# Which short-haul cabin-bag fare packaging wins booking / purchase intent for SEA/APAC travellers facing airline unbundling of overhead locker space?

- Share code: `a8DaPh7ndo74`
- Report type: `scenario`
- Generated: Sep 28, 2026, 11:47 PM (`2026-09-28T23:47:09.772Z`)
- Scenario: `product_testing`
- Label: SEA/APAC cabin-bag fare packaging 2026-09-29
- Population: Adults in Southeast Asia or Asia-Pacific who take at least one short-haul flight of under about four hours per year and usually book flights online
- Respondents: 293
- Credits used: 1.99 Credit
- Analysis: v2

## Concepts
- **Ultra-cheap underseat-only + paid overhead**: Short-haul SEA fare: lowest headline price. Free bag must fit under the seat only. A larger cabin bag for the overhead locker costs about US$18–37 extra at booking. Seat is random. App check-in is free; airport counter check-in may cost extra.
- **Mid fare with overhead cabin bag included**: Short-haul SEA fare: about 15–25% above the cheapest headline. One standard cabin bag for the overhead locker is included. Seat is random / free assignment at check-in. App check-in free. No separate overhead-locker fee at booking or gate.
- **Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in**: Short-haul SEA fare: higher headline (about 30–40% above cheapest). Includes one overhead cabin bag, advance seat selection (avoid middle), and free app or kiosk check-in with no counter fee. Total price shown upfront; no surprise bag or seat add-ons later.
- **Cheapest headline; cabin-bag fee at airport gate**: Short-haul SEA fare: matches the ultra-cheap headline online. Cabin-bag / overhead rules are unclear at booking. At the airport gate, oversized or non-underseat bags are charged about US$25–50 or must be checked for a fee. Feels like a last-minute surprise for travellers with a normal cabin bag.
- **Full-service style: bag and basics in the fare**: Short-haul SEA fare on a full-service or hybrid carrier: higher base than LCCs, but one cabin bag in the overhead and standard check-in are included without LCC-style unbundling. Seat selection may still cost extra on some rows. Positioned as fewer gotchas than budget unbundled fares.

## Overview
In testing unbundled short-haul cabin baggage models across SEA/APAC travelers (including 160 respondents from Indonesia and 60 from Thailand, with 184 categorized in low income), Concept 3 (Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in) achieved the highest purchase intent. Consumers heavily penalize surprise overhead fees, favoring upfront price predictability over deceptive cheap headline fares.

### Key findings
- Concept 3 led overall booking likelihood with the highest top-2 box purchase intent score across tested fare structures.
- Concept 3 secured an exceptional usability rating, reflecting high consumer appreciation for transparent, friction-free booking rules.
- Aggressive gate fee unbundling generated severe consumer backlash, posting the lowest purchase intent across all options.

### Concept leaderboard
Summary score across the constructs in this run.

- #1 **Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in** — score 4.0145
- #2 **Mid fare with overhead cabin bag included** — score 3.3352
- #3 **Full-service style: bag and basics in the fare** — score 2.8479
- #4 **Ultra-cheap underseat-only + paid overhead** — score 2.0442
- #5 **Cheapest headline; cabin-bag fee at airport gate** — score 1.4804

### Audience screen
Is this the right panel?

- 45% in Indonesia, 17% in Thailand
- 24% aged 25-34, 23% aged 45-54
- 52% low income
- 8% pencari-promo-diskon-price-driven-deal-seeking, 4% belanja-terbujuk-media-sosial-social-commerce-live-stream-influenced (shopping)
- 27% early-majority, 21% late-majority (tech adoption)

Use this as an initial audience screen: retarget population_query or run a follow-on Scenario if the mix does not match the intended segment.

Directional panel mix from synthetic respondent profiles — not official statistics.

