Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Ticket Price Comparison By Year  
User currently offlineDuckRedbeard From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 49 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5971 times:

One of my neigbors (who rarely flies) always brings up bag fees when we are together. He makes comments about how airlines are just adding fees to get rich, to screw the passengers. Does anyone have any link to information to show what airline ticket prices were like over the last 10 or 20 years, to be compared to other cost of living items? I'd like to see our industry's costs and compare them to his (children's clothing retail). I wonder how much a size 2T dress costs 10 years ago. Are they now hitting us with hidden fees for buttons and ribbons? I'm outraged.

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBirdwatching From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 3822 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5935 times:

Well, a couple of years ago I took a trip to Svalbard with a couple of other A.netters which involved changing planes at Tromso.

There was a collection of Scandinavian aviation memorabilia displayed in the terminal, which included a huge poster of a time table from the 30s.

We came to the conclusion that ticket prices back then were pretty much identical to today.

Soren   



All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
User currently offlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1961 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5909 times:

I'm sure someone will come up with data to show that prices are similar (or lower in adjusted terms), but I think maybe there are fewer good deals. Or something.

For example, in 2000 I flew SFO - MUC round trip departing in June, returning in July for less than $400. Total cost. After tax. That was just a randomly purchased ticket on dates that I needed from expedia. That would cost double now without a doubt.


User currently offlineAWACSooner From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1914 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5845 times:

Shhh...you might wake up the folks on here who think that flying today is still cheaper than 10-15 years ago even WITH all the nickel and dime fees.

User currently offlinemtnwest1979 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 2458 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5781 times:

I noticed that UA in 1933 had a Boise-Boston fare of around $200 ow. I bet today one can find a fare close to that looking around.
Nothing like an almost trans con with very multi-stop on a Boeing 247.  



"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
User currently offlinejerseyguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1997 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5762 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hmm...Southwest seems to be doing ok without bag fees (for first 2) and change fees. Bag fees were supposed to be due to the high fuel costs and be temporary. But with like all fees/taxes once people pay them they stay around.


Frontier Early Returns Ascent Status| Webmaster of an unoffical TTN page see profile for details
User currently offlineAWACSooner From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1914 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 5710 times:

Quoting jerseyguy (Reply 5):
Hmm...Southwest seems to be doing ok without bag fees (for first 2) and change fees. Bag fees were supposed to be due to the high fuel costs and be temporary. But with like all fees/taxes once people pay them they stay around.

But...but...but...WN doesn't have to charge for baggage because they have fuel hedges which means they don't have to pay for fuel....it's totally UNFAIR! WN aren't playing by the rules!  


User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 7, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5603 times:

Well, check these numbers out...
ALL ARE PLUS US GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION TAXES...NO OTHERS APPLIED

Chicago-DEN OW jet economy 44.00 UA sched 4-64
Chicago-CLE OW jet F 26.20 "
LAX-SFO OW jet y 23.70 "
LAX-HNL OW jet y 133.00 "
LAX-HNL OW jet F 178.00 "

BOS-MSY OW jet Y 75.45 EA 1-64
ATL-PHL OW jet y 37.97 "
YIP(detr)-MIA OW jet F 94.65 "

GRR-CLE OW Y 22.00 North Central 2-68
MKE-MSN OW Y 9.00 "
MSP-DLH OW Y 13.00 "
MSP-OMA OW Y 26.00 "

BDL-PHX OW Y 186.00 TWA June 1977
IND-DEN OW Y 100.00 "
LAS-NYC OW Y 188.00 "
LAS-NYC OW F 286.00 "
STL-MCI OW F 57.00 "
OKC-SFO OW Y 128.00 "
TPA-STL OW Y 92.00 "
I have a variety pack of scheds and prices ....no prices after 1980..sorry due to de-regulation taking hold. Prices by then were all over the board. The above was pretty much with all carriers.
There are no misprints. These were the fares for said time periods.

safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlinecrosswinds21 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 698 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5597 times:

Quoting jerseyguy (Reply 5):
Hmm...Southwest seems to be doing ok without bag fees (for first 2) and change fees. Bag fees were supposed to be due to the high fuel costs and be temporary. But with like all fees/taxes once people pay them they stay around.

This might not be the popular opinion, but checked bags on Southwest are not free. They are simply included in the price of the ticket. Do you really think that it costs them nothing to provide this service? Of course not. Just like any company, they have to cover those costs. In the case of Southwest, they do it by factoring it into the price of the ticket. In the case of most other airlines, they charge for it separately.


User currently offlinevv701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7532 posts, RR: 17
Reply 9, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days ago) and read 5513 times:

My first visit to the West Coast of the USA was in March 1981. I flew LHR-LAX by TW and returned by BA. The fare was £284. There were no taxes at that time Accordoing to this site:

http://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/result.php

£284 is equivalent to £811 in 2009 £s.

