blueflyer
Posts: 4202
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:13 pm

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 33):
Wal-Mart cannot "build a road that blocks my business."

Join the NFIB. Biggest bunch of anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-tax whiners clamoring for the government to "do something" whenever the tide turns against them.

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 33):
The government should not get to pick winners and losers.

When the government regulates a practice that most everyone is engaged into, it is hardly picking winners and losers. If the DOT decides one day that no airline may operate international flights out of EWR just for the heck of it, we can talk about picking winners and losers.

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 35):
Show me where I said that.

While it may not be pertinent to you individually, it does remain a fact that corporations do petition the government to change, annul, implement or interpret laws to their benefits, and very often to the detriment of the public, with little outcry, but when the government does the same in favor of the public, it takes but a few milliseconds for accusations of socialism, anti-capitalism, anti-Americanism and anti-Christ to fly.

I propose that the government regulates the amount of meat that needs to be on a pizza before it be called a Meat Lover's or variation thereof. Save your fake outrage for the pizza lobby that got the government to agree the processed tomato paste on that pizza is a vegetable so that it could be included in healthy lunch options at school cafeteria. Next french fries will be allowed too.
All Hail King Donald
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9751
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:30 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 29):
To make sure that planes don't fall apart and toasters don't burst into flames. The government has no business telling airlines how much and what fees they can charge, as long as they are properly disclosed. End of story.

You forgot the part about paying taxes, airlines are not paying taxes on these fees, pax cannot claim deductions on them so if the politicians instead of passing a bill listing these items simply pass a tax like they are dying to pass on rich people things would be well, in addition to the lower incomes bearing all the burdens of taxes the airlines and the rich people are making out like bandits.

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 36):
Without bag fees I bet the average fare would have been up about 8%.

Yes and the federal deficit would be lower by the additional taxes that would be paid on the 2% increase

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 45):
If bag fees were that big of an issue, customers would have revolted.

Well there are a vast number of citizens of the USA who do not like the pat down and the full body xrays they have made their objections loud and clear and guess what, they are still taking place. Just like a lot of people cannot avoid travelling by air a lot of people do not have the option of heading to airports further away to take WN or B6 to avoid the fees.
 
YULWinterSkies
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:37 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 17):
The reason why we have gridlock in Washington, the folks attack the issue from the wrong end. Presently, the entire population is behind raising taxes on the wealthy, so airlines are raking in billions of dollars in revenue and paying no taxes on them, so the super committee should have included a tax on airline fees which are no longer a part of the fare and that bill would pass overnight. In hindsight, does anyone now believe that we are seeing the real reason for unbundling fares and ala carte pricing, did we fall hook line and sinker for the cost of fuel argument??

That's a very good point. We all know that big corporations pay taxes, but also know how to find loopholes to avoid paying more taxes. The government's job is to try to have everybody pay the taxes they actually have to pay, so fighting loopholes is one way.
Whether or not the Senate bill goes is in spirit, I have no idea, however.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):
Yeah, and I'll bet you'd be singing a different tune if your business were affected. I'll bet if say Walmart built a road that blocked your business and you lost business, thus taking food out of your kids' mouth, you'd be the first one expecting government to intervene. People who talk big about things being beyond the scope of government, sure change their tune when they suddenly are personal hurt by someone else.

  
When I doubt... go running!
 
rcair1
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:39 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:40 pm

Quoting deltaffindfw (Reply 16):
"Testifying at a Senate appropriations subcommittee on homeland security in March, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the baggage check fees were costing the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) $260 million a year.

One of the least credible officials I've ever heard speak? I'm sure the numbers she quoted were gin'd up by a special interest group.

Quoting par13del (Reply 17):
The reason why we have gridlock in Washington,

The reason we have gridlock in Washington is because a majority of the people there are on the government ticket and need to protect their jobs.

Quoting ju068 (Reply 20):
What's the big deal, the EU passed a law forbbiding credit card charges for airlines. I do not see how this is a problem...

Many of us don't want EU style government.

Quoting CuriousFlyer (Reply 27):
ut today? Bag fees? Don't they have more important things to take care about? Frankly this is a ridiculous attempt to divert the attention of voters from the failure of Congress to tackle budget issues. It is really not the moment to waste time and efforts on that while the country is going through a major economic disaster.

If this is all the Senate can do, just get rid of it. What a mess!

   See you in November.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 28):
Yeah maybe in a perfect world. Government has to meddle in business; just like unions have to exist sometimes to protect employees, because corporations can't always be trusted to the right or ethical thing.

I'm sick and tired of people painting corporations as corrupt in the face of a patently corrupt government. Give me a CEO and a politician spouting on the same thing - and I bet on the CEO most days.

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 33):
This is funny. Corporations can lobby the government to make rules in their favor. But when it's "the people" lobbying their representatives to make rules in favor of the people, it's wrong? That's rich

It is the government - that so many here seem to love - that created the rules that give the power to big lobbies.

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 36):
Right, fares still haven't gone up as a % as much as the major expenses (oil, labor). For Thanksgiving week the average fare is up 6%. The price of oil is up 41%.

  

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 36):
I also have a hard time believing that more carry-ons=$260 million extra in expenses for the TSA.

I don't believe it. And if the 'supercommittee' wanted to cut costs, they could do this in a second without yet another law with unintended consequences.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 45):
Elites avoid the fee...

