Airlines will make $118B in extra fees
Airlines are projected to earn around $118 billion from “ancillary” charges such as seat selection, baggage, and other add-ons, sparking debate over whether these are fair optional extras or deceptive junk fees. Many commenters argue that unbundling can benefit light or flexible travelers, but say dark patterns, opaque pricing, and last-minute upsells make it hard to compare real costs or avoid paying more than expected. Others note that while regulations now require all mandatory fees to be shown in the ticket price, airlines still exploit loopholes through aggressive upselling, dynamic pricing, and confusing fare classes, prompting calls for stronger transparency rules.
Scope of “extra fees” and headline framing
- Several commenters say the $118B “extra fees” headline is misleading; much of this ancillary revenue (bags, food, seat selection) would be baked into higher base fares otherwise.
- Others counter that even if total revenue is similar, the way fees are presented and sold often relies on dark patterns and confusion.
Unbundling vs. junk fees
- Many distinguish between:
- Legitimate unbundling (optional bags, seat upgrades, food, Wi‑Fi) that some are happy to skip for lower base fares.
- “Junk” or unavoidable fees (resort-style charges, mandatory seat fees to sit together, carry‑on charges, surprise service fees) that feel deceptive.
- Some like ultra‑low‑cost carriers precisely because they can travel with only a backpack and pay much less; others say once you add normal baggage and seat needs, prices converge with legacy airlines.
Dark patterns and UX complaints
- Common pain points:
- Price shown in aggregators reflects bare‑bones “basic economy” and excludes common needs (carry‑on, seat choice).
- Long, upsell-heavy checkout flows where options are preselected or repeatedly re‑added, and final cost only emerges near the end.
- Seat selection flows where “free seat selection” is advertised but only paid seats appear, or where not choosing a seat is possible but visually discouraged.
- Some argue this is just reading comprehension; others insist it’s deliberate psychological design (sunk-cost pressure, urgency, confusing bundles).
Dynamic and discriminatory pricing
- Debate over whether airlines change prices based on user data (location, device, cookies):
- Some report large price swings when using VPNs/browsers; others insist first‑party airline systems don’t do this and attribute changes to cache staleness, fare bucket availability, or point-of-sale rules.
- “Only X seats left at this price” messages are seen by some as helpful information, by others as manipulative scarcity framing.
Regulation, transparency, and comparison shopping
- Several call for broader laws against drip pricing and for true all‑in comparison (including luggage and seat-selection assumptions).
- Others note US rules already require taxes/mandatory fees in listed fares, but airlines exploit unbundling to keep headline prices low.
- Some argue the real problem is consolidation and alliances reducing effective competition on many routes.
Traveler adaptations and mixed outcomes
- Strategies mentioned: exclude certain carriers, favor Southwest/Alaska, use Google Flights/Kayak with bag filters, rely on credit-card insurance, skip seat selection when solo.
- There are both very positive and very negative anecdotes about specific airlines and low‑cost carriers, underlining that experiences vary widely.