Spirit Airlines Says: "Don't Fly With Us"

[lugnut33]

How come restaurants don't charge to use their bathrooms if you're a paying customer?

There are a ton of things in life that could be fee based. How about paying a fee for shopping carts at the grocery store. Heck you don't need a cart to put things in while you shop. That would generate money for the store.

What about charging a fee to use a gas pump? You really don't need a gas pump to put gas in a car, it's just convenience to use it. What's wrong with a funnel and a can?

One of the main points I'm trying to make here is if everyone just says charging fees is OK, then that's what every business will do. It will just go crazy. It'll be like living in a Monty Python sketch, which it's almost like already thanks to RyanAir. Acceptance of the add-on charges will just lead to more and more fees being added on.

 

[TLSnell1981]

Well, maybe if they get rid of this overhead storage that will drive the price down? Or, maybe people in your area are especially slow at boarding and that's why you pay such a high fare? (just kidding by the way)

Well, I do live in the South..we are a little like molasses. Actually, the airlines have a stranglehold on us. The next airport is 2-3 hours away...and that's if traffic is good.

 

[Lewisc]

My concern isn't with Spirit directly. Spirit doesn't fly here and neither does Jetblue or Southwest. I dread the day, the legacy carriers eventually follow suit. The airfare from my city to ANYWHERE is higher than average. We don't have the advantage of low fares. Unless, we catch a sale...an average ticket to MCO (or comparable) is around $500+. And, that's for a two hour flight.

That should give people an idea as to what fares airlines charge in markets that don't have competition. The kinds of fares that are needed to compensate for the unprofitable fares most of us are able to book.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

There are a ton of things in life that could be fee based. How about paying a fee for shopping carts at the grocery store. Heck you don't need a cart to put things in while you shop. That would generate money for the store.

Actually there are grocery stores that require a payment/deposite for use of a grocery cart, and charge for bags, one I can think of off the top of my head is Aldi.

We get you don't like it, fine, don't like it, but do not berate those who choose or prefer the ala carte format. Consumerism is part of why this has occured, it would be hard to go back, unless people (the general populus) start to realize the price of quality and service. I will pay more for these items, but in general the Walmart generation has found value in not (for whatever reason, avoiding the discussion about individuals budgets and expenses).

Don't some places in Europe allow people to urinate in the gutters in the streets as well? I can see it now. Spirit can charge extra if you don't want to sit in the "Pee in the aisle" section. (Again humor/sarcasm...)

I actually don't find it funny that you choose to belittle another culture or country. But trust me, on a whole from my experiences in Europe, it is far cleaner there then it is here in the US.

 

[yooperfan]

How is trying to save on air travel by taking carry on bags only any different than saving by getting ridiculously low airfares? Also, they can stop people who have too large a bag by simply making them check it and charge them. Creating a fee for over-sized carry ons is unnecessary. Being a traveler who must take a smaller plane to link to a major airport, I understand why some would attempt to avoid checked bags. I see fares on here all the time from California to Orlando that are hundreds per ticket less than I will ever get living in the midwest. It's easy to think people are being cheap by not checking bags, but if they couldn't get their cheap flights so that the airlines could even out the cost across the board for tickets, then who would be complaining?

 

[sgtdisney]

I actually don't find it funny that you choose to belittle another culture or country. But trust me, on a whole from my experiences in Europe, it is far cleaner there then it is here in the US.

My comment, seriously, wasn't meant to be offensive. Not to mention Europe has a number of different Cultures and contains a number of countries and I didn't mention one specifically. It was a serious question, not intended as an insult. I know they have Sanisettes in France. This was interesting as well, it seems they have them in some countries in Europe

http://www.urilift.com/


I only asked a question about Europe, since it was mentioned that Europeans were more used to having to use a pay toilet than Americans. I still stand behind my assertion Spirit is wrong here, and I know I will not be flying with them anytime soon. Luckily here in Chicago we have a lot of choices.

 

[Lewisc]

I think pay toilets are illegal in the United States. I'm pretty sure a working bathroom is a board of health requirement for restaurants.

Some stores are starting to charge for plastic bags. Bring your own bag and you don't pay.