## Qualitative
### Radar
- **Ultra-cheap underseat-only + paid overhead**: purchase_intent=2.59, relevance=2.7, uniqueness=2.13, usability=2.3, credibility=2.8
- **Mid fare with overhead cabin bag included**: purchase_intent=3.15, relevance=2.83, uniqueness=2.25, usability=3.31, credibility=3.54
- **Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in**: purchase_intent=3.5, relevance=3.04, uniqueness=2.68, usability=4.12, credibility=4.47
- **Cheapest headline; cabin-bag fee at airport gate**: purchase_intent=2.04, relevance=2.54, uniqueness=2.19, usability=1.22, credibility=1.9
- **Full-service style: bag and basics in the fare**: purchase_intent=3.22, relevance=2.91, uniqueness=2.41, usability=3.53, credibility=3.82

### Relative position by construct
Comparative rank score 0–5: per-persona concept ranking per dimension (Plackett–Luce expected rank) — 5=best of the set, 0=worst; sums to ~2.5 per concept across the panel

- **Ultra-cheap underseat-only + paid overhead**: purchase_intent=1.49, relevance=1.69, uniqueness=1.27, usability=1.29, credibility=0.75
- **Mid fare with overhead cabin bag included**: purchase_intent=3.52, relevance=3.38, uniqueness=3.45, usability=3.51, credibility=3.11
- **Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in**: purchase_intent=4.53, relevance=4.45, uniqueness=4.46, usability=4.59, credibility=4.78
- **Cheapest headline; cabin-bag fee at airport gate**: purchase_intent=0.92, relevance=0.83, uniqueness=1.04, usability=1, credibility=1.38
- **Full-service style: bag and basics in the fare**: purchase_intent=2.47, relevance=2.49, uniqueness=2.45, usability=2.6, credibility=2.86

