# Frontier Airlines Joins Spirit in Rip Off the Pax!!



## Bob Dylan (May 2, 2013)

Frontier Airlines, Denver Based, has just Announced that they will join Spirit Airlines in Charging $25-$100 for carry-On Baggage for Anyone who Books through Another On-Line Site or Agency, (ie Orbitz/Cheap Flights/Travel Agents etc.) Also they will start Charging $1.99 for Coffe/Tea or Soft Drinks, Water Wasn't Mentioned! <_< Way to Go Frontier, the Race to the Bottom is On!


----------



## the_traveler (May 2, 2013)

That's why I fly Amtrak!


----------



## PRR 60 (May 2, 2013)

Or is it a race to higher profits?

From CNBC, 4/30/13:



> Spirit Airlines' first-quarter net income jumped 30 percent as tickets and fees propelled the carrier beyond Wall Street expectations.
> 
> The company earned $30.6 million, or 42 cents per share, up from $23.4 million, or 32 cents per share, in the same quarter of 2012. Excluding one-time items, the company posted an adjusted profit of 45 cents per share, beating analyst projections by 3 cents.
> 
> Revenue rose 23 percent to $370.4 million, also a surprise to the upside.


The full story is HERE.


----------



## Blackwolf (May 2, 2013)

So, even if you use a travel agent? Yeah, Frontier just went on my black list.


----------



## railiner (May 3, 2013)

jimhudson said:


> Way to Go Frontier, the Race to the Bottom is On!


I think that Ryanair is the leader in that 'race'.......IIRC, they charge passenger's to use the restroom.........


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 3, 2013)

jimhudson said:


> Frontier Airlines, Denver Based, has just Announced that they will join Spirit Airlines in Charging $25-$100 for carry-On Baggage for Anyone who Books through Another On-Line Site or Agency, (ie Orbitz/Cheap Flights/Travel Agents etc.) Also they will start Charging $1.99 for Coffe/Tea or Soft Drinks, Water Wasn't Mentioned! <_< Way to Go Frontier, the Race to the Bottom is On!


Spirit Airlines was on the path to bankruptcy back when they operated business as usual. So, even though I won't be flying them I can understand why they turned everything upside down. They're not trying to appeal to people like us anyway. They're probably trying to appeal to college kids and backpackers. I actually flew Frontier to Las Vegas for under $150 round trip a couple months ago. Do you suggest I should have taken Amtrak to Las Vegas instead? Every other airline was closer to *double* Frontier's price and Amtrak doesn't even reach Las Vegas on their own hardware. If you don't want to pay extra fees for luggage and drinks (water is still free) then you can always price check on other websites before booking directly with Frontier. These days that's generally how I do it unless it's a business trip or award ticket.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (May 3, 2013)

I always book directly through the airlines. I might use the other sites to see which airlines have the best prices. Lately I've used Google Flights to check prices & availability.


----------



## SubwayNut (May 3, 2013)

I don't mind this fee since I always book directly through airline websites. It seems like a way to try and discourage passengers from booking through third-party websites and the hefty commissions third party websites charge the airline. I understand why Frontier is doing this.

I like Frontiers Economy/Classic/Classic Plus fare structure a lot. I would fly them often from New York to College in Colorado and would choose an Economy ticket if I had no bags to check (a quick, short break) and a Classic ticket if I had bags to check (like before or after the summer). It was really nice to simply pay the $25-$30 in bag fees as I booked, generally I would be checking two bags (that would have cost $40) and also got some nice other perks on the airplane like better seat collection and free DirectTV (a perk no longer included even with the Classic Plus fares).


----------



## jis (May 3, 2013)

jimhudson said:


> Frontier Airlines, Denver Based, has just Announced that they will join Spirit Airlines in Charging $25-$100 for carry-On Baggage for Anyone who Books through Another On-Line Site or Agency, (ie Orbitz/Cheap Flights/Travel Agents etc.) Also they will start Charging $1.99 for Coffe/Tea or Soft Drinks, Water Wasn't Mentioned! <_< Way to Go Frontier, the Race to the Bottom is On!


