What’s behind all those airline change fees?

Dotti Cahill thought she had a $150 ticket credit on Delta Air Lines.

She thought wrong.

When Cahill phoned the airline to redeem the credit, which she’d received when she’d had to change a flight while helping her daughter move to Detroit, a representative gave her the surprising bad news: To use it, she’d have to pay a $150 change fee.

In other words, her voucher was worthless.

“These fees are a joke,” said Cahill, a nurse who lives in Jacksonville, Fla. “Airlines can change flights and cancel them and move you to different flights without giving us anything – but if we need to change a flight, it’s $150.”

Cahill wonders – as do a lot of other passengers – how airlines came up with the $150 change fee to begin with. Does it really cost $150 to fix a seat reservation? Or is there more to the number?

Change fees are a healthy source of revenue for the U.S. airline industry. During the first half of 2010, the 19 largest domestic airlines collected $1.1 billion in cancellation and change fees, according to the Transportation Department. Delta made the most ($347 million) followed by American Airlines ($235 million), United Airlines ($158 million) and US Airways ($128 million).

The change fees have come a long way in just a few years. In 2009, airlines took in $2.4 billion in cancellation and change fees from their passengers. By comparison, they charged only $418 million in 1999, and in 1990, just $51 million.

The fees don’t cover just the cost of changing a reservation or making a new one, according to airlines and analysts. The cost of making an actual change is a fraction of the expenses covered by the fee, perhaps just a few dollars.

“We have the change fee policy to protect against revenue dilution,” said Morgan Durrant, a Delta spokesman. “In other words, it helps us retain revenue that otherwise could have been lost through another sale.”

Delta is basically saying that the fee will cover the cost of your seat if you cancel it and no one else buys it. Which is a fine argument to make, unless the airline can resell the seat – and then protection against revenue dilution becomes double dipping.

But what if the cost of a change fee exceeds the price of a ticket?

That happened to Deborah Campbell, a reader who recently canceled a booking on a US Airways flight. The airline issued her a credit for $111, which is what she had paid for her original ticket. But to use the credit, she would have to pay US Airways a $150 change fee. “Paying the fee isn’t practical,” she said.

When a ticket change fee exceeds the original fare, what’s the justification? According to aviation analyst Michael Miller, the surcharge is based on a median fare, so some vouchers won’t be worth keeping, while others will be.

Passengers who complain about high change fees should familiarize themselves with the economics of the airline industry, he suggested. It typically costs $20,000 for an airline to operate a one-hour flight. “So there’s a lot of risk every flight,” he said.

But privately, airline insiders acknowledge that the fees more than cover their revenue dilution. They also admit that change fees aren’t just a significant revenue source for the major airlines; in fact, these companies have built their business models around them and similar fees, such as luggage fees and other ancillary charges.

In short, the fees are a source of major profit. And the airline industry is hooked.

Well, not all of it. One major airline – Southwest – doesn’t charge any change fees but still manages to run a profitable business. How does it do that?

“We have opted to develop consumer-friendly policies,” explained Southwest spokeswoman Linda Rutherford. Those policies, she said, bring new customers to Southwest – passengers who “think they were dealt with unfairly by another airline” – which increases the company’s profits. “Not having a change fee goes straight to the bottom line,” she said.

It’s unlikely that Southwest’s competitors would see a jump in business if they dropped their change fees. In the near term, they would almost certainly see a precipitous decline in profits as $2 billion got sucked out the cabin door.

But how about over the long term? There’s only one way to tell: They’d have to try it.

In the meantime, if you’re worried about paying a hefty change fee or having the entire value of your ticket nullified, there are a few easy steps you can take. The easiest, obviously, is not to change your travel plans. But that’s not always practical.

Travel insurance is yet another option. But you have to read the fine print, and unless it’s an expensive overseas flight, it may not be worth the extra money. Another way around the fees: Flash your frequent-flier program card, and a smile, and see if you can talk your way out of it.

If your card is the right color and your smile is bright enough, it might work.

  • Eric

    Maybe the change fee should be based on a percentage of the fare paid. It would feel more “fair” to the traveller, and enable the airline to cover their revenue dilution more accurately by charging lower fees for say a NYC-DCA flight, and more for something like a LAX-SYD. Unless, of course, change fees are just a scam to pad their bottom line ;o)

  • Raven

    SWA actually REFUNDED me the difference between two flights. I had booked on one day, realized that wasn’t going to work, called them, they changed the flight and put $34 back on my credit card.
    SWA is the only airline who cares more about their customers than their bottom line.

  • Pete

    Revenue dilution, huh? Maybe back when flights were regulated and there were empty seats, but I have yet to be on a flight in the last 3 years where they weren’t oversold and pax were bumped or denied boarding. Airlines make a habit of overselling their flights, assuming some people won’t show up. But if you sold 175 seats for a 150 seat flight and 15 people cxld, where is the revenue dilution? The airlines are just greedy.

  • Kenneth

    @ Raven… Yes… Even if there is a SWA lower fare at a later date, I was able to re-book for the same flight, I got the difference back. Kudos to SWA which is very customer-oriented!!!

  • Wes

    Absurd stories like this are why I’m flying Southwest 70-80% of the time domestically now.

  • http://oussamastake.blogspot.com/ Oussama

    The majors spent years developing their fees and neglected to develop their markets and customer base. The fees is the means to cover their high core activity cost. Every fee that was charged used to be part of the ticket that was bough a few years back. When they unbundled their services they conveniently forgot to unbundle the ticket fare. Revenue dilution is a good buzz word but what they should be looking at is their cost of operation. The $20000.00 to operate a one hour flight does not apply to the all aircraft types a B737 or an A320 will probably cost about half of that number. For the sake of argument and using primitive jungle accounting, a 150 passengers aircraft at 80% Load Factor will cover its cost at $167 per ticket at the rate fees and ancillary services are charged the airline is making a 100% profit. I guess every airline must has a black hole.

  • SirWired

    The USAir policy has some additional customer-hostile “gotchas.” If you do change the flight if the new booking is less expensive than the old one, you lose the fare difference, so there is zero way out of paying the $150 change.

    Example: You book a $600 ticket. Your plans change and your new ticket is only $400. Most airlines I think let you get an airfare credit, which you can then use to pay the $150 change fee (and have $50 left over). Not USAir. They simply toss the airfare difference in the trash can as if it does not exist, and you still have to pay the change fee on top of that.

  • http://www.thetravelinggiraffe.com Crissy

    If it’s about revenue dilution then wouldn’t it make more sense to have the change fee cost increase as the flight gets closer.

    They could have a sliding scale like this:

    $50 2+ months out
    $75 1+ month out
    $100 within a month.

    The more time they have to resell the seat the more likely they are to resell it.

  • Mike Z

    The first lady mentioned, Dotti Cahill, should not have been charged that fee and should have fought it. I say this because she would have presumably been charged the fee when she changed the original flights. If she then had a $150 credit left over, the airline is basically saying we are going to charge you $150 to redeem credit you have with us. I don’t see how this is legal in any way. (how can a company charge you a fee to use a credit you have wth them???)

  • Eileen

    And this is reason no. 9,876 why I fly SWA almost exclusively. I simply do not have room in my life for this type of BS.

  • MVFlyer

    Revenue dilution shemenvue dilution…it’s a way to make money, and penalize those that need to change their non-refundable fares…basically, it acts as a fine if your schedule should change. I don’t believe that revenue dilution bit…if you change to another flight, you’re creating additional revenue on that flight–for the airlines, it’s a zero-sum game, except that they make $150 PLUS the profit from your fare.