### Excerpts
#### Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in
**purchase_intent**
- "I am ready to proceed once I confirm the bag dimensions fit my professional gear. The certainty of no hidden fees makes the higher headline price feel justified for my schedule." (Strongly positive)
- "I would only consider this if my business requires a trip to Surabaya or Jakarta soon, otherwise I wait for cheaper promos. My priority is saving for my children's schooling rather than travel comforts." (Slightly positive)
- "I might buy this someday when I need to travel quickly for business, but I am not sure it is worth it for me right now. The upfront price is transparent, yet I hesitate because I usually wait for promos to keep costs low." (Slightly positive)
- "I would probably buy this if it means I don't have to worry about hidden fees when I'm traveling for family visits. The upfront price feels worth trying since I can plan my cash better." (Slightly positive)
- "I might consider this if I travel more frequently for work, but for now I stick to the cheapest option to preserve cash flow. The certainty of no hidden fees is nice, yet the initial price feels steep against my monthly budget." (Slightly positive)
- "I would likely choose this for our next family visit to the city because avoiding hidden fees aligns with how I manage household costs. The upfront total makes it easier to decide without worrying about extra charges later." (Slightly positive)
- "I am leaning towards trying this offer since it removes the stress of surprise fees that I cannot afford. My next step would be checking the exact price against my current travel budget." (Slightly positive)
- "Given my budget and habits, I would not buy this — it is a clear no for me. The savings don't match what I need right now." (Slightly negative)
- "They might consider this later if a family event requires travel, but right now the higher fare does not match their limited budget or urgency." (Slightly negative)
- "They would not buy this offer because their income is better spent on family needs than on flights they do not plan to take soon." (Slightly negative)
**relevance**
- "This fits directly into my routine of short-haul business trips across Southeast Asia. The avoidance of middle seats is a practical benefit that supports my need to arrive rested for meetings." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits my regional travel rhythm perfectly, especially when I need to reset quickly after a stressful week. Avoiding the middle seat ensures I can rest properly before returning to my meditation routine." (Slightly positive)
- "This sits on the periphery of their life since most travel is already handled by the company. It matters more for personal getaways where they prefer to keep things streamlined." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits my travel pattern well as a business traveler who visits regional manufacturing sites regularly. Knowing exactly what I pay upfront helps me manage my corporate expenses without surprises." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits the need for stability during travel, but it does not match my current habit of choosing the lowest fare possible. I need the cheapest option to keep food on the table, not extra services that cost more." (Neutral)
- "This is somewhat relevant, but it is not a priority in my day-to-day. Most of my travel is local or budget-focused, so I usually skip extras unless they are absolutely necessary." (Neutral)
- "This is somewhat relevant, but it is not a priority in my day-to-day. Most of my travel is for business supply runs where I need specific cargo handling." (Neutral)
- "It fits my need for predictability, though I mostly fly less often unless it’s for family or work. Still, it simplifies what’s usually a hassle when booking." (Neutral)
- "It fits better than standard fares because I don’t have time to juggle extra bookings at the airport. Still, daily travel isn’t my focus right now." (Neutral)
- "It fits my occasional travel needs but is not a daily priority since I mostly stay home. It helps when I do travel for my kids or family events." (Neutral)
**uniqueness**
- "It stands out because most airlines hide fees until the end, making this transparent approach notably different. I have not seen a bundle that includes seat selection and check-in so clearly before." (Neutral)
- "This stands out from what I usually see; it feels notably different. Combining the bag, seat, and check-in into one transparent price is something I haven't seen clearly offered before." (Neutral)
- "The offer feels similar to other packages I have seen, though the transparency is a bit more clear. I cannot tell how much different it is from the standard fares I usually compare." (Neutral)
- "Most airlines still hide these options behind confusing menus but this bundles them into a single transparent headline. It stands out as a genuinely different approach compared to the standard budget carrier model I usually navigate." (Neutral)
- "Most fares hide fees until the end, but this transparent approach stands out compared to what I usually see. It feels distinct enough to switch from my usual booking habits." (Neutral)
- "It feels similar to what some full-service airlines offer but packaged more clearly for the budget segment. I have seen seat selection before but not always bundled with the bag in a single upfront price." (Neutral)
- "It feels similar to what I already know from other airlines, just bundled differently. I've seen these seat and bag add-ons before, so it's not that special." (Slightly negative)
- "This feels very similar to options I already know from other airlines that bundle seats and bags. It is hard to tell apart from standard fare bundles that I have seen before." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels like the standard bundles other airlines push these days, just packaged differently. I’ve seen similar ‘all-in’ offers before, so nothing here really stands out as new to me." (Slightly negative)
