WestJet to charge some travellers for first checked bag

[ExiledFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

As a shareholder of anything, you should want these 2 things to be positively connected.

Nonsense. Westjet shares are up 5+% today because of this increase. Air Canada shares have also increased in anticipation of a future baggage fee.

The airline business is a duopoly in Canada. It's not like there are other options.

[Acey]

Based on the social media reaction today, I can safely say there's a big disconnect between theory and reality.

In theory, the cabin environment is going to suck because people will be reluctant to check bags. In reality, people are already reluctant to check bags and if you've flown transborder on a -700 you know the bins are full about 75% of the way through boarding so you're laughing at the people thinking this is what will fill the bins up.

In theory, WestJet is Satan for doing this and almighty Air Canada is the saviour. In reality, AC already tried this and when WS didn't follow they bailed, and AC current charges for a bag transborder anyway. Domestic fees for bags on AC are coming. I guarantee it.

In theory, WestJet has stopped doing what made them a low cost airline and got greedy, now their costs are worse than Air Canada. In reality, the environment does not exist in Canada for a low cost airline to survive.

Best of all, in theory, if the number of people who today have promised to boycott WS because of these fees actually did it, the airline would go out of business. In reality, WS' loads will be unchanged.

Theory versus reality.

[a750]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

They don't care that the overhead bins get crowded. In fact, that's the point. The average passenger packs less to fit within smaller carryon baggage requirements, they get more luggage in the overhead bins, and even having to gate check some of them, there is more room in the belly for cargo, thus more revenue per flight.

It sucks, and people saying "Just charge $20 more on every flight" I'm pretty sure almost every single one of us would pick Air Canada over West Jet if we saw the same flight for $20 less... haha.

this is the most important point in the entire thread, Canadian travelers are as price sensitive as they come, you could change that to $1 and it would still hold true

[Acey]

Originally Posted by a750

this is the most important point in the entire thread, Canadian travelers are as price sensitive as they come, you could change that to $1 and it would still hold true

Does this apply to 1 cent, too?

Calgary - Los Angeles roundtrip cheapest fares for mid-October

Air Canada - $435.40 (baggage fee $25)
WestJet - $435.39 (baggage fee $25)

It's almost as if WestJet is doing this to make up for lost revenue transborder vs AC.

[Cuz]

Originally Posted by ExiledFlamesFan

As a WJ shareholder I approve this. As a WJ passenger, this is awful.

The carry on situation is already bad as it is. Nobody follow the rules, people are carrying on huge items, stowing everything overhead and not using under the seat space. The overhead bins are already full on the flights I've been on lately.

For those who have flown budget European/American airlines that charge for all checked bags, how much worse does this make the carry on aspect?

The wife and I flew down to Orlando last November on United, who charge for every checked bag, and the situation was pretty much what you described above. Everyone was using bags that would never fit into the metal contraptions for the "designated size for carry-on luggage" so they didn't have to check a bag. Boarding and unboarding took forever because of this and the wife and I wondered why they do not enforce the carry-on rules.

Personally, I usually stow my carry on under the seat in front of me (a back-pack with laptop) which fits just fine for me and I am 6'2.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Cuz

Personally, I usually stow my carry on under the seat in front of me (a back-pack with laptop) which fits just fine for me and I am 6'2.

Alright we get your point and we can do without the blatant lies.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Cuz

The wife and I flew down to Orlando last November on United, who charge for every checked bag, and the situation was pretty much what you described above. Everyone was using bags that would never fit into the metal contraptions for the "designated size for carry-on luggage" so they didn't have to check a bag. Boarding and unboarding took forever because of this and the wife and I wondered why they do not enforce the carry-on rules.

Personally, I usually stow my carry on under the seat in front of me (a back-pack with laptop) which fits just fine for me and I am 6'2.

You must be a different 6'2 than me.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Acey

Based on the social media reaction today, I can safely say there's a big disconnect between theory and reality.

