Sometimes watching Spirit work feels like watching someone rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic. The recent announcement that the airline would be renaming its fare bundles felt like yet another prime example until I looked deeper. There is some substance here in that one bundle is now gone, and another is altered. I can’t say I understand this move.

When Spirit first created its fare bundles in August of 2024, it had four fare brands:

Here’s how these broke down:

• Go was the old basic, unbundled fare that always existed
• Go Savvy was effectively matching a traditional airline’s economy fare
• Go Comfy got a blocked middle seat, switching to extra legroom when Spirit pivoted to offer that instead
• Go Big was the equivalent of domestic First Class using its already-existing Big Front Seat product

The beauty of this model was that it created gentle upsells that enticed people to pay up to the next bundle. Here’s how it looked on the day it was launched, though I’m sure it changed over time:

But now, Go Savvy is gone, and the new chart looks like this:

It wasn’t listed before, but now the change fee is waived for higher brands if it wasn’t already. Other than that, there are two main differences. First, you get a carry-on bag but no longer a checked bag in Premium Economy. Second — I didn’t realize this before — you can now add on a carry-on to the Value fare. Previously you had to buy up to Go Savvy if you wanted that.

So what does this do to the upsell? I looked at October 15, a random mid-week day in the fall where I expected fares to be pretty low across the board. And what did I find? I found that the upsells are all over the map, and it’s not distance-based any longer.

From Value to Premium Economy, I saw upsells ranging from $50 on flights as diverse as Orange County – Oakland (371 miles) and Newark – DFW (1,372 miles). At the top end, we had Houston/IAH – New Orleans at a $110 upsell while Newark – LAX was actually lower at $105.

From Premium Economy to Spirit First, I found a mere $40 on Fort Lauderdale – Orlando and $65 from BWI to Houston. Meanwhile, Orlando – Atlanta was an extra $80, the same as LAX – Nashville. The biggest I saw was $290 on Tampa – Las Vegas. Here’s a chart with a bunch of numbers, all pulled for October 15 one-way travel.

It’s obvious why Spirit changed the brand names. Go Comfy, Go, whatever, it’s confusing. The goal should be to get people to understand what they’re getting as early as possible, and make it worthwhile for them to buy a higher brand without needing to do research. So, we have Value, Premium Economy, and Spirit First. Got it, though it’s clear Delta would take issue with putting “Spirit” in front of only one of the fare brands. But why don’t we have Value/Basic, Economy, Premium, and Spirit First? Why get rid of that second bundle?

It is counterintuitive to have a large jump between two fare brands, because people are less likely to buy up if there’s such a large difference. That’s where that second bundle was helpful, but now it’s gone. That does give Spirit more latitude on how it prices the upsell to Premium Economy, but in some cases, it leaves a lot to be desired.

Think about it this way. The upsell from Value to Premium seems to be between $50 and $170 each way, at least on that day I was searching. A carry-on bag is nearly always between $55 and $70, so right there if you want to carry a bag on, you’re better off buying up to Premium Economy on some of these more attractive markets. And seat assignments? The cheapest seat on the plane ranges from $14 on the low end to $30 on the high end. Let’s assume most people who are paying probably won’t pay to sit in the back, so it’s probably higher than that.

If you figure most people will want a seat assignment and will pay for a carry-on, assume that’s an $80 to $100 bump over the base fare. Sometimes that’s less than Premium, sometimes it’s more. There’s no clear way for customers to understand how this all fits together. An economy bundle would help to add clarity and encourage buy-up.

Of course, most people aren’t doing this kind of research, going back and forth between options to find what’s the best value. That’s one of the reasons Spirit introduced bundles in the first place. The idea was to make it easier for people to know what they’re getting and to buy up to get more. Now, if people aren’t doing the math, this puts Spirit in a tougher place to upsell in some markets.

Using a real example, if someone shows me a $48 fare from Houston to New Orleans and then $158 for Premium Economy, why the hell would I pay that much more? But if I did the math and realized it was $128 with the bag and seat, then that’s a more reasonable upsell that I might consider.

What happens is people will click on the $48 fare and then get really pissed off when they find out that it’s more than the cost of the fare to bring a carry-on bag onboard. They probably won’t go back to buy Premium Economy, but if they do, they’ll be really annoyed at this back and forth.

You would think that the second bundle that includes a bag and a seat would solve this problem, but apparently not.

I asked Spirit about this change, and I was given a little more than what was in the press release.

We’re phasing out the Go Savvy travel option in response to feedback from Guests who want to build their own travel experience. As part of this change, we’ve updated our Value travel option to allow Guests to purchase a carry-on bag (this was not allowed with the previous Go travel option).

Overall, our goal with this update is to deliver an enhanced Guest experience by making it easier for Guests to choose how they want to travel. The streamlined travel options and new names simplify choices for Guests so they can better understand and compare their options.

Ok, but… doesn’t this make it harder? Like I said, I didn’t realize you couldn’t add a carry-on to the basic fare before. That’s silly. But now, why not allow someone to build on their own if they want or purchase the second bundle where it’s all included? Everything Spirit does right now has to be focused on generating more revenue. Maybe it was underpricing the bundles and losing out on ancillaries that people used to piece together themselves. That, of course, could be solved with pricing changes.

It’s either that, or I’m missing something here.