- "It stands out compared to standard fares where baggage and seat selection are usually extra charges." (Slightly negative)
**usability**
- "The promise of a free app or kiosk check-in without fees is highly convenient for my mobile-first workflow. It reduces the friction at the airport, which I prioritize during tight schedules." (Strongly positive)
- "Using the app for check-in works well with my current setup. I don’t want to queue up if I can avoid it." (Strongly positive)
- "The app check-in part is a game changer for someone who values efficiency like I do. I can handle everything from my iPhone before even leaving home." (Strongly positive)
- "The app check-in seems convenient but I worry about managing it on my phone during busy moments. I prefer simple steps that do not require constant technical focus." (Slightly positive)
- "I can use the app to check in without needing to learn new steps since I prefer simple tools that work on my phone. The process should be smooth so I do not feel rushed at the terminal." (Slightly positive)
- "From my experience, this would be confusing or frustrating to use. I worry about the app steps when I am at the counter." (Slightly positive)
- "App check-in feels simple for someone who uses Android daily. Still, I need to confirm it works for my specific flight routes." (Slightly positive)
- "The app check-in looks easy enough for me to manage without asking my children for help. I prefer simple steps over complex new systems." (Slightly positive)
- "Using an app or kiosk is fine, I know how to do that on my phone. The setup seems clear enough for someone who prefers simplicity." (Slightly positive)
- "They worry the app check-in might be confusing since they prefer cash and physical bankbooks for control, but the promise of no counter fee is appealing. They would need clear steps to feel confident using it without help." (Neutral)
**credibility**
- "This feels highly trustworthy to me because the total is shown upfront without hidden fees. That matches how I expect things to be when I spend money on big items like travel." (Strongly positive)
- "This feels highly trustworthy to me — solid, credible, and well put together because it matches my preference for clear contracts. I have had bad deals before where extra costs appeared later, so this transparency helps." (Strongly positive)
- "This feels highly trustworthy to me because the total price is shown upfront without surprise add-ons. It aligns with how I expect services to be transparent and solid." (Strongly positive)
- "This feels highly trustworthy to me — solid, credible, and well put together. Transparent pricing aligns with how I run my own small business dealings." (Strongly positive)
- "This feels trustworthy because it matches how I prefer to handle transactions with clear terms from the start. I would verify the airline reputation but the offer structure itself seems honest." (Strongly positive)
- "It feels trustworthy because the rules are written clearly and the price is final. I do not like hidden charges, and this approach respects my budget and time." (Strongly positive)
- "Tempo itu kelihatannya terpercaya sih, transparan harganya gak ada tipu-tipu. Tapi tetep butuh dipikirin keras buat duit segini." (Slightly positive)
- "The transparent pricing makes it feel trustworthy enough, though they still check carefully to ensure no hidden costs appear later." (Slightly positive)
- "They remain doubtful about the no-surprise promise, needing more proof before trusting that hidden fees won't appear later." (Slightly positive)
- "They remain unsure if the upfront price holds, given past experiences with unexpected charges from travel services." (Slightly positive)
#### Full-service style: bag and basics in the fare
**purchase_intent**
- "I would buy this without hesitation because it matches the stability I need when traveling for work or family. The predictability helps me budget carefully like I do with my business inventory." (Neutral)
- "I am unlikely to buy this because my current priority is securing income rather than planning travel expenses. Saving for daily needs takes precedence over weekend getaways right now." (Neutral)
- "I might buy this someday if the price is right, but I am not sure it is worth it for me right now. I need to compare the total cost against my budget for medicine and daily needs before deciding." (Neutral)
- "I would probably buy this because it fits my needs well enough that I would try it for short trips. Knowing my bag is included makes me feel less stressed about the total cost." (Neutral)
- "I am unlikely to buy this because I do not see the value in paying more upfront when I can manage with my current options. My priority is saving for emergencies like the flood I experienced years ago." (Neutral)
- "I would commit to this quickly if it matches the price of budget airlines during a limited-time promo. My habit of hunting for vouchers means I will compare the total cost carefully before confirming." (Neutral)
- "Mungkin saya akan coba beli kalau lagi perlu ke luar kota buat urusan usaha atau keluarga. Tapi baru kalau harganya pas, nggak nambah biaya mendadak." (Slightly negative)
- "Hmm, belum ada rencana beli karena jarang sekali keluar kota untuk urusan pribadi atau kerjaan." (Slightly negative)
- "I'm not going to book this anytime soon since every coin goes to my household needs first. Maybe later if a family event requires it, but right now it's just a thought." (Slightly negative)
- "They have no plans to spend on travel soon since saving for family needs comes first. The offer doesn't align with their current focus on stability." (Slightly negative)
