ala carte fees on airlines, now I get it...

Back when all this ala carte fee structuring began, I asked myself, and then turned to my more informed and closer to the subject wife, “why are these airlines setting themselves up for vilification by charging all these extra fees?  Why don’t they just up the price of a ticket and be done with it?  Wouldn’t that practice be far more hidden to the average passenger, and not make the airlines look like money grubbing fools?”

We didn’t really do any research on the topic, but viewed it more as an item of interest, and the occasional source of conversation among the flying community.  We rarely check bags, define airline food along parallel lines with Hannibal Lecter, “I don’t even think it qualifies as food as I know the definition” and have our own earphones should we choose to listen to reruns or the lifestyle tips of the rich and famous.  We will occasionally dole out the now $7 for a cocktail, that’s about it.

So the issue never bothered us, other than it just seemed stupid to expose yourself to that kind of negative public image.  But like all things we initially deemed stupid, there has to be an underlying benefit to taking that risk.  We knew it had to be about money (what isn’t in business?) we just didn’t know exactly how it related to their quest for more.

Then the USA Today article came out today.  And it all makes “sense”, sadly.  My wife phones me from the airport, while awaiting her flight to relay the article to me.

I’m quoting  Harry R. Weber’s piece from the USA Today:

“Airlines currently pay a 7.5-cent tax to the federal government for every dollar they collect in fares, but no tax is imposed on fees collected for nonessential services, the senators said.”

Aha!  So yes, keep fares low (bonus appearance of low cost travel to customers and reduced tax expenditures) while trying to quietly up (impossible in the Internet era) the assorted fees for travel (which also happen to be tax-free, sweet!)

So shipping bags in the baggage hold is a non-essential service it seems, along with anything food related, a pillow, headsets to listen to their canned programming, even the use of the toilet, something Ryanair hopes to make use of once they get word back from Boeing on the feasibility of retrofitting their fleet of 737s with pay toilets.  No, really, they are waiting on word back from Boeing, so they can retrofit their toilets, sanctuaries in the sky as they are with a lock that opens upon payment.  It is one thing to have to pay for the use of a toilet out in the public, you are paying for the logistical convenience of “taking care of business” when and where you feel the need, but it is another thing entirely when you are twenty thousand feet in the air, and the pay toilet is your ONLY option. Aboard a small aircraft that serves food and drink no less.

But all of this might be due for a major reset thanks to Spirit Airlines.  No, they aren’t championing the rights of the commuter, they are trying to ask for a $45 fee for all carryon bags, in addition to fees for checked bags, snacks, etc…  The US Senate seems to think this is going a bit too far.  You think?  And the cry of “rising fuel costs” is quite the paper tiger these days as costs have fallen dramatically from the high of $147 back in the summer of ’08, when all this special pricing started ($86 at the time of this post).  And yet the silly fees remain.

So it all comes down to dodging taxes.  Nice.  Keeping seven and a half cents of every dollar, but alienating your customer base.  I wonder why Southwest sees fit to continue to not charge for bags. Maybe they file that tax under “marketing.”

Oh and it gets better.  Spirit Air wanted to make sure and point out the added benefits of such a fee structure, by way of Spirit’s CEO responding to the attacks, “He [New York Sen. Chuck Schumer] ignored two really good points. One is security lines will be shorter and less frustration. And it’s also safer.”  This response seems to indicate his assumption that people will avoid the fee and forego the carry-on.  He’s only partly right, they will avoid the fee, just not the carry-on, which brings us to the third benefit he left out, that there will be one less airline to worry about.  His.