Originally Posted By trekkeruss I think it's only Atlanta, but there are a couple of 5¢ fares too; Detroit, Altantic City.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I don't kow why, but this reminds me of one of my favorite George Carlin lines. "Let the daredevils get on the plane, I'm getting IN."
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Be careful about these extraordinary good deals. When they are too good to be true, they probably aren't true at all. Fares like these in the airline industry come with some huge restrictions attached to them, which are designed to bite you in the a** if your plans change for whatever reason. >>> Well, let's assume the worst case: the fare is non-changable and non-refundable. If you end up not using it, you'd be out your 1¢ (plus maybe $25 in gov't taxes/fees). The full-service airlines will nickel and dime you with change fees. In most cases, unless you pay full fare, their tickets are non-refundable and they hit you with a $100 change fee if you make any changes. This is perhaps the biggest reason I'm now a fan of Southwest for much of my domestic travel (they have no change fees, although they have other quirks that work against you in certain situations). I think the reason that the 1¢ fare should be avoided is that it's clearly not a sustainable business model. That doesn't even cover the marginal cost of fuel burn for an extra 200 lbs sitting in a seat that would otherwise go unsold, even completely ignoring the fixed costs of operating the flight. The reason this is important is that the passengers that buy these types of tickets are always the ones you see on the news, stranded far away from home when their Low Cost Carrier goes belly up without notice and stops operating. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for these people when they scream into the camera "This is ridiculous! I have to be back to work tomorrow!" when they've knowingly entered into a transaction that they know the carrier is losing money on. And as an aside, I'm skeptical that this is a good deal for the carrier even in the short term, as the people snapping up these fares are shopping on price alone and usually have no brand loyalty, so as soon as you're no longer cheaper than the next guy (which often is Southwest), you've lost them as a customer.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By TDLFAN Yes, SWA will do anything to keep the masses happy, especially now since their profit margin has taken a hit and have started to go down. But they remain CHEAP, which is the reason why people fly them, and not for the free goldfish crackers. However, I flew SWA from LAS to LAX the days before the 50th anniversary at DLR and was asked for a change fee of $150 since I wanted to change my reservation to a different flight. So, how is it they are now offering this for free? As for the 1 cent fares... that's actually 5 cents according to the reports I have read, and they were 5 cents PER MILE, with extremely high penalties. And yes... the "full service" carriers (as if there was such a thing anymore) will nickle and dime you to change travel, yet some of them will allow you to stand by for earlier flights at no extra charge for the change.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>However, I flew SWA from LAS to LAX the days before the 50th anniversary at DLR and was asked for a change fee of $150 since I wanted to change my reservation to a different flight.<<< I don't know the details of your flight, but I do believe that I was able to change my flight booking without charge. I think that the change (it was for the same flight 2 days later) was a flight that was the same price...meaning, there wasn't a diffferently listed price for the flight I wanted. And so, I think I was able to change it with no charge at all. I'm not explaining this well...and there very well might have been an exchange fee that I forgot about, or else was small enough that I still remember the exchange going very easily and smoothly. Like SD said though, in some cases that might not have been the case. As always with the airlines, who the heck knows!! Sometimes you feel like you got "a fairly good deal", other times you feel shafted.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>And yes... the "full service" carriers (as if there was such a thing anymore) will nickle and dime you to change travel, yet some of them will allow you to stand by for earlier flights at no extra charge for the change.<<< Seems to me that getting an EARLIER flight is usually not the issue. It's when things happen (like my Grandpa dropping dead...which was the reason for my SouthWest change of plans), that you need the airlines to accomodate you...and many seem to complain that they often don't. Long story about my Grandpa and all (with big kudos to SouthWest, as I mentioned, as well as priceline.com, who very kindly refunded my totally unrefundable hotel reservation without question, not to mention a mysterious stranger who helped out most of all...and big THUMBS DOWN to Korean air who couldn't care less!), but the fact is some companies ARE better than others.
