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

[maxiesmom]

I'm told the bins have a weight limit of around 83 lbs. I'm told the bins can fit 3 or 4 bags. A carryon bag can weigh 40 lbs. Do the math. The present system isn't safe.

Most bins cannot hold 3 or 4 bags that weigh 40lbs each. And from what I saw flying last week, most bins don't. Usually one big bag in each bin, and then a small carry-on or tote bag.

 

[Lewisc]

I've never flown Spirit. Any bin I've ever used can fit 2-4 bags, as long as none of the bags only fit lengthwise. Most 21" and 22" bags fit wheels in. Those bags can weigh 30-40 lbs.

 

[Had2stopLurking]

They don't do the cattle call as you put it any more. Your boarding pass number correlates to a number in the boarding line. It's quite civilized now



Yep...that is your opinion. I fly with SW for many reasons and not just lower fares. I'll pay a little more with SW over Delta or US Air because of fabulous cancellation policies and rescheduling (and more non-stop flights). Never had any issues with SW people having boarding issues ? We've found customer service with SW (both in person and on phone) FAR AND ABOVE Delta for example. And US Air was rude the last time we flew with them. They had a 3 hour baggage delay at end of flight. Nothing but top-notch service from SW. FAR from being the "walmart of airlines"
I dunno....maybe things are different out there in Denver ? But SW is awesome in Philly and Orlando and even Tampa


Maria

And that is quite possible. That's why I agree that no airline is right for anyone! SW here is a mess (they wouldn't even come to DIA until a couple of years ago because they refused to pay the fees. Now it's a mess to see their passengers trying to get to flights). It's all based on perspective of where/when you are flying. I don't put down people that fly SW if it works for them; for us, it's not a good fit. I wouldn't consider it a top notch airline (based on MY hub airport) and I don't think I would fly them even for free (based on what I have seen at DIA and SNA, but I don't think I even noticed them at MCO, LAX or TPA, so, maybe the service, cattle call is better there?)

 

[Inkmahm]

I'm not lying about it. I looked at fares for the week of August 9 through Aug. 16, which is months out. I don't know, I guess nobody should be flying Southwest because their fares are high and they don't charge add-on fees. I guess all those flyers (busiest airline in the US) are idiots. BTW, there's nothing wrong with Airtran.

As for Airtran you have to include the cost of a check-in. Yes, we like to check a bag so we don't have to carry it on to the airplane (OK, who's going to be the first one to criticize that while out of the other side of their mouth they'll complain about people taking too long to board because of carry-ons). Also, I don't think the times for Southwests non-stop flights are inconvenient @ 10:55 am and 7:25 pm with a return time of 4:40 pm. Airtran has a 6:45 am flight (which is nice if you like getting up at 3am to make the flight), a 1:56 pm, and return flights at 7:10 am and 6:21. Really there't not a lot of difference between the two. Also, if you lived nearer Chicago then the options on when to fly with Southwest really increase.

BTW, I'm flying to Disneyland (John Wayne Airport) at the end of April with Southwest and my tickets were under $200 on Southwest. Cheaper than Airtran, and I would have had to fly into LAsuX.

By 10:55 am, I am almost arriving in Orlando on Airtran rather than just leaving Milwaukee. I like getting there at lunch time. For our flights in April we leave at 7:40 am and get there at 11:20 on Airtran. My guess is the August nonstop will change to something around that time by August.

For coming home, the 6:20 flight is much better than 4:40. I can do Animal Kingdom on the return day with a flight that doesn't leave until after 6 pm. 4:40 is a bit too early to allow a whole park day.

Southwest doesn't have a single nonstop flight to LAX from Milwaukee. Airtran has two each day. The next time I go to Disneyland, I will be using Airtran. That's why I sold my $500 gift certificate for SW as I knew I wouldn't be using it.

 

[Had2stopLurking]

SW has a lot of flights to leisure destinations. Probably more infrequent fliers. That said I haven't read of any statistics that suggests SW passengers cause greater issues with security. SW passengers aren't motivated to lug large carryon bags through security to save a few dollars. I'd expect SW passengers are less likely to produce delays screening carry on bags.

