Why Are Airlines Angering People
 

One question about all these new airlines fees: why do they add them instead of adding the to the base fare. If I'm paying $700 for a ticket, I would never notice an extra $25 to make the ticket $725. On a $700 ticket, $25 is 3.5%. Who cares? I can't believe that anyone would be swayed by $25 when there are so many more important factors such as schedule, airline preference, layover time, etc.

Why are they going out of their way to anger people?

Well, I don't want a charge for checking a bag added to my airfare, b/c I don't check a bag.

I absolutely agree with you, Imhornet, the added fees only make folks angrier. We all know that all transportation (including our own, of course) is out of control and know that airlines have to find some way to pay for the additional price of fuel and other related costs. Airlines, IMHO, have never learned how to market or adjust their costs since they were deregulated back in the 1980s when they were truly a regulated, but service oriented business. They have had more than 25 years to learn, but can't seem to grasp the concept. When you are confined to an object in the sky for hours to get afrom point A to point B, you need a few comforts and you just have to budget for the expense, but I don't want to have to plan on $25 for that, or $7 for this, or to have to carry extra bags for food and water. Ah well, no one is going to ask us for our opinion, and if they did they wouldn't pay any attention anyway.

I'm with you, Imhornet. I don't get it either. I suspect the check-in people or flight attendants aren't thrilled with it either because they have to take the flack for it, not the bean counter at HQ who dreams up this nonsense.

Rational people know about the fuel price increases so shouldn't be surprised if a ticket is $25.00 to $50.00 higher than last year.

Oh, and I don't drink water either & I still don't care if the fare increased rather than nickel & diming the people who do.

Frankly, some of the stuff I've seen carried on planes makes me <b>almost</b> wish they'd charge for carry-ons.

It's quite simple, really. The traveling public has time and time again shown that they value lower fares over all else. People complain about many things - cramped legroom, lousy service, lousy terminals, etc, etc, and now baggage fees, water fee, pillow fee, etc. At the end of the day the public consistently chooses a flight based on the fare. They may make folks angrier, but that doesn't translate to changes in purchasing behavior.

Look at the revenue from last quarter for the airlines. The income from passenger add on fees was greater than expected for carriers like AA &amp; JetBlue. I expect this trend to continue.

J62 hit the nail on the head. All you have to do is read through any travel forum and it is abundantly clear that the majority of travellers are looking for the lowest possible airfare. So much so that many travellers seem to think they should be paying the same fares they were 5 years ago.

One of the big problems is the airlines have the most screwed up pricing structure of any industry out their. They should have 3 (or 4) prices - First Class, /Business Class (if a 3 class flight), fully refundable coach and advanced purchase non-refundable coach excursion fares. That would make it easy on everyone. At the very least if the airlines wanted to offer a tiered pricing structure for non-refundable coach fares the price should be lowest for those who purchase the tickets earlier rather than later.

Add-on fees can be applied to FF seats, so they capture a larger base than a general fare increase would. Beyond that, I agree with J62's take. Remember &quot;More room in coach&quot; from AA? They dumped it when they realized that whatever people may SAY to the contrary, their buying behavior is overwhelmingly controlled almost exclusively by price. By getting cute with fees, airlines can continue to advertise fares are lower than they may actually be, in practice.

t's the same with a lot of other things. Energy conservation seems like a good thing to most people, but at $4 a gallon, they will actually change their behavior. Don't want to raise the price of a package of coffee but you want more margin? Sell an 11-oz. or 13-oz. package instead of a pound. Ever wonder why gasoline is almost always sold with nine-tenths of a cent tacked on instead of just rounding it to the next even penny? These techniques have been around for a long time.

They COULD include the fee in the fare and then give people &quot;discounts&quot; for not checking bags, etc.

But that would mean that when people use Orbitz, Expedia, etc. to compare fares, those inclusive fares will always come up higher than the fares for airlines that call them add-ons.

It's simple, but demonic for the paying passenger.

Bring back the C.A.B. and standardize/regulate the airfares. Then the airlines return to competing on service! (I know, not very market oriented, but it would make flying a bit mmore enjoyable again.)

