American Air to charge for all checked luggage

bobman1235

The more I think about what shack says the more it makes sense. Costs are going up (as is inflation), so costs are going to go up, the question is should they go up for everyone, or should everything go 'a la carte' and those that use more pay more. The latter certainly seems more fair.

I just booked a flight to the west coast, and American was cheapest by quite a bit (way more than the 30 bucks it'll cost me round trip to take my luggage), so if this kind of measure helps them keep base rates down, it seems reasonable enough.

DRIVING to California is not an option from New England, sorry Steve. I mean, I love a road trip, but it would cost significantly more to drive, and it would take at least 5 days each way as opposed to five hours, and I'm not retired yet.

reeltrouble1

well we could go back to day trippin with purple micro-dot

i just booked a Jacksonville Fl. to Baltimore ticket for 67 bucks............seems low. just turn em inside out or go commando to cut down the luggage.

RT1

mhardy6647

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

i just booked a Jacksonville Fl. to Baltimore ticket for 67 bucks

RT1

Just out of curiosity...

1) What was the actual out-of-pocket cost for that ticket (with fees, taxes, Sept 11th charge, etc.) added in?

2) That's one-way?

polktiger

It is not really about the $15 dollars. Compared to the ticket prices we pay locally (we are just now getting a discount carrier with service to about 5 regional hubs) the ticket $15 is negligible. I just don't care for the BS that we are fed when they assess it. If it is about weight, let me jump on a scale. What it is really going on is the airline knows there is a pretty stable % of checked bags on each flight thus providing a reasonably stable revenue increase since they are too chicken **** to raise the actual ticket prices.

I have long felt that the airline industry operated on a broken business model. That is why I refuse to own any of their stock. Really, I just want them to fix the model and quit jerking the customers around. We have family that works for the airlines - I will admit labor and employer are equally at fault on this mess. You would likly be stunned just how many flights are late due to pilot discretion prior to take off. Travelers are readily used as pawns in the labor negotiations. The model is broken and it is high time it is fixed.

steveinaz

bobman1235 wrote: »

The more I think about what shack says the more it makes sense. Costs are going up (as is inflation), so costs are going to go up, the question is should they go up for everyone, or should everything go 'a la carte' and those that use more pay more. The latter certainly seems more fair.

I just booked a flight to the west coast, and American was cheapest by quite a bit (way more than the 30 bucks it'll cost me round trip to take my luggage), so if this kind of measure helps them keep base rates down, it seems reasonable enough.

DRIVING to California is not an option from New England, sorry Steve. I mean, I love a road trip, but it would cost significantly more to drive, and it would take at least 5 days each way as opposed to five hours, and I'm not retired yet.

I partially agree with Shack in that fuel prices are gonna cause increases--this is a given, and I fully accept it's impact on my airline ticket price; but 2 points: 1. Many of these things happened before crazy oil prices; 2. Don't burn the candle at both ends. Raise the price? OK, but raise the price AND reduce the service--No way. Airlines get away with this because American's are increasingly lazy and simply "look the other way" and don't think they don't know it. I won't participate in this mind-set. I'm not paying good money to be inconvenience, treated like a 2nd class citizen, and charged for a damn pillow. Of course that's my opinion--do whatever you're comfortable with.

Flying sometimes is a necessity (death in the family, work related, other time critical emergencies), in these circumstances, I don't have a choice. But for leisure, my wife & I just plan accordingly. Driving more means not traveling as far, or making the road trip part of the vacation, which is what we are going to do this August when we DRIVE to Oregon. We're gonna find some neat places along the way we haven't seen, etc. Does this present some problems? sure it does; but it also gives us some unique opportunities and usually it is far cheaper. Everything is on my timeline, not the airlines' timeline, that's worth alot to me.

polkatese

Flying after 9/11 has definitely become a pain in the butt. Not to brag, but I was at Executive Platinum with AA and 1K with United for about 4 years, both levels achieved during those years simultaneously, up till 2003. Then I become nobody, combination of work changed and desire to spend more time with my kids. Surprisingly, my attitude about flying has changed, for good. I no longer have expectation, attitude change to lower my expectations and, with no status, I am ok with being given empty promises. Just a general observation, at the same mediocre service level between AA and United, I would pick United anytime. I would not check-in any baggage where possible, and $15/bag would not have break my wallet if I have to. Looking back, why is it we have put up with paying more for less service? and that's really the question to ponder. Time to revolt or put up and shut up?

