Differences between QF and BA excess baggage charges

[estate]

I've been researching costs for excess baggage for SYD-LHR recently, and have come across what appears to be a big difference between QF and BA.

BA and QF both allow 1x 23kg bag for Y. But the difference in cost for excess baggage is staggering.
BA will charge you £30 to take your first bag up to 32kg, and another £32 for a second 23kg bag. So you can fly with 55kg for £62, or about $110.
A third 23kg bag costs £72, so that would give you a max of 78kg for £134, or about $240.

QF, on the other hand, will charge you $1,225 for the extra 35kg needed to reach the same weight allowance. Even if you're a QF PS like me and only need to buy an extra 25kg it's still going to set you back $875.

Relevant links are
QF Fly - Baggage - Additional Baggage
BA British Airways - Additional and overweight baggage

Why would QF feel the need to charge over 17 times more for excess baggage than its close commercial partner, and on routes where they profit share?

Then again, perhaps this is why QF is one of the most profitable airlines and BA is hemorrhaging money.

 

[Dave Noble]

Not entirely accurate

Qantas will allow 23Kg total baggage allowance total, but there is no limit on the number of bags which can be checked in ( see Fly - Baggage - Checked Baggage - New Checked Baggage Allowance )

BA will allow 1 bag of 23Kg. 2 bags totalling 23Kg will incur extra bag fee


As a Silver member, on QF you can take 2 bags totalling 33Kg ( or 1 of 32Kg ) for free whilst on BA , as a silver member, you would hit the overweight/extra bag fees. Beyond that BA is the way to go luggage wise

Overall though , BA's baggage allowances are much more generous than QF's

Dave

 

[Mal]

Yeah it is pretty interesting to see the big differences.

Not as nasty as Singapore though - 20kg max for Econ, and then $US60/Kg to LHR from Oz. I don't think they have a pre-paid option.

 

[estate]

True, QF will allow multiple bags within the initial 23kg, but then again, when you're looking to take as much as possible, taking more than one bag just eats into your 23kg with bag weight, rather than contents etc.

I'm looking at moving to London, and when BA will charge me under $250 to take a large roller suitcase with up to 32kg, a large pack weighing 23kg and a roller-bag for my suits (again 23kg max), plus a standard wheeled carry-on and a laptop bag (which they make no mention of weighing) all on a Y fare, the choice between them and QF is a no-brainer.

If you have no choice but to take a large quantity of luggage it seems to me BA are far more reasonable.
I was considering flying J on AY or CX (as per my other thread below) but this is a far better use of my money.

 

[Dave Noble]

If you have no choice but to take a large quantity of luggage it seems to me BA are far more reasonable.
I was considering flying J on AY or CX (as per my other thread below) but this is a far better use of my money.

There is another choice for large amounts of luggage. Ship it; using companies like Jetta Express large amounts can be sent for a fairly low cost.

As far as taking it with you, BA is one of the best. Go World Traveller Plus and can take an extra bag and have more comfort too

Dave

 

[estate]

There is another choice for large amounts of luggage. Ship it; using companies like Jetta Express large amounts can be sent for a fairly low cost.

As far as taking it with you, BA is one of the best. Go World Traveller Plus and can take an extra bag and have more comfort too

Thanks, I haven't heard of Jetta Express, I'll certainly check them out, much appreciated.

I did look at WT+, but unfortunately it appears to be sold out the day I need to fly - E/F is showing 0s across the board and the quote from ba.com is over $10k - I guess it's a J fare.

 

[anat0l]

I don't agree with the whole excess charges debate.

An airline can charge whatever it likes for excess baggage. Sure, it will affect their business because others will choose airlines which have better policies (read: policies which are more favourable to their needs), but that is their own doing. It is not a "rip off" because excess baggage is at the discretion of the passenger - no one forces you to bring excess baggage that you have decided to carry against the rules of your fare or carriage conditions.

This is why LCCs can enforce a 15kg first tier weight restriction and then charge an extortionate amount just to get to 20kg. Stop complaining because you knew that when you booked the ticket; if you wanted more then plan to prepay, pay big or fly another carrier.

Same deal with say JQ, who can sell JetSaver Light fares but if you decide to check-in a bit then you will need to change to a JetSaver fare (which may be many times more expensive depending on the loadings and bucket rates).

When people have specific needs to carry a lot of luggage, certainly your evaluation of excess baggage fees become reasonable, and thus that also affects choices of carrier in the end.

But back on topic, I agree that QF excess charges are quite high, but again I have no problem with them levying such charges. I will endeavour to make sure that my baggage is within the weight limits before checking in, or at least I will try to concoct backup plans

BA I have heard used to be more generous with their luggage (QF were as well, but BA more so in this case - most BAEC people were not very happy at all when they rolled out new baggage limits); this thread seems to show that even with excess baggage they are still fairly light (pun intended) on penalties. To compensate, they are also inordinately strict in the UK about weight. I've heard many stories heard about people who are a mere 1kg overweight being charged, some not even being given the chance to step aside and repack.

 

[estate]

This is why LCCs can enforce a 15kg first tier weight restriction and then charge an extortionate amount just to get to 20kg. Stop complaining because you knew that when you booked the ticket; if you wanted more then plan to prepay, pay big or fly another carrier.

In a black and white world I agree with you. But it's about managing people's expectations. They get people to book with them because of a very lowly advertised rate, but then sting them for extras that get you within cooee of a full service airline's fare. I don't have a problem with any airline charging what it wants, but I also want a bit more "truth in advertising" from some of the more extreme LCCs.