So - rewarding good customers is now illegal?
rcair1
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15584
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:41 pm

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 7):
I love bag fees.

Since I check no bags, why should I subsidize those who do? Want to check a bag? Pay for it.

  

That is one of the biggest things my company hears from our elite members, most of whom travel for one or two days on business and seldom check bags, yet their fares are typically many times more what the "We're going to Disneyland!" crowd pays per person, and they were getting 1 or 2 free bags per person, essentially being subsidized by the elite members' higher fares.

It's perfectly fair to charge to carry baggage.

Quoting as739x (Reply 14):
So in turn shall we look for, average ticket prices to go up $30/per ticket?

At first, but that ultimately results in a decrease in demand. So then you have to roll out fare sales to stimulate demand again, resulting in lower yield, lower profit, lower ability to create a stable company, etc. It's all tied together.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 7):
I love bag fees.

Since I check no bags, why should I subsidize those who do? Want to check a bag? Pay for it.

Nice to know that you never ski; never backpack; never take the aforementioned wine in your luggage. Good on you. That isn't the case with the rest of us who don't feel like getting raped...uh I mean nickle and dimed for one measly checked bag that used to be part of the ticket.

  

Which is it? A few posts back you were saying this is all about increased cost to the government, but now it sounds like this is a personal issue for you.

As someone opined earlier, relaxing or eliminating the liquid ban would alleviate quite a bit of the problems customers face.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
flyabr
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:44 pm

Like I've expressed before...I loathe bag fees. I'm just waiting for rental car companies to charge for using the trunk!!

But, anyway, I suggest that Congress let the airlines charge whatever they want for checked bags, but...pass a law that states if my checked and extra cost bag doesn't show up at bag claim, I automatically get $500...per missing bag!  
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15584
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:56 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 17):
airlines are raking in billions of dollars in revenue and paying no taxes on them

These fees count as income to the carrier. Please explain to me how airlines are somehow not paying taxes on this income. Be specific.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
silentbob
Posts: 1586
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:15 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 45):
Although I should note my last TSA experience was excellent. (Trying to herd two children I forgot about my watch... oops. The TSA agent was extreamely professional.)

Most of them are, I treat them as well as they treat me and it works out well most of the time.
 
ghifty
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:42 am

Quoting bonusonus (Reply 1):

This seems pretty stupid to me. I don't like bag fees any more than the next person, but how is it the government's responsibility to determine the rules for a private contract between an individual and an airline?
If an airline wants to charge more for a person that is bringing more cargo, why should the federal government stop them?

         It's the type of government we have right now..

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 2):

While I hate bag fees, I do not see this as a job for Congress. Even if you're in favor of this bill, aren't there more important things they could be doing like uhh, fixing the economy!?  

      Be glad! This way they are fixing the economy! Economy Class, anyways. "Congress fixes Economy" is the perfect story title, no?      

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 2):
If customers don't like the fees, fly Southwest!

   Or.. fly with bags that meet the airline's guidelines.
Fly Delta (Wid)Jets

Comments made here reflect only my personal opinions.
 
Grid
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:26 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:16 am

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 46):
How about you back that one up? If you're saying we're over-regulated on the whole, I'd be in agreement.

Some obvious facts don't need to be backed up - gravity, the Earth is round, water is wet. Subsidies for cotton, corn and sugar, tariffs, duties, non-tariff barriers to trade etc.
ATR72 E120 E140 E170 E190 Q200 717 727 737 747 757 767 777 A319 A320 A321 A330 A340 MD11 MD82 MD83 MD88 MD90
 
RamblinMan
Topic Author
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:57 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:17 am

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50):
Join the NFIB. Biggest bunch of anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-tax whiners clamoring for the government to "do something" whenever the tide turns against them.

I made it fairly clear that I don't condone unnecessary regulations, even when there would be a benefit to me, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't lump me in with any "whiners."

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50):
When the government regulates a practice that most everyone is engaged into, it is hardly picking winners and losers.

The debate was between me and another user who used the argument that bag fees hurt small business as a reason they should not be allowed. That is most definitely picking winners and losers, creating a regulation purely so that people will be more inclined to buy more crap on vacation.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50):
Save your fake outrage for the pizza lobby that got the government to agree the processed tomato paste on that pizza is a vegetable so that it could be included in healthy lunch options at school cafeteria. Next french fries will be allowed too.

I have no idea what that has to do with any of this.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 53):
Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 33):

That isn't my quote. In fact, that's a position I argue against so I would appreciate it if you would edit your post to show which user actually said that.
 
ssublyme
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:04 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:20 am

Quoting flyabr (Reply 55):
But, anyway, I suggest that Congress let the airlines charge whatever they want for checked bags, but...pass a law that states if my checked and extra cost bag doesn't show up at bag claim, I automatically get $500...per missing bag!

I seem to remember discussion around atleast getting a refund on bag fees if ur bag gets lost or doesn't arrive at the destination with the passenger. Did that ever get passed?
 
johnyv
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:23 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:26 am

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 7):



You are paying the same price you paid before the fee, you aren't subsidizing anything
 
RamblinMan
Topic Author
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:57 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:27 am

Quoting Grid (Reply 59):
Some obvious facts don't need to be backed up - gravity, the Earth is round, water is wet. Subsidies for cotton, corn and sugar, tariffs, duties, non-tariff barriers to trade etc.

Amusing how you sarcastically say "it's obvious!" then you provide the examples I asked for.

