Rockbottom budget? Avoid baggage fees!

The 70 or 80 bucks I’ve seen lately buys you quite a wardrobe!

… of second hand knickers.

I was thinking shirts, blouses, a jacket… But whatever floats your boat.

Is this one of those classic internet travel hacks that's supposed to sound clever, but on paper falls apart?

There's a false premise. On almost all legacy airlines crossing the Atlantic (like nearly all of them. KLM seems the odd man out), a standard carry-on and a personal item are included on the various basic economy tickets. But millions of people already travel carry-on only for two weeks or so in basic or standard economy, making this hack unnecessary.

The math doesn't make sense. If you're spending money in a thrift store for clothes or personal items to survive your trip, what are your real net savings?

The time tax is too much. To save how much? You'll sacrifice the first half day or so of your hard earned vacation navigating a foreign city to find a charity shop or thrift store, sorting through racks, trying on clothes, hoping they fit and finding a laundromat to wash them before wearing them. Then, you have to spend time at the end of your trip returning to donate them. Your time on vacation is worth more than a few bucks an hour.

Personally, the actual price gap between Basic and Standard Economy on a transatlantic flight isn't wide enough to justify surrendering your vacation time just to buy and abandon clothes. And ehem, you still have carry-on and a personal item even in BE.

Thank you VAP…..common sense is good.

Reminds me of the old saying penny wise and pound foolish. False economy.

To expand on what VAP said, indicating how bad an idea it is.

1- You have to devote research time to find where they are
2- They are unlikely to be in the usual tourist areas, so an even greater time investment to get to where it is
3- Lower likelihood of English speaking staff
4- Have to procure a bag to haul it all around while you are there

If the budget is that tight for someone, perhaps they shouldn't be traveling? (Is it a wise use of their very limited funds?)

"Rockbottom" to me would be one change of clothes plus the minimal toiletries/hygiene items and Rx that fit in the "personal item" that goes under the seat.

One to wash and one to wear.

Not that I want to travel like that.

That may be more in line with threads about what is the absolute minimum you could survive with.

How are you going to get around with that new wardrobe if it won't all fit in your carry-on?

When and where did you do this?

Oh, I don’t know. It could be kinda fun to see how far $150 (what it costs to either pay for a suitcase or upgrade to a level that includes a checked bag) would go in a thrift store if I really needed things. And a lot of us aren’t REALLY on terribly tight schedules when we travel. So we could afford the time.

The difference in the post and our replies is that most of us fly an airline that allows some kind of free carryon. So we don’t NEED to do the above. And many of us are older - not in our 20’s anymore, with better wages or a nice retirement. But not everyone who reads the forum is.

Aer Lingus mislaid my luggage on a trip to England. I did buy used shirts and NEW underwear from a thrift store. I still have the underwear that I still wear and declared my least favorite pair and second least favorite pair. They must be polyester and are still like new. The shirts I liked and they wore out too soon. My lost luggage came back like a month after the trip.

I generally fly back to east coast annually and use an underseat sized backpack and no complaints from my family about looking like or smelling like Pigpen from Peanuts.

I loosely tried the life hack.

Overall I appreciate anyone offering advice. And this forum.

I'm sorry, but the premise in the edit still doesn't hold up.

That critics just "don't understand rockbottom travel" is a deflection. Rockbottom budget travel requires being ruthlessly sharp with airline rules so you can exploit every opportunity available, not fabricate restrictions that don't exist.

The French Bee example is inaccurate. That $156 figure is a “priced from” one-way teaser rate. Once you actually price out a real itinerary for 1 October, the low one-way is $218 (nice), and a realistic round-trip ticket returning on 15 October comes out to $573 for their lowest tier Bee Lite fare.

Most importantly, French Bee's baggage allowance for the Bee Lite fare includes a standard carry-on cabin bag and a personal item with their carry-on weight limit at 12 kg (26 lbs). You can easily pack two weeks' worth of clothes into 26 lbs.

That low Norse Atlantic Economy Lite rate is $160 over and then another $460 for the return for a total of $620. This Economy Lite also includes a standard carry-on bag and personal item with a 10k or 22lbs allowance.

Hostel pricing is a decade out of date. Good luck finding a $15/night hostel anywhere near Paris or London in 2026. A basic dorm bed in these destination cities averages $45 to $55 a night.

And why zig zag across europe to abandon and rebuy clothes to avoid baggage fees on inter-european flights. The math simply doesn’t track. Whether you fly legacy or budget transatlantic, your carry-on is already included, making the entire strategy unnecessary.

In answer to Estimated Prophet - as to where: Just a few I can remember: Paris, Emmaus. OZ, Sallies and Vinnies. Bucharest, Podium. They are everywhere, often near universities and hospitals, so if you need something, they can be fun, disparaging remarks in this thread notwithstanding. But again, these suggestions are meant only for truly rockbottom budget folks - you know who you are (or are not).

I agree with VAP on this one- this strategy makes no sense. I say this as someone who regularly flies easyJet/Ryanair/Wizz and normally only has a carry on that fits under the seat. But that's very easy if you're only going for a long weekend. If going for a bit longer my husband and I purchase one overhead bag that we share (which you get in addition to the underseat bag). Considering all the costs that go into a trip, even a very inexpensive one, paying an additional £20 or whatever for a bag isn't going to make or break you- and frankly I think a buying a new set of clothes, even from a charity shop, will cost more. It's certainly worth it to me to pay a bit for baggage and not have to be stressed at every new location of having to source an entirely new wardrobe.

". I have received pushback this afternoon from folks who do not sound like rockbottom budget travelers."

I think you're just posting on the wrong forum - most of us are not even remotely rock bottom budget travelers. I almost always travel on full service airlines with checkin luggage. And here in Asia even budget airlines allow free carryon bags. Although I have been known to buy new clothes when I run out of clean stuff on a long trip - Uniqlo is my favourite shop for this.

Although I think this idea may be a bit odd, there are maybe several clarifications to the points above.

In big cities like London a hostel may not now be the cheapest place to stay, with the proliferation of capsule bed hotels. While not really (or at all, if I'm being honest) for me I can see their benefits if all you are looking for is a bed for the night. They are often very well priced although US$15 is not realistic- 4 or 5 x times that is more like it. I expect big cities in continental Europe also now have such places.

You don't really have to go out of your way at least in the UK to find charity (as we call them)/thrift shops. Keswick (a forum favourite in the Lake District) has them in the centre of town- maybe a street or two (literally) away from where the tourists walk, but nonetheless there. Symbolic of a deep underbelly of poverty in the area, which no amount of gratuities/tips is going to solve. It's the bit about "living like a local" which people don't want to know about.

The cost of luggage over here is a lot less than in the US- especially if just looking for something to get you by. I look at what the "enablers" on here post, or the prices in the RS store are, and am stunned. Sure cheap luggage won't last you for years (although you might be surprised), but really isn't hard to find if you know where to look.

If you want to get in from Gatwick to central London, and don't mind taking your time to save money, don't take any train but use the local bus- the #420 in this case which will take you into Zone 6 terrain. You will see more of south London than you ever knew existed, and find your thrift shops in Sutton where you change onto local trains in Zone 6.

I'm sure the same principle exists for Orly (your other example)- use local transport, not the airport express routes.

I agree with TexasTravelMom. I don't think it's for me, but I could see somebody enjoying shopping in thrift stores and picking out a new wardrobe to save money and carry-on fees. As she said, most of us here are not on that kind of budget, but I'd be willing to bet there are some here who have to stretch their dollars a lot.

In fact, I just picked up a rain jacket from a used market in a tiny town in Iceland because I accidentally left my jacket at home.

I do think it works better if you don't rush to buy everything at once. For example, if you have enough clothes for a day or so, then you could flesh it out as you travel and make it a point of stopping in a thrift store in each new town you go to. I could see the fun in that. 😊

I agree with TexasTravelMom.

Darn it, Mardee, I was just going to say exactly that. We like thrift stores because we find very interesting stuff, not found at home. And they're easy to find, and not out of the way

I applaud the OP for posting his thoughts. As mentioned, the demographic of this forum is very skewed toward older folks who don't need thrift stores, and can pay more for airfares. And maybe a few who feel thrift stores are beneath them.