My neighbor's daughter is a flight attendant. Today her mother told me that the flight attendants' association has a website that addresses this issue. The address is http://www.EndCarryOnCrunch.org/. It is interesting to see their point of view.
I'm talking about the Schumer solution. That punishment to the airlines hits the passengers. If the airlines don't charge for carry-ons, you're right, no taxes for anyone. But I don't know anywho who thinks these airlines will stick to their promise if the carry-on fee doesn't hurt Spirit. They'll all soon be charging for carry-ons.
Ed Wetschler said:
Charlie, what I mean is, if airlines have promised they won't charge for carry-ons, then there isn't any surcharge to tax. Or am I reading that wrong? Or (another train of thought), are you figuring that they wouldn't keep the promise?
Charlie, what I mean is, if airlines have promised they won't charge for carry-ons, then there isn't any surcharge to tax. Or am I reading that wrong? Or (another train of thought), are you figuring that they wouldn't keep the promise?
50% increas in booking ? Sounds tad high. Airlines and major sectors, after controlling for vagaries, and normalizing for other variables, would be happy of their bookings increase 10%. I will wait for DOT results to see if indeed Spirit's loads inroved by 50%
Charlie Leocha said:
There is one big problem with Schumer's et.al. bill. He is proposing taxing passengers, not the airlines. The excise tax that he wants to extend to carry-on bags in order to punish the airlines is not paid by the airlines. It is a separate 7.5 percent tax that is specifically paid by passengers.
I have heard that since the Spirit Air announcement, their bookings have increased 50 percent. Of course just when I wanted to compare prices, even including carry-on baggage charges, with other airlines, the Spirit website is down.
The problem is that everyone, even Sen. Schumer, assumes that this is a tax that airlines pay. It is not. It is an excise tax. The airlines never pass it along. Consumers always pay it, just like a sales tax.
Ed Wetschler said:
The New York Times story gives me the impression that the airlines who've committed to no carry-on fees would not be passing that tax along, because they wouldn't be hit by that tax. Did I read the story too hastily?
The New York Times story gives me the impression that the airlines who've committed to no carry-on fees would not be passing that tax along, because they wouldn't be hit by that tax. Did I read the story too hastily?
There is one big problem with Schumer's et.al. bill. He is proposing taxing passengers, not the airlines. The excise tax that he wants to extend to carry-on bags in order to punish the airlines is not paid by the airlines. It is a separate 7.5 percent tax that is specifically paid by passengers.
I have heard that since the Spirit Air announcement, their bookings have increased 50 percent. Of course just when I wanted to compare prices, even including carry-on baggage charges, with other airlines, the Spirit website is down.
If I am not mistaken Spirit as an LCC will have to stick to it, just like some mainline have still stuck to second checked baggage charges rule.
Charging for carryon is like saying I'll charge you for reading light and power outlet for laptop as carryone is not free. I am glad that the majors have not instituted this stupidity.
Replies
Ed Wetschler said:
Ed Wetschler said:
Charlie Leocha said:
Ed Wetschler said:
I have heard that since the Spirit Air announcement, their bookings have increased 50 percent. Of course just when I wanted to compare prices, even including carry-on baggage charges, with other airlines, the Spirit website is down.
Charging for carryon is like saying I'll charge you for reading light and power outlet for laptop as carryone is not free. I am glad that the majors have not instituted this stupidity.