Southwest Early Bird Checkin

[clanmcculloch]

35 pages and the fact is still that this is purely and simply a revenue enhancement item for SWA. Play on the fear that you may not get an "A" pass. Play on the fear that your family may not be able to sit together. Give SWA time and they will be charging per flight segment and charging more $$$ for the longer flight distances. Bags may fly free, but the people are getting nickeled and dimed even on SWA.

That's not why I paid it. I only paid it for my return flight because I love the fact that for $40 (4 seats * $10 each), I don't need to disrupt my day by stopping everything I'm doing to wait in line at Guest Services at a park or the Concierge desk at my resort to check in at a specific time. With the amount of money I'm paying for my vacation, $40 is worth the convenience to me. For me, that was always the one down side to travelling with SWA. Now I can pay a small fee and not have to worry about it. For my departure flight, I can easily be online at T-24. I'm not in any kind of panic over our seats. Even back when people had to line up at the airports and I really didn't understand how the SWA boarding process worked and I ended up with near the end of the B line or early in the C line, my family still managed to sit together or at least in pairs without having to harrass or threaten anybody (yup, I've read the whole thread) so I'm not worried.

 

[goofy4tink]

If you pre-board you can't sit in the exit rows, that is SW policy. In recent years I've seen the FA's standing in the exit rows during boarding to keep those not "qualified" from sitting there.

We all realize you can't sit in an exit row if you 'preboarded'. But, some will still try to get away with it. They aren't allowed to remain there..they have to move and now all those 'desireable' first few rows are taken.

Southwest tried that, years ago. Famlies were complaining about being "second class" passengers being forced to sit in the back of the plane. FAs didn't want to take the effort to enforce the policy.. Operationally the FA didn't know which passenger was the last family pre-board and which was the first "regular passenger". Moving family boarding (between the A and B) was the solution to family members grabbing seats in the front of the plane.

I think SW might as well start offering assigned seats. I think they should make every family member pay the fee. Give two passengers the option of aisle/middle or middle/window. Let SW assign the exact seats. Family members would wind up getting seats in the back. A family member who doesn't pay might not be able to get a seat next to other family members.

They could tell now...the FA would be able to discern who should be boarding and who shouldn't.

Goofy4tink,

Wow I am amazed you have seen FAs allow disability preboards to sit in the emergency exit rows. This is specifically spelled out in the regulation and for a FA to allow this certainly puts their job at risk.

If families wanted to sit up front they certainly could still avail themselves of the extra fee for the EB.

I think we are talking the same thing “We are offering to those families who wish an opportunity to board early and sit in our family area (rows say 18-24) in the rear of the airplane. We ask that if you are going to use this opportunity that you fill all seats contiguously (I know to big a word) in this area so there is room for all our families”.

As for getting ready to land maybe they should have a 5 minute warning light before turning on the seatbelt light since much of the stuff we have to organize needs to go in the overhead bins.

So who is sending these great ideas to the airlines?

bookwormde

Oh, make no mistake..those FA's weren't having any of it. They made every single person seated in the exit row move if they had preboarded. The one time I paid full price for each of us ($330 one way!!!) we followed close on the heels of a gentleman who had used a cane to board, right in front of us!! And he headed right to the aisle exit row seat! Ah, no. The FA was all over him, and quickly!! She was right behind us in the aisle. That guy was not happy!!!

I kind of like the idea of a "kid ghetto" in the back of the plane.

It would take the pressure off of those of us who look (and sound) like a traveling circus. It would eliminate ugly glares from those who do not have -- and apparently never were -- children. And I would never again hold up an entire plane full of people while I try to simultaneously hold an infant, buckle a toddler, break up a squabble for the window between the older two, and stow my gear.

Can we also reserve a section of every restaurant for my kind, too?

And that's the problem with being seated in the back of the plane!!! When people start thinking of it as a 'ghetto' it becomes less desirable. The 'my kind' comment??? You parents that want to preboard with your young children expect that you get what you want...even if others have paid a fee for the same thing. If you have to 'hold an infant, buckle a toddler, break up a squabble for the window between the older two, and stow my gear', then perhaps you are better off in a spot where you aren't holding everyone up. Just because someone has a family and hence more 'stuff' does not entitle them to hold everyone else up.
I don't mean to sound harsh, but this is getting ridiculous. Why do parents, with young children, feel that if they decide to fly with an airline that has lower fares, due to the type of seating they offer, feel that they should have the best of both worlds...cheap fares and better choice of seats. I don't get it. Perhaps SW needs to reduce the price of those back 5 rows...that way families can pay a bit less and still be seated together. But that won't work...simply because those families also want to sit close to the front, just like everyone else.
I wish SW would start assigning seats. Sure the fares would go up, but only a bit. Or maybe they should start charging for bags..at least the second one.