This thread isn't to criticise QF in particular, it's more an observation on the differences. QF are perfectly entitled to charge whatever they wish, I have no objection to it. I'll simply choose to fly BA instead (an academic distinction commercially speaking for the two airlines I admit, given the particular route I intend to fly).

They are also inordinately strict in the UK about weight. I've heard many stories heard about people who are a mere 1kg overweight being charged, some not even being given the chance to step aside and repack.

That's a bit extreme! I'd absolutely insist on repacking.

 

[NM]

To compensate, they are also inordinately strict in the UK about weight. I've heard many stories heard about people who are a mere 1kg overweight being charged, some not even being given the chance to step aside and repack.

When that close to a weight restriction (checked or carry-on), its important to remember that items carried in your pockets are inherently weightless. The laptop charger, electric shaver, books, phone, camera, ipod, other charges etc all weigh nothing when carried in your pockets past the weighing station . There is no limit to the amount of stuff you can empty from your pockets into trays at the security screening point. Cargo pants can be handy at times .

 

[Dave Noble]

BA I have heard used to be more generous with their luggage (QF were as well, but BA more so in this case - most BAEC people were not very happy at all when they rolled out new baggage limits);

Actually they were not. BA's old allowances were 2x32Kg on transatlantic or 20/30/40Kg on other routes. There were lots of whines that in some cases couldnt take what used to be taken but for those in economy ( the majority of passengers ) there was little in the new allowances that were bad

More recently they have reduced the bag allowance on transatlantic from 2 to 1 for economy passengers but overall BA has some generous policies

Next down in generosity scales seems to be Emirates that has 30/40/50 Kg allowances on weight based routes and stil has (iirc) 2x32Kg on piece based

Dave

 

[anat0l]

In a black and white world I agree with you. But it's about managing people's expectations. They get people to book with them because of a very lowly advertised rate, but then sting them for extras that get you within cooee of a full service airline's fare. I don't have a problem with any airline charging what it wants, but I also want a bit more "truth in advertising" from some of the more extreme LCCs.

Truth in advertising is a bit of a farce because airlines will never be able to write a big bold ad with the relevant extras added in. For example, excess baggage fees, credit card fees, telephone booking fees, etc. Then of course there are things like limited routings, no-checked-bag fares (which LCCs love to advertise now instead of with-checked-bags fares). JQ and DJ always set an ad like this:

$45 Brisbane-Sydney
Fare is one-way and does not include checked baggage...<other small print>

And unless the Western world is prepared to accept a lot, lot more sedate, straight-arrow dead serious approach to advertising and marketing, nothing is going to be done differently any time soon.

I agree there are quite a few airlines out there that could, however, make it a bit easier to get at information relating to their fares, or at least organise it a lot better.

Managing people's expectations is all part of business. If you fail to do this properly, you'll lose business and may just have to close up. Setting up charging policies and the like is all part of business; people will "window shop" or purchase products and/or services that align most with their principles and likings, and if you're not in alignment then you don't get their business.

This thread isn't to criticise QF in particular, it's more an observation on the differences. QF are perfectly entitled to charge whatever they wish, I have no objection to it. I'll simply choose to fly BA instead (an academic distinction commercially speaking for the two airlines I admit, given the particular route I intend to fly).

I didn't write to defend QF in particular, but just to point out that I see not much point in an excess charges debate when excess baggage charges are substantially a pax-discretion issue. So there is no issue of "rip offs" here, no matter which airline we're talking about. It was interesting for you to refresh us on the differences in excess baggage charges - I certainly found it good to see again. Another reminder for me not to pack too heavily (although with QF I'm glad that 15 extra kg (most of the time) is very handy).

Now an airline that forces you to pay for OLCI when there is either no other alternative or the alternative is much more expensive, is absolutely dumb and I think that is a rip off, especially if the said price is not specified in the headlined fare. You can't get out of the charge (you need to check-in somehow to get onto a flight), unlike excess baggage, so that is a true rip off.

 

[anat0l]

When that close to a weight restriction (checked or carry-on), its important to remember that items carried in your pockets are inherently weightless. The laptop charger, electric shaver, books, phone, camera, ipod, other charges etc all weigh nothing when carried in your pockets past the weighing station . There is no limit to the amount of stuff you can empty from your pockets into trays at the security screening point. Cargo pants can be handy at times .

Having been on my Euro trip, I can't agree with you enough

Thank goodness for my River's jacket which has so many pockets.

 

[Dave Noble]

I didn't write to defend QF in particular, but just to point out that I see not much point in an excess charges debate when excess baggage charges are substantially a pax-discretion issue. So there is no issue of "rip offs" here, no matter which airline we're talking about..

I don't see where anyone other prior to you had mentioned it being a rip off though

The OP seemed to be highlighting that he had found that BA was offering a much better deal for his needs on baggage

Dave

 

[anat0l]

I don't see where anyone other prior to you had mentioned it being a rip off though

The OP seemed to be highlighting that he had found that BA was offering a much better deal for his needs on baggage

Dave

You are right Dave; I stand the point only for reference then and not as rebuttal....except for the peanut gallery, perhaps.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

Very interesting to know. Now what happens when someone booked a BA flight nunber SYD/LON to be able to take advantage of the cheaper excess only to find the flight is a codeshare flight operated by QF?

Does the flight have to be BA metal or is it enough to have just booked a BA flight number irrespective of who the operating airline is :?:

 

[Dave Noble]

Very interesting to know. Now what happens when someone booked a BA flight nunber SYD/LON to be able to take advantage of the cheaper excess only to find the flight is a codeshare flight operated by QF?

Does the flight have to be BA metal or is it enough to have just booked a BA flight number irrespective of who the operating airline is :?:

It needs to be operated by BA

Dave