Coming Soon: Airlines Charging for Checking More than One Bag of Luggage

[bicker]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17046459/

This was forecasted by industry experts over the past few years. Well it appears to have finally started. British Airways is charging about $60 extra for each piece of checked luggage beyond the first, for domestic flights, and up to $236 extra for each extra bag for international flights.

Clearly, airlines would become a lot more strict about carry-ons, to make this work.

Be prepared. This is coming to an airline near you. Just like airlines did away with in-flight meals, the days of free baggage allowances on airlines is coming to an end.

 

[Lewisc]

Spirit is already limiting passengers to one free checked bag.
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1346134

Ryan air now charge for all checked bags and has limits on carryon bags to around 22 pounds.

Price is most important to most passengers. The new policy will give airlines a new revenue stream from checked bags or will free up more space for cargo including mail. Either way the airlines will be getting additional revenue.

I don't have the link but some passengers to Europe saved a few dollars by connecting to a low cost carrier to complete their journey. The extra baggage charges imposed by the discount carrier more than wiped out any savings obtained by not booking the original airline (with traditional baggage rules) all the way to the final destination.

 

[I'mNoPrince]

WOW and SW just increased theirs to 3 bags when they lowered their weight to 50lbs.

 

[UConnJack]

Something incremental would be fine (e.g., first free, $20 for the second, $50 third, $100 fourth) would make sense. But $236!?!?!?

The $10 Spirit is charging is reasonable. $236 that British air is proposing is ludicrous. Being a golfer, I can see potential golf tourists to the UK balking at paying $236 to bring their golf clubs over, especially if that's each way! If it is each way (i.e., $500 RT), may as well buy an extra ticket, check the extra bag, and sprawl over 2 seats!

 

[debster812]

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1346134

Here's the link to the thread that poor Tyler (our mod extrordinaire) has been trying to merge all the Spirit Air discussions on the charging for a second or third bag.

 

[Lewisc]

WOW and SW just increased theirs to 3 bags when they lowered their weight to 50lbs.

No SW kept their limit at three bags when they lowered the weight to 50 lbs. I think the 3 bag limit will soon be history.

 

[CarolA]

I have heard rumors that SW is going to two bags soon. And the rumors were from SW employees so they may be true.....

However, the employee also said that since the majority of passengers check only 1 or two bags the "three bags" is really more marketing then an issue.

 

[marivaid]

I saw that in the news yesterday and it made me so mad. I can accept those kinds of restrictions from a cheap airline but British Airways is FAR from cheap.
The airline companies keep taking things away yet the prices do not go down. I can tell you hell will freeze over before I pay $200 for a 2nd checked-in piece of luggage after paying over $1500 for a flight. I'd rather ship my stuff ahead of time.

 

[DebbieB]

This will encourage more carryons. People who may have normally checked 2 bags will now check one and carryon one. Which doesn't make sense because that will put more of a load on the security checkpoints and fill the overheads.

 

[marivaid]

This will encourage more carryons. People who may have normally checked 2 bags will now check one and carryon one. Which doesn't make sense because that will put more of a load on the security checkpoints and fill the overheads.

I wouldn't be surprised if they limit the size/number of carryons soon too. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if they took the seats out and just let us stand for 8 hours. It's crazy.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Yeah, the airline(s) would probably prefer that, too.

 

[bicker]

I saw that in the news yesterday and it made me so mad. I can accept those kinds of restrictions from a cheap airline but British Airways is FAR from cheap.

"Cheapness" is really not any part of this. It takes an airline with the prestige of British Airways to give a move like this some substantial legitimacy. A "cheap" airline has to present itself as NOT costing more.

The airline companies keep taking things away yet the prices do not go down.

Keep in mind that airfares are generally lower than can be supported by the current economic conditions. Prices will have to climb, or the American taxpayer will have to pay EVEN MORE that we already have to assume the debts of domestic airlines that cannot survive on the fares they're forced by competitive forces to offer today.

Personally, I would be in favor of letting a few airlines fail (putting 100,000 people out of work, perhaps, leaving hundreds of thousands of passengers stranded with airline tickets that no one will honor and for which they can get neither refunds nor compensation from the government, and setting the industry up for a lot less capacity, therefore providing higher prices and profits). My only objection is to how we've handled this situation up to now: Keeping airlines alive, so that passengers thing all is okay (i.e., so that prices stay low), hiding that cost to the taxpayer. That deception has to stop. If we want to subsidize Bobby and Janie going to Disney World, we should do it with FAIR government subsidies to government-owned airlines, not with these back-door measures like assuming pension liabilities.

I can tell you hell will freeze over before I pay $200 for a 2nd checked-in piece of luggage after paying over $1500 for a flight. I'd rather ship my stuff ahead of time.

That would foster an almost-new industry... that would be very good.