All things considered I think the US has as much of a free market economy as anyone, though there is definitely room for improvement.

Quoting flyabr (Reply 55):
But, anyway, I suggest that Congress let the airlines charge whatever they want for checked bags, but...pass a law that states if my checked and extra cost bag doesn't show up at bag claim, I automatically get $500...per missing bag

I'm surprised this hasn't come to a head yet...there's been some speculation among legal theorists that once the airlines started charging for bags, the existing T&C and liability limitations should be an invalid contract. Not sure how it would play out but in general I agree with your sentiment- we put up with a certain level of unreliability when the service was "free" but now that it's charged there should be stiff penalties for losing or delaying bags.
 
Grid
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:26 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:35 am

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 63):
Amusing how you sarcastically say "it's obvious!" then you provide the examples I asked for.

All things considered I think the US has as much of a free market economy as anyone, though there is definitely room for improvement.

The question was not whether it has a free market economy as much as anyone ... but whether it operates as such.
ATR72 E120 E140 E170 E190 Q200 717 727 737 747 757 767 777 A319 A320 A321 A330 A340 MD11 MD82 MD83 MD88 MD90
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6313
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:36 am

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 60):
The debate was between me and another user who used the argument that bag fees hurt small business as a reason they should not be allowed. That is most definitely picking winners and losers, creating a regulation purely so that people will be more inclined to buy more crap on vacation.

Again, you completely took my statement out of context. I was mentioning the Arizona Winery as an another example of the downside of first bag fees to go along with the TSA's assertion that they add considerable cost to the government.

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 60):
I made it fairly clear that I don't condone unnecessary regulations, even when there would be a benefit to me, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't lump me in with any "whiners."

How is it that liberals are always "whiners". You're whining just as much about the possibility of a regulation on bag fees.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 54):


Which is it? A few posts back you were saying this is all about increased cost to the government, but now it sounds like this is a personal issue for you.

What am I only allowed to make one single point about bag fees? Yeah, it's really annoying to go on a ski trip and have to pay $120 extra in bag fees (I can usually get my clothes into a carry-one and get away with only my skis checked, but most can't).

But AS lost some business because of their bag fees. This particular Seattle area ski club booked a large group trip to RNO on WN instead of QX/AS only because of the bag fees. The trip organizers made this clear. And they will fly WN anytime they can in the future for sometimes large number of people on a trip, rather than AS or DL, for example. As much as I like AS, I also enjoy making a point of how bag fees continue to lose them the business of a large club and a number of large group reservations.
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:38 am

I would point out there are a few things here.

Firstly in regards to no charge for water (and other reasonable requests - attn Michael O'leary that means
no toilet charges!) an aircraft inflight is a bit of a unique situation. You can't simply go elsewhere if you can't
get the basics. Normally that would constitute illegal imprisonment but certain situations, like flight for example
(probably a high speed train and a ship too for that matter) have other considerations where it is simply not safe
or practical to be able to return one's liberties back. ie - allow the person to 'go elsewhere' to service those needs
after the trip as already commenced. In those situations then, it is not unreasonable to expect the very basics must
be available. That is, water and restroom facilities. And at no cost.

The bag situation is a bit different. Although I personally dislike the idea of governments dictating service standards/business models, there is a consumer protection element at play here. That is, you pay one price,
expecting to receive one thing only to find out for that price you don't get what you thought you got. One thing about
flying domestically in the USA compared with say Australia, New Zealand, or say an England to Germany flight is the
sheer huge amount of carry-on in the USA. We know why. But there could be a bit of a safety argument here, as well
as an argument about 'personal space'. With all these giant fatties running around the US, there really isn't room to fill
both the overhead bins and the space in the seat in front. There could be an argument here that reducing the cabin
baggage provides a bit of increased safety (less potential stuff flying around the cabin) and that bit of leg room needed
as more junk is either in the cargo hold where it belongs, or in the overhead bins.

What I would prefer to see is the market itself turns one of the carriers more into a QF/BA/AF/KL type short haul operation. $10 or $15 more but introducing a few things back. Given the mess AA is in, it could be the way for it to turn itself around and get the premium pax back (It worked for CO once!)
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:50 am

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 7):
Since I check no bags, why should I subsidize those who do?

Except that it's turned the other way around - those who do check bags are being charged higher fees so that your fare can be less. In other words, those who check bags are subsidizing you.

I'd feel a lot better about bag fees if they reflected the actual cost of moving bags from A to B rather than an arbitrary number designed to increase revenue.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Rafabozzolla
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 1:27 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:57 am

Kudos to the Senate, for many reasons, like:

- Fares did not go down when bag fees were introduced (no one would be subsidizing no one else).

- A reasonable amount of luggage (especially in winter, not everything fits into a carry-on) is an ESSENTIAL part of a trip.

- Air travel is a monopolistic industry by nature, many times there is only one option for a given route, especially non-stop.

- IT IS the government's job to protect consumers from unfair business practices.

These are just some of the reasons on the consumer side of things that make this bill relevant, not to mention TSA, safety, bla, bla, bla...
 
BMI727
Posts: 11300
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:10 am

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 37):
What does it tell me? That people like first bag fees?

