Northwest: Pay $25 to check second bag

[flashl]

Source: Detroit News

Northwest Airlines Corp. said today that it will begin charging most coach class customers $25 to check a second piece of luggage.

The change is effective May 5 for passengers traveling on Northwest mainline flights within North America, as well as Northwest Airlink passengers flying on Mesaba, Pinnacle or Compass Airlines. It does not affect Northwest's trans-Atlantic or trans-Pacific routes.

In addition to the second-bag fee, Northwest increased from $80 to $100 the charge for customers who check three or more bags, and from $25 to $50 the charge for overweight luggage (more than 50 pounds).


The fees will apply each way on a round-trip flight.

Detroit News

Read more: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080328/BIZ/803280445/1396/biz

---

Less weight, save fuel, rob customer?

[Hawkeye-X]

1. I predict that NW will go bankrupt again

and whining for the Government to bail them out again. I say let them go Chapter 11.

Hawkeye-X

[selador]

2. rob?

they are a business. they set their costing structures, and you are free as a CONSUMER to choose another airline if you don't like it.

what the heck is wrong with that?

it actually sounds like a reasonable policy. less weight DOES save fuel.

[Sherman A1]

3. Agreed & Well Said

Airline fuel isn't free just like the gas in our auto. It has to be paid for by the consumer one way or the other.

[flashl]

5. This decision denies the reality on Main Street, consumers are not spending.

[Gormy Cuss]

6. It's not about a direct link of extra weight and expended fuel

It's just a way of getting more revenue through means other than tickets. If it were about weight, they charge for second bags by distance rather than a flat fee.

As for being free as a consumer to choose another airline, United, US Air and others have already announced this policy. What's the choice on most routes?

[selador]

7. the airlines compete

if the price structure is viewed as unreasonable by consumers, then an airline will remove the policy to make more money to compete with those that still have that policy.

like i said, i have no problem with it

[nyy1998]

9. i disagree

In an industry built like the Airline industry, in one competitor does something like this, then the other competitors will also do the same. It would not surprise me if other airlines such as Delta, and American start doing the same thing. People like me who need two bags sometimes(I'm a college student in Massachusetts who lives in Texas) get screwed over by something like this/ Second bags is necessarily for plenty of travelers and this simply another greedy airline trying to take advantage of that in an industry that made about $3 billion. Contrary to popular belief, these airlines are not hurting financially. I think Congress needs to pass a Passenger's Bill of Rights because too many passengers are getting screwed over.

[Psephos]

12. The airlines aren't hurting?

With $105/bbl oil?

And they owe you free baggage?

It's never been free, it's been part of the cost structure of every ticket. The airlines are doing every possible thing to shave their fuel bills, and discouraging excess baggage is part of it. It's also a greener practice.

[nyy1998]

15. while i'm all for greener practice

These airlines aren't paying $105/bbl oil, they've locked in oil prices way before oil went this high, it's the reason why airlines like Southwest were doing so well(because they locked in when oil prices were extremely cheap) and also why this isn't about saving oil prices but about making extra money.
I know that the second bag has been part of the cost structure, but this is an additional cost that is unnecessary and hurts numerous customers.

[selador]

28. exactly

whether something is costed in, or seperated out, you still gotta pay.

the reality is that with a 2 free bag policy, those with no bags (checked) are essentially subsidizing those with 2 bags. etc.

that's how pricing works.

deal with it

[pitohui]

22. the other airlines are ALREADY doing it

that's why northwest is saying "me too"

delta, american, united, etc. made this announcement some weeks past

[selador]

43. you can't inject FACTS

into these arguments. some people here simply think that any step that corporations make that can be seen as a burden on consumers/individuals is AUTOMATICALLY bad.

it's completely kneejerk. corporations are BAD. that's the logic.

gets old

[selador]

27. there is no right

no right to have X amount of bags without additional charges.

the very idea is ridiculous. the airlines operate with relatively low profit margin, and they are hardly doing gangbusters. they, like any business - need to make a profit.

i am sorry if you HAVE to have two sometimes (so do I). they have the right to set the cost structure for baggage

[BlueCollar]

36. you my friend are naive

if you think they're not hurting. I hope you take economics while you're at college

[strategery blunder]

10. Airlines often have near-monopoly power in some cities.

If you live in Minneapolis and fly frequently, you are probably fairly much screwed over by this change.

Likewise, if you live in Chicago and both American and United announce the same policy change in tandem (fairly common in the airline industry), you're fucked.