If I book the same trip today with BA out on 13 October and home on 20 October - dates selected at random - the lowest all-inclusive fare quoted was £519. This includes £55 government tax reducing the all-inclusive charge made by BA to £464.

So in absolute terms the price has increased by 63 per cent from £284 to £464. In real terms it has declined from something more (to allow for inflation since 2009) than £811 to £464. This will be a reduction of 43 per cent as at last years prices or about 46 per cent at current prices.


User currently offlinejerseyguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1997 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5428 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

[quote=crosswinds21,reply=8]In the case of Southwest, they do it by factoring it into the price of the ticket.{/quote]

Multiple Dates in Feb
PHL-MCO $149 WN $149 FL $178 DL

BTW FL does charge for baggage.

Plus what about the change fees..Southwest must factor them into the price of the ticket.. Wait hold on but again WN and FL are the same and FL charges change fees. This can't be. Must be something wrong with sidestep/kayak  

Multiple Dates in Feb
PHL-LAS $369 WN $339 F9 (only one thats cheaper) $369 US $389 YX, $369 DL, $401 AA

[Edited 2010-09-21 18:21:09]


Frontier Early Returns Ascent Status| Webmaster of an unoffical TTN page see profile for details
User currently offlineFutureUScapt From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 765 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5394 times:

Here's a good link:

http://www.centreforaviation.com/new...-lost-decade-for-us-airlines/page1

"If you compared the fares from 1980, today’s fares are about 55% below where they were in 1980 in real terms."

Note: The numbers quoted do NOT include items such as baggage fees, but you this article shows quite clearly why airlines are adding these fees - and it isn't because they are being greedy.


User currently offlinevv701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7532 posts, RR: 17
Reply 12, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5194 times:

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 11):
"If you compared the fares from 1980, today’s fares are about 55% below where they were in 1980 in real terms."

Note: The numbers quoted do NOT include items such as baggage fees, but you this article shows quite clearly why airlines are adding these fees - and it isn't because they are being greedy.

This is pretty close to my own experience:

Quoting vv701 (Reply 9):
This will be a reduction of 43 per cent as at last years prices or about 46 per cent at current prices.

recognising that the fares I quoted are all inclusive with the only possible extra charge being for EXCESS bagage that applied back in the early 1980s just as it does today. Of course over the period since then these reductions in real fare prices are in the face of significant REAL TERMS increases in both wages and the cost of fuel.


User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5236 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4863 times:

Here's something to think about.

I flew ORD-ATL-ORD in April of 1994 on AA for roughly $225, the cheapest leisure fare. And that was after TWA started a fare sale while trying to establish ATL as a focus city.

In May of 1995, the cheapest leisure fare was $118 on AA. At that time, both ValuJet and PrivateJet were flying ATL-MDW. So AA and UA were matching. For whatever reason, DL was always more expensive on ORD-ATL.

The $118 leisure fare stuck around until a few months after 9/11.

Now, you have to figure that between 1994 and 2001, costs at AA, UA, and DL increased. Gas in Chicago was as low as $.89 in 1998, but got close to $2 a gallon in mid 2000. Even ValuJet/Air Tran had to have some increase in costs, since people hired in the mid 90s would have seen pay raises by 2001.


User currently offlineairtrainer From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 1558 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4626 times:

I paid around 380€ (converted from Francs) to fly CDG-MUC-EWR on LH ten years ago. It was in august and I had booked the flights two weeks before. For sure it's possible to fly for the same price now, but I don't think it would be that cheap with the same restrictions...


Life is short : eat dessert first !
User currently offlinejunction From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4439 times:

The extra bag fees are to generate more revenue. Everyone knows that, and no one ever said it was temporary. It's not making anyone rich, but WN is missing out on a lot of extra revenue by not doing it.

User currently offlineN92R03 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 344 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4204 times:

In the mid 90's I would pay $300-$350 to fly R/T between SAN and TPA. Just checked and could do the same for $277 on WN.

Back in the 90's, a gallon of gas was under $2.00, even in Califonia...


User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9367 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4139 times:

Quoting junction (Reply 15):
The extra bag fees are to generate more revenue. Everyone knows that, and no one ever said it was temporary. It's not making anyone rich, but WN is missing out on a lot of extra revenue by not doing it.

yes but that's the catch, Southwest *does* do it. it's just not advertised.

despite their "bags fly free" campaign, 2 trips to Chicago this past summer cost me less to fly United, even with paying for a checked bag. Southwest would have been another $80 and even on the day of departure, Southwest still cost more than a walk up ticket on United. yet, i bet those Southwest planes still went out with a full load to Chicago thanks to people who just clicked on Southwest.com, bought their ticket, and didn't bother to look at the other airlines because on Southwest, "bags fly free."



if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9367 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4125 times:

the famous Southwest Airlines ad campaign back in the 1990's on Chicago radio ... Columbus ... $49 anyweek day, $39 on the weekends. roundtrip.

now it's $79 one way weekday, for december
$49 one way weekend, for december

[Edited 2010-09-22 08:57:17]


if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4052 times:

Quoting mtnwest1979 (Reply 4):
I noticed that UA in 1933 had a Boise-Boston fare of around $200 ow. I bet today one can find a fare close to that looking around.

