Price discrimination is charging customers different prices for the same good/service. Here Southwest is simply recombining the services it sells into different bundles. True, the purpose is the same as with price discrimination: they expect the new scheme to let them appropriate
some of the consumer surplus that existed under the old one.
How many of these problems result from airlines charging for checked bags and not charging for the overhead bin space? (although the risk of them losing a bag is higher than it should be, so there is another hidden cost to checking a bag, in addition to the time lost at baggage claim). I don't understand why I can't reserve an overhead bin space with my seat. Then the plane could board sensibly back to front, window seats first, etc without the risk of the people at the back taking the overhead bin space at the front.
In Japan checked baggage is still free, most people do check their luggage as a result. Though I am far from the only one who doesn't for the standard M-F business trip. Fortunately it seems to be rare that (on the flights I'm on) too many people do like me. Mind you one thing people in Japan can do is ship luggage direct to/from the hotel which solves the whole problem of dragging it to and through the airport, deciding to check it etc.
JAL has, in the last year or so, experimented with different boarding options for hoi polloi. Back of the plane first, window seat first etc. I think they seem to have decided that window seat first is better
Charging for checked bags is a kind of price discrimination, too. The airline's baggage handlers don't work for free, so better to pass the costs along to the customers who are actually causing them to be incurred.
I guess I'm a bit of a pack mule when it comes to traveling, because I almost always check my bags. I guess I view the danger of flying to Texas or Oregon or some other far off corner of the country and not having the right clothes for the occasion as a far bigger cost than the 5-10 minutes you save not having to stand around the luggage carousel waiting for your bag.
“they will figure out another way to charge extra for reserving seats next to people who are not super-sized.“ Let’s take this a step further and suggest pricing in proportion to one’s weight. People that weigh less require less fuel, thus they should pay less. Work = Force x Distance.
Extra wide load passengers should pay an externality fee, or be invited to super size their seats. Would wide girth seats be more or less expensive than business and first class?
Being tall, I would gladly pay extra for a taller seat with more legroom.
The first time I traveled by jet was circa 1975 on Southwest Airlines from Lubbock, TX to Austin. Standby fares were around $19 at the time. Being a poor college student, I went standby. The plane was boarding and I patiently waited for my name to be called. Finally, as the last passenger to board the plane, I heard my name. I went onto the plane and they closed the door behind me. And I looked for my seat, the last seat available in the cabin. And looked. And looked. The stewardess told me to take my seat, but I, then her, could not find it. Finally, as the plane was taxiing to the runway, we found my seat. I was next to one of the largest persons I had encountered to that date (remember, it was about 1975.) That has set my expectations for flying ever since.
This is a monumentally stupid decision. Tax abitratage is also a major driver here. The ticket tax (I think 7.5%) doesn't apply to ancillary revenues (like seat assignments and bag fees). Southwest's boarding process is the fastest the fastest in the industry which enables quicker turns than any other airline and thus greater utilization. They are going to end up sacrificing a round trip for every city pair to chase a seat upgrades.
Assigned seats will relieve Southwest from policing their open seating policy in ways that could trigger cries of racism. Most flights are uneventful and most people are polite, but I have also recently seen
a) a black man sit across two seats in row 4 during group A boarding on a full flight; was any flight attendant going to tell him not to do that? His wife was in the window seat.
b) a hispanic man trail in on group A boarding with a C pass, and fake not being able to speak English at the gate check even though a couple of us had struck up a friendly conversation with him during the long wait and explained to him he had a C pass.
c) those of any color who abuse early boarding by arriving in a wheelchair.
Southwest takes the blame for any late departures, and gets no credit if the late departure resulted from policing open seating, while opening themselves up to racial drama.
My wife and I have been flying with SWA for the past 8 years after ditching AA because of what we regard as excessive fees for checked bags—and poor service in general. We always check suitcase/bags and stow what little we carry under the seats in front of us. As for obese travelers, we see lots of them on our SWA flights—we fly business select, get to board early and get either AB or EF seats and give the stink eye to discourage any solo obese person who looks like they want to sit in the aisle seat.
They don't really. Their "customer of size" policy is optional, "may proactively purchase" and it is "complementary" if you are willing to go though the hellish pain of the process to eventually get the refund. So far these frictions have prevented a flood of marginally less obese people from abusing the system and doubling up, but I doubt that's sustainable, which is true of most things that rely on widespread adherence to norms of courtesy, integrity, and the honor system in contemporary America.