That people tolerate them. Airfares have fallen like a rock over the last few decades, leading to the loss of meals, amenities, and now the free checked bag. And all that has happened because that's what passengers want. They want the low fares, even if it means "unbundling". For passengers who do not want that, there is always Southwest or flying first class.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15584
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:11 am

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 65):
AS lost some business because of their bag fees. This particular Seattle area ski club booked a large group trip to RNO on WN instead of QX/AS only because of the bag fees. The trip organizers made this clear. And they will fly WN anytime they can in the future for sometimes large number of people on a trip, rather than AS or DL, for example.

And while that's certainly regrettable, the business AS has lost is FAR more than offset by the bag fees other customers have been and continue to be willing to pay. Keep in mind, AS was late to join this movement - they intentionally held off on charging a first bag fee while competitors charged them, thinking they'd see a shift in market share that would make the "no bag fees" stance worthwhile. There wasn't one, though - consumers didn't reward them by booking AS over competitors.

At this point, AS was essentially depriving themselves of the equivalent of an across-the-board fare increase that all their competitors now enjoyed. Sure, customers SAY they'll gladly pay a bit more for free bags, but their purchasing behavior has repeatedly shown demand goes down with fare increases, but not when carriers implement a-la-carte pricing for extras like bags.

There was simply no business case left for NOT charging bag fees once all was said and done.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15584
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:13 am

Quoting rafabozzolla (Reply 68):
- A reasonable amount of luggage (especially in winter, not everything fits into a carry-on) is an ESSENTIAL part of a trip.

I frequently travel from Phoenix to Seattle for six to eight hours' worth of meetings, up and back same day. Tell me, what "essential" checked luggage would I need to accomplish this feat? Have I been doing it wrong all these years, as I have yet to check a bag. Please, enlighten me.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:38 am

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 56):
These fees count as income to the carrier. Please explain to me how airlines are somehow not paying taxes on this income. Be specific.

Here's a fare breakdown I pulled off of ITA for AS SEA-EWR. The line I put in bold is the tax in contention. If the fare was increased by the cost of one piece of luggage, for instance, the US Transportation Tax would be higher:

Fare 1: Carrier AS V14N4 SEA to EWR (rules)
Passenger type ADT, one-way fare, booking code V
Covers SEA-EWR (Coach) $256.74
US Transportation Tax (US) $19.26
US September 11th Security Fee (AY) $2.50
US Passenger Facility Charge (XF) $4.50
US Flight Segment Tax (ZP) $3.70

Subtotal per passenger $286.70
Number of passengers x1

TOTAL AIRFARE & TAXES $286.70
International Homo of Mystery
 
airbazar
Posts: 9952
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:41 am

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 35):
Did I say that? Show me where I said that.

Did I quote you?

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 53):

Many of us don't want EU style government.

Really? Speak for yourself. Where were you during the last presidential election?
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14568
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:53 am

I haven't flown for several years, but I think the 3 part proposal is a good idea. The airlines could get around this by much higher fees on the 2nd checked bag. Access to toilets and water with no fees is a public health and comfort issue, not something the airlines should be charging for.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15584
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 3:11 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 72):
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 56):
These fees count as income to the carrier. Please explain to me how airlines are somehow not paying taxes on this income. Be specific.

Here's a fare breakdown I pulled off of ITA for AS SEA-EWR. The line I put in bold is the tax in contention. If the fare was increased by the cost of one piece of luggage, for instance, the US Transportation Tax would be higher:

Fare 1: Carrier AS V14N4 SEA to EWR (rules)
Passenger type ADT, one-way fare, booking code V
Covers SEA-EWR (Coach) $256.74
US Transportation Tax (US) $19.26
US September 11th Security Fee (AY) $2.50
US Passenger Facility Charge (XF) $4.50
US Flight Segment Tax (ZP) $3.70

Subtotal per passenger $286.70
Number of passengers x1

TOTAL AIRFARE & TAXES $286.70

You're talking about two different things - this outlines the taxes on tickets paid by customers that go directly to the government. The baggage fees count as non-ticket ancillary revenue (income) and tax on this is paid to the government by the carrier on the basis of it being overall income to the company.

In other words, airlines aren't getting a free ride - they ARE paying taxes on the bag fees, fees for meals, or any other non-ticket income.

[Edited 2011-11-23 19:20:32]
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
splitterz
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:40 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 3:15 am

Never does a day go by that my government does not disappoint me.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 3:19 am

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 75):
The baggage fees count as ancillary revenue (income) and tax on this is paid to the government by the carrier on the basis of it being income.

If it was incorporated into the base fare, it would be subject to the US Transportation Tax. Income taxes paid by corporations can vary widely, based upon any number of factors. What you pay at the gate for your base fare gets taxed as a transaction tax, and sent to the gov't by the airline whether the airline makes money, loses money or merely breaks even.
International Homo of Mystery
 
RamblinMan
Topic Author
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:57 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:35 am

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 65):
How is it that liberals are always "whiners". You're whining just as much about the possibility of a regulation on bag fees.

Did I use the "L" word? And if you consider all debate on here to be whining, why, exactly, are you on this site?

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 65):
But AS lost some business because of their bag fees. This particular Seattle area ski club booked a large group trip to RNO on WN instead of QX/AS only because of the bag fees. The trip organizers made this clear.

I'm sure AS is crying its eyes out.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 73):
Did I quote you?

You don't have to quote someone to direct something at them. It seemed directed at me, if not, sorry.
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:03 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 6):
There should never be a charge for carry-ons, nor should there be a charge for water.

