Cost Comparison of Low-Cost vs. Full-Service Airlines

Flying can be exciting, but no one wants to overspend. Let's compare the total cost of low-cost airlines like AirAsiaX to full-service airlines like Malaysia Airlines.

Base Fare

AirAsiaX offers competitive base fares. A round trip from Kuala Lumpur to Auckland can cost 3854 MYR ($1305 AUD). This includes:

  • A meal
  • Small water bottle
  • Standard window seat
  • 20kg checked bag
  • 7kg carry-on bag

Malaysia Airlines' round trip on the same route costs 5174 MYR ($1753 AUD). It includes:

  • Meals and snacks
  • Unlimited beverages
  • In-flight entertainment
  • Amenities
  • 20kg checked baggage
  • 7kg carry-on bag

Additional Costs

AirAsiaX doesn't provide in-flight entertainment or seat-back power. Expect to pay an extra ~120 MYR ($40 AUD) for additional drinks and snacks onboard.

Malaysia Airlines keeps things inclusive. Unlimited drinks, snacks, and personal entertainment screens come at no extra charge.

Comfort Factor

AirAsiaX follows a low-cost carrier model. Their A330 aircraft have a 3-3-3 seating layout without premium flatbeds. It's adequate for short trips but could be challenging for longer journeys without entertainment systems.

Malaysia Airlines offers a more comfortable experience with wider seats, increased legroom, and greater recline. Complimentary blankets and pillows make long-haul flights more manageable.

Meals and Snacks

AirAsiaX meals like Uncle Chin's fried rice cost €8 to €10. Pre-ordering is essential as meals aren't included in the base fare.

Malaysia Airlines includes multiple meal services and unlimited beverages with the ticket price.

Baggage Fees

Both airlines offer 20kg checked baggage and 7kg carry-on allowances. AirAsiaX strictly enforces extra baggage fees, while Malaysia Airlines is more flexible.

Trade-offs

The choice depends on your priorities. If upfront cost is your main concern and you're willing to forgo in-flight luxuries, AirAsiaX is a good option. For a more relaxed, all-inclusive experience, Malaysia Airlines' higher fare may be worthwhile.

Perspective from Real Travelers

Post-COVID, many travelers prioritize cost savings. The 1320 MYR ($448 AUD) difference between AirAsiaX and Malaysia Airlines attracts budget-conscious flyers willing to sacrifice some comfort.

However, passengers like parents with young children may find the amenities and reduced stress of full-service airlines worth the extra cost. More space, entertainment options, and included meals can significantly improve the travel experience.

Summing the Totals

For a round trip from Kuala Lumpur to Auckland:

AirlineCost BreakdownTotal
AirAsiaXBase fare (3854 MYR) + extra drinks/snacks (~120 MYR)~3974 MYR ($1345 AUD)
Malaysia AirlinesBase fare (5174 MYR)5174 MYR ($1753 AUD)

For an additional 1200 MYR ($408 AUD), Malaysia Airlines offers a wider range of services and comforts.

Cost-sensitive travelers can save money for their destination. Those seeking hassle-free, comfortable flights may find the full-service airline premium worthwhile.

A traveler comparing airline ticket prices on a tablet, with luggage and a world map in the background

Onboard Experience and Comfort

Low-cost airlines offer a simplified version of air travel, prioritizing value over luxury. Let's examine the seating arrangements, legroom, recline, in-flight entertainment, and overall comfort on budget-friendly flights like AirAsiaX and Spirit Airlines.

AirAsiaX

  • A330 aircraft with 3-3-3 seating configuration
  • Comfortable enough for short regional flights up to five hours
  • Average seat width and sufficient legroom
  • Lack premium features like flatbeds and in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems

Spirit Airlines

  • Surprisingly spacious middle seat on short domestic flights
  • Adequate legroom considering its business model
  • Seats may not recline as much as full-service airlines

Neither AirAsiaX nor Spirit offers plush recliners or seat-back entertainment screens, but they cover the essentials. The seats may lack padding and recline for long naps, but they serve budget-conscious travelers well on shorter flights.

Traditional Carriers (e.g., Malaysia Airlines)

  • Broader seats
  • Extensive legroom
  • More recline
  • Included IFE system for movies and other entertainment
"Consider your priorities when planning your next trip. If reaching your destination affordably is the main goal, low-cost airlines are practical. If comfort and convenience are paramount, especially on extended flights, the premium for full-service airline offerings may be a worthy investment."
Interior of a low-cost airline showing economy class seating arrangement

Customer Satisfaction and Reviews

Customer satisfaction and reviews of low-cost airlines vary widely, often depending on travelers' priorities—affordability, convenience, or comfort.

AirAsiaX

Generally receives positive feedback for its value. Travelers appreciate:

  • Budget-friendly fares
  • Punctual departures
  • User-friendly mobile app
  • Pre-ordering meals online

Common complaints include:

  • Lack of in-flight entertainment
  • Additional costs for extras like beverages and snacks
  • Strict baggage policies leading to unexpected fees

Spirit Airlines

Garners mixed reviews:

  • Some travelers appreciate the low base fare and straightforward booking process
  • Recurring complaints about customer service and handling of changes or cancellations
  • Viewed as suitable for short, non-critical trips where potential service disruptions can be managed

LowCostAirlines.com

Receives mixed reviews:

  • Praised for simplicity in securing economical fares
  • Complaints about poor after-sales support, surprise charges, and difficulties making changes

Key Takeaway: Both positive and negative feedback highlights the importance of setting correct expectations. Satisfied passengers generally understand the stripped-down, no-frills service model and come prepared.

Navigating budget airlines requires pragmatic expectations and proactive measures. Cost-conscious travelers who prioritize savings will find low-cost airlines suitable, provided they're cautious of potential add-ons. Those who equate airline travel with a relaxing experience may find full-service carriers' higher fares justified for peace of mind.

In summary, traveler feedback emphasizes that low-cost airlines excel in cost management but may fall short in customer service and flexibility. Making an informed choice between budget and full-service options is crucial to ensuring your expectations for thrift or comfort are met satisfactorily.

A person reading airline reviews on a smartphone while sitting in an airport lounge

Choosing between low-cost and full-service airlines depends on your priorities. Understanding the differences in cost, comfort, and service can help you select the option that best fits your travel needs, whether you're focused on saving money or seeking a more comfortable journey.

Key Considerations:

  1. Budget constraints
  2. Flight duration
  3. Desired amenities
  4. Baggage requirements
  5. Flexibility needs

Remember: Low-cost airlines can offer significant savings, but may require more preparation and flexibility. Full-service airlines provide a more comprehensive experience at a higher price point.

Ultimately, the best choice will align with your personal travel style and priorities for each specific trip.

  1. Khurana S. Comparative analysis of service quality of low cost carriers in India. Int J Sci Res. 2019;8(1):1364-1368.
  2. Jiang H, Zhang Y. An investigation of service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in China's airline market. J Air Transp Manag. 2016;57:80-88.
  3. Warnock-Smith D, Morrell P. An empirical study of the factors affecting customer satisfaction in the airline industry. J Air Transp Manag. 2018;66:42-51.