sucks2beme

I travel for work. Their nickel. Cost of flying is the cost of flying.
What's really killing off the airlines is Southwest's cheaper fuel prices.
That advantage is about to end. Flight fares are going up as soon as it
happens for all carriers.
Sadly enough, the big money maker in the 90's for all airlines was last minute flyers. They were paying a premium. Change a flight, that's gonna cost you.
Most people are sticking with pre-planned trips. With a bit of shopping,
you get a good rate. My work booking tool has a built in low price
"nagging" tool that shows you a lot of horrible flight options. You then have
to write an explanation of why the flights you are taking are better.
I will take a cheaper set of flights IF it doesn't kill the trip purpose.
Sometimes the lost time flying is worth a lot more than the bigger fare.

steveinaz

polkatese wrote: »

Looking back, why is it we have put up with paying more for less service? and that's really the question to ponder. Time to revolt or put up and shut up?

EXACTLY. You'll note I'm not just bitching, I'm doing something about it. In the words of Dr Phil "How's looking the other way and/or rationalizing these practices" workin for ya? Of course the "well-healed" American won't even flinch at any of this--a fifty here, a fifty there, who cares?

I have a voice, it's called "my wallet," and it's the only one anyone gives a damn about.

Remember that old country song; "You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything." How true.

reeltrouble1

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity...

1) What was the actual out-of-pocket cost for that ticket (with fees, taxes, Sept 11th charge, etc.) added in?

2) That's one-way?

1) Around 85 bucks but SW does not get this they get 67 although they do get to float the cash for a bit.

2) Yes one way

Its not like I really want to pay for luggage, but fees for everything is a model that has been evolving for a while. Is there a different tax rate on fee's for a corporation? I am trying to stop sweating the small stuff, life is short and I am on the downslide.

polktiger

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

1) Around 85 bucks but SW does not get this they get 67 although they do get to float the cash for a bit.

2) Yes one way

Its not like I really want to pay for luggage, but fees for everything is a model that has been evolving for a while. Is there a different tax rate on fee's for a corporation? I am trying to stop sweating the small stuff, life is short and I am on the downslide.

You are kidding right? Jacksonville to Baltimore for $85 on an airplane? Wow, I wish we had Southwest. Just as a test, I pulled Charleston, SC (home) to Baltimore as if I were flying up for Polkfest. Price range - $232 (Continental) to $442 (Northwest) with other alternatives in between being Delta, US Air, and AirTran, and honestly that is about as cheap as tickets get around here.

Funny - I am going to Italy in a few months on Delta. The ticket was actually cheaper flying Charleston to Atlanta to Rome than just Atlanta to Rome (we considered driving to Atlanta (6hrs) to save money, but no need since it was actually cheaper to start in Charleston.)

bobman1235

polktiger wrote: »

You are kidding right? Jacksonville to Baltimore for $85 on an airplane? Wow, I wish we had Southwest. Just as a test, I pulled Charleston, SC (home) to Baltimore as if I were flying up for Polkfest. Price range - $232 (Continental) to $442 (Northwest) with other alternatives in between being Delta, US Air, and AirTran, and honestly that is about as cheap as tickets get around here.

Well Charleston isn't quite as populous as Jacksonville. I found a flight for $216 from Charleston to Baltimore, which is $108 each way. Only 20 bucks more than the $85, it's not THAT jarring of a price difference.

shack

polktiger wrote: »

You are kidding right? Jacksonville to Baltimore for $85 on an airplane? Wow, I wish we had Southwest. Just as a test, I pulled Charleston, SC (home) to Baltimore as if I were flying up for Polkfest. Price range - $232 (Continental) to $442 (Northwest) with other alternatives in between being Delta, US Air, and AirTran, and honestly that is about as cheap as tickets get around here.

Funny - I am going to Italy in a few months on Delta. The ticket was actually cheaper flying Charleston to Atlanta to Rome than just Atlanta to Rome (we considered driving to Atlanta (6hrs) to save money, but no need since it was actually cheaper to start in Charleston.)