I STRONGLY disagree with charging for both but to say never is a very fine line. At what point does big brother say "this is our business" and "that is not our business". Some things I just don't understand. Perimeter rules DOES NOT WORK. Look at IAD. DL barely maintains the schedule it has to its fortress hub in Atlanta yet DCA is almost every hour..oh just like LGA that is about every 60 minutes yet JFK is only fed by ATL with a limited amount of flights; all a/c being rotated into the JFK schedule for other flights and to serve the big banks. We were talking about this in the DCA/LGA slot swap.

Me thinks they need to worry about other very important aviation related issues.

Quoting ssublyme (Reply 12):
For some to simply say "Govt has no business telling private individual/corporation what to charge" only holds so much merit. We all know it takes one big corporation to change the rules and others follow. Before you know it, there are no real alternatives/options for those who want to "protest with their wallet". All it takes is a UA or DL to start charging for carryon, and others follow suit. Govt should have some role/right in monitoring what private corporations can and cannot do. Afterall, it is a govt for the people.

No, they need to re-regulate if they want all these hands in the pot; plain and simple.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 49):
Oil used to be $30 a barrel. Welcome to 2011.

Send your skis, wine and backpack on FedEx and see how much that will cost you.

Thank you. I've said time and time again. Just go to greyhound.com and see how much it costs to travel from coast to coast and HOW LONG it will take.
What gets measured gets done.
 
aklrno
Posts: 1542
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:17 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 77):

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 75):
The baggage fees count as ancillary revenue (income) and tax on this is paid to the government by the carrier on the basis of it being income.

If it was incorporated into the base fare, it would be subject to the US Transportation Tax. Income taxes paid by corporations can vary widely, based upon any number of factors. What you pay at the gate for your base fare gets taxed as a transaction tax, and sent to the gov't by the airline whether the airline makes money, loses money or merely breaks even.

I suspect that if the f the ancillary fees were taxed then the airline would just add that tax to the fee (like they do to the ticket price) and the passenger would pay that too. I'm fine with the fees going untaxed and letting the airline pay the tax on its profits, for the few that have profits. Adding any taxes to AA seems like a bad idea right now.
 
keagkid101
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:26 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:19 am

It is not the responsibility of the government to tell private industries how much money they can charge for a certain service. They can, however, argue that taxpayers are paying more because of the additional baggage that has to be screened at the checkpoint (which is being argued in the article). I believe that the government should just tax airlines on EVERY baggage fee charged.

However, piggybacking on the Interstate Commerce Act passed by Congress, I do believe that there should be no baggage fees on shorter journeys. The Interstate Commerce Act stated that that railroads could not charge higher rates for shorter journeys. If I'm flying from CLE to CMH with two bags, why would I want to pay $100 r/t in baggage fees for such a short flight?

My proposition:
Flights less than 250nm: No baggage fee on the first piece of luggage (this would allow for more efficient security screenings, better on-time departures because passengers wouldn't be caught up at the checkpoint, etc.)
Flights longer than 251nm: Baggage fee taxable by the US federal government
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1329
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:42 am

Quoting bonusonus (Reply 1):
but how is it the government's responsibility to determine the rules for a private contract between an individual and an airline?
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 2):
While I hate bag fees, I do not see this as a job for Congress. Even if you're in favor of this bill, aren't there more important things they could be doing like uhh, fixing the economy!?

Since Congressional approval ratings, per most national polls, continues to remain at a low point, and the US is beginning to see an increase in air passenger travel due to the upcoming holidays this month and next, it is clear that this is just political posturing. It seems to me that this is a political strategy for members of Congress (who support this bill) to say to their constituents, "Hey, I'm on your side."

Quoting toobz (Reply 3):
jeez...with all the issues that our government has, i can't believe they are wasting congressional time on this...

See above, I can.

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 7):
Since I check no bags, why should I subsidize those who do? Want to check a bag? Pay for it.

Your airfare does not subsidise the "cost" of someone else's checked luggage. Airfare, as far as I know, when calculated at the time of booking, does not assume that you are or are not checking luggage and gives you a price based on that assumption.

While weight of luggage (not contracted cargo) is a consideration in terms of aircraft performance and fuel burn, it is not as big of a consideration as some of you might think (based on my experience), unless under "extreme" circumstances, such as nearing the edge of the aircraft's performance envelope (range/MTOW/environmental or geographical considerations, i.e. climb performance at a short/high field...).

Of course the airlines are monitoring their fuel bills, however, your 757-200 flying ORD-LAX isn't going to add hundreds of dollars to it's fuel bill because upon check-in 74 Y-class passengers have checked bags.

If Congress were really smart (which is kind of an oxymoron these days), they would pitch this Bill as a way to improve on-time departures for flights... particularly narrow body flights where overhead locker space in the back is a premium and runs out before seating 3 and 4 are even on board....
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:49 am

Quoting UA772IAD (Reply 82):

Great points and I agree with you 100%. I've said it time and time again that bag fees were not instituded to offset the cost of fuel. That's simply not how fuel planning and w&b works.
What gets measured gets done.
 
usairways787
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:42 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:58 am

I wonder what Southwest will advertise for now??? I also know this is gonna shoot OJI's through the roof with Airlines.

[Edited 2011-11-23 22:14:11]
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 6:13 am

Quoting aklrno (Reply 80):
I'm fine with the fees going untaxed and letting the airline pay the tax on its profits, for the few that have profits. Adding any taxes to AA seems like a bad idea right now.

