and soon it will be $100. How long will it take for other airlines to follow?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...f140634D18.DTL

Most low costs airlines don't charge for hand luggage but do for checked luggage as it means less people check luggage and the airline can spend less on baggage handlers and enables quicker turnaround.

It also brings a valuable revenue stream to airlines from people too lazy, stupid or arrogant to read the rules and who either bring too much hand luggage or it's too big.

Can't see the logic in charging for hand luggage at all.

It will be a long time before the big carriers do this. It's too difficult to police, and there will be too many complaints. Though I could be wrong, this doesn't seem like a sound policy for any airline. They would have to track not just what people bring on the plane but whether or not they place it under their seat or in the overhead compartment. to me, this seems like a logistical nightmare for the typical airline that doesn't nickle and dime as much as Spirit.

The logic of this is simple and impeccable, however. It takes longer to load the plane when people have hand luggage. By coercing people to check their bags, Spirit both ensures a steady revenue stream since few passengers travel with nothing, and it also makes boarding easier and faster since passengers who do have hand luggage must place it under the seat in front of them to avoid the charge. It requires their gate agents and flight attendants to enforce the policy, but there are decided advantages.

And soon there will be rants of here because flyer see "cheap flights" and never check the extras.

so how long before we have to start payingto use the restrooms?

<i>so how long before we have to start payingto use the restrooms?</i>

M'lud I refer the defendant to the standard text on low costs airlines - pay-per-poo could be the least of your worries

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAg0lUYHHFc

That was hilarious alan!