debunking the myth

Are you the bald-headed airline executive in the Southwest commercials or something? The only different view that would allow anyone to "understand" this is the "our business is fucked and we need more money" view. A few years ago the airlines were similarly strapped and decided to add a "fuel surcharge" that was not listed as part of the ticket price. If you can name a single facet of air travel that is more integral to the experience than fuel, I will give you a dollar. Yet all the airlines -- except Southwest -- decided to try this "fuel surcharge" as if fuel was some optional thing that we could elect to receive.

This isn't much different.

 

Southwest also hedged their fuel at a rate that kept them from having to use a surcharge.

The point of all this is that no matter what, you're paying to check your bags. Southwest is lying creatively.

 

You seriously consider what they're doing lying?

 

The proof of the pudding is, Southwest is still cheaper on the vast majority of routes, and I don't hafta pay extra at the airport, and it's as safe as anyone. It doesn't really matter if there's something Machiavellian going on (and I doubt there is)

 

OK I am already too involved in this to give up now, because I'm quite entertained by this line of reasoning. Here's the situation as I see it:

Southwest: "We are going to charge you $300 to fly. United, American and the rest say on their Web sites that they are charging you $275, but if you want to carry a bag there and back your charge is actually $315."

You: "Southwest is lying."

And regarding fuel ... so Southwest found a way to conserve fuel and otherwise absorb the charges without charging customers more? The bastards!

 

Ltr

But what if you don't check a bag in that scenario? Then your fare is covering a service you're not using. Simple as that. They may have lower operating costs, keeping the overall fares low, but believe me, the increased cost of the bags is in that fare you pay.

And they hedged on fuel prices before they spiked. Great move by them.

 

Again, you have not shown that there is any extra expense in putting a bag into the hold, aside from cost of living, that wasn't existant. My brother-in-law was a baggage handler for decades, and his job never changed. It's just a way for some airlines to squeeze out as much money as they can in a tough environment. Or to the traveler, a cash grab.

 

I'm not trying to prove that. There is no change. It is a money grab. That's not my point at all.

 

I have absolutely no concern whatsoever whether the fare I pay on Southwest includes the cost of the bag, and I don't know why anyone would care. I only care what the total cost of the flight is going to be. If the charge is $300, I don't care if that includes $20 for my bag or $20 because the lead stewardess has a nice rack. It's $300 is all I care about. Southwest tells me that information at first glance. The others do not.

Your first post said you used to be in the airline industry. You sound like you're carrying water for your friends who are still at your former place of employment.

 

And you're a teetotaler.

 

I understand what your saying about up front pricing. And yes, was and hope to someday get back in the airline biz.

It just bugs me to hear how great SWA is cause they "don't charge for bag" when in fact they do, just not separate from the fare. All airlines used to operate that way.

I guess it goes to my core when I hear talk about tax cuts and things like that. Too much taking things at face value and not looking at the underlying causes or reasons.

There have always been costs for additional baggage. That's nothing new. Just the way most airlines deal with it has changed.