American and United require purchase of the extra seats. Many other airlines like the policy to be kind of vague with nods to being accommodating if possible, but also, if you need room and didn't buy that extra ticket and the fight is full, they can boot you off the plane until there's a flight with enough extra space for you. In the background is fear of all kinds of lawsuits or potential goverment penalties or new regulations.
Interesting title: price discrimination. This implies something akin to racial injustice (or some other type of injustice) when a company charges different rates for preferred seating. However, how is this different from paying for early bird checkin or for a "business fare" where one can pay more for a guaranteed A1 - A15 seating arrangement? It isn't.
The most recent analysis of the airline industry shows SW as less profitable per seat mile as the mainline carriers, so I suspect they are trying to make up the difference for competitive positioning.
I loved this aspect of flying Southwest. There was an aspect of meritocratic egalitarianism. It rewarded people who were organized enough to check-in 24hrs prior. I also liked the lottery aspect…what number will I get today? I read somewhere that this system made it much faster for Southwest to board planes compared to other airlines. I wonder how this new policy will affect the duration of the boarding process…
I think it's illegal, by govt rules, to charge more to fat people.
It should be legal, and some airlines should do so, while also having extra-wide seats at 50% more (2 seats instead of 3).
Fat folk encroach on seating neighbor's space. It's not nice for the normal folk who get stuck next to them.
Race, sex, height, are fixed. Weight is a series of daily decisions on how much to eat, and exercise.
20 years of slight overeating creates a fat guy -- the history is why the current status exists. Some folk for the same amount of food get fatter -- life is unfair Reality is unfair. It's not injustice, tho..
We don't have enough truth about the difference of injustice, based on human decisions, and unfairness, which abounds between different people.
It's not directly illegal for airlines to charge larger customers more for the extra space they require, though there are lobbies for the obese which are trying to make it that way. However, some obese people will make the claim that their obesity is a consequence of some recognized disability which must be accommodated, and airlines don't want to have to argue the point over and over.
Price discrimination is charging customers different prices for the same good/service. Here Southwest is simply recombining the services it sells into different bundles. True, the purpose is the same as with price discrimination: they expect the new scheme to let them appropriate
some of the consumer surplus that existed under the old one.
How many of these problems result from airlines charging for checked bags and not charging for the overhead bin space? (although the risk of them losing a bag is higher than it should be, so there is another hidden cost to checking a bag, in addition to the time lost at baggage claim). I don't understand why I can't reserve an overhead bin space with my seat. Then the plane could board sensibly back to front, window seats first, etc without the risk of the people at the back taking the overhead bin space at the front.
In Japan checked baggage is still free, most people do check their luggage as a result. Though I am far from the only one who doesn't for the standard M-F business trip. Fortunately it seems to be rare that (on the flights I'm on) too many people do like me. Mind you one thing people in Japan can do is ship luggage direct to/from the hotel which solves the whole problem of dragging it to and through the airport, deciding to check it etc.
JAL has, in the last year or so, experimented with different boarding options for hoi polloi. Back of the plane first, window seat first etc. I think they seem to have decided that window seat first is better
Charging for checked bags is a kind of price discrimination, too. The airline's baggage handlers don't work for free, so better to pass the costs along to the customers who are actually causing them to be incurred.
the cost differential means that it is not really price discrimination.
We may have a "second best problem" here.
I hope the wrong people don't read that.
I guess I'm a bit of a pack mule when it comes to traveling, because I almost always check my bags. I guess I view the danger of flying to Texas or Oregon or some other far off corner of the country and not having the right clothes for the occasion as a far bigger cost than the 5-10 minutes you save not having to stand around the luggage carousel waiting for your bag.
“they will figure out another way to charge extra for reserving seats next to people who are not super-sized.“ Let’s take this a step further and suggest pricing in proportion to one’s weight. People that weigh less require less fuel, thus they should pay less. Work = Force x Distance.
Extra wide load passengers should pay an externality fee, or be invited to super size their seats. Would wide girth seats be more or less expensive than business and first class?
Being tall, I would gladly pay extra for a taller seat with more legroom.
“we could choose a seat next to someone of normal girth.“ Please include in your up coming stand up comedy routine.
The first time I traveled by jet was circa 1975 on Southwest Airlines from Lubbock, TX to Austin. Standby fares were around $19 at the time. Being a poor college student, I went standby. The plane was boarding and I patiently waited for my name to be called. Finally, as the last passenger to board the plane, I heard my name. I went onto the plane and they closed the door behind me. And I looked for my seat, the last seat available in the cabin. And looked. And looked. The stewardess told me to take my seat, but I, then her, could not find it. Finally, as the plane was taxiing to the runway, we found my seat. I was next to one of the largest persons I had encountered to that date (remember, it was about 1975.) That has set my expectations for flying ever since.