In theory, the cabin environment is going to suck because people will be reluctant to check bags. In reality, people are already reluctant to check bags and if you've flown transborder on a -700 you know the bins are full about 75% of the way through boarding so you're laughing at the people thinking this is what will fill the bins up.

In theory, WestJet is Satan for doing this and almighty Air Canada is the saviour. In reality, AC already tried this and when WS didn't follow they bailed, and AC current charges for a bag transborder anyway. Domestic fees for bags on AC are coming. I guarantee it.

In theory, WestJet has stopped doing what made them a low cost airline and got greedy, now their costs are worse than Air Canada. In reality, the environment does not exist in Canada for a low cost airline to survive.

Best of all, in theory, if the number of people who today have promised to boycott WS because of these fees actually did it, the airline would go out of business. In reality, WS' loads will be unchanged.

Theory versus reality.

Could you elaborate on this? I am failing to understand how WJ will fail if it doesn't follow suit with everything that AC does. How does AC's greed necessitate the same in turn from WJ? Would customers suddenly flock to AC because WJs lower fares and better services scares them? If WJ stayed its own course, what would really happen?

I used to love WJ, but there is absolutely nothing that differentiates it from AC now.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I used to love WJ, but there is absolutely nothing that differentiates it from AC now.

Live TV versus Video on Demand with recent movies?

[Badgers Nose]

AC is much better when you factor status, which almost any frequent business traveller should be able to attain.

Now I spend the time I save in security lines by getting a nexus card downing free beers in the maple leaf lounge.

Whereas years of flying wj got me nothing. Rates are the same.

[puffnstuff]

I would rather they charge for checked bags by weight, because really thats what matters and what they need to know. Set some parameters for cost, if your checked bag weighs less you dont pay. The more it weighs, the more you pay.
Reduce and then enforce the carry on size limit...or maybe charge for carryons instead of checked bags.
This would work best for the way I travel. I do short business day trips and just have a small lap top bag I carry on. Vacations, I pack light.

[Tinordi]

I'm in support of this, those who don't check bags cross subsidize the passengers who do. You have no entitlement to get stuff for free, those bags cost the airline money, which should move to cheaper tickets for people who don't fly with luggage. Basically makes the pricing system more efficient.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I'm in support of this, those who don't check bags cross subsidize the passengers who do. You have no entitlement to get stuff for free, those bags cost the airline money, which should move to cheaper tickets for people who don't fly with luggage. Basically makes the pricing system more efficient.

You might want to tell the airlines to build bigger overhead bins to handle the increased carry on bags. The offset of cheaper flights is the longer offloads as everyone stands up and waits longer and longer as more passengers unload thier bags from the overhead bins. Not exactly efficient in my mind.

They might also want to start enforcing the rules when it comes to sizes of carry on bags. They do a crap job of that right now.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I used to love WJ, but there is absolutely nothing that differentiates it from AC now.

That is correct.

What I meant was that prior to this announcement, some people were somewhat upset with WestJet for "getting away from their roots" of 1996 with just a couple of old birds swinging between Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton and Kelowna. It was supposed to be the Canadian version of Southwest, so what happened? The fact that the Canadian tax/airline structure doesn't really allow a low cost model to thrive as it does in the US has been interpreted by some as greed. WJ's costs are similar to AC now and as I showed above they match fares.

I have no reason to love any company unless I work for them or have stock in them but aside from the esponiage lawsuit you've got to applaud WestJet, to some extent, for the major decisions they've made. To achieve the success they have in Canada is impossible without kicking some people to the curb along the way.

[Dion]

That's Ridiculous! Airline Passengers Go to War Over Bin Space

Flight attendants say the overhead bin space is the number-one reason passengers fight with each other and with crewmembers. The conflict has only escalated since many major airlines, including AirTran, began charging for the first checked bag. While this made the airline industry profitable again, it only ratcheted up tensions on the plane.

"Many more people are bringing a carry-on that's generally larger than before," says Jon Kapecki, a frequent flier and technology consultant in Rochester, NY. "The result is that there is often insufficient room in the overhead bins."

What's the fix?

We could turn back the clock on the airline baggage fees. Already, one travel industry group is urging airlines to quote a fare that includes one checked bag (opens as PDF) and the Senate is considering a bill that would require airlines to let air travelers check a bag "for free." But critics fear that could plunge the industry into bankruptcy.

We could go the other way. That's right, we could start charging airline passengers for their carry-ons. Ridiculous? Sure, but Spirit Airlines did it in 2010 and is earning $50 million a year from the fee. About 20% of its customers pay to bring their bag into the main cabin, according to a recent study (opens as PDF). The rest travel light -- and doesn't that solve the problem in a kind of twisted way?

We could let the market solve the problem. That's the solution Masters will get the next time he flies on AirTran. The airline has been acquired by Southwest Airlines (www.southwest.com), which famously has a "bags fly free" policy. (In other words, it includes the price of checking luggage into its fares.) Passengers basically said they preferred that approach to the bags-don't-fly-free policy of the major airlines and they voted with their wallets.

"In effect," he adds, "they're making passengers pay for a problem the airlines created."

Will any of these steps put an end to the overhead bin wars? Probably not.

But it's worth a try.

http://www.frommers.com/deals/airfar....cLHZnSLD.dpbs

[Acey]

Again... what Southwest and Spirit do are mostly irrelevant because in Canada we have two airlines carrying 90% of fliers, Toronto has the highest landing fees of any airport on the planet, and you pay exorbitant ATSC, AIF, Nav Canada, etc. fees on top of the base fare.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Dion

You might want to tell the airlines to build bigger overhead bins to handle the increased carry on bags. The offset of cheaper flights is the longer offloads as everyone stands up and waits longer and longer as more passengers unload thier bags from the overhead bins. Not exactly efficient in my mind.

They might also want to start enforcing the rules when it comes to sizes of carry on bags. They do a crap job of that right now.

All good points which are beside the point I'm making.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I'm in support of this, those who don't check bags cross subsidize the passengers who do. You have no entitlement to get stuff for free, those bags cost the airline money, which should move to cheaper tickets for people who don't fly with luggage. Basically makes the pricing system more efficient.

Everyone travels with some baggage. By your theory people who don't use the overhead bins subsidize those that do. Want a truly fair method, charge based on weight of the passenger and their luggage. My checked bag and me would barely tip 225. If we're so concerned with subsidizing everyone else why should I pay the same as someone who's 300 plus baggage? Also humorous that one of the more socialist posters is worried about people subsidizing others.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Everyone travels with some baggage. By your theory people who don't use the overhead bins subsidize those that do. Want a truly fair method, charge based on weight of the passenger and their luggage. My checked bag and me would barely tip 225. If we're so concerned with subsidizing everyone else why should I pay the same as someone who's 300 plus baggage? Also humorous that one of the more socialist posters is worried about people subsidizing others.

Laugh. "Socialist" What a baseless, stupid comment of which anyone who wasn't completely ignorant about "socialism" would have a very hard time justifying based on my post history. Or are "socialists" just people you disagree with?

But anyway, we agree, I would support pricing all bags, potentially based on weight. Clearly I wouldn't support pricing on passenger weight but bags for sure. Or some minimum amount like say 8 Kg and then price after that. That would be an optimal pricing scheme.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Laugh. "Socialist" What a baseless, stupid comment of which anyone who wasn't completely ignorant about "socialism" would have a very hard time justifying based on my post history. Or are "socialists" just people you disagree with?

But anyway, we agree, I would support pricing all bags, potentially based on weight. Clearly I wouldn't support pricing on passenger weight but bags for sure. Or some minimum amount like say 8 Kg and then price after that. That would be an optimal pricing scheme.

Sorry, apparently thats a slur now. Also I don't keep tabs on your posts to see if they are the dictionary definition of socialism.