Before this thread continues off on all these tangents, let's go back and address what Congress is actually trying to do here. I actually believe they're doing the right thing.

America's transportation infrastructure, including the FAA, etc., has to be paid for somehow. Part of it is paid for via transaction fees. You and I and everyone else who buys a gallon of gas (highway taxes), or buys an airline ticket (US Transportation Tax, plus a few others), makes a contribution to the upkeep and current administration of that infrastructure as user fees levied as a tax.

What Congress has been looking at is how airline tickets aren't priced in the traditional way any longer, with much of the final ticket price on airlines such as Spirit, being charged to the passenger away from the traditional source of infrastructure funding from airline tickets, which is the US Transportation Tax on the base fare.

Do folks realize that when a passenger on Spirit pays a base fare of $9, but $191 in ancillary fees, then you pay $200 to fly the same route on another airline, you're contributing over 20x more towards the cost of maintaining the transportation system than the Spirit passenger? This is what Congress is trying to address. Why does Spirit get to keep the transportation tax to themselves, to be paid into the General Fund, not the Transportation Fund (where it belongs), if they happen to post a profit vs. a loss, to use the reasoning popular in this thread? Why do Spirit's passengers get a free ride? Why isn't everyone paying their fair share of supporting the system? It works the same way on tickets where if the fuel surcharge is included in the base fare or not. When a fuel surcharge is a separate line item on your ticket, then the gov't doesn't receive its transaction fee, because the fee is based on a percentage of the base ticket price.

I guess we could go to a system like the UK 'enjoys', where there's a set fee for each ticket based on class of service and distance. Wouldn't that be nice?   "Yes, sir, your upgrade cleared. That'll be $50 in supplemental government fees, please. I'll have to run the charge on your credit card before reissuing your boarding pass." That would actually be a far more equitable solution, but carries its own set of problems.
International Homo of Mystery
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18829
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 6:40 am

One of my friends used to travel extremely heavy. As in 7 bags for a couple. Bag fees have changed his habits.  
Quoting par13del (Reply 51):
Well there are a vast number of citizens of the USA who do not like the pat down and the full body xrays they have made their objections loud and clear and guess what, they are still taking place.

That is one reason I fly less. I do not like the level of 'examination.' As a male, when I travel alone, no big deal. With my family... it is a big deal.

No complaints, no gripping... just fewer family flights. Now, last time was an excellent experience with the TSA, but just the chance has me arguing for non-flight vacations... Despite the fact I love to fly and my kids are 'easy fliers' who are well behaved.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 53):
So - rewarding good customers is now illegal?

Poor wording on my part. Mea culpa. I meant that the really important customers, the elites, are not impacted.

My point is let the airlines charge. As long as it isn't hidden...

Quoting silentbob (Reply 57):
Most of them are, I treat them as well as they treat me and it works out well most of the time.

I was excited about how well the TSA treated me at LAX last time. Different terminal... Different experience. I've found the TSA at smaller airports have been very good. At larger airports... Not so much. But like I said, last time at LAX I was impressed.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 65):
But AS lost some business because of their bag fees. This particular Seattle area ski club booked a large group trip to RNO on WN instead of QX/AS only because of the bag fees. The trip organizers made this clear. And they will fly WN anytime they can in the future for sometimes large number of people on a trip, rather than AS or DL,

The market works. My corporation now sorts flights by total costs, including one checked bag.

Do any of the online search engines now include bag fees? In my opinion, the way to improve service is to allow customers to better search on what they care about.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
silentbob
Posts: 1586
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:09 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 77):
If it was incorporated into the base fare, it would be subject to the US Transportation Tax. Income taxes paid by corporations can vary widely, based upon any number of factors. What you pay at the gate for your base fare gets taxed as a transaction tax, and sent to the gov't by the airline whether the airline makes money, loses money or merely breaks even.

No problem, simply change the transportation tax to apply to all fees not mandated by the government. That seems far less intrusive, yet it still achieves the same goals and still allows the various airlines to price/market themselves as they see fit. Most airlines are not staffed at the appropriate levels to handle a massive increase in bags. They would have a significant increase in costs to go along with the decrease in revenues.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:17 am

Quoting silentbob (Reply 87):
That seems far less intrusive, yet it still achieves the same goals and still allows the various airlines to price/market themselves as they see fit

That could be a viable option. This is why Congress holds these sessions. To identify the problems, then root out the best way possible to implement tax revenue protection. But where does it stop? 7.5% tax on your inflight drink and BOB meal too?

Clearly, the system is now broken. It needs to be fixed. $260 million is a big hole to fill one passenger at a time over an array of fees and supplemental charges.
International Homo of Mystery
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:37 am

I made about 20 flights this year. Only one of them I needed to check in the bag, the rest there was space enough for what I needed in the carry on. I would definitively hate to have to pay for a bag hidden in the global price for every flight, when I need it 1 out of 20 times. Pay for what you need.
 
beertrucker
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:13 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:46 am

OK Well I have read this and everyone brings up valid points for both sides.

I want to travel back in time....... How many of you were on here back when they started charging for bag fees? I was and have been on here in total about 15 years if not more.

I remember the day that the news report came out saying airlines are going to start charging for bad fees. This forum went absolutely bonkers. Out of the all the post about it only a few people agreed that they needed to make the money that way. Almost everyone else was yelling at the top of their lungs about how unfair it was and this and that.

