Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 49

Thread: Airline Has No Spirit.

  1. #1
    Forum Veteran Daquan13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    East Boston, MA.
    Posts
    2,728

    Default Airline Has No Spirit.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_Airlines


    Spirit Airlines will start charging passengers for the use of the overhead bins on their planes!

    This new charge applies to passengers who booked after April 6 for future flights.

    Spirit claims that the charges are needed to offset the costs of ticket reservations, but analysts are saying that Spirit is charging the extra $45 anyway just because they want to be hard asses, and that they are not being fair to the passengers.

    Yet another reason not to fly!
    Last edited by Daquan13; April 16th, 2010 at 06:39 AM.

  2. #2
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    No, the thing is, these companies should just charge what they need to to operate the flights.

    If every single airline is having problems, why do they all still fight for prices? Why is there still $99 flights to Florida?

    I can understand if they are all trying to compete with a mega-corp that is shipping people like cattle and can afford the lower prices, but it just amazes me when I see crowded airports, reports of too much air traffic at airlines (clogging runway and airspace) but yet all the airlines say they do not have enough $$.....

    Something is wrong with their buisness model.

  3. #3
    Forum Veteran Daquan13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    East Boston, MA.
    Posts
    2,728

    Default

    But the so-called dirt-cheap airfares are not really dirt-cheap if those airlines engaged in all those unfair practices are going to friggen charge passengers for everything under the sun - ranging from pillows & blankets to window & aisle seats, being overweight & having to use two seats and a seat belt extension, to food & drink.

    What a crock!!

    One int'l airline (Ryan Air) even wants to start charging passengers to use the bathrooms on their flights!

    You have to sit still and be quiet, do not read anything, don't make a move and you're even limited as to how many times you can use the bathroom!! They are treating the passengers like little boys & girls!

    Where & when will this all end?

  4. #4
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    being overweight & having to use two seats and a seat belt extension
    That is not a crock.

    If I am paying the same $$ to travel somewhere and have Mr Tons-O-Fun rolling over the seat next to me so I can't even sit strait in my own, I would expect that he would have to make special accomodations, and restitution, for his increased girth.

    The only tricky thing is, where do you draw the line? You definitely need two seats when you have to impose on others you are near, but how can you quantify it? Have people sit in chairs and measure them? Have people squeeze through sertain size doors?



    As for the other things like blankets and pillows, that is just plain cheap. I think the soda thing may cost the most just because of space and weight, but no more so than tap water.


    I think they have the right to charge for anything that IS extra. But within reason. Charge a buck for a soda, charge the same for some chips. Charge XX/lb for any checked in baggage, but allow one standard size carry-on for free! Blankets? How much does that really cost them? Same with pillows.

    If they are having $$ problems, they need to up their prices on the front end and do not do the classic health care nickel-and-dime routine ($30 asprin).

  5. #5
    Forum Veteran Daquan13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    East Boston, MA.
    Posts
    2,728

    Default

    It IS a crock.

    Before 09-11, all that stuff in coach was for free. The only thing that you paid extra for was for beer, alcoholic beverages and to listen to movies through the supplied headsets.

    I think not too far from now, they'll start charging the passengers to look out of the windows, stow personal items in the seat pockets and to use the tray tables!

    I just think sometimes, that they are getting too far out of hand and they're getting away with too much with all those ridiculous charges, even though they might seem small to you.

    Some people (myself included), are on a limited income from the gov't, and we have to try to make ends meet by making sure that we know where every penny is going and keep track of it.

    I just don't think that it's fair for the airlines to nickel-&-dime us! And until they relax some of that crap, I just won't fly.
    Last edited by Daquan13; April 16th, 2010 at 07:05 AM.

  6. #6
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    Daq, I think you just got the point that others will make.

    If you are on a limited income, why are you concerned about flying around? That was, and still is, a luxury that we have come to expect as somehow being a given rather than something that is earned, saved for, and somehow special.

    Like many things in our lives, we seem to expect it rather than truly appreciate it.

    I still remember when it was a big deal to have a used 12" B+W TV in the room I shared with my brother (complete with coathanger arial!) when today's kids are walking around with iPods and portable computers.

