• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Ryanair and Easyjet

Status
Not open for further replies.

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
All that matters to me is the final price, and I find Wizz Air is often extremely competitive even including baggage fees.

Bizarrely though, a lot of people would rather pay more as long as everything is inclusive. Similar to the way that German trains get slated for not giving you free refreshments. People would rather pay £200 for a First Class ticket on a British train because you get a free meal and unlimited tea/coffee than pay £100 on a German train because you have to pay for your refreshments.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Bizarrely though, a lot of people would rather pay more as long as everything is inclusive. Similar to the way that German trains get slated for not giving you free refreshments. People would rather pay £200 for a First Class ticket on a British train because you get a free meal and unlimited tea/coffee than pay £100 on a German train because you have to pay for your refreshments.

A lot of that may be because of them getting the freebies that their travel expenses would not otherwise pay for, e.g. a free meal when you're going to be home in time for the evening, which is not considered a tax-exempt expense.

FWIW, I'd rather lower 1st fares (1.5-1.6x Standard at all times) and no freebies. Though I do think it's a good idea to serve paid-for food and drink at the seat on proper crockery. And funnily enough the time of day when I'd most likely be willing to pay well over the odds for a restaurant car meal is the time of day when you get next to nowt, Sunday evening...
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
The problem with allocating seating at booking is that that seating is then unavailable for those paying for seating to select it. So short of filling the middle seats from the back you may lose a paid selection.

I don't think it's realistic to be able to expect people to check-in online and print a boarding pass while abroad so I think they should either allow check-in 15 days in advance for the return flight (to allow for an up to 14 days holiday) or allow people to use the self-service check-in machines at the Airport without having to pay extra.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I didn't see that on the five or six flights I took, but several of them had many free seats so probably no pressure on the lockers either. I think the idea of encouraging people to bring small cabin bags is to avoid that sort of problem.

But if cabin baggage is free and hold baggage is chargeable then they aren't encouraging people to use smaller cabin bags.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I don't think it's realistic to be able to expect people to check-in online and print a boarding pass while abroad so I think they should either allow check-in 15 days in advance for the return flight (to allow for an up to 14 days holiday) or allow people to use the self-service check-in machines at the Airport without having to pay extra.

Or if the fee for using one was reasonable, e.g. a couple of quid rather than £30-odd.

easyJet allow online checkin 30 days out which tends to be sufficient while not causing massive issue to those wishing to pay to select seats. (They tend to fill from the back on check-in - these seats are the least popular to those paying)

But if cabin baggage is free and hold baggage is chargeable then they aren't encouraging people to use smaller cabin bags.

If a large cabin bag is more expensive than a checked bag, as I believe it is, they are. It sort of makes sense, but as few can travel on just a small bag it's just a bit of a nuisance. Personally I think the first 23kg checked bag should be free, then the problem would reduce.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
Failing that, yes, the last to board is probably friendliest but operationally most inefficient.

"Last to board" is the most operationally efficient, and probably the only practical way to select cabin bags to go in the hold. When someone can't find a space for their bag, it is simply taken away from them. Asking for volunteers takes time (meaning the flight will be late, and all subsequent flights using that aircraft). It brings confusion - if there's compensation, can I volunteer for my small handbag to go in the hold, even though that won't free up any useful amount of room? What if I volunteer but then need to extract some essential items from my baggage, and have to repack in the aisle while everyone waits? And do you think the likes of Easyjet and Ryanair are interested in giving you something for free that you might otherwise pay for?

In principle, I like the idea that people could volunteer for their bags to go in the hold in exchange for compensation, but I just don't think it would work in practice.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Personally I think the first 23kg checked bag should be free, then the problem would reduce.

I agree, but you have to understand that would increase prices for those travelling with only hold luggage, and make any airline bringing in such a policy on their own less competitive. Baggage charges are often a substantial addition to the airfare, and it's not that unusual for them to be more than 50% of the price paid.

The only way this would happen is for governments to require it by law.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
"Last to board" is the most operationally efficient

It's not, because if you take at random, or the first few in the non-priority queue, or whatever, you can be loading them while others board.

Asking for volunteers takes time (meaning the flight will be late, and all subsequent flights using that aircraft). It brings confusion - if there's compensation, can I volunteer for my small handbag to go in the hold, even though that won't free up any useful amount of room? What if I volunteer but then need to extract some essential items from my baggage, and have to repack in the aisle while everyone waits? And do you think the likes of Easyjet and Ryanair are interested in giving you something for free that you might otherwise pay for?

In principle, I like the idea that people could volunteer for their bags to go in the hold in exchange for compensation, but I just don't think it would work in practice.

It would and it does. Been on an easyJet flight lately? It's precisely what they do. It's done while the queue is forming but before boarding actually commences - dead time, unlike waiting for people to be unable to fit them in.

I agree, but you have to understand that would increase prices for those travelling with only hold luggage, and make any airline bringing in such a policy on their own less competitive. Baggage charges are often a substantial addition to the airfare, and it's not that unusual for them to be more than 50% of the price paid.

The only way this would happen is for governments to require it by law.

It's something that regulation could sort out, yes. A bit like the UK has a minimum airline seat pitch by law (and is I believe the only country to do so). It isn't great (28" I think) but it does provide a level playing field to prevent silly "race to the bottom" type competition.

Regulation has similarly nicely got rid of "applies to everyone" card surcharges and the likes.

FWIW, if you consider how things work, you need ground staff anyway, and a carry-on passenger benefits from someone else checking their bag instead, because that makes more space in the overheads for them to place their bag at their leisure.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Do they also have the Ryanair & EasyJet policy if the flight is full where some randomly selected passengers with large cabin bags get told their bag has to go in to the hold?

Certainly easyJet do. easyJet will, on a busy flight, ask for volunteers to put their cabin luggage in the hold at no extra cost, in return for speedy boarding. They stated that if they don't get enough volunteers, they'll offload larger cabin bags. When I went to Prague a few months ago, I offered to have my bag tagged as I wasn't in a rush at the other end.

This may be a thing of the past if the proposed new overhead lockers being introduced by Boeing (I think) become widespread (the ones on the right allow one large cabin bag per person).

bins-high-1.jpg
 
Last edited:

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
It's not, because if you take at random, or the first few in the non-priority queue, or whatever, you can be loading them while others board.

It would and it does. Been on an easyJet flight lately? It's precisely what they do. It's done while the queue is forming but before boarding actually commences - dead time, unlike waiting for people to be unable to fit them in.

Indeed airlines have always done this. I was thinking of the case where a few bags at the end of boarding that might or might not fit. Then, asking for volunteers doesn't work.

It's something that regulation could sort out, yes. A bit like the UK has a minimum airline seat pitch by law (and is I believe the only country to do so). It isn't great (28" I think) but it does provide a level playing field to prevent silly "race to the bottom" type competition.

Regulation has similarly nicely got rid of "applies to everyone" card surcharges and the likes.

FWIW, if you consider how things work, you need ground staff anyway, and a carry-on passenger benefits from someone else checking their bag instead, because that makes more space in the overheads for them to place their bag at their leisure.

I have always made exactly this argument. The baggage charge is not based on any actual extra overall expense to airlines and airports. It's a way for an airline to gain a short term advantage by appearing more competitive, that can never be reversed (short of regulation) because soon all airlines will be forced to follow suit.

So yes, regulation could be a good answer.
 

ivanhoe

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2009
Messages
929
I sometimes wonder how some people get on with their cabin baggage. Some luggage looks like it would never fit into a Ryanair measuring contraption. It maybe the right height but it just looks wider than the canvas case I use. Indeed I have no problem with an airline dictating what goes into a hold as long as they are fair and consistent. There is an increasing amount of passengers nowadays who couldn't give a toss about anybody else other than themselves. They are invariably the same ones who are up and pushing as soon as the plane has come to a stop. I always chuckle when I see two buses waiting outside which won't shift until everybody is off the plane.

My advice to passengers is just chill.
 
Joined
13 Feb 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cardiff
The baggage charge is not based on any actual extra overall expense to airlines and airports.

The airport will charge the airline a fee per bag which will get passed onto the customer. If airline x gets 200 passengers with hand luggage only then they don't have a fee to pay. It's surely in the airlines interest?
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
The airport will charge the airline a fee per bag which will get passed onto the customer. If airline x gets 200 passengers with hand luggage only then they don't have a fee to pay. It's surely in the airlines interest?

You're missing the point. The airport has to have the infrastructure to handle bags, whether it is used or not. Therefore, there is no overall additional cost when a passenger checks in a bag - the cost of the baggage infrastructure could be included in a flat per-passenger (or whatever) fee charged by the airport. I suspect this is what used to happen, in the same way that airlines used to include one or even two hold bags in the price of a ticket.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Compared to twenty years ago, fewer passengers are using check in desks and fewer passengers are traveling with hold luggage. I remember back at Glasgow Airport many years ago, every British Midland flight had two or three desks dedicated to just the one flight. By contrast, nowadays flyBe will only have a few desks open which are used by all their flights. Things have dramatically changed.

The infrastructure may be in place, but it's actually not been expanded anywhere near as much as you'd expect given the rise in passenger numbers. Ultimately, if we all still had to go to a check in desk, airports like Edinburgh would have had to invest millions in building new check-in halls, but this hasn't really happened. More flights are using the same number of desks at many airports, because fewer people are using check in desks. This means that fewer desks are needed per flight. As each desk needs to be staffed, this reduces the cost of staffing. If fewer bags are being loaded onto the plane, the cost of hiring baggage handlers and purchasing the necessary equipment is reduced.

So, yes, there's actually been a huge cost saving to airlines and airports by encouraging travel with carry on baggage only.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
This may be a thing of the past if the proposed new overhead lockers being introduced by Boeing (I think) become widespread (the ones on the right allow one large cabin bag per person).

To be fair lockers are bigger on Airbus aircraft than Boeing ones anyway. easyJet increased their bag size when they switched fully to Airbus aircraft from the original 55x40x20 (same as Ryanair) to 56x45x25 (IATA size).
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
Compared to twenty years ago, fewer passengers are using check in desks and fewer passengers are traveling with hold luggage. I remember back at Glasgow Airport many years ago, every British Midland flight had two or three desks dedicated to just the one flight. By contrast, nowadays flyBe will only have a few desks open which are used by all their flights. Things have dramatically changed.

The infrastructure may be in place, but it's actually not been expanded anywhere near as much as you'd expect given the rise in passenger numbers. Ultimately, if we all still had to go to a check in desk, airports like Edinburgh would have had to invest millions in building new check-in halls, but this hasn't really happened. More flights are using the same number of desks at many airports, because fewer people are using check in desks. This means that fewer desks are needed per flight. As each desk needs to be staffed, this reduces the cost of staffing. If fewer bags are being loaded onto the plane, the cost of hiring baggage handlers and purchasing the necessary equipment is reduced.

So, yes, there's actually been a huge cost saving to airlines and airports by encouraging travel with carry on baggage only.

The fact that fewer check in desks are needed has more to do with automated check in machines (for proper airlines), print at home boarding passes, electronic ticketing and better IT. Twenty years ago, people travelled with paper tickets (often handwritten) and everyone had to go to a check in desk to get a boarding pass, regardless of whether they had hold luggage.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
... which was my point exactly. This is all multifactorial.

However, there is no doubt in my mind that discouraging the use of hold luggage also helps in reducing check in costs for airlines and airports. Even if you do use mobile boarding passes, you have to use a check in desk if you have hold luggage (albeit for a slightly shorter time). With more people not checking in a bag, that significantly reduces the demand on check in desks. There is no doubt in my mind that use of hold luggage has reduced markedly in the last few years - I remember our family of four used to go on holiday for a week with four overloaded suitcases - that would be unimaginable now! Even if mobile and self-printed boarding passes had happened, without the reduction in hold luggage usage we'd all still be using a check in desk at some point.

In the last twelve months I've taken twelve flights and used a check in desk on only two occasions, because I've otherwise always just had cabin baggage.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
Even if mobile and self-printed boarding passes had happened, without the reduction in hold luggage usage we'd all still be using a check in desk at some point.

Only if we took hold luggage. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think it's ever been compulsory.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Of course it's not compulsory. But I know for a fact that, when it was free included in the fare, it was much more common to take luggage for the hold, even if you didn't strictly need to. A lot of people probably just found it easier to dump their bags when they get into the airport.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
Of course it's not compulsory. But I know for a fact that, when it was free included in the fare, it was much more common to take luggage for the hold, even if you didn't strictly need to. A lot of people probably just found it easier to dump their bags when they get into the airport.

Is it a good thing that we discourage people from dumping bags? For me, I either need hold luggage or I don't - free or not, I wouldn't take it unnecessarily for very obvious reasons. But is it good that we encourage other people to drag their luggage around airports, through security and on to planes - which were, after all, designed to carry luggage in the hold?!
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Of course it's not compulsory. But I know for a fact that, when it was free included in the fare, it was much more common to take luggage for the hold, even if you didn't strictly need to. A lot of people probably just found it easier to dump their bags when they get into the airport.

Ironically the cheaper fares for not having checked baggage started around the same time as liquid restrictions started applying to cabin baggage, so the saving is not usually as much as it appears at first glance.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
Ironically the cheaper fares for not having checked baggage started around the same time as liquid restrictions started applying to cabin baggage, so the saving is not usually as much as it appears at first glance.

This is of course a reason why the airlines don't fight the restrictions on liquids - because they force people to pay for hold luggage they wouldn't otherwise need.

Airports like the restrictions because they get to sell water, shampoo, etc to people who have just had theirs confiscated by security, or who didn't bring it in the first place because of the security rules.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Airports like the restrictions because they get to sell water, shampoo, etc to people who have just had theirs confiscated by security, or who didn't bring it in the first place because of the security rules.

I think there's 3 options:
1. Buy miniatures (before you go to the Airport) which per ml are more expensive than normal sizes.
2. Buy normal size ones at the Airport before boarding your outbound flight (more expensive than the High Street shops) or after arrival at your destination and throw away any left over at the end of your trip.
3. Take hold baggage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
This may be a thing of the past if the proposed new overhead lockers being introduced by Boeing (I think) become widespread (the ones on the right allow one large cabin bag per person).

bins-high-1.jpg

I've seen this photo before, and it looks great. Except I can't see how it will look when people stuff their duty free bags, coats, hats and other stuff in - often being quite small but bulky (and expanding) which blocks easy access to put other things in. Cabin crew can and do a good job sorting it out, but passengers left to their own devices will never make the overhead bins look this tidy!
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
I think there's 3 options:
1. Buy miniatures (before you go to the Airport) which per ml are more expensive than normal sizes.
2. Buy normal size ones at the Airport before boarding your outbound flight (more expensive than the High Street shops) or after arrival at your destination and throw away any left over at the end of your trip.
3. Take hold baggage.

Indeed - here's a few more suggestions:

4. Use the free toiletries you get at most hotels (*, and depending on location). The only "liquid" I usually carry on business trips is toothpaste.

5. Find non-liquid alternatives. Thanks to the restrictions, I discovered solid shaving soap, which feels like something my grandfather would have used but gives the closest shaves I've ever had. :)

6. Take an empty water bottle through security, and fill it from a drinking fountain in the airport. Many airports have such fountains (I think it's a legal requirement in many countries), but you may have to search for one!

(*) I don't mean stealing them, just using them when you stay in the hotel.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I've seen this photo before, and it looks great. Except I can't see how it will look when people stuff their duty free bags, coats, hats and other stuff in - often being quite small but bulky (and expanding) which blocks easy access to put other things in. Cabin crew can and do a good job sorting it out, but passengers left to their own devices will never make the overhead bins look this tidy!

There's also the issue that passengers with smaller bags do not like being forced to put them under the seat in front, particularly if they have long legs. There's an argument for what Wizz do, but not as "big bag, small bag" but actually allowing the purchase of a limited number of places in the overheads.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Is it a good thing that we discourage people from dumping bags? For me, I either need hold luggage or I don't - free or not, I wouldn't take it unnecessarily for very obvious reasons. But is it good that we encourage other people to drag their luggage around airports, through security and on to planes - which were, after all, designed to carry luggage in the hold?!

Is it good for the airlines and airport? Yes. It reduces the cost at check-in, and (as has already been said) potentially increases the spend once you're through security. Security itself may be slightly more expensive to run, but there's probably not much in it - all passengers go through security and most have a bag of some sort anyway (whether it's a suitcase or a handbag).

Good for passengers... not necessarily. Some people do benefit - fares can be cheaper without luggage*, and it is usually quicker at both ends if you don't have a hold luggage (although of course the passengers who would benefit need not carry hold luggage in the first place). Reducing the size of cabin baggage, even with complimentary hold luggage, will disadvantage many who prefer not to check their baggage in (which is probably disproportionately the higher-yield business passengers). As I've alluded to, if hold luggage grew at the same rate as passengers I think that airports would not cope today and would require additional baggage handling systems and staff - which would ultimately manifest as higher fares for passengers.

* It is likely that some airlines use hold luggage charges purely as ancillary revenue, but it is reasonable to say that lots of airlines also charge lower fares because they're not carrying luggage. There's no way that the lowest fares would exist inclusive of luggage.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
I prefer to carry flexible hand luggage (ruck sack, man bag) so it can go under the seat in front easily, and I like the planes with seats that have lots of storage space (including the high up storage bins on the seat) so I can take out the essentials (headphones, battery charger, phone).

If a seat is fixed, why not have more places to store things at the back, above and below the table. Above obviously has implications for head protection, but clearly it has been done by some airlines. Below, well then you impact on leg room - but people can make their own choices.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
There's also the issue that passengers with smaller bags do not like being forced to put them under the seat in front, particularly if they have long legs. There's an argument for what Wizz do, but not as "big bag, small bag" but actually allowing the purchase of a limited number of places in the overheads.

A better solution that doesn't come across as "money grabbing" would be to allocate a space in the lockers to each seat. For example, in the picture above the new style lockers hold six bags corresponding to two rows of three passengers. Each one could perhaps be divided into six giving each passenger a dedicated space for their seat. I wouldn't advocate a physical divider, perhaps just a painted line that would be useful in disputes. If it doesn't fit in that area, it goes under your seat.

Of course, at exit rows it becomes more difficult as you are not allowed anything under the seat, so jackets and so on have to go into the lockers. In the front row, the lockers are often used for essential equipment. On easyJet at least, purchasing the exit row seat means that you are allowed two bags which makes space in those areas of the plane are at an even greater premium.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I prefer to carry flexible hand luggage (ruck sack, man bag) so it can go under the seat in front easily, and I like the planes with seats that have lots of storage space (including the high up storage bins on the seat) so I can take out the essentials (headphones, battery charger, phone).

Funnily enough, the "thou shalt carry only one bag" thing makes people more likely to carry one large trolley case than a few smaller soft bags which would be far easier to distribute around e.g. under the seat and in small gaps in the lockers. easyJet toyed with the idea of "bring as many as you want provided they all fit in the sizer at the same time" - that seemed a really good idea to me.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
^ I'd agree that it's a sensible idea, and I'd support its implementation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top