Slashdot Mirror


United Makes Plans to Drop 'Baggage Neutrality'

theodp writes "If you need a clue as to how creative ISP execs might get in the absence of network neutrality, look no further than United Airlines CEO Glenn Tilton, who is wowing Wall Street with his willingness to examine new ways to wring money out of the carrier, including making economy passengers pay a fee unless they want their luggage to come last off the plane." Now I think when i was like gold ultimate handjob elite years ago my bags had tags that usually made them come out first, but this seems just kinda crappy. I mean, remember when you got a meal on airplanes? No wonder people hate to fly.

18 of 682 comments (clear)

  1. TANSTAAFL by winkydink · · Score: 5, Informative

    First, the article saya the CEO of United "wants to pursue everything, from a merger to charging passengers who want their luggage to come first off the plane" (emphasis mine). That's a far cry from the article title which infers it's a done deal.

    Deregulation brought about intense competition in airline fares. The flying public wants to get from Point A to Point B as quickly as possible. As a result, the airlines have been under continued pressure to reduce costs to stay competitive. This has resulted in charging for meals and in some cases, even pillows.

    ISP's are in a similar boat with respect to intense pressure on keeping prices low. It's only a matter of time before they figure out how to charge additional
    fees for "extras". You get what you pay for.

    Oh, and you still get "priority" tags on your bags for being an elite frequent flyer. Whether or not your bags come out first though is strictly a matter of chance.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    1. Re:TANSTAAFL by rjhubs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is the moves airlines make don't make sense if they wish to stay in buisness. In a competitive enviroment, buisnesses should be seeking to reduce their costs and increase the value a customer recieves. Charging to get your baggage first lowers the value of the product because while people who pay might get added value, the customer who is still paying the same ticket price gets less value by having their luggage no longer randomly come out. If the airlines were interested in being more competitve the correct move would be to offer flyers a discount if they don't mind their luggage coming out last. Removing meals from planes is the same thing. Reducing costs is only effective if you change the way you act internally and the product the public gets doesn't suffer.

    2. Re:TANSTAAFL by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nope. How it works is this. The baggage handlers can see all the people waiting at the carousel. Not only that, but they know everybody's face and name. Then they search through all the bags, and find the ones belonging to the people who are closest to the belt. They unload those first.

      If it isn't so, why does everyone press right up to the belt, even if their bag isn't there, completely getting in the way of anyone whose bag is on on the belt?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. No problem by LordSnooty · · Score: 5, Funny

    making economy passengers pay a fee unless they want their luggage to come last off the plane.
    If no-one pays the fee, all our luggage will come off at the same time. Problem solved.
  3. I mean, remember when you got a meal on airplanes? by Jack+Malmostoso · · Score: 5, Funny

    I do. And I'd rather forget, believe me.

  4. Re:Not a dump truck by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This kind of stuff is why I try to fly Southwest Airlines whenever possible.

    I mean...yeah, I'm not thrilled with the 'cattle car' mentality you go through, but, hey....at least their prices are reasonable, they seem to be about the best with respect to flight times, and they don't seem to try to fsck the last $ out of their customers.

    I hope, though, that they stop the policy of trying to keep good looking chicks with skimpy outfits off the planes....that was kinda stupid.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  5. Re:Not a dump truck by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny

    The baggage claim is not a dump truck!

    Of course not. It's a series of belts.

  6. Ah, but you see.. by The+Creator · · Score: 5, Funny

    If noone pays, the luggage will come out at the same time - but last. If everyone pays, it will come out at the same time - but first!

    --

    FRA: STFU GTFO
  7. EasyJet/RyanAir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The airlines all have to be looking at the low cost European carriers, such as RyanAir or EasyJet. I haven't flown EasyJet in a while, but on RyanAir, the ticket covers carriage, everything else, baggage, excess baggage, drinks, priority seating, luggage tags, calls to customer service, etc. etc. are a premium. It's declared up front, and you take the "a la carte" items you wish.

    The problem is, that taking one part of this model will not work, you have to take it all - very low cost tickets, fly only one type of plane, open seats, fast airport turn around, and so forth. The leading carriers in the US don't get this, so will nickel and dime without adding service or reducing costs/fares.

