Travel reporter for WSJ took three trips on European budget airlines. Spoiler alert - had no trouble. She tried to make it more controversial and cliff-hanging but the only real complaint she could find was, bad seats. Duh.
I don't currently have the article in front of me.
Wow, this article is really silly. I fly budget airlines all the time- it's how I've been able to visit nearly all 50 countries across this continent. A few things I found particularly ridiculous:
-Complaining about being charged extra to check in at the airport- why would you need to do that when you could easily check in online, which everyone does these days? If you are capable of purchasing the ticket online you should be able to handle online check-in.
-None of these intra-Europe flights are much more than three hours- do people need wifi and food that badly for such short flights? Plus even the legacy carriers charge extra for these now on short haul flights.
-Complaining about Luton and Gatwick not being on the tube- it's faster for me to get to those airports on the train than to take the Piccadilly line to Heathrow! Not sure how the author wound up paying $55 USD to get to Luton one way.
-Is the easyJet "rescue fee" really nickel and diming- do other airlines just allow you to miss your flight and rebook for free? I've not heard of this.
-The bag size issue comes up over and over again. But in the end, if your bag doesn't fit in the bag sizer it's not going to fit in the overhead compartment/under the seat either. It's easy these days to buy baggage to airline specifications.
I think we should all be thankful we get to experience the miracle of flight for such a small cost... just my thoughts. Thanks for sharing, it was some interesting click bait!
Posted by Cat VH
A few things I found particularly ridiculous:
-The bag size issue comes up over and over again. But in the end, if your bag doesn't fit in the bag sizer it's not going to fit in the
overhead compartment/under the seat either. It's easy these days to
buy baggage to airline specifications.
Based on questions in this website, I'm not sure this is true.
A bag is bigger than allowed in one dimension, but smaller than allowed in another. Volume is the same as the dimensions specified by the airline. The answer is usually that if the bag is "soft" and not over-stuffed, you can probably make it conform to the airline's specifications and "fit in the bag sizer" as you pointed out. But not "easy" to shop for.
The highest possible train fare from St Pancras to Luton Airport Parkway is a 1st class anytime single at £28.80 or about US$37.
Book ahead and you can often get 2nd class for about £6.
There is no such train as the Luton Express. Some are fast, but they don't have that or any name.
The journey from St Pancras takes 22 to 44 minutes + a few minutes on the DART train from station to airport.
So two embellishments in the story straight away.
RS professional travelers cant find a bag within the size limitations? There are plenty out there, people just want to be victims.
Agree 3 hours or less I don't care about amenities, etc. I can eat/drink before and after the flight.
LOL….we just flew from Portland to Hawaii on Alaska, 5 1/2 hours with no food unless you ordered and paid for ahead of time. $8.50 for a small box with a couple grapes, cheese and crackers? I don’t think so. She needs to look at what available in US before whining about other countries’ airlines. And it really isn’t that hard to bring your own on board.
margie, that's right. 5.5 hours is a bit long without food and drink, but it's so easy to bring your own stuff for that amount of time, and the food we bring is far healthier than the overpriced mediocrity served by the airlines.
Just throw in some snacks, a water bottle, maybe a sandwich with some fruits or veggies, and you're good to go. Heck, I can make a 7-8 hour flight fine with my own personal menu in my little day bag. Also includes oral care bags to feel fresh and clean.
There are plenty out there, people just want to be victims.
Ah, but we strive to be poorly dressed victims, so as to also be derided as cultural vandals. And it's actually to our advantage to buy a suitcase within "the limits" so that we can blame our slovenliness on those limitations. Felices Victimæ!!
I fly the discounts from time to time. In my case most of the time I end up paying for the upgrade to check a bag; but not always. We have a couple of people this year that are doing extended stays in one city or another and for them the discounts open up a broader world at a good price. Trips of two or three days are very possible within the carry on limitations so you can go from city to city for as little a $25 sometimes. Works well for that. If your carryon is too big, there are cheap luggage shops in most major cities. You can pick up a bag here for $30 that will last your stay plus some or travel like many of the locals .... reuseable grocery bag LOL.
With both Ryan and Wizz I have found the staff to be as good as any other airline. The seats no worse than Lufthansa (but with no recline, but who needs that on 90 minute flight). The carry on inspection .... well .... so far I have only seen people stopped for trying to carry on too many pieces, but I have never seen any measured or weighed and I have seen a lot of oversize stuff going on the plane. Lufthans and Austrian Air I see carry on checks all the time. I think the smaller size might have as much to do with efficiency in boarding and in reducing the size of the cheating bags as anything else. Boarding and getting off has been efficient and organized. Flights have been as timely as any other carriers. Honestly I cant find a thing wrong with them for what they are and for what they do.
My destinations with these guys: Malta, Romania, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Germany, Moldova and I think it was Wizz that I took to Lviv. My biggest gripe is the shell game with the pricing. I am smart enough to come to the right conclusion but it does take time to weigh all the conflicting options. Under seat vs Check + Underseat vs Carry on but no underseat vs ..... its silly. But in the end the prices are good, the service is good and more of the world is open to me.
Wow, this article is really silly.
Yup, this is the state of modern journalism.
“I don’t use Wizz,” he said. “Their charges for luggage are a scam.”
They gave it up right at the start of the article. That over used word "scam", that actually means "I had no understanding of what I was buying, or I didn't think the rules applied to me."
Volume is the same as the dimensions specified by the airline.
But one is not allotted or paying for volume.
Ryanair is increasing bonuses for staff spotting oversized bags - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c99mdv3y431o
VAP, yup, those gate agents will be on the hunt now ... for that $1 bonus. Somehow I doubt it. But what did catch me in the article was:
The airline currently allows a small carry-on bag – with a size capped
at 40cm x 20cm x 25cm and weight of 10kg – with every ticket.However, this is set to increase to 40cm x 30cm x 20cm from September
after a change in EU rules.
With all that is screwed up in the world, is the EU really getting involved in bag sizes? You know the Iphones usigng a mini-C charging cable now instead of the trademark lightnening (or what ever it was called) is an EU mandate. Thank gwad for that. The world was ending. If the EU really did dictate bag sizes, then they changed the wrong dimenision. Should have changed the 20 to 25 cm, that would have been more help.
Still, Ryan and Wizz allow more weight than does Lufthansa and a few other mainstream carriers and no less weight than the majority so the very slightly smaller current size just means packing a bit tighter (sitting on the bag to zip).
UPDATE: Apparently the bill still requires all the EU countries to sign on to it. The bill also requires that everyone get a free carry on and a free personal item. Good news our airline tickets are going up in cost until all the EU countries get around to approving it.
I don't see where she tried to make it controversial or "cliff-hanging," and if you read the actual article from the WSJ, her sub-heading says, "Hopscotching across Europe has never been cheaper or easier thanks to airlines like Ryanair, Wizz Air and easyJet.
It sounds to me like she was trying to let folks know that flying cheap airlines can be easy and ... well, cheap. :-)
I agree with Mardee's take on the article.
While many folks don't mind "rules" designed to catch you and charge you an extra fee, I personally hate being nickeled and dimed. I avoid these type of airlines and think commonsense minimum standards regulations are a benefit to consumers who shouldn't be in a situation of always shopping for a new bag that maybe fits the ever evolving "standard" size.
When you go to many European cities, you'll often see them display medieval measures-- this is a foot, this is a pound. Standards! It empowers markets! If Ryan Air is handing out bonuses for being luggage police, I say avoid them like the plague! (Of course if you like this sort thing, go for it. )
Happy travels.
If you dont like something, you should avoid it. That is your privilege. If enough, I agree with you then the airline changes. If enough disagree, you get out voted. Democracy in action.
There are a number of problems with that so-called article, but I see no attempt to make it controversial of cliff-hangy.
First, it's not an "article" (any more than this post is). It's a social media post pretending to be journalism, nothing more. It's basically, "hey I went to Europe and flew around a bit. It was OK." Where's the new value in that?
BREAKING NEWS: OCEAN STILL WET, try this one crazy trick! Now THAT'S journalism.
The rules are the rules, and anyone who ignores them gets what they deserve.
Calling the airlines "stingy" (which the article never did) seems pretty unfair to me. The airlines are simply giving their customers exactly what they demand - cheap, cheap, cheap tickets, to the exclusion of any other consideration. If your flight costs no more than a fancy cup of coffee, don't be surprised if there's no in-flight shower or caviar bar. People demand tickets that cost less than a trip to Mickey D's so that's what they're selling. If you don't like it, stop shopping and paying for flights to the exclusion of any other consideration.
Personally, I try to avoid the cheapest possible anything, that includes airplane rides. Sometimes the cheap-o option is the only flight serving a route I want, and in that case I'll suffer the low cost airline experience for a short bit, but I'll typically pay for a checked bag and maybe other amenities.
And if the "stingy" label applies here, it's on the customers, ain't it?
If you read the WSJ for any length of time, you see that its target audience for "lifestyle" issues is above-average income-wise. Informing them you can fly safely and less expensively among the proleteriat might indeed be news. In much of the US (the WSJ's home), the budget airlines that periodically pop up and then disappear have a much less savory reputation than in Europe.
And then, the vestigial newspaper world is struggling hard to compete with social media, where the line between entertainment, opinion, and news is not a strong point.