That's been my thought since this all started. Why not just raise the fare $25 instead of tacking on the $25 visibly extra? I'm no business wizard but seems bad all around.

I'm not angered by the luggage fees. I don't think the cost is so much for the weight of the bag, although that amount will add up, of course, as much as it is for the fact that the airline takes on a certain amount of liability and customer service requirements when it handles checked bags.

The majority of the travelling public flies AT MOST 1x/year.
As a result of this, those people who post on Fodors, are (unfortunately) outliers.

It doesn't seem as though we're outliers b/c we are having wonderful conversations with the choir, whilst happily ensconced in the pulpit.

Here's the bottom line:
Passengers are deciding who to fly based on FARE alone time and time again.
The airlines who bundle things in their fares are losing RSM's and are going to be in trouble.

As much as everyone bellyaches and complains about fees, fees, fees, they are STILL going to fly from A to B if they want to be in B.

Not gonna change, not ever.
Dave

First of all, the baggage fees have <i>nothing</i> to do with &quot;new&quot; baggage costs. They are just one of several back-door ways to raise fares for most travelers while leaving an &quot;out&quot; for the airlines' favorite frequent fliers (elite, premier, etc.)

All those fees are ALL add-ons to hide fare increases -- they just name them different things. Don't misunderstand me, I'm guessing they can cost these fees out on a balance sheet to look like they relate somehow to the cost of carrying baggage -- but that itself is just a new way of packaging an old product. We've always had baggage, they've always carried it.

The most honest and straightforward are the &quot;fuel surcharges&quot; -- but they'll lose their &quot;honesty&quot; if/when fuel prices go back down and the surcharges remain.

Second, the only way they'll ever get incorporated into the fare is if ALL airlines are forced by regulation/law to get rid of add-ons to base fares -- no one airline will ever say &quot;we'll charge you more but no extra fees.&quot; As noted above, the airlines want the fares quoted to be no higher than anyone else's. It's not collusion, but it is consensus.

Third, no one will ever succeed in enacting such a regulation or law. Too many would cry &quot;socialism&quot; &quot;big government&quot; &quot;anti-freemarket,&quot; &quot;antibusiness,&quot; etc. etc. etc. Just because it would benefit the customers doesn't mean a thing.

Fourth, the airlines are hurting and, while much of the hurt comes from the price of fuel, they were already hurting. These fees are just a cluster of straws they're grasping for while the national transport system limps toward near-incapacitation.

Big article about this in Sunday's NYTimes Business section. It's the second-most-emailed article after the one that questions whether you should keep your FreqFlyer credit card. See &quot;At Least the Airsickness Bags Are Free (for now)&quot;

A guy from Southwest -- which DOESN'T indulge in this a la carte fee business -- says the other airlines are hooked on &quot;fee heroin.&quot;

&gt;&gt;A guy from Southwest -- which DOESN'T indulge in this a la carte fee business -- says the other airlines are hooked on &quot;fee heroin.&quot; &lt;&lt;

While he MAY be right - that doesn't do some of us very much good since there are a ton of folks on Fodor's who fly INTERNATIONALLY!!

I am tired of hearing about WN and how they fly from one 2nd rate airport in a big city to a different 2nd rate airport in another big city while simultaneously not charging for extra bags. :-(

Let them fly a few routes overseas and then we can talk.
Dave

Um, Dave? No need to rant on this. No one is imagining that SW flies internationally, but that doesn't mean Fodorites have no business talking about it. And it doesn't mean what the SW guy said isn't pertinent. Actually analogy to addiction is probably accurate because &quot;withdrawal&quot; might actually kill an airline or two.

I run into &quot;experts&quot; every week who knock WN.....Then I remind them that good ole WN is the NUMBER ONE domestic carrier...READ: Jaw dropping to the floor.Knock yourself out knockin em...

One question about Ual's newest policy of charging for overseas meals. Which currency do the plan to use?

Will I be able to change my Euros on board or vice versa?

&lt;&lt;Why not just raise the fare $25 instead of tacking on the $25 visibly extra?

I wondered the same thing. Then I read an article that stated the airlines want their fares to show up as the lowest fare in search engines.