This is a monumentally stupid decision. Tax abitratage is also a major driver here. The ticket tax (I think 7.5%) doesn't apply to ancillary revenues (like seat assignments and bag fees). Southwest's boarding process is the fastest the fastest in the industry which enables quicker turns than any other airline and thus greater utilization. They are going to end up sacrificing a round trip for every city pair to chase a seat upgrades.
Assigned seats will relieve Southwest from policing their open seating policy in ways that could trigger cries of racism. Most flights are uneventful and most people are polite, but I have also recently seen
a) a black man sit across two seats in row 4 during group A boarding on a full flight; was any flight attendant going to tell him not to do that? His wife was in the window seat.
b) a hispanic man trail in on group A boarding with a C pass, and fake not being able to speak English at the gate check even though a couple of us had struck up a friendly conversation with him during the long wait and explained to him he had a C pass.
c) those of any color who abuse early boarding by arriving in a wheelchair.
Southwest takes the blame for any late departures, and gets no credit if the late departure resulted from policing open seating, while opening themselves up to racial drama.
Less conscientious people could already pay a fee to jump the line ahead of you. I don't see a change there.
Interesting point about whether obese avoided SW but I'm skeptical.
The bigger question is what impact this has on ticket prices. I can see it reducing them slightly.
Aside: I never pay anything for seats. My wife and I nearly always sit together (way over 90%) and even more often have overhead space for our bags.
My wife and I have been flying with SWA for the past 8 years after ditching AA because of what we regard as excessive fees for checked bags—and poor service in general. We always check suitcase/bags and stow what little we carry under the seats in front of us. As for obese travelers, we see lots of them on our SWA flights—we fly business select, get to board early and get either AB or EF seats and give the stink eye to discourage any solo obese person who looks like they want to sit in the aisle seat.
Southwest has a "person of size" policy that requires the grossly obese to purchase an extra seat, but it doesn't seem to be enforced.
They don't really. Their "customer of size" policy is optional, "may proactively purchase" and it is "complementary" if you are willing to go though the hellish pain of the process to eventually get the refund. So far these frictions have prevented a flood of marginally less obese people from abusing the system and doubling up, but I doubt that's sustainable, which is true of most things that rely on widespread adherence to norms of courtesy, integrity, and the honor system in contemporary America.
American and United require purchase of the extra seats. Many other airlines like the policy to be kind of vague with nods to being accommodating if possible, but also, if you need room and didn't buy that extra ticket and the fight is full, they can boot you off the plane until there's a flight with enough extra space for you. In the background is fear of all kinds of lawsuits or potential goverment penalties or new regulations.
Interesting title: price discrimination. This implies something akin to racial injustice (or some other type of injustice) when a company charges different rates for preferred seating. However, how is this different from paying for early bird checkin or for a "business fare" where one can pay more for a guaranteed A1 - A15 seating arrangement? It isn't.
The most recent analysis of the airline industry shows SW as less profitable per seat mile as the mainline carriers, so I suspect they are trying to make up the difference for competitive positioning.
Channels a certain Vader, D
"I'm altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
Why not pay extra for being able to avoid the inconvenience of having to time your check-in so precisely.
They already have that. You can pay extra for "early bird" checkin.
I loved this aspect of flying Southwest. There was an aspect of meritocratic egalitarianism. It rewarded people who were organized enough to check-in 24hrs prior. I also liked the lottery aspect…what number will I get today? I read somewhere that this system made it much faster for Southwest to board planes compared to other airlines. I wonder how this new policy will affect the duration of the boarding process…
I think it's illegal, by govt rules, to charge more to fat people.
It should be legal, and some airlines should do so, while also having extra-wide seats at 50% more (2 seats instead of 3).
Fat folk encroach on seating neighbor's space. It's not nice for the normal folk who get stuck next to them.
Race, sex, height, are fixed. Weight is a series of daily decisions on how much to eat, and exercise.
20 years of slight overeating creates a fat guy -- the history is why the current status exists. Some folk for the same amount of food get fatter -- life is unfair Reality is unfair. It's not injustice, tho..
We don't have enough truth about the difference of injustice, based on human decisions, and unfairness, which abounds between different people.
It's not directly illegal for airlines to charge larger customers more for the extra space they require, though there are lobbies for the obese which are trying to make it that way. However, some obese people will make the claim that their obesity is a consequence of some recognized disability which must be accommodated, and airlines don't want to have to argue the point over and over.
Price discrimination: All hail the financialisation of civil air travel
Isn't Neoliberal economics grand!
;)