American Airlines -- $15 for your first bag to check-in now!

[Count Desmo]

I'd just as soon stay out of that sticky wicket.

I'm not entirely sure what a "sticky wicket" is, but it sounds kinda kinky.

[ducatania]

I'm not even going into applying financial penalties to people who are considered "overweight" or "obese".  That gets messy quick... changing societal definitions, lack of scientific evidence whether it's genetic or not, and other arguments mean I'd just as soon stay out of that sticky wicket.

At the end of the day, I personally don't care.  As both a tall guy and an engineer in the aerospace industry, I am acutely aware of the arguments on both sides.  My pocketbook prefers no weight penalties for heavier people, but hey, whatever.

As far as AA charging for checked baggage... that's bogus.  TSA screws you at security, and now the airline wants to screw you if you avoid security by checking luggage.  Fahdge... do they want the whole airline industry to go belly-up?

Charging a passenger more because of their weight? I can see the problems with that. But when some fat slob ends up taking 1 1/2 seats, they should have to pay for both of them.

As for the bags, they have those "boxes" at the gate check in to see if your carry on fits inside or they don't let it on the plane. And they keep making that smaller.

Let's face it, the entire airline industry is make the beast with two backsed.

[Duc L'Smart]

Someday, I want to have just enough money, so that whenever (or if) I fly, I can overnight my luggage ahead, & just walk on the plane with my iPhone & wallet... 

[Triple J]

As for the bags, they have those "boxes" at the gate check in to see if your carry on fits inside or they don't let it on the plane. And they keep making that smaller.

Really?  Carry on roller bags have been the same size for years.  I was a baggage handler in the mid 90s and carry ons were allowed to be the same size as now.  In fact, the overhead bins in newer planes are larger than older ones. 

[Randimus Maximus]

I can understand some of the concerns with this new policy...luckily, I rarely (if ever) fly American and am a Premier Executive member with United, so I can check three bags free!

But if you look at airfares over the last ten years (at least), you'll note that they haven't changed much.

Certainly, the airlines can do a lot of things to get their houses in order, but we've become very accustomed to flying on the cheap.

Consolidation will continue to take place, reducing capacity and naturally causing prices to increase.

As cyrus said, it is what it is.

[darylbowden]

The airline industry is just one of many american industries to be in shitty condition right now.  Yes, this is ridiculous in that we see it as 15/bag, but in reality, all the airlines need to make up for the increase in oil, some will do it with higher fares, others with hidden fees and American has chosen the 15/bag policy.  Does it sounds dumb?  Yes.  But, I guarantee you corporations that book tons of flights will swallow this pill a lot easier than a 10% (or whatever) fare increase.

[S4ROB]

HOW TO SAVE THE AIRLINES

Dump the male flight attendants. No one wanted them in the first place.

Replace all the female flight attendants with good-looking strippers! What the hell -- They don't even serve food anymore, so what's the loss?

The strippers would at least triple the alcohol sales and get a 'party atmosphere' going in the cabin. And, of course, every businessman in
this country would start flying again, hoping to see naked women.

Because of the tips, female flight attendants wouldn't need a salary, thus saving even more money. I suspect tips would be so good that we
could charge the women for working the plane and have them kickback 20% of the tips, including lap dances and 'special services.'

Muslims would be afraid to get on the planes for fear of seeing naked women. Hijackings would come to a screeching halt, and the airline
industry would see record revenues.

This is definitely a win-win situation if we handle it right -- a golden opportunity to turn a liability into an asset.

Why didn't Bush think of this? Why do I still have to do everything myself?

Sincerely,
Bill Clinton

[ptam]

As someone who flies constantly on business right now, I find this whole thing ridiculous.  Although 95% of the time, I am carry on only, I find it ridiculous to be charging for the first bag.  I would not be opposed to a small fare hike across the board instead.  They're conditioning people to overpack and overstuff the overhead bins, which they already are at that point.  This will just delay flights and add to more passenger frustration, as overhiead bin anxiety is already high enough.  I am now avoiding American Airlines at all cost, even if I have to pick a fare with another airline that is several hundred dollars more, just out of principle.

There was a woman who wrote into USA Today that said that she felt that the airlines should charge fares based on weight, that because she only weighed 125 lbs, that it was not fair that she subsidized people who are heavier.  I don't think that'd ever fly.  I'm not opposed to charging the folks for an additional seat if they cannot fit in the one they are in.  I've been in the situation sitting next to someone like that before ... where they took 1 1/2 seats (they spilled well over the arm rest), and I was only in 1/2 of mine. 

[cmorgan47]

last time i flew (spirit) it was 20 for the first bag.
problem is, my wife brings lotions/shampoo/etc, which cannot be carried on if greater than 3 oz... so in effect, there is no way to carry more than 3oz of a liquid for free

this is the biggest "theatre of security" ever devised....absolutely worthless

[ptam]

Looks like US Airways and United followed suit.  Now US Airways is also charging $2 for sodas now.  They call this their "'pay-for-what-you-use' model."  What next, a $25 surcharge for a seat to sit in?

[bigiain]

But if you look at airfares over the last ten years (at least), you'll note that they haven't changed much.

Hmmm, I've got some records here for 11 years worth of return flights from Sydney to San Francisco in late Aug/early Sept... In 1998 I paid $1440 - last friday I paid $2610 (last year I paid $2221).

Addmittedly, a few hundred dollars worth of that is in new "airport taxes" imposed by the Australian government, but I'm seeing an 80% price increase there... (which, over 11 years is only 5.4%/year, which I guess I shouldn't complain too much about...)

big

[55Spy]

The cost for luggage is directly related to the cargo space available and the weight that goes with it as others have stated.

But what I did not see was the part of the business model that the airlines employ in taking paid freight/cargo on commercial flights as a means of additional income.  The less amount of checked baggage directly relates to more cargo space and available weight to be used to transport cargo they are charging companies to transport from place A to place B.

I disagree in the charge for one checked bag, If they want to go that way allow one bag for free, and an under seat bag ie purse computer bag etc.  If you chose to check the bag then ok, if you chose to carry on to avaoid the baggage line OK, But I sometimes must check and don't have a carry-on because I am transporting things that can't meet TSA's requirements for in cabin travel. But whatever, It's not like I'm gonna take the train to avoid airlines!

[ptam]

I think what this does is encourage people to drive if they can now.  With all the TSA restrictions, it was already pushing people to drive if the trip was less than 5 hours.  For myself, I would much rather drive from San Francisco to Los Angeles than fly.  When I figure out door to door times, it is about 4 hours or so for me to fly.  I can drive it in about 5.

[erik822]

I think many of our problems with the airlines would be fixed if they were allowed to go belly up and disappear entirely. Everyone pregnant doges about airline service, pricing, etc. But the airlines have no real reason to give a rats ass. If they screw everything up, the CEO and board memebers get rich, the rest of the company takes a pay cut and then the airline just hits the reset button. At that point in time they get to renegotiate all their contracts and gain an advantage over their competitors. Whereas if they just went tits up, the other airline (the one doing a better job of running a business) would be able to expand profitably.

By the way, last year Douglas Steenland CEO of Northwest Airlines Corp. got paid 6 and half million. The 18th highest salary in Minnesota. Since they excited bankruptcy, NWA stock has done nothing but go down. Who helped bail out Northwest Airlines? We did. Taxpayers. They changed all the agreements they've made with the state, forced changes on the employees and took good care of the board in the process. Congraulations are due to Douglas Steenland. The ultimate Welfare Queen.