Frankly I find the belly-aching about airlines charging for coffee, tea or soft drinks in economy class somewhat amusing in a forum that sings the glory of Amtrak. Try getting a coffee, tea or soft drink in Amtrak Coach without paying for it. For that matter you can't get any for free even in Acela Business Class, which could hardly be characterized as an LCC.
In India, my preferred airline these days is IndiGo, which has a similar fare structure philosophy. You can up front buy a basic trransportation ticket for which everything is add-on, or you can buy upgraded packages which includes things people typically want packaged. you get to choose when buying the ticket. As it turns out I always buy a package with a pre-assigned seat, and food, since the upcharge is so small. For those that want to opt for the bare minimum fare, why should they be denied that option?


----------



## SarahZ (May 3, 2013)

I don't use the third-party sites anymore. Sometimes I'll use them to compare flight costs, but that's it. I realized that, 99% of the time, the price I paid through Expedia or Travelocity was the exact same price I would have paid through the airline's website. I use Google now, like Betty. So much easier. 

Charging for carry-on is ridiculous. I understood charging for checked bags since it was intended to relieve some of the cost for those who only travel with a carry-on and don't bring their entire wardrobe. I didn't see ticket prices go down after that, so so much for that, but whatever.

On the other hand, I don't know anyone who flies without SOME kind of carry-on luggage, so that charge seems rather unfounded. Just build it into the ticket prices. Same with the soda and coffee. Not many people will notice tickets going up $10/stretch, but they ARE going to notice a bunch of BS fees tacked on afterward.


----------



## PRR 60 (May 3, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> I don't use the third-party sites anymore. Sometimes I'll use them to compare flight costs, but that's it. I realized that, 99% of the time, the price I paid through Expedia or Travelocity was the exact same price I would have paid through the airline's website. I use Google now, like Betty. So much easier.
> Charging for carry-on is ridiculous. I understood charging for checked bags since it was intended to relieve some of the cost for those who only travel with a carry-on and don't bring their entire wardrobe. I didn't see ticket prices go down after that, so so much for that, but whatever.
> 
> On the other hand, I don't know anyone who flies without SOME kind of carry-on luggage, so that charge seems rather unfounded. Just build it into the ticket prices. Same with the soda and coffee. Not many people will notice tickets going up $10/stretch, but they ARE going to notice a bunch of BS fees tacked on afterward.


The reason for the carry-on charge is to reduce the number of bags carried on in order to maintain short turnaround times. Planes on the ground don't make money, and long turn times keep planes on the ground. Much of the delay in boarding passengers comes from those who carry on too much stuff, then struggle to get it all in the overhead. For later boarding groups, often that means running the bags back up front to be gate checked. Those bags then have to be sent down to the ramp and loaded on the plane. All this results in slow boarding and long turn times. If an airline can limit the number of bags carried on, it can greatly reduce the time needed to board an aircraft. It does not take much time to simply walk on a plane and sit down.

For those airlines that do this, the prepaid charge for checking a bag is usually lower than the charge for carrying on, thus encouraging checking bags and discouraging carry on.


----------



## rrdude (May 3, 2013)

Charging for CARRY-ON is right on! Discourage those travelers who don't check anything, (me) from slowing down the whole boarding process. (me)

Offer one FREE checked bag, and charge a modest amount for carry-on, outside of either (1) a purse or laptop bag.

Do you realize how much easier and faster boarding would be? People (me) refuse to check now for a few reasons:


Fees
Takes to long to get bags
I don't use a humungus roller-board bag. Usually just a laptop, coat, and backpack-style suitcase.


----------



## fairviewroad (May 3, 2013)

railiner said:


> I think that Ryanair is the leader in that 'race'.......IIRC, they charge passenger's to use the restroom.........


Actually, they don't. The CEO floated that idea briefly but it never came to fruition. The CEO of Ryanair is known for making outlandish proposals to get publicity then quietly walking them back (or being told by regulators or aircraft manufacturers that they won't accommodate his ideas...such as Standing Room Only tickets and replacing most on-board lavs with more seats). The reason he does this is that the airline's actual policies seem quite reasonable in comparison to his headline-generating ideas.



SubwayNut said:


> I don't mind this fee since I always book directly through airline websites. It seems like a way to try and discourage passengers from booking through third-party websites and the hefty commissions third party websites charge the airline. I understand why Frontier is doing this.