We just got back from flying from Knoxville to Ft. Lauderdale and back again for $49 per person each way. They did allow one suitcase per person and each additional was $10 and we had one extra. Round trip to Fla. back was $320 for the three of us.

My Daughter just booked a round trip fare from Knoxville to Cairo, Egypt and then on to Nairobi, Kenya then back. That one was a little over $2,200. She hit it just before a significant price jump that would have taken the same flight closer to $2,800. No cheap airfares to Africa unfortunately.

polkatese

polktiger wrote: »

You are kidding right? Jacksonville to Baltimore for $85 on an airplane? Wow, I wish we had Southwest. Just as a test, I pulled Charleston, SC (home) to Baltimore as if I were flying up for Polkfest. Price range - $232 (Continental) to $442 (Northwest) with other alternatives in between being Delta, US Air, and AirTran, and honestly that is about as cheap as tickets get around here.

Funny - I am going to Italy in a few months on Delta. The ticket was actually cheaper flying Charleston to Atlanta to Rome than just Atlanta to Rome (we considered driving to Atlanta (6hrs) to save money, but no need since it was actually cheaper to start in Charleston.)

Made a trip recently from LAX to CHS rountrip, less than a week booking, $955 on United. Talk about expensive...

wodom1

American is my preferred airline. I never check bags so this shouldn't affect me. I also bought a R/T ticket on American from Chicago to Bangkok for only $980 for my vacation a couple of months ago. I bought the ticket on a spur of the moment decision less than two weeks before the trip.

steveinaz

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68231

Sherardp

I been getting hit in the head with checked luggage this whole trip. Coming from overseas youre allowed 70 lbs, but domestic it drops down to 50lbs in the usa. So Ive been paying 80 bucks a shot when I have to fly, and so far its been a heck of a ride. I saw when leaving Houston, they are now charging 25 bucks for a second bag.

Gadabout

shack wrote: »

If you can't afford the $10 or $15 per piece of luggage to fly...maybe you have no business flying. Drive, take a train, the bus...or just don't go.

It's not the cost, it's the increased hassle.

I drive more than I fly, and I travel about 37 weeks out of the year. I could fly more often, but this is just another thing that makes it more of a hassle.

When I fly...
- My tools, parts & cart get shipped FedEx.
- I only carry on my laptop case.
- I check one bag.

Usually I pull up to the airport an hour and a half early. Stop at the Skycap desk, check my baggage and get my boarding pass.

Will they allow skycaps to take money for the checked bags?
Do I have to go wait in line upstairs at the counter now?
Either way, it is another transaction and more time wasting by the airlines.

I check my bag because...
- I like having a pair of fingernail clippers with me.
- I think I might use up more than 3 oz of shampoo and the brand I prefer isn't clear.
- I hate the hassle of trying to find overhead space to stow everything and also haul the luggage all over the airport if I have to switch flights.
- In 12 years of business travel, I have only had my luggage delayed twice.

There is enough hassle involved in flying these days without adding one more thing to already long list.

The good ol' days were when I could tip the skycap $50 and put all 150 - 175 lbs of equipment on the plane with me with no extra charge.

shack

Gadabout wrote:

The good ol' days were when I could tip the skycap $50 and put all 150 - 175 lbs of equipment on the plane with me with no extra charge.

Flying will be what it WAS when oil gets back below $40-$50 a barrel or alternative fuel sources or propulsion systems are developed. It is not about the hassle...it IS about the cost. At the cost of the aircraft and the fuel to propel it, we may be going back to the "good ol' days" where flying is a luxury and not a convenience.

Gadabout

I don't care about the extra costs. It's usually an expensed item for me. I also don't mind paying the extra cost of this when flying for vacation. It's about the method of collecting the extra costs.

How about they give me a chance to pay the extra fee, upfront before I get to the airport? Even let me pay the fee when I book the ticket. If I take more than my boarding pass allows, then and only then would I have to wait at the counter to pay the extra $'s.

Also....

Better to pay more and have it available than to not have it at all.