Originally Posted By Labuda "However, I flew SWA from LAS to LAX the days before the 50th anniversary at DLR and was asked for a change fee of $150 since I wanted to change my reservation to a different flight. So, how is it they are now offering this for free?" I'd suspect that whatever ticket you ended up with had a listed price of $150 more. Either that, or they found out you work for another airline and upped the charge becuase of that. lol Heck, SW even lets you get tickets refunded and you can then use those funds to book another flight - no charge. In that manner, they have a great business model. I mean, really - how much does it cost them for the electricity and manpower to change a ticket from flight 1 to flight 2? Not much, I'd say.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Yes, SWA will do anything to keep the masses happy, especially now since their profit margin has taken a hit and have started to go down. >>> Their fare rules are pretty much the same today as they have been over the last few years, so the notion that they're taking drastic steps now to maintain profitability isn't very accurate. And, I have to point out that Southwest has a 35-year track record of being profitable in just about every quarter, which is absolutely unprecedented in the US airline industry, so I think that any implication that they are taking short-term measures without regard to long term viability is totally off base. Note that I think that this is different than most of the start-up LCCs, which seem to always do this sort of thing and then eventually go out of business. Southwest's fare rules and structure, and in-flight service standards have been largely unchanged in recent years, which is drastically in contrast with what the "full service" carriers have done: in most cases (other than Continental) the full service carriers have almost completely eliminated the in-flight service offered on domestic flights, even those that are relatively long. And for those non-US readers, I have to point out that "domestic" flights in the US context include not only coast-to-coast flights which are about 5 hours, but even Midwest or East Coast flights to Hawaii, which are 8-10 hours in duration, so in-flight service is more than just window dressing in many cases. <<< However, I flew SWA from LAS to LAX the days before the 50th anniversary at DLR and was asked for a change fee of $150 since I wanted to change my reservation to a different flight. So, how is it they are now offering this for free? >>> I was trying to avoid going into the details, which is why I just said "quirks" above, but I'll go into more detail now that you bring it up. Southwest has no change fee on any fare, but they do require you to meet the advance purchase requirement in all cases when you change a flight. So, if you had purchased a 7-day advance purchase fare from LAS to LAX, and later wanted to change it at least minute, you'd have to pay the fare difference between the 7-day advance purchase fare and the unrestricted fare, although there would be no change fee per se. Assuming that this was a one-way fare, let's compare this with what would have happened on a full service carrier: a full service carrier would have never sold you any sort of discount ticket on a one-way itinerary in the first place, so although their ticket would have had no change fee, it would probably have been no more expensive than the Southwest discount-plus-"change-fee" price. I'll leave it at that unless you want to go into it in more detail. <<< And yes... the "full service" carriers (as if there was such a thing anymore) will nickle and dime you to change travel, yet some of them will allow you to stand by for earlier flights at no extra charge for the change. >>> That is the one big difference between Southwest and the mainline carriers: how they handle standby. Basically, most carriers allow customer-initiated standby on the same routing on the same day at no additional cost. Southwest doesn't permit this: if you want to fly on a different flight on the same day to the same destination, you have to pay the difference between your fare paid and the walk-up fare. This is what I referred to as a "quirk" above. And I have very recent experience where it worked out better that I was on a full-service carrier rather than Southwest: this week, I was flying a 1300+ mile itinerary each way. I had purchased a very good fare of $262 roundtrip, and I had arrived at the airport and checked in for my departing flight and was airside, only to find out that I needed to be on the phone and computer for what turned out to be 90 minutes past departure time due to a work emergency such that I would miss my flight. I was able to rebook my outbound flight to one 4 hours later at no additional charge. Had I been in this situation with Southwest, I would have had to upgrade to a full-fare ticket. So it all depends on the situation.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Seems to me that getting an EARLIER flight is usually not the issue. >>> This is one of the Southwest quirks that I've been talking about: Southwest, unlike any of the full-service carriers, does not allow same-day standby at no charge, even if you want to take an earlier flight on the same day. Southwest requires that you meet the minimum purchase requirement on all customer-initiated standby travel, which means that unless you already have a full-fare ticket, you must pay the difference between your discount ticket and the full-fare ticket, even if it's as simple as getting to the airport early and wanting to take the flight to the same destination that leaves an hour eariler. For me personally, this is not that big of a deal. With my travel patterns, I tend to not be in the situation where I need to or want to change my flight to the same destination on the same day but just at a different time: my changes often involve drastically changed or cancelled trips where I change my dates of travel or destinations completely. As with any other situation, each situation is different, and what's best for one person is terrible for another, and because of this it's often bad to make general statements of what's "best" or "worst" in the general sense.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I mean, really - how much does it cost them for the electricity and manpower to change a ticket from flight 1 to flight 2? Not much, I'd say. >>> Ah, but that's not the point. If you make a very detailed analysis of the fare rules of most US carriers, whether they be Southwest or one of the full service carriers, you will find that that one of the main goals is to separate business from leisure travel. A textbook example of this is the "Saturday night stay" requirement of many discount fares. It's plainly obvious that the cost to the carrier is unaffected by whether the passenger does or does not stay at their destination over a Saturday night. The purpose of this rule is to allow the carrier to charge more for business travel and less for leisure travel.
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>I'd suspect that whatever ticket you ended up with had a listed price of $150 more. Either that, or they found out you work for another airline and upped the charge becuase of that. lol<< I bought that ticket just like anyone else would online thru their site. They would never know I work in the industry. >>Their fare rules are pretty much the same today as they have been over the last few years, so the notion that they're taking drastic steps now to maintain profitability isn't very accurate. And, I have to point out that Southwest has a 35-year track record of being profitable in just about every quarter, which is absolutely unprecedented in the US airline industry, so I think that any implication that they are taking short-term measures without regard to long term viability is totally off base. << Actually it isn't because they are still profitable concidering the drop in profits. As long as they are in the black, fares won't change much. Furthermore, even bankrupted airlines have lowered their fares to remain competitive, even if it is a bad business decision. The irony of the whole thing is that SWA has been profictable for the last 35 yrs by being CHEAP all around. Now? Everyone is bit*** and moaning because the so-called "full service" carriers have adopted the same business scheme and service practices, at similar fares, yet many of you still complain about their service while praising SWA, the original cheap, no-frills, no-premium service, no seat assingment (wait in line for 3 hrs to be group A), greyhound of the industry. Makes no sense to me. And SuperDry, I don't hear you complaining about the full carriers when you get your free-loading FC seat for MC cheaps...
