debunking the myth

[bydesign77]

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

 

[LongTimeListener]

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.

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.

 

[dooley_womack1]

And you're a teetotaler.

 

[bydesign77]

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.

 

[MileHigh]

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.

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.

Exactly. I want a) the cheapest flight and b) to get me to my destination as quickly as possible.

I'm not checking a bag. If it is, it's at the gate and there's no cost. So I look for the cheapest flight that gets me there as quickly as possible.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

And you're a teetotaler.

When I golf - I admit to be a tee totaler. Every stroke I take from tee to cup is totaled.

Can we get Dooley a ****ing editor?

 

[dooley_womack1]

But you're not being asked to fish out a credit card to get your bags on Southwest. Why other airlines don't realize how much of an inconvenience and PR bomb this is, I dunno. I guess they figure fooling someone into paying a lower price, then hitting them with the bags things, is a safer bet against discount airlines than it would be to put the bag price into the initial fare. And until I see the link showing that Southwest adds a bag cost into their fare, I ain't buying it.

 

[dooley_womack1]

And my ****ing doesn't need to be edited.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

Seeze you

 

[joe king]

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.

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.

It's $50 for a nice rack. Just thought I'd clear that up.

 

[DanOregon]

I think bag fees are stupid. Kind of like a restaurant charging for utensils, or being charged a "convenience fee" or service charge when you buy a ticket to a show at the door.

 

[SoCalScribe]

Fact: bydesign77 has some sort of beef with Southwest that has nothing to do with this thread, or anything that anyone has said on this thread.

I could go into a lengthy explanation of things everyone already knows about the transparency of Southwest and its pricing and fees relative to other airlines, but given the above, what's the point in this venue?

I mean, my goodness, look at the thread title. "Debunking the myth" -- seriously? Talk about transparency.

 

[dooley_womack1]

They put him in the C seating bloc.

 

[Point of Order]

I mean, my goodness, look at the thread title. "Debunking the myth" -- seriously? Talk about transparency.

Yeah, SWA's baggage policy wasn't the first thing that came to mind on seeing the thread title.

 

[bydesign77]

You got me. I was raped by SWA as a young child and this is my passive aggressive way of getting back at them.

I
Seriously, I think they are a great airline at what they do. And I can see where the general public buys into the "we don't charge for bags" scheme.

And I like the example of a resturant charging dor utensils. Good analogy. And it is a PR headache. Believe me, I worked on the first day my airline started to charge bag fee separately.

The like that the price is included? Every airline does calculations based on averages. Weight and balance is done by the FAA saying the average passenger weighs 185 during the summer and 195 in the winter. That includes their carryon. It also was assumed that everyone checked 1.2 bags, I think (that may be off). So they would preplan for fuel based on all of these numbers. And that all went into an average fare. (- don't want to get too deep into fare structure because there are a lot of factors that go into that and they make even less sense.)

But have you flown somewhere and checked 2 bags? How about none? So either way, you were either getting less or more of a service for the same price.

Well when fuel prices rocketed, it was impossible to stay competitive with the likes of SWA, who had the foresight to hedge well on fuel, not to mention having a young fleet of only one type of plane and low employee overhead.

So other airlines looked at how they could keep fares low and what services they could rearrange to generate more money. Bag fees was the answer they came up with. Not a good answer but it's here to stay for awhile.

Meanwhile, SWA doesn't have to do anything. Their fares, still assuming the same averages above, still factors all that in. No need to change anything to stay competitive, they already have low fares, and sometimes they have ridiculously low fares. But in those fares, the added weight of your checked bag (either 30 or 50 pounds on average) is included in the price (just like it used to be with everyone else).
So the idea that Bags Fly Free is a misnomer (a lie). They don't. You just don't pay separately for them.

Great move by them. It is something that most of you like and buy into. It's not true but OK it works.

My beef is they are merging with AirTran and will be in Atlanta now. And everyone is gushing! I can't stand flying them but that's me. But AT was a cheaper way to travel in a little more comfort on a discount carrier and they are going to be no more. And this is only going to hurt the flying public. Less competition = higher fares and SWA will be no different in that regard.

 

[LongTimeListener]

So -- it is your contention that the other airlines' ticket pricing DIDN'T take into account the extra fuel required and processing involved for carrying bags?

 

[Double Down]

Since we're allowed to use anacdotal evidence to make sweeping points in this thread, let me say that I've flown a ton this year with my 1-year-old and without a doubt, the Southwest flights have been the most pleasant with employees the most helpful. So I really don't give a **** that I might have hidden fees on other SW flights when I'm only carrying a carry on. I'll pay more for a work trip flight simply as a thank you for people not acting like assholes when I'm flying with my family and have 7 different bags and a kid tucked under my arm.

 

[ucacm]

I haven't flown Southwest in years because it's never cheaper the times I look at their fares. I just don't see how so many people are saying it's cheaper.

 

[BTExpress]

Earlier this month I paid Lufthansa . . .

$130 for a bag overweight by 15 pounds.

$250 rebooking fee because they denied my wife boarding and, naturally, had to rebook her. (Did you know that if a Russian citizen takes a flight from Saint Petersburg to Miami with two connections in Germany they need a German Transit Visa? Neither did we. And neither did a German neighbor of ours who has a Russian wife and who works for Lufthansa.)

$380 for the "fare difference" in the original flight she was not allowed to board and the one she was.

I wish my biggest gripe was a $25 charge for a bag.

 

[bydesign77]

At this point I'm done explaining. I see it differently.

And no I didn't know that. But a quick run through timatic woulda told me she would. And lack of planning on your part doesn't make me empathize with you at all. That's stuff people need to check prior to travel.