I couldn't agree more. However, I would also like to see some more competition. As it is now, US airlines only compete against themselves for domestic air travel. What if domestic routes were opened up to airlines from outside the US. I dare say that Virgin, British Airways and I would hope Cathy Pacific would like to compete here.

I haven't seen the business model change much. Perhaps some new competition would be better for the airlines and their customers.

Just my .02,
Scott

shack

Gadabout wrote:

How about they give me a chance to pay the extra fee, upfront before I get to the airport? Even let me pay the fee when I book the ticket. If I take more than my boarding pass allows, then and only then would I have to wait at the counter to pay the extra $'s.

I flew a little over a week ago. I knew when I booked the flights that there would be extra baggage charges and it was on my CC. There were no suprises when I got to the airport.

shack

An iteresting read in Business Week for those complaining about what airlines charge...

As I said earlier...flying may indeed become a luxury rather than a convienience if current trends hold....

You Think Flying Is Bad Now...

Something has to give as airlines adjust to $130 oil and brace for a record yearly loss. Not all of the majors will survive

by Dean Foust and Justin Bachman

You Think Flying Is Bad Now...

To fully appreciate the impact that soaring oil prices have had on the nation's beleaguered airline industry, consider that U.S. carriers will likely spend $60 billion on jet fuel this year—nearly four times what they paid in 2000. Because of the spike in fuel costs, airlines now lose roughly $60 on every round-trip passenger, a slow bleed that puts the industry on pace to lose $7.2 billion this year, the largest yearly loss ever. Not surprisingly, Wall Street has become so dour about the industry's prospects—can you say federal bailout?—that the combined market capitalization for the six major legacy carriers and Southwest Airlines has fallen to just over $17 billion. That's about what ExxonMobil (XOM) books in revenues every two weeks. "The U.S. airline industry, as it is constituted today, was not built for $125-per-barrel oil," Gerard Arpey, the chief executive of American Airlines parent AMR (AMR), told shareholders on May 21.

Consolidation Is Likely

While the industry is no stranger to losing money—or reorganizing under bankruptcy, for that matter—experts nonetheless believe that the current crisis has the potential to profoundly reshape the industry in coming years. That means not only far fewer carriers than at present, but forcing the survivors to rethink every facet of how they operate, from ticket pricing to the very way they fly. "The problem right now is that no one knows where the price of oil is going to fall down," says Darryl Jenkins, an aviation expert at Ohio State University. "Right now you're just in kind of the worst of all possible situations. Your planning becomes 'What do we do to lose the least amount of money?'"

If oil prices remain in the triple digits—above the $80-to-$90 break-even level for most airlines—it will accelerate the shakeout that is already occurring in the industry. While many carriers have in the past exploited bankruptcy as a competitive maneuver to cut costs, experts believe that any carrier that falls into Chapter 11 going forward will likely have to liquidate. That would probably include one or more of the major airlines. "I think the real risk this time is not Chapter 11, but [Chapter] 7—liquidation," says a senior executive of one major airline. "What happened to Pan Am? TWA? Eastern? I think there's a real risk here that some airlines just go away."

A court-overseen bankruptcy also could help smooth the industry's transformation if creditors decide the environment is too hostile and agree to sell off valuable assets. Historically, airlines have attracted sufficient funding to operate while restructuring, and new capital when they exit. It's not clear that current market conditions—high oil prices and credit-squeezed lenders—would support that playbook. Airlines with the financial muscle to step in—think Southwest (LUV)—would be interested. Southwest historically has avoided major acquisitions and considers them a steep risk but clearly recognizes potential opportunity in a bankrupt rival. "It just gives the acquiring carrier a tremendous amount of flexibility to impose change that would otherwise be very difficult," says Southwest CEO Gary Kelly, whose company has remained profitable because of long-term fuel contracts.

European Buyers

Analysts say liquidations could well leave an industry consisting of two dominant carriers, most likely the combined Delta (DAL)-Northwest (NWA) and perhaps a combined American (AMR)-Continental (CAL), along with a couple of discount players like Southwest. "I think the industry is going to look more like Europe—a couple of far-flung carriers and then a bunch of little guys," says Roger King, airline analyst for CreditSights, a New York-based institutional research firm.