    1. Re:EasyJet/RyanAir by allcar · · Score: 5, Informative

      The low cost Airlines are actually being taken to task for the lack of transparency in this approach. The problem is that they are advertising flights at a specific price point, but it is never possible to actually travel for that price. I was particularly annoyed by a recent Ryanair flight. Checking in each item of luggage cost an extra 10GBP, so the wife and I thought we would save a tenner by sharing a single case. As it turned out, for checking in without a case, there was still a charge of 4GBP. So the advertised price was not a real price at all. In order to get on the plane you had to pay at least 4GBP over the advertised price, before you even start to talk about airport taxes and fuel surcharges. I can see no point at all in having a price that does not include check-in, as check-in is compulsory. It's just a marketing game.
      To make things worse, our shared case was overweight, so we ended up paying 25GBP excess baggage - teach me to be a skinflint.

  8. It already happens today by Hangtime · · Score: 5, Informative

    Submitter has never worked in the airline industry before.

    You will notice bright orange tags as they come off the converyor belt in baggage claim. Those tags are for GS, 1K, Premier Exec, Premier, *Gold, and *Silver. The idea is that you alert ground crews to the bags belonging to the best customers so that they will offload those first. This is no different from AA, Delta, USAirways, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, and every other airline that flies. All Tilton wants to do is offer this service as an add-on so if you are NOT an elite member and feel it necessary to get your bags off in a hurry (tight transfer in ORD or LHR perhaps) you can purchase that service.

    *wacks subby over the head*

  9. I drive at every opportunity by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As someone who travels quite regularly for their job, I avoid the airports whenever possible because of this type of crap. These days, if it's under 500 miles each way, I'll drive it. I used to wish for the airlines to all go out of business, hoping that they'd be forced to figure out a business model that was actually profitable, but gave up on that after we (US taxpayers) were forced to bail them out after 9/11. It's a mess with no easy fix in sight, unless someone can magically make all of the airline lobbyists disappear.

  10. A Lesson in Airline Revenue Managment for /. by Hangtime · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm seeing a lot of anger and discussion as to why are airlines *cheapening* the flight and do all of these things like what United does with Economy Plus or Continental and Northwest charging for exit row. So let me bring you into the world of US domestic air travel.

    Domestic air travel is one of the five most price elastic products avaliable for purchase today. This means when you go on to Orbitz we all charge practically the same thing. Internal tests in the airlines have proven that a $5 difference in airfare will dry up your demand. So, no people for the most part say they want everything but time again have proven through actions that they will only buy for the most part on price. International flights are a different story.

    Price, Schedule, Frequency in that order is how people buy airfare. The idea now is to shrink the price as much as possible and try to recoup through the difference with ancillary revenue streams. This is why you see such things as purchase of Snacks on Board, charging for pillows, SkyBus and RyanAir charging for everything. People complain about buying a $5 meal on the plane but you can create a better product and for most part people realize they will pay $10 in airport for the same caliber of meal.

    Since the industry is so price sensitive it is trying to debundle the product. It costs money to serve meals and when you make as little as $200 on a flight from JFK to LAX TOTAL, you have to find other ways. So what do we do, we try to offer things that people are willing to purchase. Economy Plus 5 additional inches of leg room on most United flights...it makes a big difference when you go cross-country or across the ocean. Purchase an Admirals Club ticket from AA for $35 for the day so you have a place to shower and change because you can't check into your hotel in London until after 4:00 PM but you got there at 10:00 AM.

    Programs like giving luggage priority to the customer that flys 1 or 2 times a year is to give customers what they want (a lower flight price), but also for those folks that want something extra a place where they can purchase it.

  11. The Point Is... by beadfulthings · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You don't get what you pay for, but you're required to pay anyway. As in:

    1) You pay for homeowners' insurance only to find that your particular disaster isn't going to be covered. Just ask the people on the Gulf Coast.
    2) You pay for a utility, like phone or cable, only to find that when you've got a problem or outage, you're without your service--not for hours, but for days or possibly even weeks. (Ever try to get a rebate from, say, your phone company when they take four days to send out a "technician" to spend twenty minutes fixing your trouble?)
    3) You pay ever-increasing costs for your health insurance only to find that a catastrophic illness or accident leaves you in debt for years.
    4) You pay for what is termed "unlimited" Internet services only to find that your ISP is cutting you back because they have a different idea of what constitutes "unlimited."
    5) You earn your money, but you are required to pay the bank ever-increasing "fees" so that they can use it until you need it. In some cases, you even have to pay to speak with a human being (as opposed to an automated system) to receive an answer to your question.

