Spirit dying is going to mean prices go up substantially across industry. They provided a price floor above which other airlines couldnt raise prices without risking losing business to spirit. Usually the difference was pretty small, basically a market calculated fee for not wanting to deal with Spirit. But since their bankruptcies, in areas where they have pulled out, the other airlines have been seen to raise prices by something like 12-15%. I would expect similar or worse now that they're gone for good.
An unsustainable price floor, apparently. Which suggests that it’s not the appropriate floor price, unless Spirit crashed for reasons unrelated to airport / plane / gate operations costs?
>Spirit dying is going to mean prices go up substantially across industry.
Maybe, but the economics of budget airline service are solid, so we will undoubtedly get new entrants. What wasn't solid was Spirit's outright disdain for their customers. It was completely unnacceptable how they operated, and the market has spoken as such. Even Frontier has humans you can talk to. Being stranded by one of Spirit's constant delayed flights with no recourse but an automated chatbot should have been illegal. It reached a point where your stated departure time was really no more than a vague suggestion of the time window you might be leaving around. They pushed the trend of service enshittification to its extreme conclusion and people finally had enough.
One of the best flights I've ever taken was Spirit and had 8 passengers on it, 5 of which were transferring staff/pilots. The second worst flight I've ever had the pleasure of enduring was also Spirit - the worst was Easyjet (simply because their seat dimensions are somehow smaller than the average human and generally incompatible with human physiology), and third worst was Ryanair because a mass of orange colored Brits are with near a unlimited supply of duty free gin is... amusing enough to move it up a few notches.
> a mass of orange colored Brits are with near a unlimited supply of duty free gin
I fly direct from London to Vegas occasionally. The upside is that going through immigration is trivial -- of 270 people on a flight, 265 go to the "foreign passports" line. The downside is the 15 minute wait after getting to the gate for the police to come and arrest the people who were fist fighting in the aisle.
I've flown on Spirit exactly once, thanks to an ex-wife who fit the "needlessly frugal" type talked about yesterday to a tee. Grew up in foster care and couldn't acknowledge we weren't poor. We flew into Miami during some bad weather and it's the only time ever in decades of flying I've seen the flight attendants visibly scared. If you've ever gotten speed wobbles on a skateboard, it was just like that. I'm still amazed the plane didn't fall apart in the air. They also charged for water.
They subsidized cheap prices with market segmentation. This is not the dunk everyone thinks it is. Some who needed it could fly for dirt cheap prices, subsidized by people who needed the add ons and were less price sensitive. Now they just, what? Have no option that's that cheap. Hooray I guess?
We need functioning poverty where people can still get by even if they fall below a certain threshold, they have a recourse to getup and live without being treated like animals.
Around The World with Louis C.K. | Jim Norton Can't Save You EP 68
In a podcast, Louis C.K. has remarked on his observations of "functioning poverty" during his travels in India, contrasting it with the homelessness and societal dysfunction he sees in New York City.
Oh neat; I’ve been calling it the “economy of the poor” since I can’t find any proper conversation on it. This is the first time I’ve seen someone bring it up
But I think the notable aspect is not that they have recourse, it’s that the economics properly scales down. Can’t afford 20 cigarettes? An Indian shop will sell you 10. Can’t afford 10? They’ll sell you 1. Can’t afford 1? They’ll sell you half a cigarette.
Can’t afford clean water? They’ll sell you mildly dirty water. Can’t afford mildly dirty water? They’ll sell you dirty water.
Can’t afford a modern, well built, safe car? How about one with 3 wheels? No doors? No AC? 10 MPG? The crumpling structure of a tin can? An engine with less HP than a lawnmower?
In the US, there’s an arbitrary cutoff where you simply aren't allowed to be sold goods and services by anyone in normal society. It’s not about giving recourse; it’s about not actively trying to ostracize them as a separate class of humanity.
You have to actively work to stop “functional poverty” from existing. In any normal setup, it’s just more of the same economy as otherwise.
For cities where the flight is an 1.5 hours or less high speed rail (300kph) is usually about the same (if not slightly faster) because it's much faster to get in and out.
This works even better when the train station is closer to downtown than the airport.
Spirit dying is going to mean prices go up substantially across industry. They provided a price floor above which other airlines couldnt raise prices without risking losing business to spirit. Usually the difference was pretty small, basically a market calculated fee for not wanting to deal with Spirit. But since their bankruptcies, in areas where they have pulled out, the other airlines have been seen to raise prices by something like 12-15%. I would expect similar or worse now that they're gone for good.
An unsustainable price floor, apparently. Which suggests that it’s not the appropriate floor price, unless Spirit crashed for reasons unrelated to airport / plane / gate operations costs?
>Spirit dying is going to mean prices go up substantially across industry.
Maybe, but the economics of budget airline service are solid, so we will undoubtedly get new entrants. What wasn't solid was Spirit's outright disdain for their customers. It was completely unnacceptable how they operated, and the market has spoken as such. Even Frontier has humans you can talk to. Being stranded by one of Spirit's constant delayed flights with no recourse but an automated chatbot should have been illegal. It reached a point where your stated departure time was really no more than a vague suggestion of the time window you might be leaving around. They pushed the trend of service enshittification to its extreme conclusion and people finally had enough.
Frontier has humans that you can talk to, for a fee. They charge $25 for going to the counter at the airport.
One of the best flights I've ever taken was Spirit and had 8 passengers on it, 5 of which were transferring staff/pilots. The second worst flight I've ever had the pleasure of enduring was also Spirit - the worst was Easyjet (simply because their seat dimensions are somehow smaller than the average human and generally incompatible with human physiology), and third worst was Ryanair because a mass of orange colored Brits are with near a unlimited supply of duty free gin is... amusing enough to move it up a few notches.
> a mass of orange colored Brits are with near a unlimited supply of duty free gin
I fly direct from London to Vegas occasionally. The upside is that going through immigration is trivial -- of 270 people on a flight, 265 go to the "foreign passports" line. The downside is the 15 minute wait after getting to the gate for the police to come and arrest the people who were fist fighting in the aisle.
I've flown on Spirit exactly once, thanks to an ex-wife who fit the "needlessly frugal" type talked about yesterday to a tee. Grew up in foster care and couldn't acknowledge we weren't poor. We flew into Miami during some bad weather and it's the only time ever in decades of flying I've seen the flight attendants visibly scared. If you've ever gotten speed wobbles on a skateboard, it was just like that. I'm still amazed the plane didn't fall apart in the air. They also charged for water.
Spirit was a once and never again situation for me personally. But I’d like to think it helped drive prices in some of the competing routes.
For $9 I'll shed a tear.
Better check the baggage fees before you make an offer like that.
They subsidized cheap prices with market segmentation. This is not the dunk everyone thinks it is. Some who needed it could fly for dirt cheap prices, subsidized by people who needed the add ons and were less price sensitive. Now they just, what? Have no option that's that cheap. Hooray I guess?
We need functioning poverty where people can still get by even if they fall below a certain threshold, they have a recourse to getup and live without being treated like animals.
Around The World with Louis C.K. | Jim Norton Can't Save You EP 68
https://youtu.be/z0cypFadE3k?t=2394
In a podcast, Louis C.K. has remarked on his observations of "functioning poverty" during his travels in India, contrasting it with the homelessness and societal dysfunction he sees in New York City.
Oh neat; I’ve been calling it the “economy of the poor” since I can’t find any proper conversation on it. This is the first time I’ve seen someone bring it up
But I think the notable aspect is not that they have recourse, it’s that the economics properly scales down. Can’t afford 20 cigarettes? An Indian shop will sell you 10. Can’t afford 10? They’ll sell you 1. Can’t afford 1? They’ll sell you half a cigarette.
Can’t afford clean water? They’ll sell you mildly dirty water. Can’t afford mildly dirty water? They’ll sell you dirty water.
Can’t afford a modern, well built, safe car? How about one with 3 wheels? No doors? No AC? 10 MPG? The crumpling structure of a tin can? An engine with less HP than a lawnmower?
In the US, there’s an arbitrary cutoff where you simply aren't allowed to be sold goods and services by anyone in normal society. It’s not about giving recourse; it’s about not actively trying to ostracize them as a separate class of humanity.
You have to actively work to stop “functional poverty” from existing. In any normal setup, it’s just more of the same economy as otherwise.
His idea of functioning poverty in that video seems to involve shanty towns and more "side hustles" for the poor.
His heart may be in the right place but he may be too rich for this conversation. He comes off as more than a little bit out of touch here
Are you saying observation about a situation requires a privileged or non privileged position?
Dutch frugality means booking the cheapest flight to your 4 star resort. It is a badge of honour.
Isn't the 4 star resort also usually in a country that has at least 50 to 1 difference in purchasing power?
Control-F "antitrust". Zero hits.
Why no discussion of "yet another victory" for antitrust? Was 2024 really that long ago?
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-s...
I won't miss the nickel and diming that's for sure...
Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47983873
Good news for Frontier it seems
If it lowers air travel then it's a good thing, since it's probably the only way the US will meaningfully invest in high speed rail.
Quite the opposite. You reckon taking planes out of the skies will lower the cost flying? Supply and demand.
Yes, it will likely raise prices.
My point/question is whether this will reduce air travel and increase demand for rail.
I think OP meant whether this might "lower the demand" for air travel...due to the expected spike in prices
All for this if the train cruises at 600mph.
For cities where the flight is an 1.5 hours or less high speed rail (300kph) is usually about the same (if not slightly faster) because it's much faster to get in and out.
This works even better when the train station is closer to downtown than the airport.