    Does that mean I WANT everything to go back to the way it was? Hell no, but at the same time I don't think many truly realize how good we all have it, even in comparison to ourselves just a generation ago.

  7. #7

  8. #8
    Forum Veteran Daquan13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    East Boston, MA.
    Posts
    2,728

    Default

    Looks like that guy is sitting on the armrest of that seat!

    Ninjahedge;

    I used to work for United Airlines and I used to fly on standby (non-rev). This was back in the '90s when flying standby was a pleasure. I still paid for a ticket then at times.

    But eventually, even THAT became a nightmare as well because I once got stuck in Las Vegas for 8 hours and stuck in San Francisco for another 7 hours. The next year that I went there, I happly PAID for a ticket over flying standby.

    Flying still beats the bus, but until and unless some of that nonsense goes away, I won't fly. I have no problem at all paying for a plane ticket if I need to be at a place quickly.

    But come on now, something's gotta give! I don't care about PAYING for a ticket. I'm just not going to be croaked for extras on the planes that used to be for free in coah. I won't do it!!
    Last edited by Daquan13; April 12th, 2010 at 02:30 PM.

  9. #9
    Forum Veteran Daquan13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    East Boston, MA.
    Posts
    2,728

    Default

    The Federal Gov't is now happily stepping in and is getting involved in this latest unfair practice, saying that it will heavily tax airlines that plan to charge passengers for their carry-on bags being stowed in the overhead bins.

    "This type of practice is very unfair to travelers and it will not be tolerated. The carry-on feature is a right and convenience to the traveler and it shouldn't have to be abused by carriers who want to charge the passengers for something that is a nessecity and is a safety feature that's mandated by the FAA. They've gone too far!" one official said.

    So this ridiculous charge that Spirit plans to put in place by this coming summer just might go away.
    Last edited by Daquan13; April 16th, 2010 at 07:10 AM.

  10. #10
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    I think the government should stay out of this.

    They have enough problems to deal with, making sure we are charged "fairly" for something that is, to 95% of the people even in the US, a LUXURY, is a waste of time and money.

    It is only a cheap attempt at getting approval ratings from their constituenct by beating on a generally unpopular idea that will have little, if any, ramifications to their political monitary support.

  11. #11

    Default

    Well, it is ridiculous that they are charging customers with carry-on bags, I am happy Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) is blocking it from becoming true.

  12. #12
    Forum Veteran Daquan13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    East Boston, MA.
    Posts
    2,728

    Default

    Ninja;

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be condoning this new charge for the use of the overhead bin.

    Nothing against you at all, but if you don't mind the idea of having to fork up an extra $45 or $50 charge for using the overhead bin, then more power to you.

    Honestly, I don't think that any airline should be allowed to get away with imposing this ridiculous charge.

    Have you ever thought that the gov't is intervening because the use of the bins are FAA-regulated and that it IS for the safety and welfare of the passengers that carry-on bags be properly stowed in closed and latched bins, not only during taxi takeoff and landing, but just in case of unexpected turbulences in flight? It HAS happened.

    No one should ever have to be forced to pay any extra money for stowing their carry-on bags in the overhead bin. The buck stops here! Airlines are simply getting away with too much these days.
    Last edited by Daquan13; April 16th, 2010 at 10:28 AM.

  13. #13
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daquan13 View Post
    Ninja;

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be condoning this new charge for the use of the overhead bin.
    Condoning means I approve of the business practice, which I do not.

    But I do not need the government to be my mother. If I do not LIKE the practice, I do not USE the company providing the service. This is not something I need on a daily basis, and somehow thinking that I am entitled to legal protection from a stated charge is ridiculous.

    It is like saying that somehow Plasma/LCD TV's should be price controlled to limit profit (because it is my right to watch TV) or, as Teno would probably agree with, Apple was legally prevented from charging whatever it wanted for its non life essential products!

    Nothing against you at all, but if you don't mind the idea of having to fork up an extra $45 or $50 charge for using the overhead bin, then more power to you.
    Where did I say I did not mind?

    Honestly, I don't think that any airline should be allowed to get away with this ridiculous charge.
    They should be allowed to charge for whatever service they provide that is more than moving your tuckus from here to there. Does that mean you have to LIKE it or USE it? No. But we demand that services be cheaper and cheaper, and they make them cheaper, but then do not make enough profit to stay in business. So they ala-carte everything.