I try to book directly through airlines' websites too (guess I got "trained" to do this back in the day that you would actually get bonus FF miles for booking directly on an airline website). But the fact is, there are some itineraries that are cheaper by booking multi-airline connections. So once in a while I'll book a flight on Expedia that includes Airline A to a connecting city, and Airline B for the next segment. Sometimes this saves significant cash versus booking it on a single airline (or sometimes booking on a single airline isn't possible if no single airline serves both my departing and arriving city). I'm not saying I'll avoid Frontier in this situation, but it would certainly make me think twice.



jis said:


> Frankly I find the belly-aching about airlines charging for coffee, tea or soft drinks in economy class somewhat amusing in a forum that sings the glory of Amtrak. Try getting a coffee, tea or soft drink in Amtrak Coach without paying for it. For that matter you can't get any for free even in Acela Business Class, which could hardly be characterized as an LCC.


 Excellent point! In fact, try getting a soft drink on Amtrak for "only" $1.99. The going rate seems to be $2.25.


----------



## saxman (May 3, 2013)

I took Cebu Pacific Air in the Philippines a few months ago and they charged for everything. Even a seat reservation fee. When booking they asked if I was going to check a bag, and I would need to pay for it now, to get the discount. Otherwise, pay a lot more at the ticket counter. Well they didn't say that their maximum weight for carry-ons was only 7 kg! Since my small back pack was about 10 kg, I'd have to either check it or go buy another bag and carry two items on the plane, (instead of one!) I just got on the plane anyway with my one overweight carryon. No one said a word. I did notice that I probably had the largest bag of anyone though, which was just a medium size hiking pack.


----------



## the_traveler (May 3, 2013)

AmtrakBlue said:


> I always book directly through the airlines. I might use the other sites to see which airlines have the best prices. Lately I've used Google Flights to check prices & availability.


When I don't fly Amtrak and have to fly "the other guys", I first compare the fares on sites like Expedia or Travelocity, but then I book directly with the airline's website. Sometimes you can even find lower fares, and you don't pay any other fees (like a booking fee). And if you collect frequent flyer miles, you may also get extra from booking on the airline's site! :excl:


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 3, 2013)

the_traveler said:


> When I don't fly Amtrak and have to fly "the other guys", I first compare the fares on sites like Expedia or Travelocity, but then I book directly with the airline's website. Sometimes you can even find lower fares, and you don't pay any other fees (like a booking fee). And if you collect frequent flyer miles, you may also get extra from booking on the airline's site! :excl:


1. Which aggregate sites charge the consumer for booking fees?

2. Which airlines give you extra miles for booking directly?


----------



## SarahZ (May 3, 2013)

PRR 60 said:


> Sorcha said:
> 
> 
> > I don't use the third-party sites anymore. Sometimes I'll use them to compare flight costs, but that's it. I realized that, 99% of the time, the price I paid through Expedia or Travelocity was the exact same price I would have paid through the airline's website. I use Google now, like Betty. So much easier.
> ...


Bleh. So we're all getting punished for the entitled morons who can't use a measuring tape to save their lives. Excellent.


----------



## Texan Eagle (May 3, 2013)

As a frequent flier member of Frontier, they sent me an email today describing the new changes that will "improve your travel experience". Now, I am not as smart as these airline folks, but I am wondering how will

1) asking me to pay for carry on bag that was free so far

2) Increasing the checked bag fee for airport check-in from $20 to $25

3) Charging $1.99 for drinks that were free so far

4) Reducing FF miles I can get if I book from a third party site from 50% to 25%

*IMPROVE* travel experience?

If an airline wants to impose these fees, fine, its their airline, their decision, but saying it is going to improve experience is utter BS. Frontier used to be one of my favorite airline, then they stopped giving chocolate chip cookies onboard that got me a bit disappointed, and now with all these _improvements_ Frontier has now dropped to the BOTTOM of my preferred choices. I will explicitly make it a point to avoid them now.

