That CNBC clip is the first I have seen to accurately represent the new baggage fees, specifically that it is unexpected that anyone will actually pay $100 to carry on a bag. It is about controlling costs not about generating revenue.

I agree, cnbc is the only one who was honest.

I don't know about honesty, but at least the explained the how and why of this new fee.

Instead of just saying that it will be impose to everyone.

You mean to tell me fox news didn't fairly present the new fees in a balanced way???? Huh! Go figure...

It was all "It's going to cost the customer $200.00 round trip for a carry on bag on Spirit!" on fox news yesterday. Oh, and they made some socialist statements about how the costs should be included in the fare. You know so that everyone subsidizes each other. The irony!

They also raised the fees for pre-paying for carry-on bags online and at the kiosk. Was that also to change behavior and get people to pay for their carry-ons ahead of time online or at the kiosk?

Right! so people stop showing up with oversized bags and unpaid items accompany with comments like, (they said it was ok), lawn furniture (the ticket counter lady said that it was fine), etc. Still cheaper to paid online or at the counter.

I'll guess that you're on to something. Slipping in a rate increase on normal carry-on's while everyone is focused on the outrageous "at the gate fee" sounds like it could be their strategy.

Neither. It was likely to change the behavior to get more people to check bags - management doesn't run decisions by the line pilots first, so none of us know for sure why it was done.

I take delays for passengers (with their expensive carry-ons which slow them down) much more often then late bags. Maybe this fee change will change behavior, maybe it won't. It will likely increase Spirit's ancillary revenues, helping Spirit's industry leading RASM to CASM spread grow. That in turn rewards our shareholders by increasing the price of our stock, which is management's job.

Spirit is a business, and, as a public company, it exists to reward its shareholders. Only time will tell if Spirit's focus on ultra low ticket costs and profitable ancillary revenue opportunities (at the expense of customer amenities and service) will be a successful long-term strategy, rather than a 'happy employees = happy customers = happy investors' strategy, though, as our CEO has pointed out, a growing airline keeps most seniority based employee groups happy. As line pilots, we provide the best service we can to our customers, but can't control what happens when the door is closed or the decisions of our senior management.

spirit employees who make excuses for spirits unethical business practices are part of the problem. As the old saying goes, "They came for the passengers and I said nothing, because i was not a passenger..."