Et cetera. This is about screwing over consumers, and it works well for those stuck in captive markets.

[Gormy Cuss]

11. If it's the only airline flying the route, the consumer pressure is irrelevant

If all airlines on the route lock into the same policy (as is so often the case,) it's doubtful that anything but an organized boycott would get their attention. Since many of the business flyers are exempted from these nickel-and-diming policies the remaining flyers are mostly the infrequent variety and I suspect most can't be bothered to argue for once or twice a year trips. I'd also guess that the early adopters of this policy have done the customer sat research.

[deadmessengers]

14. The funny thing is

Frequent business travelers are the ones that are far and away less likely to check even one bag. I travel for business very frequently (50000+ miles last year, with 30,000 miles already in '08) and I can't tell you the last time I checked a bag on a business trip, nor do I know anyone else who does. A max-size carryon is *more* than enough for a typical business trip.

[Gormy Cuss]

39. I know that only too well.

I was a business traveler in the past. So why the exception? Because it's one more way to show a benefit to FFs who are paying higher fares.

[lostnfound]

35. Distance vs flat fee -- not quite true.

The vast majority of fuel is used during takeoff and climb, not cruise.
You are right that this is primarily about getting more revenue through means other than tickets, however.

[Gormy Cuss]

41. One would think that if it's about fuel, transoceanic flights would also have the service fee.

So far it seems to be little more than domestic/North American flights. That was a tip off to me that fuel costs are the plausible explanation but not the principal reason for the change. If I had to guess I'd say it's a response to the increase in checked luggage since the liquids restriction went into effect. Charging for some of the pieces handled will either reduce the volume or provide new revenue to fund that operation.

[lostnfound]

46. Each major airline stands to face several BILLION $ of increased fuel cost

this year if fuel stays where it is.

Jet fuel was at $40-$50 per barrel a few years ago; now it is $110-$120. Airline executives are looking at projected losses and saying HOLY S***, what are we going to do? All the majors are looking for EVERY possible way to cut costs and increase revenue.

On edit: About the transoceanic. It's a valid point, except 1) no airline would want to be the first to do so, whereas a precedent was already set domestically and 2) international routes are inherently more profitable at the moment. From the airline point of view, there's "overcapacity" in the domestic market and combined with the exhorbitant fuel costs they are in crisis mode. Also, it's always a tradeoff between the expected fee revenue and the lost-customer-factor,

[jayfish]

8. Really?

What is this choice you speak of?

Jay

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

13. Your comment ignores one thing:

All the industries and businesses that were deregulated during the late 90's are failures. Complete and utter jokes. Telecom, especially broadband? Look at their deployment across the US and the list of promises to Congress during the hearings that lead to dereg. Epic Fail. Energy? Snort. Financial Sector? Oh lawdy. Airlines? "Please, Mr. Government! Don't regulate us, just give us more money!"

I think its time for the government, I mean a real government and a real administration running it, with a real congress with grit, to start choking a lot of business sectors till their eyes pop out on 12" stalks. We'll survive.

[llmart]

38. Then do you advocate.......

charging all those obese customers more money too? If your argument is about extra weight, then we should be charging fat people more.

[truthisfreedom]

4. Flying seems to be getting a lot more expensive.

I haven't seen any low fares for quite a while.

[lostnfound]

34. Jet fuel has gone from probably 10% of expense to 30%; and airlines are scrambling to deal with it

This maneuvre is desperation driven by fuel prices. At all the airlines.
The majors will probably spend an extra few billion dollars annually if fuel stays where it is right now.

[Hawaii Hiker]

16. The problem is; you almost HAVE to check bags nowadays because of the liquid/gel rules

where your liquids/gels can't be bigger than 3oz...And your only allowed one plastic zip-lock bag to bring your gels/liquids....Unless, you're going on just an overnight trip, it's almost impossible NOT to have to check a bag or two because of the strict liquid/gel carry-on rules today...



:banghead:

[deadmessengers]

23. What the heck are you bringing on trips?

I just looked in the Ziploc bag I keep stocked for trips. In it, I have: 1.5oz toothpaste, 3oz bottle of hair gel, 2 3oz bottles of shampoo, 1 3oz bottle of lotion, an asthma inhaler, and a nasal spray. On one trip I had to bring a larger bottle (about 10oz) of a prescription medication, which was exempt from the 3oz/1 liter regulation.

