Decisions, Decisions

One of the cases I discuss with my students is about Southwest Airlines, and since this is a strategy class what we mostly discuss, both in class and in their written assignments, is changes the company could make in its strategy in light of the changing conditions within their industry. I get students from all of the various majors in the business school in my class, so I try to select cases that can be looked at from a variety of different angles and from the perspective of different disciplines. For example, the Southwest case was written just as the company had acquired Air Tran, and our Finance majors can analyze the deal and discuss the implications for the company’s future equity and capitalization, while the Human Resources students can talk about the difficulty in merging the two (very) different corporate cultures. It isn’t easy coming up with assignments that are interesting and fun (or at least, not boring) for this many different interests, and I’m sure I don’t always succeed. But the Southwest case is popular, and discussions of the anti-bag-fees policy are almost always spirited…

If you don’t fly commercial, you may not be aware that some years ago all of the major airlines started charging an extra fee for every piece of checked baggage, starting at around $25 and escalating rapidly from there. Some carriers have kept the fee structure basic, some have jacked the price up to see how high it can go, and others have tied it into other promotions, offering free bags for their frequent flier customers, people who sign up for their branded credit cards, or whatever. Only Southwest, out of the major carriers, has persisted in allowing customers to check two bags per person without charging extra – despite the fact that the airline industry as a whole is making roughly $3.5 billion on bag fees each year, according to an article this week in the Wall Street Journal. Many of my undergraduates have suggested that Southwest consider adding such a fee, given that these charges are now the industry standard and appear to be gradually gaining acceptance. But it’s never the Marketing majors who make that suggestion…

In the same article, the CEO of Southwest is quoted as saying that adding bag fees could end up costing the company in excess of $1 billion per year in lost revenue, as customers abandon Southwest in reaction to the change. On the face of it this seems alarmist – the company still has a number of other strategic advantages, such as lower fares and convenience of travel, not to mention overall customer satisfaction in most other areas of its operations. But there is no denying that the “Bags Fly Free” slogan is an important part of Southwest’s brand image, both in terms of the actual savings (at $35 or $50 per bag it doesn’t take long before we’re talking a significant expense) and also in terms of the company’s image as different from all of the other large airlines; a maverick organization that takes care of its loyal customers. And therein lies the question of strategy…

Southwest has spent most of its corporate existence working on a low-cost strategy – minimizing all possible costs in order to offer the lowest price to the customer while still earning a greater profit on each ticket than any competitor. But to continue on as they have, both of those things must remain true. If they depart from that strategy they may lose customers, as they will almost certainly lose their price advantage over the other airlines. But if they continue to pass up a major revenue stream like the checked baggage fees they run the risk of becoming less profitable than the other airlines, becoming a less attractive investment than other airlines, and losing the support of investors, which will impact their stock price and eventually their cost of capital. Not to mention earning less money in absolute terms…

Sooner or later, Southwest is going to have to decide if they believe they can make more money flying more people (and more people per flight, as well) without baggage fees than they could make by implementing them. Their traditional strategy has served them well so far, but can they continue with it if the add-on fees the competition is charging become the industry standard? Stay tuned, folks…