Tell that to the family in front of me my last trip that took EVERY LITTLE THING out of their backpack and put it in separate bins (not kidding, a brush in one bin, a comb in another, their nintendo ds in another, ect, they had like 10 bins) then tried to carry the empty backpack through the metal detector (um, no, that needs to go onto the belt too, it would have been fine to leave it with all your crap in it to be checked).

I realize there are people that aren't familiar with traveling and rules, but, it's annoying for those of us that are held up by it. And guess what airline they were traveling? SW!! Go Figure! (I could see their boarding pass after they had to get it back out to walk through the screener)

 

[lugnut33]

By 10:55 am, I am almost arriving in Orlando on Airtran rather than just leaving Milwaukee. I like getting there at lunch time. For our flights in April we leave at 7:40 am and get there at 11:20 on Airtran. My guess is the August nonstop will change to something around that time by August.

For coming home, the 6:20 flight is much better than 4:40. I can do Animal Kingdom on the return day with a flight that doesn't leave until after 6 pm. 4:40 is a bit too early to allow a whole park day.

Southwest doesn't have a single nonstop flight to LAX from Milwaukee. Airtran has two each day. The next time I go to Disneyland, I will be using Airtran. That's why I sold my $500 gift certificate for SW as I knew I wouldn't be using it.

 

[Lewisc]

Tell that to the family in front of me my last trip that took EVERY LITTLE THING out of their backpack and put it in separate bins (not kidding, a brush in one bin, a comb in another, their nintendo ds in another, ect, they had like 10 bins) then tried to carry the empty backpack through the metal detector (um, no, that needs to go onto the belt too, it would have been fine to leave it with all your crap in it to be checked).

I realize there are people that aren't familiar with traveling and rules, but, it's annoying for those of us that are held up by it. And guess what airline they were traveling? SW!! Go Figure! (I could see their boarding pass after they had to get it back out to walk through the screener)

Some airports have a separate line for inexperienced fliers (families). It's a shame a TSA employee, airline employee or fellow passenger didn't take a minute to explain the rules to that family.

 

[sgtdisney]

Just got an email from Spirit with the subject line :

Message from Spirit Airlines CEO about the carry-on crisis

Seriously ? Crisis ? I truly don't feel it's a crisis....and I do feel it's a way for Spirit to get extra fees. Noone will ever convince me otherwise....I think they're doing a little back-peddling and trying to justify their reasoning for the fee.......

Maria

I got that letter from Mr. Baldanza as well. Apparently Spirit feels that people carrying on luggage has reached crisis proportions, so therefore has decided to charge fees to help eliminate the 'crisis.'

Sorry, I found the letter laughable. The carry-on 'crisis' started when airlines decided to charge for checked luggage, since almost everyone was trying to avoid the fee. According to Spirit, one of the benefits of the fee will be shorter and faster security lines. I wonder how that will happen unless Spirit will have dedicated security lines with the "happy passengers who pay less" and carry less too!

If the airlines want to have shortened security lines and better boarding, enforce the regulations for carry-ons. I think I would have had more respect for Spirit, if in their letter if they were simply more up-front about wanting to charge passengers more via fees to keep the airfares artificially low.

A previous poster mentioned the golden age of airline travel, when the airlines were regulated. Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be better to go back to that. It was a fun time to fly when the airlines had lounges in the aircraft for both coach and first class passengers, etc, and you didn't feel like you were flying on a bus, like you do nowadays.... Oh well.

 

[eliza61]

Just got an email from Spirit with the subject line :

Message from Spirit Airlines CEO about the carry-on crisis

Seriously ? Crisis ? I truly don't feel it's a crisis....and I do feel it's a way for Spirit to get extra fees. Noone will ever convince me otherwise....I think they're doing a little back-peddling and trying to justify their reasoning for the fee.......

Maria

Hey girlfriend
Spirit is calling it a crisis because you're not the only one who thinks that spirit is trying to gouge the public. The Secretary of Transportation wants to haul the CEO of Spirit into it's chambers to explain the new fee

It seems that travelers and readers of this blog aren’t the only ones angry about the new Spirit Airlines carry-on bag fee. In an interview with Chris Elliott, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood let it be known that he does not support this latest move from Spirit:

“I think it’s a bit outrageous that an airline is going to charge someone to carry on a bag and put it in the overhead. And I’ve told our people to try and figure out a way to mitigate that. I think it’s ridiculous.”

LaHood goes on to say, “I don’t think they care about their customers. That’s what I think.”