Again, I'll say - I've been on 50 flights in the last 18 months, almost all for 2-5 day trips, and have not once had to check a bag. I can see vacationers needing to check bags from time to time (can't carry on golf clubs or skis, for example), but business travelers, who make up the bulk of US flyers, generally don't check bags without a very compelling reason to do so.

[nyy1998]

25. these penalities aren't designed for business travelers

As an experienced traveler myself, I agree with deadmessengers, that on short trips, if you can't get your stuff in one bag, there's something wrong. The exception is if your taking your golf clubs or skis, but in those cases, you could afford to pay the extra fee because you're going to ante up some good money for the activities associated for those kind of gear. It's the college students/families/other type of vacationers who are hit hard by this kind of fee, which is why I'm complaining.

[pitohui]

24. well i can travel for a week and never check a bag

you have to know what you're doing, for instance, if you are going to a sunny location, you have to use a solid sunscreen instead of a cream (such as paradise which is a solid), if you are going to sweat, use a solid deodorant instead of a gel -- i find just by substituting those 2 items i can easily get all of my liquids/cream/gels in the kip hawley baggie

also if you're staying in a traditional hotel, just ask at the front desk for an amenity kit -- many have free toothpaste, mouthwash, etc. (i also bring my own small tube of toothpaste and often end up with extra by the end of the trip!)

[krabigirl]

42. oh goodee for you. Can't do that as a family with young kids, sorry,

[Hulk]

17. That's good enough reason to NEVER fly Northwest.

[Hulk]

18. How about we determine our fare by our weight? Is that next?

I get so pissed when Continental dings me for and extra $25 because I'm two pounds over weight. Then some 350 lb passenger comes up to the desk right behind me. I weigh less than half of his weight.

All bullshit!!

[deadmessengers]

19. Does a baggage handler have to haul him into the plane?

Your bags have to be manually lifted and loaded on and off the plane by an airline or airport employee. If those bags are over a certain weight, the likelihood of an airline employee injuring themselves and incurring a worker's comp claim goes WAY up. Fat passengers don't (usually - I can certainly see some extreme cases where that could be different) carry such risk for airline employees.

So, the added fuel is only one consideration for a $25 overweight baggage charge - there are other factors at work there.

[deadmessengers]

20. Or United, or American, or Delta, or Continental

They all charge it, and I'm almost certain that Southwest always has.

[pitohui]

21. yeah, this airline is a follower, not a leader, the others did it so they say "me 2!"

i'm a "go lite" fanatic anyway so it doesn't affect me but it's really going to be rough on people who transport sporting equipment such as skis, golf clubs, and such

[uppityperson]

26. Any predictions of how many more people have larger carry-ons to compensate?

I've checked 2 rather than having a carry-on (if going to check 1, might as well do both). Now I'm taking the second as a carry-on.

[riverdale]

29. I will just have to purchase

one big ass piece of luggage

[Haole Girl]

37. Then you will be charged excess baggage...

..for an over-sized piece!

[Occulus]

30. If you put the contents of your second bag on your person at the terminal,

would you still get charged for a second bag?

Dress in layers, people. Dress in layers.

:silly:

[lligrd]

31. Do We Get A $25 Discount If We Don't Check Any Bags? nt

[PittPoliSci]

32. united started pulling the same shit a month ago.

as result, i've been taking trains.

[gear_head]

33. avoid Northscab airlines when possible n/t

[llmart]

40. Here in the Detroit area......

we call them "Northworst" airlines.

By the way, I flew Spirit last month and they were the first, I believe, to charge for every piece of luggage.

[Thickasabrick]

44. I'm actually ok with this. If you count 1 checked bag and 1 carry on,

you are actually getting away with two.

[slackmaster]

45. Nobody really needs a second bag anyway

:hide:

[Buns_of_Fire]

47. Watch for an upswing in 75lb+ carryons

You know, the ones stowed right above your head that take up all the space so you can't even squeeze your toothbrush in.

Me, I travel light. Which then would make the TSA wonder why I only need a briefcase-sized carryon if I'm spending two weeks at Hedonism II.

I imagine telling them that it's because I plan to spend most of my time there naked won't cut me much slack. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Robb]

48. Airline pricing recently has me befuddled

I mean, the $5 snack meals and what-not...

...How does it work to have a product with a 'round $500 price point, and have to administer $5-25 add-ons? Doesn't it come close to costing as much in labor to collect and catalog those $5 extras as they bring in?