**relevance**
- "This fits my routine of frequent business travel within the region where time is critical. It supports my goal of managing travel costs efficiently while maintaining professional standards." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits my business travel pattern well since I often carry a laptop and clothes in a single bag. It simplifies my airport routine, which is helpful after long days at manufacturing sites." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits my pattern of short regional getaways where I prioritize comfort and efficiency over minimizing cost at the expense of convenience. It aligns with how I manage logistics for both work and wellness retreats." (Slightly positive)
- "This helps when I travel for work or homecoming but does not affect my daily routine at the village. Most of my time is spent managing the factory and attending local meetings.
    "uniqueness":" (Neutral)
- "It fits my travel habits when visiting heritage sites, though it is not a priority for my daily needs in Jakarta. I mostly stay in the city for studies and only travel during break periods." (Neutral)
- "This offer does not connect with my daily life because I am mostly focused on caring for my household and local community needs right now. My travels are usually homecoming trips where simplicity matters more than fare types." (Neutral)
- "This is mostly irrelevant to me as I can barely see where it would fit. I travel infrequently and my current budget focus is on daily logistics and family needs." (Neutral)
- "It fits my travel patterns for religious gatherings and family events in the region. However, it is not a daily priority since I focus mostly on local business operations." (Neutral)
- "This feels like the kind of clear deal I look for when planning trips to see my wife’s family on weekends. It avoids the hidden fees that usually stress me out when comparing budget airlines.
  "metric_notes": {
    "purchase_intent":" (Neutral)
- "Ini tidak terlalu pas dengan rutinitask saya yang lebih banyak di rumah dan fokus pada pekerjaan kecil sehari-hari." (Slightly negative)
**uniqueness**
- "It feels a bit different from the usual budget options I compare online. The included bag is familiar, yet the pricing structure is not memorable compared to what I see on travel apps." (Neutral)
- "They find it distinct from low-cost carriers but not entirely new, as some full-service airlines already offer similar bundles. It stands out for explicitly avoiding the unbundling tactics they have encountered before." (Neutral)
- "This feels similar to what full-service carriers already offer without the unbundling confusion. I have not seen a clear distinction that separates it from the standard economy class I usually book." (Slightly negative)
- "It stands out because most budget airlines here make you pay for every little thing, which adds up quickly. This feels different enough to be worth trying, though I have seen similar bundled deals before." (Slightly negative)
- "It stands out compared to budget airlines that split costs across many extras. This approach feels different enough to consider over what I usually book for short regional flights." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels different from budget airlines that charge for everything, but I have seen similar offers before. The main difference is knowing the total price upfront, which helps me plan better." (Slightly negative)
- "This stands out from what I usually see because most airlines in this region split every service into separate fees. It feels notably different from the budget carriers I normally use for short trips." (Slightly negative)
- "The idea feels familiar to me because many airlines already include bags in their standard economy class. It does not stand out as a unique choice compared to what I have seen before." (Slightly negative)
- "Feels pretty much like what other carriers already do during their sales events. Hard to see why this stands out when I can just grab a bundle package online." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels similar to what legacy carriers offer but positioned against low-cost options. I have seen comparable bundles before, so the distinction is not entirely new to me." (Slightly negative)
**usability**
- "Including the bag without extra steps simplifies check-in, which helps when they are rushing between work duties and family commitments." (Slightly positive)
- "They find the idea of not paying for bags convenient, but the seat selection rules still add a layer of decision-making they would rather avoid." (Slightly positive)
- "I could probably use this with a bit of effort because checking the in requirements takes time during my planning. Nothing special stands out as significantly easier than what I am used to." (Slightly positive)
- "The inclusion of standard check-in and overhead baggage makes the process easier for our group. I expect minimal friction when checking in at the airport terminal." (Slightly positive)
- "The concept seems straightforward to understand and book online. I would not struggle with the process given my comfort with digital tools." (Slightly positive)
- "Booking might feel a bit complicated if I need to check seat rules online. I prefer simple steps when I’m juggling work and family calls." (Slightly positive)
- "Booking online should be fine since I use WhatsApp and apps for my stall. Just need to make sure the process is straightforward without too many steps." (Slightly positive)
- "From my experience, this would be confusing or frustrating to use. I prefer simple processes I can trust immediately without reading too many terms." (Slightly positive)
- "Booking these things online can get confusing with all the extra boxes to tick. I prefer simple deals I can understand at a glance without reading too much." (Neutral)