LaHood is joined in his outrage by Senator Chuck Schumer:

“‘Passengers have hit a breaking point on fees that are being imposed,’ Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Sunday.” (from the New York Daily News)

According to the Daily News, “If the Feds don’t put a stop to carry-on bag fees, he (Schumer) said he’d introduce legislation that will.”

http://rickseaney.com/2010/04/12/tr...-respond-to-spirit-airlines-carry-on-bag-fee/


LaHood on Spirit’s carry-on baggage fees: “We’re gonna hold the airline’s feet to the fire on this”

Hence, that's why it's now a crisis.

 

[eliza61]

Some guests have been charged a "package acceptance fee" by Disney. CSR, and maybe some of the other covention hotels.

Man, if I could only pick winning lottery tickets as well.

 

[Lewisc]

Eliza61
Those statements were quoted earlier in this thread.

What's missed in this thread. Spirit is reducing the size of bags which are allowed in the bin:

Current maximum size is 24X16X12 new maximum size is 22X18X10
That should ban bags that only fit lengthwise.

Once the bins are full current rules allow Spirit to charge applicable checked baggage fees for bags that must be gate checked. Some people don't think it's fair to charge the last passengers who board the plane. Present system is broken. JMO but that's more unfair then the new policy. People who are willing to pay use the bins instead of passengers who board first.

I'm surprised more politicians haven't spoken up. Good publicity. No cost. They'll claim "victory" when they get an agreement or regulation which bans pay toilets in airplanes. Airlines are allowed to charge for soda. They're allowed to charge for checked bags. I can't see any reason why they should be allowed to charge for a checked bag but not allowed to charge if a bag is put in the bin.

Any other airline might "bend" to pressure from the public or politicians. I suspect Spirit will remove the bins (probably just nail them shut) rather then back down. They won't continue to let passengers cheat them out paying for luggage by bringing the bags on board. Being able to, rightly, point to safety and boarding issues makes it easier to justify.

Food companies reduce sizes as a way to make price increases less visible. Often a "pound" of coffee is less then a pound and a "gallon" of ice cream is less then a gallon.

Assume almost every passenger brings a bin bag. Boarding is slower and bins may be loaded above capacity. Charging for bin bags is the easiest way to ensure fewer passenger bring bin bags. Would you rather Spirit says the first 60 passengers to board can use the bin? Passengers who pay higher fares can use the bin?

 

[MiaSRN62]

“‘Passengers have hit a breaking point on fees that are being imposed,’ Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Sunday.” (from the New York Daily News)

According to the Daily News, “If the Feds don’t put a stop to carry-on bag fees, he (Schumer) said he’d introduce legislation that will.”

http://rickseaney.com/2010/04/12/tra...ry-on-bag-fee/


LaHood on Spirit’s carry-on baggage fees: “We’re gonna hold the airline’s feet to the fire on this”

Hence, that's why it's now a crisis.

Ahhh...so true eliza ! CRISIS revealed

Maria

 

[kaytieeldr]

United tried the same thing out of the Rockford IL airport years ago. The airport made them a sweetheart deal so they really had nothing to lose by doing it. I think it lasted less than a year.

Well, Logan didn't make any 'sweetheart' deal with Southwest. The airline already serves two airports within fifty miles of Boston. They started in August with nonstop flights to BWI and MDW. They recently added PHL, so it doesn't look like they're planning to pull out in under a year.

Still, they're not going to add a lot of nonstop destinations in the forseeable future, if at all. Most flights will require a plane change (or two), although there is the occasional direct flight. Southwest's BASE fares out of Logan are simply more expensive than most other airlines. Add to that additional landing and take-off fees at the interim airports, and, well, it's TRULY not competitive.

It's great that you can find such awesome fares from Chicago and Milwaukee. Those fares don't help anyone in the Northeast trying to get to Orlando.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Through this thread I have several times indicated that I'm sure there are times where Southwest is more expensive and the natural extension to that is there are times where other airlines are cheaper. However, when you get people saying they are shocked that Southwest is cheaper, well I just don't get that.

I'm not sure why you don't get it. In my example, while my times are similar (late afternoon departure with an evening arrival, early morning return with a midmorning arrival), in all cases the fares I quote are the lowest available fares for the dates I chose - 9/25-10-2. I probably could have matched the times even better, but then I would have had to choose a higher fare on one airline; in fact, I think it was Southwest

 

[kaytieeldr]

Man, if I could only pick winning lottery tickets as well.

