Please don’t use the C-word at this airline fee conference

I don’t think it’s illegal because they’re not actually price-fixing. All they’ll claim/admit to be doing is looking at other ways to part people from their money, not actual numbers.

It’d be a huge shame if protesters showed up at this conference. Just sayin’.

The conference itself probably isn’t illegal. What may be discussed at the hotel bar after the conference might well be.

Kayak (and maybe others) now allows you to search with baggage fees included. Maybe one of the booking agents will allow us to sort by airline quality/customer service.

Here’s the real problem, though, and airlines know it: the longer ever-increasing fees stick around, the more likely the traveling public will be to forget the days when luggage was free, just as we will (or already have) the days when meals were free, drinks were free, and we actually looked forward to getting on a plane.

That is, until we fly a foreign airline. I got a bigger, better meal on a 30-minute turboprop flight in Cambodia than first class customers get on flights under 90 minutes in the U.S.

I agree with 99% of what you write – but I don’t believe this is collusion. Every company’s primary goal is to make more money and increase shareholder value. Every industry in existence has conferences where ideas on how to make more money can be swapped – that doesn’t mean it’s price fixing or collusion. Unfortunately, recent tactics used by airlines to “make more money” are quite intrusive and don’t seem fair to the customer – however, that doesn’t make it collusion.

Here is a much more basic example but still relatable. Restaurant beverages. It used to be that soda refills were almost always free … it was just a given. Then, in the early 90’s, some chain restaurants realized that if you charge for refills, people still often paid and they made more money. Does this mean that TGI Fridays, Applebee’s, and Bennigans colluded? No … one of them found a way to make more money, and when folks heard about it, they were eager to get in on the game.

IMHO we are looking at this thing sideways.
1.Airlines need to make a PROFIT (Income – costs = Profit?)
2.We, the traveling want to fly for free (See Carver’s $29 airfare).
3.Airlines seem to have NO IDEA how to make a PROFIT from their primary product (uh, transportation by aircraft, I think).

Just for giggles I priced Delta tickets 30 days from today. SFO-LAX (via SLC) $59, 1040 miles flown; ATL-LAX $179, 1940 miles flown; DHN-ATL $252, 180 miles flown. Competition, route, equipment, yada, yada yada. It SHOULD cost $X to fly Y miles…..Period.

When you charge LESS than $X YOU CANNOT MAKE A PROFIT! So when you can make up $1.64 BILLION from any other revenue (Delta last year) it really eases the pain of a bad business plan. I’m not just picking on Delta, I just had their numbers handy, pick your airline and name their bankruptcy year…

Yes, I want to fly for less, but I want my airline to make enough profit that ideas like “no more pillows”, “$2 for a can of soda” or “selling the marketing space of my tray table” aren’t the best ways my airline can make ANY profit. $29 SFO-LAX? What’s the going rate on Greyhound?

@William. Just for grins and giggles I prices a comparable Greyhound route. The cheapest one way fare was $39.00.

Then I checked the mileage. Its 382 miles from San Francisco to Los Angeles. You would spend $72 in gas alone. But using the feds reimbursement of $0.55 per mile to get a truer cost, it would cost me $210 in wear and tear on my car to drive.

Call me an airline apologist if you must, but I just can’t get worked up over so called nickel and dime charges if it results in fares one way fares as low as $29.00.

A few years ago, when everything was all inclusive, the same route regularly cost over $170.00

@ Carver,

Citing a few examples to overshadow the bigger picture is downright dishonest. Do airlines deserve a profit? Of course, this is American and people need to make a living. A company would not exist if it didn’t maintain a positive revenue to pay it’s workers and have reinvestment capital. I think the issue at hand is HOW they are going about it. This being DISHONEST and DECEITFUL methods. For example, listing a fare at “150″ dollars only to find it’s nearly doubled by the time you go pay for it. Airline bills look just as bad as phone company ones. You see so many “B.S.” made up fees that by the time you’re done, you are left to wonder which one’s are real, and which are shams that the airline simply pockets. Issue #2 is the fact that airlines are NOT lowering prices in conjunction with this whole new charge for baggage push. Matter of fact, prices have stayed steady or gone up for the most part. As Elliott points out, airlines are RAKING in the capital. The big legacy one’s anyway. Certainly, smaller one’s weren’t. ATA, Spirit, etc that went under. With so few choices left, these big boys now have an open playing field and they KNOW the customer is powerless. If you have only a few choices, your wallet can’t really talk too loud.

Justin

@Carver
Knowing that the bus fare is $39, it should be obvious to you that a $29 airfare is unprofitable and therefore unsustainable, at least for American. This raises the question of the motive for offering such a low fare. It is also a dubious assumption that the $29 fare results from unbundling whatever was included in the $170 of years past. Competitive pressures have far more to do with that than the cost of food, baggage handling etc.

I think the issue at hand is HOW they are going about it. This being DISHONEST and DECEITFUL methods. For example, listing a fare at “150″ dollars only to find it’s nearly doubled by the time you go pay for it.

It’s a so-called given that businesses want to make the most money out of whatever they’re selling. But most if not all travel vendors do state prices aren’t guaranteed until booked.

I rather agree that some are arguably being dishonest and deceitful when not stating upfront what fees will be charged like, say, upon arriving at the hotel. While it’s nice if vendors’ web sites do state the fees upfront, what if it “scares” off some prospects to finding those that don’t say it at the front but mention it after the fact?

In essence, that’s a dilemma many businesses face. How much to state upfront and how much isn’t “needed” to be said there and then that would affect desired results.

Issue #2 is the fact that airlines are NOT lowering prices in conjunction with this whole new charge for baggage push. Matter of fact, prices have stayed steady or gone up for the most part.

I don’t know, Justin. While not necessarily authoritative, some sites like Kayak seem to suggest otherwise:

http://www.kayak.com/trends/Down

Limitations apply like everything else, of course. If anything, their data suggests fares have been going down for the past year or so.

DOT’s site seems to report a similar thing. There’s more if/when one looks hard enough there:

http://www.bts.gov/press_releases/air_travel_price_index.html

Frustrating, I know. But…that’s reality sometimes.

And don’t fret as these aren’t meant to dishonestly overshadow the bigger picture. Whatever that bigger picture is that people can pretty much agree on, though.

I think sometimes people need to step back and realize that when they a “company” is making these decisions, it’s really *people* making them.

Yes, a company should make money. But currently, it’s the individuals who close their eyes to the affects their decisions have on the public that are responsible for these things.

Don’t blame the company, blame the people making the decisions and trying to take advantage of as much financial gain as they can.

As someone posted earlier, just because it’s legal, doesn’t make it right.

People making these decisions at the companies don’t care about what’s “right”… just what will make themselves more money. Screw the public.

A topic that received some publicity last week are the taxes on each airline ticket that go into a general federal aviation slushfund. The money is then distributed to general aviation airports throughout the nation. With some exceptions, most general aviation airports are lightly used and do not deserve the massive infusions of cash they receive each year to subsidize their operations.

In my opinion, it is a huge misallocation of resources that subsidizes wealthy private plane owners and corporate aviation at the expense of ordinary air travelers.

Taxes on airline tickets should be lower and the USA as a country should stop squandering limited resources to keep these little used and out of the way airports in business.