 

[pooch]

That's not why I paid it. I only paid it for my return flight because I love the fact that for $40 (4 seats * $10 each), I don't need to disrupt my day by stopping everything I'm doing to wait in line at Guest Services at a park or the Concierge desk at my resort to check in at a specific time. With the amount of money I'm paying for my vacation, $40 is worth the convenience to me. For me, that was always the one down side to travelling with SWA. Now I can pay a small fee and not have to worry about it. For my departure flight, I can easily be online at T-24. I'm not in any kind of panic over our seats. Even back when people had to line up at the airports and I really didn't understand how the SWA boarding process worked and I ended up with near the end of the B line or early in the C line, my family still managed to sit together or at least in pairs without having to harrass or threaten anybody (yup, I've read the whole thread) so I'm not worried.

Just wanted the convenience of auto-check in for our return flight and more than willing to pay the $20 for it.

 

[goofy4tink]

Just wanted the convenience of auto-check in for our return flight and more than willing to pay the $20 for it.

And that, dear poster, is the idea behind EBCI. The ability to not have to be hovering over your computer right at 24 hrs before. You pay that $10 pp, and SW takes care of it for you..nice perk for $10. One I will be using the next time I fly SW.

 

[BigTigger]

If that's the way you feel, simply refuse to fly with SWA. There are plenty of other airlines out there that fly out of Logan, Bradley, Providence and Manchester. No one is asking you to compromise your principals. Heck, my father refuses to use any of the toll roads in FL (takes him double the time, and probably more gas to get anywhere) - but it's his belief the roads should be free and he won't give in.

Disney will be just as enjoyable regardless of how you get there

Agreed. My point was that SWA has gone with the marketing of Bags Fly Free, It's On, etc. to differentiate themselves as having no added fees. Then they add a fee. Kind of an impure situation, but marketing never did equal honesty (think Toyota ads on quality and all the recalls for rusting frames, brakes that don't work in extreme cold weather, etc.).

I have found JB to be the better experience from Boston on five of my last six trips. Better schedule, better price (even with extra legroom seat fees for my 6'6" frame). The only issue is parking cost at Logan, but with the movement of spaces in the main garage and terminal E lots to economy parking prices in October, even this issue will have a partial solution.

 

[MAH4546]

"Monopoly" airlines are an entirely different issue, the exception far more than the rule; however, even those airlines charge competitively where there is competition.

Right now, Boston to Orlando in mid-November nonstop ranges from $194 (JetBlue) to $219 (Delta) and up, and $183 (AirTran) and up with a plane change. The lowest nonstop fare (again, JetBlue) to Las Vegas is $299, and $268 (United) with a change.

It's not the exception. It is often cheaper to fly trans-continental than it is to fly between to mid-size cities that are close by.

 

[bicker]

Agreed. My point was that SWA has gone with the marketing of Bags Fly Free, It's On, etc. to differentiate themselves as having no added fees.

It was "Bags Fly Free" -- not "No Added Fees". If folks choose to impose what they want something to mean ("no added fees"), on a promise ("Bags Fly Free") the airlines makes that actually doesn't imply what folks have chosen to impose, it seems to me that the folks misconstruing the promise are in the wrong.

Kind of an impure situation, but marketing never did equal honesty

Except that in your scenario, the folks misconstruing the promise injected the impurity, and were therefore the ones effectively being dishonest.

 

[daisyyy]

I did not do the early check in, but waited until this morning and @ exactly 24 hrs before my flight, this is what I got.

I guess it's ok. I suppose if you have a trip for a week without access to internet, you can check in before you leave for your return flight. I'm just cheap, and didn't want to spend the extra $10 per person.

 

[momtoccc]

My brother's family is flying to WDW today. They checked in at exactly 24 hours yesterday and ended up with B29 - B32 for their family of 4. Now they are traveling with 2 kids ages 5 and 7 so they don't qualify to get on with Family boarding. They are hoping they can find 2 sets of 2 seats together.

I'm going to check them in on their return.. will be interesting to see what they get. They didn't know about EB check-in and didn't want to pay it for the return.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Agreed. My point was that SWA has gone with the marketing of Bags Fly Free, It's On, etc. to differentiate themselves as having no added fees. Then they add a fee

Southwest did not add a fee. They added an option (similar to what had been offered by several unaffiliated websites) which, for a relatively small amount, allows passengers to NOT have to be at a computer/online exactly 24 hours prior to departure.

Granted, it's new by Southwest, but anecdotally only a few passengers are taking advantage of the option.

The only issue is parking cost at Logan, but with the movement of spaces in the main garage and terminal E lots to economy parking prices in October,

What??? Tell me more!

 

[keishashadow]

You forgot to add a green smiling smilie face after that.

actually, i had this guy but removed him, didn't want to gloat

nice to hear re the recent experiences, but i don't think we'll know the true picture until after the Xmas holidays; maybe not until spring break as many casual travelers may jump on it after one bad experience

 

[BigTigger]

What??? Tell me more!