Um, not really. Whichever resorts have been doing this started it wayyyyyyyy back in 2009, possibly even earlier. There were complaints about it on the budget and resorts forums, and probably others as well (TPA&S, community?). More likely, you read it back then.

 

[lugnut33]

I'm not sure why you don't get it. In my example, while my times are similar (late afternoon departure with an evening arrival, early morning return with a midmorning arrival), in all cases the fares I quote are the lowest available fares for the dates I chose - 9/25-10-2. I probably could have matched the times even better, but then I would have had to choose a higher fare on one airline; in fact, I think it was Southwest

I get that other airlines are cheaper sometimes, but you seem to be insisting that since they don't match the times and fares that you want that means the whole Southwest system is broken. There's a reason why Southwest has become the nation's busiest airline.

This thread really isn't about Southwest fares, it's about Spirit being mean-spirited with their fares. And if people are willing to just bow down and pay those fees (really they are just revenue enhancers and don't the CEO fool you by using terms like "unbundling") then that gives carte blanche to the other airlines to rip their customers off.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Right. It's not about Southwest fares. I'm pointing out, however, that even with Spirit's luggage fees, they're STILL cheaper - by about 30% - than the oddly-popular Southwest.

Again, while the fares I found were for similar times, in all three cases they are alse the lowest fares each of the three airlines had available for the dates I selected. These are not hypothetical dates. They're the dates I will be traveling if I fly from Boston to Walt Disney World in 2010.

I do understand the thread isn't about SWA - but despite all these complaints about Spirit's new fees, they're STILL $89 cheaper than Southwest for my plans. Not that this matters to me - I'd be flying JetBlue at a savings of $21 over even Spirit, once you add in the luggage fee

 

[lugnut33]

Right. It's not about Southwest fares. I'm pointing out, however, that even with Spirit's luggage fees, they're STILL cheaper - by about 30% - than the oddly-popular Southwest.

Again, while the fares I found were for similar times, in all three cases they are alse the lowest fares each of the three airlines had available for the dates I selected. These are not hypothetical dates. They're the dates I will be traveling if I fly from Boston to Walt Disney World in 2010.

I do understand the thread isn't about SWA - but despite all these complaints about Spirit's new fees, they're STILL $89 cheaper than Southwest for my plans. Not that this matters to me - I'd be flying JetBlue at a savings of $21 over even Spirit, once you add in the luggage fee

That's fine that SW isn't the cheapest in your area, and I've said numerous times that they are not always the cheapest. Heck, Spirit is not the cheapest from Chicago to Orlando... Southwest is. It's all over the place, can we agree on that?

Back to the original point, Spirit can take their fees and shove it!!

 

[Lewisc]

That's fine that SW isn't the cheapest in your area, and I've said numerous times that they are not always the cheapest. Heck, Spirit is not the cheapest from Chicago to Orlando... Southwest is. It's all over the place, can we agree on that?

Back to the original point, Spirit can take their fees and shove it!!

Your thread is titled Spirit Airline Says "Don't Fly With Us". Spirit has said no such thing. Spirit has decided to increase the price paid by some of their passengers. It will raise some revenue, improve efficiency and safety.

Intelligent people will add the cost to check a bag (two if necessary) to Spirit's fare. Book Spirit if it makes sense. Book a different airline if it makes sense.

Stubborn people will only look at SWs website. AFAIK it's the only airline that still lets you check 2 bags without paying.

 

[kaytieeldr]

And yet, despite all that, Lewis - Spirit is STILL cheaper for me than Southwest would be . By a LOT. Southwest fans keep touting its "two bags free" policy - but Spirit's base fare for me is $230 vs. Southwest's $359. Add in one checked bag in each direction and Spirit "leaps" to $270. Southwest is, in comparison, apparently bundling in charges of $100 for that so-called 'free' luggage - note that I'm allowing for a very generous additional $29 in additional landing and takeoff fees for the flight change in each direction on Southwest.

Bundled or unbundled, a la carte or not - when you consider how open and public Spirit is about the new fees, and that it will speed up turnaround and debarking times simply because now fewer people will be carrying on overhead-compliant luggage, well... that works for me!