Well how the times have changed over the years. Now there is only a few people who still say that charging for a bag fee is still not right. And most of you say it is OK.

Things are getting out of hand a little I think for some things. I mean water that is just stupid. I have to pay cause I am thirsty? Why cause you don't have the option to say no thanks I want tap water like in the restaurant.

Now I will say it does affect small business. Heck it affects large business too. I work for a big theme park and yes the amount of merchandise sold went down when bag fees came into play.

Now I will show you how it affected me and a small business. A lot of people go up to the northeast in the fall to see the trees and the country side. Heck even skiing and all times of year. Now when I used to go up there to visit home I always bought something from up there when I would visit. That is fresh maple syrup. Now cause of the liquid rule I don't buy it anymore. And I am sure I am not the only one. Now I would by it from the farm stands on the side of the road(some of the best places to buy it). So yes it does have an effect on small business. If I go up there and used to buy it you know other people used to also.

The thing is just like gas people have gotten used to paying what they pay over the years. Why no matter the cost we still need the gas. So no matter the bag fee people will still pay to have the bag go down below. Am I happy about the bag fee. No. Do I want to see first bag free? You bet I do. I never agreed with a bag fee and never will. But I still need to travel so guess I will be paying if I need to check a bag.

This topic might as well be like a political campaign cause both sides are going to say they are right and the other is wrong. And no one will change from their thought of this. Both sides do have valid points thought I will say that.
Fly HI
 
odafz
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:00 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:31 am

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 71):
I frequently travel from Phoenix to Seattle for six to eight hours' worth of meetings, up and back same day. Tell me, what "essential" checked luggage would I need to accomplish this feat? Have I been doing it wrong all these years, as I have yet to check a bag. Please, enlighten me.

I think you missed the point... you have been doing the right thing, it will be ludicrous to have a checked bag for a day meeting,,, But I wonder for 3-day meeting when traveling from North to South .....
 
odafz
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:00 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:42 am

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 7):
Since I check no bags, why should I subsidize those who do? Want to check a bag? Pay for it.

Your point utterly lacks rigor., is moot and at the limit intellectually dishonest.

the only thing you are missing is the fact that you are not subsidizing any one unless you fly with WN... but you are not... Aren' t you ?. The persons checking a bag are simply paying for that service unless they fly with WN.
 
JU068
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:23 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:47 am

I do not see why some of you are so angry that this decision was made. It would have been one thing if the airlines had lowered their fares in order to introduce the baggage fees. Since they have not done so they have played dirty. If anything the US government is protecting the ordinary citizen against airlines.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15584
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:19 am

Quoting ODAFZ (Reply 91):
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 71):
I frequently travel from Phoenix to Seattle for six to eight hours' worth of meetings, up and back same day. Tell me, what "essential" checked luggage would I need to accomplish this feat? Have I been doing it wrong all these years, as I have yet to check a bag. Please, enlighten me.


I think you missed the point... you have been doing the right thing, it will be ludicrous to have a checked bag for a day meeting

No, no - check again what he wrote:

Quoting rafabozzolla (Reply 68):
- A reasonable amount of luggage (especially in winter, not everything fits into a carry-on) is an ESSENTIAL part of a trip.

He clearly says he believes that a reasonable amount of checked luggage is an ESSENTIAL part of a trip. I'm simply challenging his assertion, as would many business travelers who pack 1 to 3 (or more, in some cases!) days' worth of clothes in a carryon bag. There's nothing "essential" about checking luggage - it's a choice a customer makes, and in most cases, that choice means paying a little extra.

In many cases, airlines' elite-level fliers are exempt from fees for checked luggage, as are most First Class passengers. If you want rock-bottom pricing, there are trade-offs, like less flexibility, ticket nonrefundability, etc. Paying extra for checked bags happens to be one of those trade-offs for low fares, in most cases.

Checked bags are not a right, but a privilege - and that privilege costs money. Full-stop.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
BMI727
Posts: 11300
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:42 am

Quoting ju068 (Reply 93):
I do not see why some of you are so angry that this decision was made. It would have been one thing if the airlines had lowered their fares in order to introduce the baggage fees.

Airlines were losing passengers and money because passengers sought the lowest fares possible. This isn't a new trend either. They responded with "unbundling," and while Southwest does well, passengers have not shunned the airlines that do charge fees. All in the name of lower fares, and there is no problem with that.

The problem here is that the government is overstepping its bounds. They have no business telling airlines what extras they can charge for and how much. How much the airlines charge and what you get for it is a matter between the airline and the passenger. If you want to avoid bag fees, WN or any first class cabin will have a seat for you.

This is an example of a bad regulation and the government getting where it doesn't belong. Deregulation is one of the best things that happened to the airline industry, and the government would be well advised to avoid undoing it, even a little bit.

Quoting ju068 (Reply 93):
Since they have not done so they have played dirty. If anything the US government is protecting the ordinary citizen against airlines.

There is no dirty, just economics and the government isn't protecting anything. I think the government should pass regulations regarding the full and proper disclosure of fees, but not at all regarding what and how much the fees are for.