Look, I would have fallen for the argument that making everything paid add-on will result in lower fares for people who want to travel without those perks IF airline fares followed some known pattern where I can see a noticeable drop. Currently airlines set up their fares absolutely randomly, so HOW am I to be convinced that these changes resulted in a lower fare? The fare could be lower simply because they wildly swing the fares around on a daily, sometimes even hourly basis. Corporate BS.


----------



## Ryan (May 3, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> Bleh. So we're all getting punished for the entitled morons who can't use a measuring tape to save their lives. Excellent.


Not necessarily - if everyone brought on the allowed number of carryon items that were near (but within!) the limits, there's no way there would be enough room in the overhead for all of it.


----------



## jebr (May 4, 2013)

My biggest reason for booking direct tends to be that it saves another party being thrown into the equation.

Now if it was a live travel agent or someone that I can talk to in-person that I trust, then I could see the benefit. But when it's just another company, I'd rather work directly with the airline instead of getting the runaround from two different large companies.


----------



## leemell (May 4, 2013)

jebr said:


> My biggest reason for booking direct tends to be that it saves another party being thrown into the equation.
> Now if it was a live travel agent or someone that I can talk to in-person that I trust, then I could see the benefit. But when it's just another company, I'd rather work directly with the airline instead of getting the runaround from two different large companies.


I agree with this completely. Just try to cancel or change reservations, I have and got a three way runaround each time.


----------



## Anderson (May 5, 2013)

My issue with the buy-on-board plans tends to be the TSA fluids rule (and the fact that the airport isn't generally _that_ much better in terms of costs). Now, if the airlines were inclined to fight that rule, that would be one thing, but as long as it's there I don't like those plans.

I know this is a shift in my attitudes, but...it's one thing to run an OBS operation (whether the prices are reasonable or not) in an environment where passengers can bring their own stuff on and another to run it with a captive audience. Don't worry, I'm almost universal in these views and I resent stadiums and so forth for the same reasons.


----------



## Ispolkom (May 5, 2013)

I can't understand the consternation. What difference does it make if my ticket costs $200, and I can check a bag for free, vs. a ticket that costs $175, plus there's a $25 charge to check a bag? The charging for drinks seems even less important. I used to always pack a bottle of water in my carry on (which is always small enough to fit under the seat in front of me). Now I bring an empty plastic bottle through security and fill it up at a water fountain. I've always felt a chump buying water, anyway.

I guess what I don't understand is this: flying is cheap. I'm flying from St. Paul to Kansas City this month for $59. Next month I fly to San Diego for $110. At those prices, I really can't expect more than that the airlines (Southwest and American, respectively) get me to the correct airport safe and more or less on time. I don't blame the airlines for adding fees, especially since I've never found it particularly difficult to ascertain what fees are applicable and whether to pay or avoid them.

I'll admit it does seem strange that the airline business model seems to be approaching that of Blockbuster Video, which notoriously made money not on renting videos, but on late fees, but that's a problem for the airlines and their stockholders, not me.


----------



## jis (May 5, 2013)

I generally agree with Ispolkom.

For me whther I even use any food on flight dfepends on the length of the flight. Typically on a flight (or a train ride less than 3 hours, food is not that omportant. Something to drink is nice, whether I bring it on board myself or get one on board. Three to 8 or so hours, at least one meal is important. A single meal is something that I can buy at the airport and bring on board, and possibly even an additional snacking item. It is still useful to have food for purchase avallable on board in case I don;t have time to pick something up at the airport due to close connection or whatever.

Beyond 8 hours, it is absolutely essential that there be food service on the flight. I cannot imagine a 15 hour flight to India with no food service. That I think is unworkable.

Coming to think of it, my behavior appears to be similar on trains too. I seldom partake of food on an Acela run to Washington or Boston, another reason why I do not spring for First Class. It is an expensive additional facility that I seldom really need. The fact that I consume alcohol only very occasionally also plays into that. On a ride to Norfolk or Charlottsville from NJ I would have at least one meal and some snacks. Usually I buy and take along the meal from Subway or some such and use the on board cafe for the snacks and drinks. On LD trains rela food service is essential.

Having said that, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, if the upchatrge for a ticket that includesfood is reasonable, I'd take the package, since it is one hassle that then i don;t have to keep track of separately. I'd do this even on a less than three hour flight today. I probably would not have done so in my grad student days of poverty, when I even rode Amtrak only when I could get someone else to pay for it. Fortunately since in the latter half of my thesis work, my adviser had moved to Oregon and I was in New York, I got many trips on Amtrak (Boradway Limited, Empire Builder, North Coast Hiawatha, Pioneer/San Francisco Zephyr) paid for out of my reserach grant, and that too in Slumbercoach and Roomette! back then Amtrak Sleeper was surprisingly price competitive with airline fares!


----------



## AmtrakBlue (May 5, 2013)

My question is - is the cost of the soda for the whole can or just for the small cup of soda they usually give you? I'd prefer the smaller can at a lower cost because I generally don't want a 16 oz soda on the plane.


----------



## Bob Dylan (May 5, 2013)

As usual jis (and Ispoken also) has logical and well thought out Posts, but I'm wondering why Airlines such as Southwest can make a Profit without Nickel and Dimeing their Passengers?!! Lots of Airline Infrequent /Non-Business Flyers that have to Pay their Own Fares can't afford the High Dollar Full Fares and thus look for the Cheapest Fare they can find! Back in the Day when my Employer picked up the Tabs for Travel I too didn't care what it Cost, but now as a Retired Person who still loves to Travel (Amtrak is my Magic Carpet of Choice) Price is THE Major Factor and being Nickeled and Dimed by Anyone (Most people hate the way Banks and Car Dealers do this!)is Not an Insignificant Matter :angry: ! Hopefully Amtrak's Management wont have meetings @ 60 Mass and come up with Copy Cat Ideas to Raise Revenue!


----------



## jebr (May 5, 2013)

jimhudson said:


> As usual jis (and Ispoken also) has logical and well thought out Posts, but I'm wondering why Airlines such as Southwest can make a Profit without Nickel and Dimeing their Passengers?!! Lots of Airline Infrequent /Non-Business Flyers that have to Pay their Own Fares can't afford the High Dollar Full Fares and thus look for the Cheapest Fare they can find! Back in the Day when my Employer picked up the Tabs for Travel I too didn't care what it Cost, but now as a Retired Person who still loves to Travel (Amtrak is my Magic Carpet of Choice) Price is THE Major Factor and being Nickeled and Dimed by Anyone (Most people hate the way Banks and Car Dealers do this!)is Not an Insignificant Matter :angry: ! Hopefully Amtrak's Management wont have meetings @ 60 Mass and come up with Copy Cat Ideas to Raise Revenue!


Because most airlines are focused on attracting those business travelers and building loyalty. Southwest builds loyalty from non-frequent "leisure" travelers. Business travelers get a lot of additional perks that Southwest just can't offer (first class, meals, etc.)

Southwest also only goes to major markets and is almost entirely domestic. They may be trying to make up for not having as extensive of a network. Larger airlines are usually the only ones in mid-sized airports (for example, Sioux Falls (FSD)) and the smallest airports often only have one airline, usually a major airline's regional service. If everyone going to an airport charges for checked bags, you aren't at a weaker position for doing the same.


----------



## Texan Eagle (May 5, 2013)

Ispolkom said:


> I can't understand the consternation. What difference does it make if my ticket costs $200, and I can check a bag for free, vs. a ticket that costs $175, plus there's a $25 charge to check a bag?


As I mentioned in my earlier reply, I would not mind at all if airlines want to go a-la-carte and promise lower base fare *if* airlines had a well-defined fare structure, like for example Amtrak has five buckets. But it is not that way. If you check airfares from city A to B over ten consecutive days of travel, you might find the same flight is being sold for, say, $130, $156, $199, $187, $154 and this keeps varying multiple times a day sometimes. In this scenario, *how* am I to believe that making the checked bag a separate entity has actually reduced my base fare? This is precisely why I am against the a-la-carte model. Either go like the good old days where fares were hard-coded (printed out on brochures) so you know going from A to B is going to cost $X any day, then you show me you reduced it to $(X-25) and $25 bag fee and I will be very happy with the change, but as long as airfares remain a mysterious rapidly changing lottery, I don't believe any airline is *lowering* *the base fare* because there is *NO* base fare as such, its a luck of draw what you pay.


----------



## jis (May 5, 2013)

At the end of the day all that really matters is when one goes to make a reservation and buy a ticket one gets a full rundown of the cost involved, and what one gets for that price. Beyond that it is upto the one buying the ticket to decide which one of the various offers works the best for them at that point.

As for whether the airline is providing a lower base fare or not etc. etc. is between the airline and its business model. If they can sustain a fare level without losing customers, that is the way these things are supposed to work.

People just like to moan way more than they actually hate something enough to actually walk away. Everyone complains about RyanAir, and yet it is one of the most profitable airlines in Europe. Clearly it is not holding that position by losing a huge number of customers. Same is true for airlines like Spirit and Frontier. IndiGo in India has unpackaged fare structure, and it has just become the biggest airline in India, while others are struggling. All this must say something about the psychology of the traveling public, and the disconnect that exists between what people say they want and what they seem to actually want.

I know some feel jilted when their favorite ariline takes a step that they dislike. But face it, the relationship between a person and their favorite ariline is not, or at least should not be like a love affair.

So all that i can say is, keep moaning. but as long as you eventually go back and use the services offered with the modified fare structures, that is what you will get and live with.


----------



## Ispolkom (May 5, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> Ispolkom said:
> 
> 
> > I can't understand the consternation. What difference does it make if my ticket costs $200, and I can check a bag for free, vs. a ticket that costs $175, plus there's a $25 charge to check a bag?
> ...


I'm not sure how dynamic pricing enters into it. I remember the supposed "good old days," and how much plane tickets cost before deregulation. What I meant is that I can easily compare the cost of a Delta flight, which would require me to pay $25 (I think) to check a bag with the cost of an American flight on which I would be able to check a bag for free (at least until I cancel the credit card). Remember elementary economics: prices aren't determined by costs. They are determined by the market. That's why it costs $59 to fly to Kansas City from here, and $376 to fly to Minot, a similar distance.



jis said:


> I know some feel jilted when their favorite airline takes a step that they dislike. But face it, the relationship between a person and their favorite ariline is not, or at least should not be like a love affair.


I've never understood the concept of loyalty to a company. I'm as constant as a weather vane. If American Airlines offers me a good fare, I'm just as happy to give them my business as Southwest, or United. I've considered Frontier, but have always found an equal or better price to cities they serve on an airline whose miles I collect. It isn't as though anybody's seats are wider, or drinks are stronger.

ETA: Well, if Southwest still serves 101 proof Wild Turkey, the drinks *are* stronger on that airline.


----------



## chakk (May 5, 2013)

AmtrakBlue said:


> I always book directly through the airlines. I might use the other sites to see which airlines have the best prices. Lately I've used Google Flights to check prices & availability.


I've been using kayak.com for several years to price shop airline tickets.


----------



## chakk (May 5, 2013)

Ispolkom said:


> Texan Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > Ispolkom said:
> ...


Loyalty will get you more legroom in coach and free baggage checking on several of the legacy airlines, if you have flown them enough in the past or have purchased your ticket with their sponsored credit card.


----------



## JayPea (May 5, 2013)

Frontier's decision to charge $100 for carry -ons doesn't affect me as I always check my luggage and I always deal with airlines directly. I do have a backpack that fits under the seats. Like Devil's Advocate, I find their prices for the places I want to fly to very competitive. As you might imagine it's not exactly easy to fly in and out of an out of the way place like Spokane and Frontier fits the bill fine. As for charging for soda, that's all the less chance I will have to crawl over two people to use the bathroom as I prefer a window seat.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (May 5, 2013)

JayPea said:


> Frontier's decision to charge $100 for carry -ons doesn't affect me as I always check my luggage and I always deal with airlines directly. I do have a backpack that fits under the seats. Like Devil's Advocate, I find their prices for the places I want to fly to very competitive. As you might imagine it's not exactly easy to fly in and out of an out of the way place like Spokane and Frontier fits the bill fine. As for charging for soda, that's all the less chance I will have to crawl over two people to use the bathroom as I prefer a window seat.


Yeah, I left out that part (the bathroom) on purpose when I said I would prefer a smaller can of soda especially since I prefer the window seat too.


----------



## The Journalist (May 10, 2013)

Wait, charing for _carry-ons? _Meaning they want you to check them instead? That's just bizarre. I don't think I or anyone I've flown with has checked a bag on a plane more than once in the last decade. And it's not because of fees; 90% of my flights are on Southwest.


----------



## Shortline (May 13, 2013)

I'm a fan. The carry on's have gotten ridiculous. The more weight, the more cost. Why shouldn't the carrier recoup some of that. I'm actually somewhat of a fan of frontier too. I usually fly delta but fly enough on frontier that I'm a Summit member on them as we'll, I prefer their A-319/320's to other carriers Boeing/DC/MD fleets, as they are an inch wider. At seat entertainment at every seat is also a bonus.


----------



## SarahZ (May 13, 2013)

Shortline said:


> I'm a fan. *The carry on's have gotten ridiculous. *The more weight, the more cost. Why shouldn't the carrier recoup some of that. I'm actually somewhat of a fan of frontier too. I usually fly delta but fly enough on frontier that I'm a Summit member on them as we'll, I prefer their A-319/320's to other carriers Boeing/DC/MD fleets, as they are an inch wider. At seat entertainment at every seat is also a bonus.


This is why I think they should enforce the carry-on rules. Have everyone stick their carry-on in that metal thingie near the gate to make sure it fits and maybe turn the bottom of it into a scale. If it doesn't fit, it gets gate-checked. They're punishing everyone who is smart enough to measure their bag once packed; although, I'll argue that weighing it can be tricky. I put mine on my bathroom scale, but not everyone owns one.

I just don't see the point to charging for carry-on AND checked baggage. I don't know very many people who fly without some type of bag, even if it's just a backpack.


----------



## Ispolkom (May 13, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> I just don't see the point to charging for carry-on AND checked baggage. I don't know very many people who fly without some type of bag, even if it's just a backpack.


I think that the point is revenue. In any case, the charge is for bags that go into the overhead bin. If you put it under the seat in front of you, it's still free.


----------



## Anderson (May 13, 2013)

What even fits under the seat anymore? No, really...legroom shrinkage over the years has cut the effective space down there.

As to the revenue aspect: Look, I get the airlines wanting to raise more money (not to mention ducking fare-related taxes by moving revenue from the ticket sale price to "fees"), but I do have to wonder how many people get stuck paying one or the other. At some point (i.e. if 75% of people are paying one or the other), they ought to just take the lower of the two, slap it onto the fare, and then charge the balance on the higher as a fee if it is used.

And as to checked vs. carry-on baggage: If you carry it on, the carrier can't lose it (or smash it up). We've all heard enough horror stories about lost luggage (even if we haven't experienced them firsthand). Likewise, with carry-ons there's no waiting at the luggage belt for your bags (which can take a while to get out, especially at a busy airport).


----------



## SarahZ (May 13, 2013)

Exactly, Anderson, which is why I never check my bag.

Good to know it's still free if you stick it under the seat. Personally, I don't mind since I'm not that tall, but I know that's hard for other people.


----------



## JayPea (May 13, 2013)

I. I have a small backpack that can fit under the seat in front of me as well as my camera bag. True, if I have a box of crackers in the backpack it usually gets reduced to a boxful of crumbs, but otherwise it works fine. I also have enough sense to carry my medicines, toiletries, and a change of underwear in the backpack too. I can actually fit quite a bit into the backpack and still fit it under the seat.


----------



## Shortline (May 13, 2013)

I fly 3-5 round trips a month. I check bags every time. Only carry my laptop and iPads. Not once, in the last 5 years, has a bag not shown up. I think the last time I lost a bag was 1998 coming off an international flight from Frankfurt. But I have a HUGE problem, with boarding with my one small carry on and having to put it under my seat because all the leisure travelers have 2 full carry ins apiece, plus shopping bags, burgers and purses. I don't fly coach often except to small airports that only have 50 seat regional jets, which helps, but really-let the luggage go below. It crowds the plane and the airports. Why lug it around yourself? Let them deal with it so you don't have to mess with it between flights, or waiting to pick it up multiple times if it gets gate checked.


----------



## SarahZ (May 13, 2013)

And that's the problem. If people were forced to abide by the rules, we wouldn't have this issue. We're flying on Virgin, and it specifies one carry-on per passenger plus one personal item, such as a laptop bag OR purse, not both.

