Which airlines charge the most in ticket cancellation fees?

by Christopher Elliott on July 8, 2009

ishot-3

United Airlines and US Airways lead the pack, according to the Transportation Department, charging their customers $78 million and $66 million, respectively. (The figures on the chart are for the first quarter of 2009, and are in millions.)

Conspicuously missing, of course, is Southwest Airlines. It doesn’t play that game with its customers.

Also noteworthy is Delta Air Lines’ low number. Is it waiving the fee for more travelers? And will its acquisition of Northwest Airlines, which charged nearly $40 million, encourage it to do the same?

We’ll see.

Also, where’s American Airlines? Did it bother reporting this number for the quarter?

Meantime, here are a few thoughts on change fees:

• It’s easy to see the airlines that consider change fees a reasonable penalty for a change in schedule, versus a profit center. Most passengers don’t have any trouble paying what they consider a fair change fee. But they don’t want to be taken advantage of.

• I’m willing to bet that these numbers will be higher for the balance of 2009 and significantly higher in 2010, particularly for legacy airlines. Can you say “no waivers, no favors”?

• Is there a correlation between change fees an profitability? The most distressed airlines also charge the most ticket change fees. Could that be a coincidence?

Print Friendly

Tagged as: airlines, cancellation, fees

  • Frank

    Conspicuously missing, of course, is Southwest Airlines.
    =============================================

    Look at their LOAD FACTORS. Always below average for the industry. They can accommodate someone on another flight.
    ——————————————————————————-

    Is there a correlation between change fees an profitability? The most distressed airlines also charge the most ticket change fees. Could that be a coincidence?
    ==============================================

    Please explain that correlation? According to LOAD FACTORS:
    US Airways Group, Inc. (NYSE: LCC) today announced June, second quarter
    and year-to-date 2009 traffic results. Mainline revenue passenger miles
    (RPMs) for the month were 5.4 billion, down 4.1 percent versus June
    2008. Capacity was 6.3 billion available seat miles (ASMs), down 6.1
    percent versus June 2008. Passenger load factor for the month of June
    was a record 86.8 percent, up 1.8 points versus June 2008.

    CHICAGO, July 6 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — United Airlines today reported its preliminary consolidated traffic results for June 2009. The company reported a June consolidated passenger load factor of 85.9 percent.

    AND THEN YOU HAVE:
    Jul 07, 2009 (AIRLINE INDUSTRY INFORMATION via COMTEX) — LUV | Quote | Chart | News | PowerRating — Southwest Airlines (NYSE:LUV) reported a load factor of 79.5% for June 2009, an increase of 1.3 percentage points compared to the same period of last year.

    so, according to load factors, people are choosing the two legacy carriers. Yield is what produces PROFITS, and this goes to show you, ticket prices are NOT covering costs. Even Southwest is losing money! Their business model depended on those fuel hedges for years.

    ============================================================

    Also noteworthy is Delta Air Lines’ low number. Is it waiving the fee for more travelers?
    ————————————————————————————-

    Interesting QUESTION, let us all know when you find out.

  • Wrona

    Also missing from your chart is American Airlines

  • Pingback: Which airlines charge the most in ticket cancellation fees?

  • Chuck Etheridge

    Your chart isn’t completely accurate becasue the airlines report the data differently to the DOT. One airline might report cancellation fees only on tickets that were actually outright canceled and were never re-booked. Another might report report the fees on every ticket that was canceled even those that were rebooked at the same time. The DOT hasn’t set a standard that the airlines can follow when filing this data.

Previous post:

Next post: