I'm kind of impressed by Spirit Airlines' new carry-on baggage fee.

[randomness]

And it looks like Congress is too: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-13/spirit-s-carry-on-bag-fees-draws-senate-bill-to-ban-practice.html

Carrying a bag onto a Spirit flight will cost passengers $45 at the gate, or $30 if paid in advance, starting in August

Even AirAsia and Ryanair haven't thought of that one...but I'm guessing they'll try now.

Comments

[frotz.livejournal.com]

Are they not being transparent? Certainly in the case of Spirit, I pointed a web browser at spiritair.com and was two fairly obvious clicks away from this page: http://www.spiritair.com/Policiesbags.aspx#CheckedBag

These days, I don't think anybody can really have any expectation of not needing to go looking for such things when booking flights. It's irritating at times, but the price we pay for deregulation and open competition.

That said, you do have to know to be looking for such things in the first place, and if you look at, say, Ryanair, there's a link right on the homepage but the sheer number of ways to get charged over the base fare is eye-overglaze-inducing.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

Most of the airlines I've been flying lately--JetStar, Tiger Airways, AirAsia--do the eye-overglaze-inducing charges. Tiger, for example, charges a mandatory flight insurance fee if you use a credit card, but if you don't use a credit card they charge a different fee, and if you use cash--assuming you can find one of their offices in your country--they charge yet another fee.

On the other hand, even after all the fees the flights come out cheap, so that's fine. I would rather know that all these mandatory fees are actually part of the price, but I guess that's the price comparison engines' job now.

The other pet peeve I have is that there isn't a global open skies agreement, but then I'm a dreamer. JetStar Pacific--just as an example--flying in the United States would be extremely surreal, but rather amusing.

I don't know whether the whole "You are not permitted to eat food you bring yourself on the flight" would go over with Americans, however. Asians put up with it, it seems, because all the low-fare airlines out here do it. AirAsia didn't really seem to enforce it particularly well on my last BKK-JHB flight, though.

[digitalemur.livejournal.com]

I don't know whether the whole "You are not permitted to eat food you bring yourself on the flight" would go over with Americans, however.

I hope we can keep that from happening by regulation, in the US, if it came to it, just because not being able to dig into a snack or a drink is a real hardship for people with all manner of health issues, many of which are really minor and manageable until one gets cooped up in a place where you a) can't leave and b) have to buy some company's crap instead of just feeding yourself. I'm sure companies will eventually try it... but there's a making-travel-accessible-to-all rationale for not allowing it.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

I have in fact been buying food from the airlines partly because I am having sugar crashes at inappropriate times and partly because I'm curious about the food.

It's mostly been bad food but it does help me maintain blood sugar. And ten bucks isn't a hardship for me but it might well be for everyone else.

I sure they wouldn't stop me from taking my glucose tablets--there's a specific exemption for meds--but I didn't bring the big bottle, just the ten-pack, so I'm saving those for sometime when I really have no other alternative.