Adjust that for inflation first...
What was $200 in 1930 in today's dollars?

Quoting N92R03 (Reply 16):
In the mid 90's I would pay $300-$350 to fly R/T between SAN and TPA. Just checked and could do the same for $277 on WN.

Last December I did a mileage run on DL on MCO-SAN. It cost me $220 R/T including taxes.

Quoting stlgph (Reply 17):
Southwest still cost more than a walk up ticket on United. yet, i bet those Southwest planes still went out with a full load to Chicago thanks to people who just clicked on Southwest.com, bought their ticket, and didn't bother to look at the other airlines because on Southwest, "bags fly free."

An excellent job of marketing and positioning in the marketplace by WN. On top of that, I'd pay more to fly WN and avoid UA. Some things are worth paying for, like not having to deal with United.


User currently offlinejunction From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3935 times:

Quoting stlgph (Reply 17):
i bet those Southwest planes still went out with a full load to Chicago thanks to people who just clicked on Southwest.com, bought their ticket, and didn't bother to look at the other airlines because on Southwest, "bags fly free."

Chances are the Southwest planes would still be full even if they did have a bag fee on top of the ticket price. The bag fees are not keeping anyone from flying.


User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9367 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3874 times:

Quoting junction (Reply 20):

Chances are the Southwest planes would still be full even if they did have a bag fee on top of the ticket price. The bag fees are not keeping anyone from flying.

Southwest already does have a bag fee in the ticket price. that's the point.

if they "removed" the bag fee from the ticket price, they'd simply be matching the prices of other carriers.

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 19):

i have to hand it to United, the last couple of trips ... not bad. not bad at all.



if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
User currently offlineMD95 From Italy, joined Apr 2005, 104 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3874 times:

Quoting crosswinds21 (Reply 8):
Quoting crosswinds21 (Reply 8):
This might not be the popular opinion, but checked bags on Southwest are not free. They are simply included in the price of the ticket. Do you really think that it costs them nothing to provide this service? Of course not. Just like any company, they have to cover those costs. In the case of Southwest, they do it by factoring it into the price of the ticket. In the case of most other airlines, they charge for it separately.

You are perfectly right. Now, what you just said apply to all other airlines too. So why they did not deduct from the cost of the ticket the cost of baggage handling when they introduced the baggage handling fee?



dario
User currently offlinejunction From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3805 times:

Quoting stlgph (Reply 21):
Southwest already does have a bag fee in the ticket price. that's the point.

How can they have it built in to the ticket price? They don't know how many bags you’re going to check, if any.


User currently offlinekonstantinkoll From Germany, joined Aug 2006, 99 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3744 times:

Quoting junction (Reply 23):
How can they have it built in to the ticket price? They don't know how many bags you’re going to check, if any.

But they surely have an average number per passenger, maybe broken down to individual flights (morning/evening lighter because of same-day business travellers etc.)


25 StuckInCA : I was just recalling that I used to fly BUR-SMF all the time for $39 each way too in the early 2000's. Closer to home in my life is electronics pricin
26 jerseyguy : Do you have any examples like mine below that confirm your "theory"? I used Southwest's low fare calendar and the flexible search feature of sidestep
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
DL To Ground All Dedicated Freighters By Year End posted Tue Apr 21 2009 05:02:49 by PHXtoDCAtoMSP
ZED-ticket Price Hike, Your Airline Too? posted Thu Oct 2 2008 12:26:17 by Airevents
F Ticket Price Less Expensive Than Upgrade? posted Thu Sep 4 2008 08:46:40 by Falstaff
What Ticket Price Is Needed For Profitability posted Wed May 21 2008 17:43:22 by Jayspilot
BA's Next Fleet Decision By Year End posted Mon Feb 4 2008 02:30:13 by Scbriml
JAT "gets" Rothschild - Privatization By Year End posted Fri Sep 7 2007 20:33:22 by JoKeR
BMI To Delay TransAtlantic By 1 Year posted Fri Aug 24 2007 03:20:44 by Scotron11
FI: Airbus Expects 200 A350 Orders By Year End posted Thu May 31 2007 13:01:39 by EI321
CO Likely To BOS Terminal A By Year's End posted Tue Apr 10 2007 11:59:46 by N801NW
Concorde Ticket Price posted Thu Mar 15 2007 23:57:21 by Collin260