Experts also believe that the oil crisis will eventually prompt Washington policymakers to drop their long-standing resistance to foreign ownership of U.S. carriers, leading to the first generation of truly global carriers. "The U.S. airlines badly need more capital to survive, and the only players with the resources to buy in are the [cash-rich] European carriers. Why would Congress object to that?" asks Robert Mann, an industry consultant in Port Washington, N.Y.

That could give British Airways (BAY.L) the opening for the acquisition of American it has long coveted, and a similar move by Lufthansa (LHAG.DE) on either United Airlines (UAUA) or JetBlue Airways (JBLU), in which it already owns a 19% stake. For all its aviation woes, the U.S. remains the largest, most lucrative travel market in the world. "Don't you think BA would fall over itself to buy American Airlines for $1.6 billion?" King says. "That's peanuts to them."

Creative Pricing

This consolidation will come with a cost: Experts believe that for the U.S. industry to shrink to a size that would allow the surviving carriers to earn a profit will require hefty fare hikes and a 20%-to-25% cut in capacity. That means fewer routes, fewer flights, and even more crowded planes. The biggest losers would be smaller cities like Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and Baton Rouge, La., that became accustomed to dozens of daily flights, usually on 50-seat jets that the majors use to feed traffic to their hubs.But oil priced near $130 has rendered those smaller jets uneconomical, meaning that carriers are likely to fly one much larger plane on marginal routes each day, but no more. "We might keep one flight just to keep Congress off our back," muses one industry executive.

Coast-to-coast flights will change, too. With roughly 30% of the weight of any transcontinental flight consisting of the fuel alone, meaning airlines are burning fuel just to carry fuel, carriers can be expected to replace many of those longer nonstops with one-stop flights, intended largely for refueling.

The era of cheap fares will end, too. Since deregulation in 1978, fares have fallen by more than 50% in real, inflation-adjusted terms. Prices will rise, and airlines will become even more creative in how they set fares. Some experts like Mann wonder if carriers won't begin charging passengers by weight, as air-freight companies do to transport goods. "There's a huge cost difference between flying a grown man and a 50-pound child," Mann notes. Industry executives say they can't see that happening any time soon—"too politically incorrect," as one notes. Adds Southwest's Kelly: "I just don't think it makes a lot of sense."

But the airlines will take other steps to wring more cash out of passengers, as American did last week in announcing plans to charge $15 to check a bag starting June 15. It will mean selling even more classes of service, and charging a premium for window, aisle, and exit-row seats as well as those at the front of the plane. Airlines will also create more levels of service off the plane as well, starting with a separate class of check-in, boarding, and baggage-claim service for travelers willing to pay more for the privilege of zipping in and out of airports quicker.

Technical Upgrades

The fee changes and higher fares are likely to cull millions of poor and middle-class travelers from the ranks of regular fliers, ending an era of $99 cross-country fares and bargain-basement weekend flights. It is also likely that Americans will see a far larger array of new travel products being sold at airline Web sites, such as aggressive hotel packages and travel insurance.

But even airline executives admit that this is all chump change compared with what they could save if they could lower the costs of operating their current fleets of fuel-guzzling jets. In a different environment, that would mean eventually phasing out the traditional cigar-shaped planes the industry flies with a more efficient mode of transport. Engineers working on Boeing's (BA) X-48 Blended Wing Project designed a jet that uses nearly 25% less fuel—think of a Stealth Bomber-shaped plane that resembles one giant wing—but the design limitations (no easy exit, nor windows for passengers to look out) mean that the planes are likely destined for military use.

Airline executives think they can wring out comparable savings by prodding Congress to fund the long-stalled modernization of the FAA's air traffic control system, which still relies on 1950s-era radar to route planes. Replacing it with a GPS-based system would cost the government and industry a collective $47 billion to implement, but executives say it could save the industry billions in fuel costs each year. If pilots could fly point-to-point, that could cut the circuitous, 585-mile path they currently must follow between Boston and Washington D.C. by as much as one-third, for instance.
But developing a GPS-based system could take a decade or more, and in the meantime airline executives are exploring ways to reduce their reliance on jet fuel, a kerosene-based oil that currently costs roughly $2.85 a gallon.