    We're all part of a vast pool of money to be tapped into at will, and the game is to return the bare minimum of value for what we're all willing (or able) to pay. Why should the airlines be any different? An interesting article appeared on CNN a couple of days ago. It seems the "working poor" are having increasing trouble making that paycheck stretch from one payday to the next--and the term "working poor" is now encroaching more and more into the "middle class." The Big Box Marts are starting to notice an impact to their bottom lines.

    The airlines will find that fewer and fewer people can afford to fly, so they'll focus on ways to wring more out of the people who can still afford to fly. It's not surprising.

    --
    "Here's what's happening. You're starting to drive like your Dad..." - Red Green
  12. Re:I used to like flying... by pla · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've never traveled by train, just taken tourist-type train rides.

    Travelling by train actually pretty much rocks, if you don't need to get across the country in three to five hours (or cross an ocean, obviously).

    They don't pack you in like sardines, you frequently have real tables and comfy seats (as in, you can face your travelling companions and play cards or something), you can move about (pee, go to the bar, etc) whenever you want, usually no assigned seating (which could count as a downside, but usually the non-commuter-trains have so few passengers you have all the choice you could want)... For a vacation rather than a business trip, I'd highly recommend going by train - And as a bonus, you'll actually see the country rather than seeing clouds.

    Of course, like the rest of our lives, we Americans even make our leisure time a non-stop rush-rush-rush flurry of activity. Get "there" as fast as possible, then lose more sleep than normal trying to visit every point of interest in a 100mi radius of our destination. Thus we have the phenomenon of needing to come home an extra day before resuming work because we need to crash from what we call "relaxation".

    Sad.

  13. Re:Not a dump truck by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I was doing VTC installs on the west coast I usually flew Southwest and it was great because I just wanted to get there and get home. If I got to the airport early I usually got on an earlier flight no problem, if I was late then I got on a later flight with no extra charges. I packed light personally but had a 50 pound tool kit that never was a problem. I rarly had a reason to bitch about SWA.

    Now the other west coast carrier, America West was a horror story almost every time. I would wait overnight and fly SWA before I got on another AWA flight. We once arrived at the counter at 6:30am an hour before our flight, pre-9/11, only to be told that because we booked the flight over 30 days prior and failed to confirm in the last 24 hours we were bumped. Even though the seats were paid for. Of course they tell us this after our luggage went down the chute, which they told us we could retrieve if we ever got to Portland. Then promised us to get us on the next flight. Fast forward 8 hours and we are still being fed bullshit by the ticket agents, of course I forgot to mention the two little bored kids with us. AAAAAAAAAAAhhhhh never agian AWA we went done the counter and immediately got on a SWA flight, kids got to sit with the pilot during a lay over (pre-9/11 again dang I miss the old days) and arrived 12 hours after our luggage, which was dumped beside a carousel out in the open. Never again AmericaWorst!

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
  14. Re:Not a dump truck by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is not equivalent to net neutrality.

    The analogous situation to no net neutrality would be to say the destination countries need to pay to guarantee good baggage delivery, so people don't associate them with lost baggage.

    Charging the customer for better service is a perfectly acceptable way to handle getting more money, both the cable and phone companies do it.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  15. Re:Less is more by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The government should've let a multi-billion dollar industry go down because terrorists took over a few planes?
    If they had gone out of business, it wouldn't have been because of terrorists, but because they had a faulty business model to begin with.

    I'm pretty sick of people using 9-11 as an excuse for everything from having to bomb Iran to having to wiretap Americans without warrants to giving corporations special taxpayer-funded benefits (only after they make large contributions to candidates, though).

    Let's see, what else is happening with 9-11 as the excuse? Um, how about creating an ex post facto law to give telcos immunity from prosecution for having broken the law (even though the illegal act took place 6 months before 9-11?

    Bullshit. 3000 people die and a nation of 300 million goes belly up?

    Bullshit. We are being played.
    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.