Many gas stations charge extra if you want an attendant to pump your gas for you. Some charge extra if you want to use a credit card to pay.

Very few people in this thread agree with you. Charging for a large carryon bag is a logical extension of charging for checked bags. The alternative is being willing to pay profitable fares. A poster in this thread was able to book a below $100 R/T fare. You furnished examples where SW offered better fares. It's very simple. Book SW. Enough people do that and Spirit will have to reconsider how they price.

How come restaurants don't charge to use their bathrooms if you're a paying customer?

There are a ton of things in life that could be fee based. How about paying a fee for shopping carts at the grocery store. Heck you don't need a cart to put things in while you shop. That would generate money for the store.

What about charging a fee to use a gas pump? You really don't need a gas pump to put gas in a car, it's just convenience to use it. What's wrong with a funnel and a can?

One of the main points I'm trying to make here is if everyone just says charging fees is OK, then that's what every business will do. It will just go crazy. It'll be like living in a Monty Python sketch, which it's almost like already thanks to RyanAir. Acceptance of the add-on charges will just lead to more and more fees being added on.

 

[MiaSRN62]

Lewisc: few people in this thread agree with you.

and this thread on the DIS is most notably not representative of what the mass population think. Proof will be in the pudding....how many actually pay this fee or even choose to fly Spirit. I listened on the news all day......a lot more difficult to find fans of this new carry-on fee. So I take what I read here on the DIS with a grain of salt really.......I will be curious to see how this all plays out when people are actually given the choice to pay or go with another airline and not pay.

So lugnut...you and I are probably not outnumbered in the real world in how we feel about this. There are also WAY more lurkers to these heated types of threads than actual postings. A lot of DIS'ers just plain shy away from these topics and don't blame 'em
Maria

 

[KINGBOBOFTHENORTH]

And people here will applaud because they are concerned Spirit might not be making enough money off the people flying with no bags.

I'm with lugnut. I am shocked about how many people on here are.....fools! You think fares are lower because many airlines charge baggage fees? They're not lower. You think Spirit now charging for using the overhead storage bin is going to lower fares? Dream on. Competition determines fares. Supply and demand. It's as simple as that. When one airline starts a sale, everyone else matches. They lower fares when demand is not filling seats; period. If seats are filling, prices go up. The fees are purely extra income.

The logic of people on this board is that airlines don't make enough money because of the low fares they offer. Passengers, that is NOT your problem! You should be motivated to find the very lowest prices possible. If an airline goes out of business because their fares were too low, why are you concerned about it? Did you offer the car dealer a higher price for the last car you bought because you were concerned about the dealer not making enough or concern the manufacturer might go out of business? Do you hope your favorite grocery store raises its prices because their profits aren't high enough for you?

BobK/Orlando

PS-I hear Spirit charges $6 for a can of Coke. Is that true? Another rip-off. Of course, I know you're happy to pay it because that way Spirit can offer lower fares. Of course they do.

 

[kaytieeldr]

If an airline goes out of business because their fares were too low, why are you concerned about it?

Choice and competition. If an airline goes out of business, the fewer remaining airlines can charge higher prices - bad news for the price-centric customer.

 

[Lewisc]

People don't like paying profitable fares. Consider Spirits $9 fares.

People don't like paying for assigned seats. People don't like paying to check bags. Some people don't like paying for soda or for snacks.

I'm not suggesting people will like being charged to use the overhead bin. I'm suggesting Spirit passengers accept fees.

I'm suggested Spirit has to do something to control use of the overhead bins. Slows down boarding.

I wonder if legacy airlines will follow Spirit's example and do something to control overhead bins or will follow Southwests example and try to promote free bins.

 

[KINGBOBOFTHENORTH]

Choice and competition. If an airline goes out of business, the fewer remaining airlines can charge higher prices - bad news for the price-centric customer.

If airline prices become high then airlines become very profitable. When there are excess profits, new airlines enter the marketplace and prices go down.

You're not seeing any new airlines currently because very few airlines are profitable right now.