    Would you rather pay more on every flight you take? Would you like it if nothing was charged extra and someone else drinking more, eating more, and taking more luggage would be shared on your ticket price?

    Again, I am not condoning this. I am just saying the government should stop focusing on this and let US handle it by simply NOT choosing that airline to fly on.

    ANY politician jumping on this is like getting on the bandwagon against puppy killing. (not that that is not legal...). Chances are, you will get nobody disagreeing with you on the matter and it will increase your voting popularity ("Crime is WRONG!!!!"), but does not really serve the public at large.

    Have you ever thought that the gov't is intervening because the use of the bins are FAA-regulated and that it IS for the safety and welfare of the passengers that carry-on bags be properly stowed in closed and latched bins, not only during taxi takeoff and landing, but just in case of unexpected turbulences in flight? It HAS happened.
    That has nothing to do with charging for carrying bags on. The FAA says nothing about that.

    No one should ever have to be forced to pay any extra money for stowing their carry-on bags in the overhead bin. The buck stops here! Airlines are simply getting away with too much these days.
    Why should they be forced not to charge? In a consumer market for a non-essential service, the answer is simple.

    DON'T FLY.

  14. #14
    Forum Veteran Daquan13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    East Boston, MA.
    Posts
    2,728

    Default

    So you DO, in some way, AGREE with the airlines doing whatever the hell they want to do.

    Well then, any airline that decides to take up this horrible practice will eventually get their just deserts; They WILL start to LOSE some of their loyal customers and they in turn, will start to seek other airlines that aren't charging for that. Which means that they will start to lose money! And in THIS day & age, they can't afford to lose customers because they are still trying to rebound from the affects of the 09-11 terror attacks.

    Laptops when closed, can fit into the seat pocket in front of you, but I'll be dammned if I'm going to put it into a checked suitcase, especially now since the gov't forces you to keep your checked in bags unlocked!! And I WILL seek an airline that dosen't charge for the use of the overhead bin.

    I don't mind flying and paying for the plane ticket. I'm just NOT paying for the use of the overhead bin. I go elsewhere.
    Last edited by Daquan13; April 16th, 2010 at 11:01 AM.

  15. #15
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,781

    Default

    No, I don't. Daq, you are playing sides here.

    There is a difference between declaring when you buy the ticket that you need to pay extra for X Y and Z, and giving you a bunch of free soda on a trans-atlantic and charging you $20 for the bathroom.

    The choice is still ours, and I do not believe it is in the province of the GOVERNMENT to tell them what to do. It is OUR responsibility to tell them, by feedback AND by simply not using them in favor of a compeditor, that we do not approve.

    As for the Laptop, you are getting off topic again. I am not disagreeing with you on the concepts there, all I am saying is that that does NOT fit into consumer protection, safety, or any other regulation that the US government should have a say in.

    I don't mind flying and paying for the plane ticket. I'm just NOT paying for the use of the overhead bin. I go elsewhere.
    And that is exactly what I am saying.


    BTW, would you still fly them if the cost of ticket PLUS overhead compartment was less than any other ticket? How much less would make you fly a plane where you did not like the policy? 10%?

    Many people say they will not use something, that they do not approve of this and that, but then when they are presented with a $99 ticket to LA (with a $20 overhead luggage charge) as opposed to $200 for another airline, guess what they choose?

    Completely off topic, why do you think Wal Mart does so well with its shoddy products, poor worker policies, and aggressive buisness models? Many do not LIKE what they are doing, but $2 TUBE SOCKS??!? /Colbert.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Airline Safety
    By BrooklynRider in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: September 19th, 2008, 12:39 PM
  2. Airline offices in NYC
    By matvail2002 in forum Questions and Answers about New York City
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 7th, 2006, 11:33 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: October 22nd, 2005, 07:29 PM
  4. The Spirit of Houston
    By BigMac in forum World Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: February 10th, 2004, 02:45 PM
  5. Song (the airline) opens new SoHo store
    By STT757 in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 7th, 2003, 05:50 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software