Moving the weight around wasn't an option, I knew I would have to pay a fee, and I really didn't mind, just thought it was still $25. I checked 2 bags, the 58 lb one and a 47 lb one, and I also had a carry-on that was bulging at the seams. I was bringing all of my clothes and such back to college for the semester, and I also had a bunch of Christmas presents I was bringing back to PIT (like lots of heavy books), so there wasn't much I could do about it.
I'm not the type that sends in letters to complain about things like this, but perhaps I will dash off an e-mail. They've devalued elite status so much, perhaps they could give preferreds some extra baggage allowance (or even just a discounted overweight fee) like most of the other Star carriers do.
As for the problems I see with the new US Airways Magazine, they don't affect me in any way. I know how to navigate around an airport without a map, and I don't speak Spanish. But there are plenty of people out there for whom those things would be quite useful.
I agree that leaving out the Spanish customs/immigration instructions was probably an oversight, but again, it was a sloppy one by someone who wasn't thinking with the right mindset. The airport maps and the other Spanish features, those I think were more deliberate though. And again, even if they do fix/revert the changes, with the lead times for the magazine, it'll be until at least the March or probably April issue before it's fixed.
I agree, and I can't believe they said that about FLL. How do you think that makes the FLL customers feel, that they're a failed experiment? And it surely hurts confidence that the remaining flights will stick around for people booking future tickets. It's almost as bad as Bronner from RSA opening his big mouth and saying inappropriate things. If FLL was a failed experiment, you don't have to say so. And really, I don't think it was--they didn't give it any time at all to develop, and yet the routes that they still have there now are doing quite well.