BobK/Orlando

 

[Brian Noble]

and this thread on the DIS is most notably not representative of what the mass population think

I thought so too...at first. We'll see in another month or two. If this fee quietly goes away, then Spirit's market will have spoken. If it doesn't, then they *also* will have spoken, but they will have said something different. When this was first announced, I was convinced that Spirit's budget-conscious customers would balk. After reading the thread here and on other boards, now I'm not so sure.

I wonder what the FlyerTalk guys are saying about it....

When there are excess profits, new airlines enter the marketplace and prices go down.

We are a long long way from that point. A very very small number of airlines were profitable in the most recent FY.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Realistically, Bob - read the threads on the Transportation and Budget forums. Most of the people here AREN'T going to pay the fares necessary for the airlines to profit. Many are horrified at having to pay over $200 to fly between the Northeast and Orlando. Can you imagine the outrage if the airlines tried charging a profitable fare?

 

[lllGurulll]

Partially correct, they do not itemize their baggage fee, basically subjecting everyone to the same baggage costs by including it in their base fare.



It's a double edged sword, either raise the base fare and include the baggage costs in the base fare and make everyone pay them, or only charge those who choose to check bags, I'd take the latter over the former, I'd rather pay for what I use, not subsidize others more then I already do.

Though I understand your point, it completely prices larger families out of the market. If they want to do the a la carte pricing at least make it fair.

 

[Brian Noble]

it completely prices larger families out of the market.

Larger families face these sorts of situations all the time. If you need to fly 8 people to Orlando, rather than 4, it's going to cost twice as much.

The real issue is that some people will necessarily be priced out of the airfare market once we reach a price point at which airlines are not losing money in general. That's simply an inevitable consequence of microeconomics. So it goes.

 

[lomorton]

Even before checked baggage was charged- we carried on our small luggage. I'm a big fan of packing light and leaving the airplane without having to deal with baggage claim. If you think about it, not checking bags saves the airlines labor(no one on the landing strip loading up bags, checking them in and loading them at their destination, etc).

I think that charging for overhead bin items is a crock. IF you must charge, punish those who don't follow airline guidelines for carry-ons, or charge a fee when the carry on exceeds a certain weight. I'd be willing to argue that now passengers will overstuff their free carryon.

This is not about airlines making travel safer for passengers, but instead for increasing the money in their pocketbooks.

 

[lugnut33]

I think pay toilets are illegal in the United States. I'm pretty sure a working bathroom is a board of health requirement for restaurants.

Some stores are starting to charge for plastic bags. Bring your own bag and you don't pay.

Many gas stations charge extra if you want an attendant to pump your gas for you. Some charge extra if you want to use a credit card to pay.

Very few people in this thread agree with you. Charging for a large carryon bag is a logical extension of charging for checked bags. The alternative is being willing to pay profitable fares. A poster in this thread was able to book a below $100 R/T fare. You furnished examples where SW offered better fares. It's very simple. Book SW. Enough people do that and Spirit will have to reconsider how they price.

So why shouldn't pay toilets on flights be illegal?

Do you honestly believe that if you find a way around all the extra fees out there now, that they just won't continue to come up with ways to fleece you? They come out with a new fee constantly to seperate you from more of your money.

And I realize I just need to find airlines that don't do it if I want to avoid it, but for me it's a principle thing, I just don't want to pay more. I'd say you were right if there weren't other airlines out there doing it the right way.

Very few people here on this board agree with me, but I know nationally most people feel differently. Take a look at the reaction to this in the news, Spirit is taking a beating, as well they should.

 

[lllGurulll]

Larger families face these sorts of situations all the time. If you need to fly 8 people to Orlando, rather than 4, it's going to cost twice as much.

The real issue is that some people will necessarily be priced out of the airfare market once we reach a price point at which airlines are not losing money in general. That's simply an inevitable consequence of microeconomics. So it goes.

Hence why we can't swing taking the entire family to Disney the last two times we have been. We are going to try to do a complete family vacation to Disney in 4-5 years with Disney Rewards points but I am afraid that the airfare is going to completely kill the savings we get from the rewards points.

 

[Brian Noble]

That stinks, no doubt. But, it's a luxury, not a necessity. You aren't alone, that's for sure.