So, I'm carrying my carry-on plus my purse, and my boyfriend will have his small duffel bag and the laptop bag.

Of course, then we watch people walk on with all kinds of crap, and it makes me wonder why nobody at the gate speaks up. It's unreal.


----------



## Ispolkom (May 13, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> And that's the problem. If people were forced to abide by the rules, we wouldn't have this issue. We're flying on Virgin, and it specifies one carry-on per passenger plus one personal item, such as a laptop bag OR purse, not both.
> So, I'm carrying my carry-on plus my purse, and my boyfriend will have his small duffel bag and the laptop bag.
> 
> Of course, then we watch people walk on with all kinds of crap, and it makes me wonder why nobody at the gate speaks up. It's unreal.


That's why I especially like the bit about charging $100 for passengers who show up at the gate without prepaying for their steamer trunks.



Shortline said:


> I fly 3-5 round trips a month. I check bags every time. Only carry my laptop and iPads. Not once, in the last 5 years, has a bag not shown up. I think the last time I lost a bag was 1998 coming off an international flight from Frankfurt. But I have a HUGE problem, with boarding with my one small carry on and having to put it under my seat because all the leisure travelers have 2 full carry ins apiece, plus shopping bags, burgers and purses. I don't fly coach often except to small airports that only have 50 seat regional jets, which helps, but really-let the luggage go below. It crowds the plane and the airports. Why lug it around yourself? Let them deal with it so you don't have to mess with it between flights, or waiting to pick it up multiple times if it gets gate checked.


I have to agree with you completely. I do mostly fly coach, for my sins, and have the exact same attitude: I'll put my one bag up top, thank you very much, but as for the rest of it, I'm quite happy to not drag my checked suitcase around with me. The only time in this century I had a bag go astray was really my fault. There was a mechanical problem with a connection at JFK (Lord I hate that airport), and I ended up on a different airline flying out of a different terminal, and it took my bag a day or two to find me. The funny thing was that the lost luggage was a carry-on bag that was my sole luggage for a two-week trip in Italy, including jacket, tie, and dress shoes for La Scala. I just didn't want to bother with it on the way home.

In the end, though, Frontier's strategy is simple and intelligent. They, like other airlines, started charging for luggage to offset low ticket prices, to decrease their baggage handling costs, and perhaps to free up space for valuable air cargo. Now the passengers are carrying so much on that it delays boarding, especially with gate checking, so they start charging for carry-ons as well. That should solve the carry-on problem, perhaps by convincing some to pack more easily. In any case with money involved, I'll bet that Frontier gate agents are much more aggressive about bagging and tagging the passengers who have big carry-ons.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 14, 2013)

These new carry-on luggage charges apply to people who book through third party booking agents. Those who book directly are not paying for carry-on luggage.


----------



## SarahZ (May 14, 2013)

Devil's Advocate said:


> These new carry-on luggage charges apply to people who book through third party booking agents. Those who book directly are not paying for carry-on luggage.


I keep forgetting that. It's purely about revenue then. Disgusting.


----------



## Shortline (May 14, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> Devil's Advocate said:
> 
> 
> > These new carry-on luggage charges apply to people who book through third party booking agents. Those who book directly are not paying for carry-on luggage.
> ...


I think it makes sense-it's about keeping revenue in house. This encourages booking through the airline website rather than a 3rd party site that then charges the airline a fee to book the flight, that would have been booked for the same price at fly frontier.com which, makes sense to me. It appears to be more about revenue management than gouging. In any event, if it keeps more luggage out of the cabin, Im a fan.


----------



## SarahZ (May 14, 2013)

I didn't realize the airlines were charged a fee. I thought the third-parties existed to compare fares all at once and got their money from advertising and such.

That's why I always book through the airline's site; I never found a rate on a third-party site that was lower than the published fare. Plus, I figured if I booked through the airline's site, it made it easier to find my reservation and deal with customer service. Once you go through third-party, you sometimes end up tangled in customer service hell. 

Anyway, after that clarification, I understand it better. It's not so much gouging as making sure people pay the same fare by balancing the costs out. Makes sense.


----------