If the TSA needs more revenue to operate, then they should tax bag fees at a reasonable level. The law becomes a serious problem when the government starts taxing it in order to discourage airlines from doing it.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2635
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:11 am

The bill is ridiculous and a sorry attempt at populism. The airlines are allowed to charge whatever fees they want and the consumer has a choice whether or not they want to fly that airline...just another thing the government wants to get it's hands into.

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 18):
Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 7):
I love bag fees.

Since I check no bags, why should I subsidize those who do? Want to check a bag? Pay for it.

Well considering you never saw a fare drop when bags were taken out of the fare equation, you aren't saving anything. It is simply just a way for airlines to raise fares without actually raising the base/advertised fare.

I have heard this argument bandied around more than once on here, but do you realize on most flights you're paying less now than you would on the same route in the 1960's...and that's before adjusting for inflation!!!! Just look at transcon flying, airfares today are probably half of what they were in the 60's or 70's before inflation. Airlines are not getting the yields out of base fares that they need to in order to make a profit and the consumers have obviously shown that a huge fare hike to actually cover all flying costs and a good profit margin is not palatable. So stop with the whining about not seeing a drop in airfares with bag fees when airlines have to contend with consumers demanding $280 r/t JFK-LAX fares in the face of exponentially rising fuel costs.

Bag fees are now something that airlines have to do to survive in this volatile, low-yield environment. I hate them, but until people start coming around to the idea of actually buying airfares that cover the costs of their trip, they're hear to stay.

Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 46):

Quoting Grid (Reply 39):
The U.S. is certainly not a free market economy.

How about you back that one up? If you're saying we're over-regulated on the whole, I'd be in agreement.

I don't think he was trying to be offensive because for all intents and purposes we're not a true free-market economy...our markets are in fact heavily regulated.

Quoting par13del (Reply 51):
Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 36):
Without bag fees I bet the average fare would have been up about 8%.

Yes and the federal deficit would be lower by the additional taxes that would be paid on the 2% increase

HA! I doubt even if the government confiscated 100% of baggage fees from all airlines it would make even THAT much of a dent in the deficit...nor that they would have been responsible enough not to spend it on something.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 53):
Quoting ju068 (Reply 20):
What's the big deal, the EU passed a law forbbiding credit card charges for airlines. I do not see how this is a problem...

Many of us don't want EU style government.

  

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 53):
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 28):
Yeah maybe in a perfect world. Government has to meddle in business; just like unions have to exist sometimes to protect employees, because corporations can't always be trusted to the right or ethical thing.

I'm sick and tired of people painting corporations as corrupt in the face of a patently corrupt government. Give me a CEO and a politician spouting on the same thing - and I bet on the CEO most days.

  

Quoting rafabozzolla (Reply 68):
A reasonable amount of luggage (especially in winter, not everything fits into a carry-on) is an ESSENTIAL part of a trip.

What is "reasonable" and why is it "essential" and why should any one person or small group of people get to define either of these?

Quoting airbazar (Reply 73):
Quoting rcair1 (Reply 53):

Many of us don't want EU style government.

Really? Speak for yourself. Where were you during the last presidential election?

HA! Not to stray too far off topic here, but I'd HARDLY call 2008 a ringing endorsement of EU-style socialism....and where were YOU during the 2010 election?
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14568
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:10 pm

I think part of the problem is how much the fees are today. I traveled on PeopleExpress several times back when they existed in the 1980's. They charged $3 for every checked bag, charged $.50 for a soda or coffee, on fares that were anywhere from $29 to $99 for one way domestic flights, one way flights to $149 for flights from EWR to BRU and LGW. Today those numbers adjusted for inflation would be about $9-10 and $1.25 - prices that were reasonable by any standard and a much lower percentage of the base fare than today. I don't think people would complain as much if the bag fees were $10 instead of $25-30 and a soda - a full 12 oz can - for $1.

These fees got their start when airlines would sell highly discounted tickets ahead by months, then with fuel prices going up by huge amounts in the meantime and unable to collect more in fares, needed a way to recover those additional costs from flyers. They also saw these fees were all cash to them, the government didn't get a cut. Almost no airlines makes enough profits to pay taxes on their dividends/profits to shareholders and have enough in tax credits to sometimes get a net amount from government rather than paying any net taxes These fees may be the only way for airlines to remain competitive on the initial fare price that is now the dominate way we make a choice of who to fly with.

Then you have the numerous fees by governments and airport operators added on to fares for security costs. Some of these fees are added on as some may be exempt from them, including where the government pays the fares for an employee including for military personnel. Those fees are not proportional to the fares or length of the flight.
 
NASCARAirforce
Posts: 2458
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:35 pm

I hate bag fees and I hate that some airlines (cough) Spirit charge for water also.

I just refuse to fly that airline if they do stuff like that - this has NO PLACE for the government to get involved to say what an airline can or cannot do in terms of charges (unless it comes down to bathroom charges - ie Disability Act laws, I guess water could be factored into this for people's health reasons though too)
 
User avatar
flylku
Posts: 597
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 10:44 pm

RE: Senate Bill To Ban Bag Fees

Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:25 pm

Big government strikes again. Out of one side of their mouths they laud competition. Out of the other side they stifle it.

I suspect the one airline that fears this the most is Southwest.

Once again, legislation that will increase ticket prices across the board. In this case it will be for those who pack lite and only carry on.

Can't wait for next November!
...are we there yet?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 1337Delta764, afcjets, B717fan, DarkSnowyNight, Grizzly410, LJ, LovePlanes74, N14AZ and 63 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos