• 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.

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
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.

Do you have figures to back this up? I ask because thinking about myself (I might or might not be typical, but I do fly a lot), I am more likely to be forced to check bags in on budget airlines (that were first to charge for luggage), than on traditional airlines, because the budget airlines have much smaller carry on allowances.

On British Airways, Lufthansa, etc, I can take on board both a carry-on sized bag (in the locker) and a rucksack (decent day-sack size - under the seat if the lockers are full). I can live comfortably from these for a week on a typical business trip.

With budget airlines, I am only allowed one of these two bags (*). The other *has* to go in the hold. Therefore, I check in *more* bags when I fly with a budget airline than when I fly with a traditional airline. I think this is to extract more ancilliary revenue, not to reduce check in costs.

(*) I'm aware that some budget airlines claim to allow two bags. However, my *laptop* alone is too large to count as the second bag on Ryanair.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
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.

It's not surprising they dropped that idea - it would have reduced their revenue.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A better solution that doesn't come across as "money grabbing" would be to allocate a space in the lockers to each seat.

Indeed - but I suspect airlines rely on the fact that not everybody uses their fair share of cabin baggage space.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
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. :)

I'm not keen on the non-liquid alternative to deodorant.

A lot of leisure travellers require sun cream as well.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
I'm not keen on the non-liquid alternative to deodorant.

A lot of leisure travellers require sun cream as well.

I forgot deodorant - I carry the small roll-on type, or the solid types you can still get in the US. Not ideal, but better than checking a bag in.

Sun cream - yes absolutely, but sadly not needed on most business trips. :)
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
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.
I agree with this, and even in many hotels you can get a complimentary toothbrush/toothpaste kit if you ask. Saying that, I have lots of free samples from my dentist :D Or an alternative option which I use is to buy a transparent bag with some small empty bottles in it, then refill them from the normal size ones at home. I got a bag and a few bottles from the £1 shop a few years ago and use these for things that you don't get in the hotels.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Do you have figures to back this up? I ask because thinking about myself (I might or might not be typical, but I do fly a lot), I am more likely to be forced to check bags in on budget airlines (that were first to charge for luggage), than on traditional airlines, because the budget airlines have much smaller carry on allowances.

I'm afraid I don't - I couldn't find any, but certainly anecdotally people do seem to be using hold luggage a lot less often. For example, my parents previously took massive suitcases on holiday - last time they had a carry on bag each. (Both one week trips to the same locations).

Indeed - but I suspect airlines rely on the fact that not everybody uses their fair share of cabin baggage space.

I am, of course, assuming that the "new" lockers (which boast enough space for everyone to have a full size carry-on bag) become standard. Certainly with the current lockers, this would not be possible!
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
I am, of course, assuming that the "new" lockers (which boast enough space for everyone to have a full size carry-on bag) become standard. Certainly with the current lockers, this would not be possible!

It will be interesting to see whether budget airlines adopt these new lockers, and whether they change their baggage allowances. On the face of it, more space in the cabin is very very bad for budget airlines, as it will reduce the need for people to pay baggage charges.
 
Last edited:

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
On the face of it, more space in the cabin is very very bad for budget airlines, as it will reduce the need for people to pay baggage charges.

No it won't. In fact, it's geared specifically towards budget airlines. At present, everyone gets so much baggage. In reality, the cabin is too small to allow all passengers to carry a full sized carry on bag, so airlines have to stow some of the cabin bags below. As long as the bag is within the limits, it gets stowed free of charge, but it takes the airline time to do this (and budget airlines of course spend as little time on the ground as possible).

I should point out that the increased stowage space still only allows one IATA sized cabin bag per passenger. So, whilst there potentially is scope to increase the size of cabin bags, you'd be back in the situation of not having enough space. For budget airlines, the solution here is to increase the space for cabin baggage. They won't increase the size of the carry on bag, but allowing everyone to have their luggage on the plane means that they don't waste time and money offloading cabin bags - it is very common for easyJet to offload cabin baggage.

If they increase the size of cabin bags, they'll be back in the same situation as before whilst losing revenue. So they'd be foolish to do that. What they will do is save themselves time and money, and improve the customer experience to boot.
 
Last edited:

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
No it won't. In fact, it's geared specifically towards budget airlines. At present, everyone gets so much baggage. In reality, the cabin is too small to allow all passengers to carry a full sized carry on bag, so airlines have to stow some of the cabin bags below. As long as the bag is within the limits, it gets stowed free of charge, but it takes the airline time to do this (and budget airlines of course spend as little time on the ground as possible).

I should point out that the increased stowage space still only allows one IATA sized cabin bag per passenger. So, whilst there potentially is scope to increase the size of cabin bags, you'd be back in the situation of not having enough space. For budget airlines, the solution here is to increase the space for cabin baggage. They won't increase the size of the carry on bag, but allowing everyone to have their luggage on the plane means that they don't waste time and money offloading cabin bags - it is very common for easyJet to offload cabin baggage.

If they increase the size of cabin bags, they'll be back in the same situation as before whilst losing revenue. So they'd be foolish to do that. What they will do is save themselves time and money, and improve the customer experience to boot.

Let's see. It will remove one of the advantages of "speedy boarding" and the like - i.e. that you get your carry on bag on board first. This is bad for budget airlines. A bit of competition for space (with a charge to avoid that competition) is good for profits.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
There are still people who'll buy speedy boarding. Just do what easyJet are already doing and sell it as a premium product, I'm sure they'll find ways of selling it - for example, people with Speedy Boarding already benefit from having a second small bag that they can put under the seat in front.

Originally Speedy Boarding was designed to avoid the scrum for a seat, but now that all seats are allocated it's evolved. I see no reason why they won't evolve things further.
 

richw

Veteran Member
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Messages
11,213
Location
Liskeard
There are still people who'll buy speedy boarding. Just do what easyJet are already doing and sell it as a premium product, I'm sure they'll find ways of selling it - for example, people with Speedy Boarding already benefit from having a second small bag that they can put under the seat in front.

Originally Speedy Boarding was designed to avoid the scrum for a seat, but now that all seats are allocated it's evolved. I see no reason why they won't evolve things further.

I've discovered travelling with children under 5, easyjet board you with the priority boarders so no need to pay out.

I've just booked a return Ryanair trip and in July, for 3'of us, just under 200 return from Bristol to Chania
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
There are still people who'll buy speedy boarding. Just do what easyJet are already doing and sell it as a premium product, I'm sure they'll find ways of selling it - for example, people with Speedy Boarding already benefit from having a second small bag that they can put under the seat in front.

Originally Speedy Boarding was designed to avoid the scrum for a seat, but now that all seats are allocated it's evolved. I see no reason why they won't evolve things further.


You can't buy it on its own, only with a premium seat or Plus card.

Ryanair still sell it separately though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Although airports have to maintain baggage handling systems, largely regardless of the number of bags they process, much of the work is still done by human baggage handlers. The number and hence cost of them is much more dependent on the number of bags to be handled, for example unloading the bags off trolleys onto the back of the baggage belts. Unloading and reloading of baggage at the aircraft is another one, and also one of the several things that has to happen during the aircraft turnaround so the airlines want to minimise this because of the risk of delay as well as the cost.
 
Last edited:

dievoyagerdie

Member
Joined
1 Oct 2013
Messages
58
People are saying that airlines won't adopt the larger overheads as fewer people will then check in bags and then they won't make as much money.

This simply is not true. If your bag fits a certain size, it is carried free of charge, wether it fits in the cabin or has to be tagged and put in the hold. EasyJet uses a matrix on how many passengers versus how many checked bags, and this bags are tagged at the gate instead of letting 20/30 people through with bags that physically won't fit have to then battle to the front of the plane to get their bag tagged.

Unfortunately, the overheads are not large enough for everyone and their bag, hat, coat, airport shopping and handbag to fit in the over head.

Bigger over head lockers mean more bags in the cabin, and fewer bags need to be offloaded. Therefore turnarounds are quicker, and more passengers happy because their cabin bag is pretty much guaranteed to travel in the cabin.

The cabin bag guarantee didn't work because everyone refused to put the bags under the seat in front of them and the over head lockers were jammed.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
I'm sure I#d seen that Ryanair had ordered new 737s with the new four-bags-per-six-seats overheads?
 

Techniquest

Veteran Member
Joined
19 Jun 2005
Messages
21,674
Location
Nowhere Heath
If they're anything like the lockers on 787-9s they won't be that much better. You should have seen how much the Norwegian crew had making one locker close, thanks to one couple who seemed to have brought the world with them! There is no way on Earth some of those bags fitted the dimensions...

These lockers are frigging enormous too, I was mind blown by how much room there was in them! So don't expect miracles out of any new lockers Ryanair etc may bring in, some people are ridiculously greedy...
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
If they're anything like the lockers on 787-9s they won't be that much better. You should have seen how much the Norwegian crew had making one locker close, thanks to one couple who seemed to have brought the world with them! There is no way on Earth some of those bags fitted the dimensions...

These lockers are frigging enormous too, I was mind blown by how much room there was in them! So don't expect miracles out of any new lockers Ryanair etc may bring in, some people are ridiculously greedy...

Did you go on a 787-9 chief, didn't think they had many of them yet! Nice one if so. Some people go a bit crazy with the hand luggage, some of my friends being amongst them.
 

Crawley Ben

Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
490
Location
Crawley, West Sussex
Did you go on a 787-9 chief, didn't think they had many of them yet! Nice one if so. Some people go a bit crazy with the hand luggage, some of my friends being amongst them.

The Norwegian 787-9's have been coming in to Gatwick ex New York & Ex Los Angeles of late (almost always full!)! They 787' in general seem popular with those that have travelled on them from what I've been told.

Ben
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Just had a look on the Norwegian website and the Gatwick-New York fares at first seem comparable to the Air Transat Toronto fares. However, on closer inspection checked baggage and a meal isn't included - now on a 3 hour flight I can understand why they want to offer cheaper fares which don't include those options but on a 7-8 hour flight I'm not sure why those should be optional extras. Of course, the advantage of Norwegian over Air Transat is the new Dreamliner jets opposed to refurbished Airbuses (which do have mood lighting.)
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Just had a look on the Norwegian website and the Gatwick-New York fares at first seem comparable to the Air Transat Toronto fares. However, on closer inspection checked baggage and a meal isn't included - now on a 3 hour flight I can understand why they want to offer cheaper fares which don't include those options but on a 7-8 hour flight I'm not sure why those should be optional extras. Of course, the advantage of Norwegian over Air Transat is the new Dreamliner jets opposed to refurbished Airbuses (which do have mood lighting.)

I went to Florida with them last year and chose not to buy any extras. I was only going for three days so I didn't need a checked bag and I ate a big meal before getting on the plane. These small sacrifices saved me £100.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I'm not massively convinced by the mood lighting - they seem to use all sorts of weird colours. Using it to do a proper artificial dusk/dawn would be better than the way it does seem to be done which involves all sorts of odd purples and the likes. And blue is a bad colour to use overnight, it wakes you up!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

kingston_toon

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
105
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.

7. Purchase a set of empty 100ml bottles for around 99p in Ikea and decant your own stuff into them at home, carrying them through security in a little clear plastic bag. Shampoo, shower gel, face wash, deodorant and toothpaste. Sorted. I can do two weeks + with just that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top