I can't find an online link to it, but I belong to Parking PASSPort at Logan and in the August newsletter they had an announcement that with SWA starting service on August 17th, Massport was looking to keep the growth of the discount airline business by adding Economy priced slots to the central parking and terminal E lots in fall 2009. I asked when in the parking office a few weeks ago and was told October is the target date. That's the good news, the bad news is "economy" to Massport is $18 a day. They announce these nuggets in the newsletter and usually they happen on time. The Terminal C Security check-in work to link the United and JB sides and replace two, slow check-in line areas with one new 14 lane area and to allow movement between both sides of C without having to go through security again has begun as promised with a fall 2010 completion.

 

[twinklebug]

the bad news is "economy" to Massport is $18 a day.

Yea, that's so typical. I could just have the livery service drop us off and pick us up for close to the same price (over a week's vacation) & have no worries.

 

[Lewisc]

It was "Bags Fly Free" -- not "No Added Fees". If folks choose to impose what they want something to mean ("no added fees"), on a promise ("Bags Fly Free") the airlines makes that actually doesn't imply what folks have chosen to impose, it seems to me that the folks misconstruing the promise are in the wrong.

Except that in your scenario, the folks misconstruing the promise injected the impurity, and were therefore the ones effectively being dishonest.

It was "No Hidden Fees"

No fee for an aisle or window seat was listed. It's not clear how often a passenger who doesn't pay for EB will get wind up with a middle seat. JMO but what SW is offering is worse then charging for an assigned seat.

Not the end of the world but the fee for EB is SW sort of admitting the other carriers are correct. Passengers prefer optional (unbundled) charges as an alternative to fare increases they can't avoid paying.

I don't think SW is being dishonest but SW is starting to modify its no fee policy.

I'm not sure how to get the SW piece to show in this post.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/crankyflier/2716225182/
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AeZhrvvRa...m2bSPi4UW-Q/s320/southwest-no-hidden-fees.gif

 

[bicker]

What do you mean by "was"?

 

[TheWog]

It was "No Hidden Fees"

No fee for an aisle or window seat was listed. It's not clear how often a passenger who doesn't pay for EB will get wind up with a middle seat. JMO but what SW is offering is worse then charging for an assigned seat.

I agree. How long before SW goes the way of Airtran and charges for assigned seats and scraps the letter coded boarding system? I think it worked for a while, but now they are almost forcing those that want to guarantee seats together to sign up for the EB process. I think as it moves forward people will end up paying to utilize the service in order to have the possibility of getting that coveted A boarding pass. You don't get to have the thrill of logging on 24 hours in advance, three screens open and hitting refresh over and over.

In addition, their fares haven't been all that great lately anyway. When I was looking for past and future trips they were the same or higher than the JB flights I was looking at. They do have the convenience of flying out of Manchester vs. Logan, but not worth paying more to do it.

 

[Lewisc]

What do you mean by "was"?

The current piece on SWs website just says save up to $100 in checked bag fees. SW is not (at least currently) showing the no hidden fee chart (I linked to in my previous post) on their website.

 

[TDC Nala]

I don't consider this a "hidden" or "added" fee. Indeed I don't even consider it a "fee." It's an "option." You're not required to do it. You can still get a seat if you don't pay. The question is, do you want to pay so that you don't have to do your own check-in and you might get a BETTER seat. I don't consider Airtran's reserved seat charge to be a hidden fee either, because you can get a seat on the plane without paying it. You can't check a suitcase without paying the luggage fee though.

I don't think I'd blame them for charging for an A boarding pass if they thought people would pay for it. This way, at least there is a chance that not all the A spaces will be taken up by those who paid extra.

 

[goofy4tink]

You know...as I sit and think about the whole EBCI system...I have to wonder. No, it isn't a 'fee' per se. It is giving someone the option of not having to sit there, at the 24 hr mark, to check themselves in. They are free do go off and get on with their lives. But..and this is the thing that bothers me...it does impact others who have not paid for that option. Yes, I realize they can also pay the fee for that perk as well. But for some reason it just doesn't sit well with me. It isn't a level playing field. At least if you have to pay for that extra leg room on JetBlue, you aren't impacting someone else's ability to get a seat..no, they can't get that particular seat, but there will most likely be others available. Or if you decide that you want to bring two checked bags, you aren't making it harder for someone else to do the same.
Now...if SW told everyone that there were a finite number of these EBCI spots available, then fine. Then they could say there are 10 more spots left, or whatever. But I can just imagine what it would be like if there were 55 passengers who paid that $10 fee, pp, to do EBCI....now, there are no A's left and families are going to grab seats together, making it almost impossible for those with end of B group and all of C group to find two seats together.
Man....just charge for that second checked bag and be done with it.

 

[B&Pdisneymom]

I am flying SW in Jan. from PDX to DEN then on to MCO. I was not elibagle for EBCI and not sure if I would purchase to DW, but definantly would have for our trip back. My question is this...... When we stop in Denver, and maybe some people get off there, then we are free to move seats once the FA has counted the through passengers. What about the people in DEN who have purchased EB I haven't flown SW in years, so this maybe this question doesn't even apply?? Just wondering....