free (included in the price of a ticket).

I can only hope that the policy is adopted by other airlines and extended to the first checked bag as well.

1flyer1

That's great....just booked family trip to KOA for Christmas 2008 this morning. Had i booked it yesterday, i would not would not have been subjected to the $25 fee for the wife and kids (3) second bag.
I guess we will just have more carryons.

jcs17

Absolutely. And UA can say "So long!" to those flyers. They'll never fly United again unless they are absolutely forced to. I am losing my status this year, and chances are, United has lost my business over this hare-brained scheme. I usually have to pack an extra bag for longer trips, especially international ones, or I'll bring my golf clubs with me on vacation. This won't be picked up by any other US airlines because it is simply a terrible idea (the reasons have already been discussed).

alliance

International trips are not impacted by this new policy.

seanp7

This, to me, is like NWA or Virgin America's exit row seating charge - those who think it is an outrage will refuse to fly United, while the rest will grumble, pay the fee, and continue. In 6 months, we may not even be talking about it.

I guess I prefer this method rather than adding $25 across the board to the fare itself - at least then folks have a chance to avoid the fee through loyalty (elite) or preparation (flying with just the essentials).

camachinist

Next stop, hefting your carry-on onto the scale at the ticket counter

(weight limits on carry-ons)...

That oughta keep the lights on Wacker Drive lit late into the night

Boraxo

What has UA management accomplished that a trained monkey cannot?

Name one original idea (Hint: E+ doesn't count, not created by this team).

Every single "enhancement" is a matter of playing catchup with the competition. Even today's announcement was probably just a reaction to WN's decision to drop the free allowance from 3 -> 2.

danM

Actually, it sounds like it will speed up the curbside checkin -- didn't I see somewhere that you won't be able to pay the extra $25 at the curb but will have to go inside?

Dan

notquiteaff

The new fee applies only to domestic trips.

Look at the bright side -- by not bringing your golf clubs you're saving a lot of money!

I wouldn't bet on it.