Originally Posted By Mr X How the heck does SuperDry's posts about how nice Continental airlines and it's lounges are violate community standards? That makes absolutely NO sense at all.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< How the heck does SuperDry's posts about how nice Continental airlines and it's lounges are violate community standards? That makes absolutely NO sense at all. >>> Wow. I agree - this makes no sense at all. I can't imagine anything I said that came even close to violating community standards. What's most disappointing is that although I've had a few posts admin'd and I sometimes can figure out what the problem is, other times I have absolutely no idea what the problem is, and I've NEVER gotten a single email from admin explaining what I did wrong. I feel like a kid that is smacked across the face and sent to his room without explanation and has no idea what he did wrong. I guess "because I'm the mommy" is all the authority that is needed in such a situation, but it's not good parenting if the kid can't figure out why he's being punished.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< while praising SWA, the original cheap, no-frills, no-premium service, no seat assingment (wait in line for 3 hrs to be group A), greyhound of the industry. >>> Well, SWA personnel will tell you themselves that their main competitors are Greyhound and General Motors. Their average trip length is far shorter than many other carriers, although increasingly they have longer non-stop segments which even include transcons in some cases. <<< (wait in line for 3 hrs to be group A), >>> I feel a need to respond to this comment in particular. I agree with you completely, at least in a historical sense: one of the reasons I used to despise SWA was for exactly the reason you allude to: the constant need to wait in long lines. You had to wait in line at the counter to check your bags (which was always a long line), and you had to get to the gate early and wait in line in order to get in Group A (which you had to do in order to get a good seat with their open seating boarding, regardless of how far in advance you booked). Immediately following 9/11, you had to stand in line at the ticket counter even if you had no checked bags, as you couldn't get past security without a boarding pass. But SWA has solved all of these problems with online check-in. Now, like most other carriers, you can check in online up to 24 hours in advance of a flight. So, assuming you have carry-ons, there are no longer any lines to wait in: you check in online 24 hours beforehand, and in 30 seconds you have an A boarding card. At the airport, you go directly to security, and get to board in the A group as long as you're at the gate 20 minutes before departure. They turned what was once the worst airport experience into one of the best.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Furthermore, even bankrupted airlines have lowered their fares to remain competitive, even if it is a bad business decision. The irony of the whole thing is that SWA has been profictable for the last 35 yrs by being CHEAP all around. >>> I can't help but make a comparison to WalMart. WalMart provides stiff competition on the low end of the retail space. And, as K-Mart has found out, you can't "out-WalMart" WalMart. I think that the poor management at many US carriers (some of which are in bankruptcy as you point out) has caused them to respond to competition with Southwest by matching fares and cutting in-flight service to match. But the problem is that there's no way you're going to ever be competitive with Southwest by trying to match their low fares, since nobody is going to match their lower cost structure. You can't just take a mainline, full-service carrier and match SWA's cost structure by removing in-flight amenities. SWA is always going to be able to do this better than the other guy can. I can't help but make a comparison to WDW management: it's always the easiest thing to do to just cut costs when faced with a difficult financial situation, but the short-term gains often come with long-term effects that are hard to measure directly or immediately, but almost always have detrimental effects in the end. I hope this doesn't lead to another admin, but I'll point out that the one mainline carrier that's been most profitable post-9/11 has been Continental, and they still provide most in-flight amenities that have been traditional for a full service carrier. Just yesterday, as I was flying from Philadelphia back to Texas, I was served a hot dinner and was shown a movie on a 3-hour flight, and I was in row 26 in the back of the bus.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< And SuperDry, I don't hear you complaining about the full carriers when you get your free-loading FC seat for MC cheaps... >>> I'm not sure what "MC cheaps" is (is that a new rap group? ), but I get the jist of the rest of your statement. I do feel very fortunate to be able to fly half-way around the world on an award ticket, although in my case the carrier is getting actual cash from my bank for the miles that I redeem, even if it's not the same amount that they'd charge a walk-up customer. And speaking of which, on my most recent trip to TDR, I did in fact pay the full fare for business class travel out of my own pocket, for a variety of reasons. Because I had a complex multi-city, multi-carrier itinerary that changed several times, this worked out best in this situation, and it was liberating to just be able to call them up and change things without restriction or extra charge. But the cost was very expensive, and unreasonably so for what you get in my opinion. I'd much rather it be a situation where the fare charged was reasonable to start with, rather than what we have now where the paid fare is unreasonably expensive with the opportunity to get it for "free" with award travel. I think that SWA embodies this notion domestically, and I'm glad to see that we're seeing the infancy of this on international routes (with MaxJet serving the NYC-London market with $1500 business class fares). As long as the US-based full-service carriers have their pricing structure set to the "fleece the full-fare passenger" model, I'll react by taking advantage of discount programs, of which award travel through partner miles is one (even though some might call this freeloading).