- "Kayaknya bakal ribet kalau prosesnya nggak jelas. Saya khawatir waktu check-in jadi lama, nanti keburu telat." (Neutral)
**credibility**
- "Seems solid since it comes from a proper full-service carrier, not another budget label cutting corners." (Slightly positive)
- "They remain skeptical about whether the fare truly covers everything without hidden add-ons, so they would need clear proof before trusting the claim." (Slightly positive)
- "The claim of fewer gotchas aligns with what their colleagues say about hybrid carriers, making it feel trustworthy enough to consider." (Slightly positive)
- "I’m not sure if they’ll keep this promise when things get busy during holidays. My father always says to read the terms carefully so I don’t get stuck with hidden debts." (Slightly positive)
- "The offer feels trustworthy because it avoids the bait-and-switch tactics I have encountered with budget airlines. I rely on this level of honesty when managing family expenses." (Slightly positive)
- "This fare sounds like it might save some hassle, but I still feel it's too complicated for how I book travel. I usually stick to what I know when I'm checking costs for my trips.
  "metric_notes": {
    "purchase_intent":" (Slightly positive)
- "This feels like the kind of clear deal I look for when planning trips to see my wife’s family on weekends. It avoids the hidden fees that usually stress me out when comparing budget airlines.
  "metric_notes": {
    "purchase_intent":" (Slightly positive)
- "I am unsure if the fare rules are truly transparent or just hidden fees. I need more details before trusting this with my household spending." (Slightly positive)
- "It seems trustworthy since full-service carriers usually keep their word on baggage rules. I'd just double-check the fine print before booking, like I do with any new supplier." (Slightly positive)
- "They remain skeptical about the actual savings compared to booking items separately. They would want to see clear data or proof before trusting the value claim." (Neutral)
#### Ultra-cheap underseat-only + paid overhead
**purchase_intent**
- "They might consider it for a quick solo trip if the total cost stays under their budget, but family travel usually requires more comfort. The impulse to grab a deal is there, yet the final price often feels less worthwhile once extras are added." (Neutral)
- "I might grab this if I’m heading somewhere simple for a weekend, but I’d compare the total cost first." (Neutral)
- "I am hesitant to move forward because I need to plan every rupiah for my household before committing. The extra cost for a larger bag makes me wait to see if a more straightforward option appears." (Neutral)
- "I might consider it for a very short trip if the base price is low, but I will check the total cost before deciding. My budget for travel is limited, so I need to know the full amount upfront." (Neutral)
- "I will not buy this offer since my priority is saving for rent and food rather than traveling. My GoPay balance is needed for daily expenses so I cannot spend on unnecessary fees." (Neutral)
- "I will not buy this because the extra fees make it less attractive than standard fares I usually book for regional trips. I wait for deals that include baggage before committing to any travel purchase." (Neutral)
- "I would buy this without hesitation if the final price stays clear, but the extra bag fee makes me wait to see the total. I plan to check my budget for the next village visit before committing." (Neutral)
- "I would hesitate to pay extra for overhead space unless it is absolutely necessary for my trip, since I usually travel light to save money. The underseat only option is tempting, but I need to be sure it fits everything I need." (Neutral)
- "I would not book this because the hidden fees create stress that outweighs the small savings I might get. My budget planning is meticulous, and I prefer transparency over unexpected charges later." (Slightly negative)
- "They would skip this offer since saving for their children’s future matters more than cheap travel." (Slightly negative)
**relevance**
- "It fits how I manage my budget right now, especially since I’m saving for a property." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits their regional travel needs but clashes with their preference for straightforward booking. They usually plan trips around clear costs, not conditional deals." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits their promo-hunting style for short trips, though the restrictions don't align well with how they typically travel with family." (Slightly positive)
- "This idea fits my need to save, but it does not match my habit of packing light for short trips. I usually travel with my husband to visit relatives, so we need space for gifts." (Neutral)
- "This is somewhat relevant to my life, but it is not a priority in my day-to-day routine. I usually travel only for festivals or family visits, so frequency is low compared to local costs." (Neutral)
- "This option does not fit my current travel habits since I rarely fly for leisure and mostly keep to local routines. My weekly trips to the wholesale market and temple visits do not require cabin baggage that would justify this fare structure." (Neutral)
- "This fits my budget-conscious lifestyle but misses the mark on simplicity since I prefer all-inclusive options for family trips. We usually travel to visit heritage sites so carrying gifts back matters more than saving on the ticket." (Neutral)
- "This fits my budget-conscious mindset, but it does not match my current travel habits with family. I usually need more space for gifts when I go to visit relatives." (Neutral)
- "This fits some travel needs but is not a priority for my regular work trips. I usually plan ahead and bring necessary items, so extra bag fees complicate my routine." (Neutral)
- "Travel does not fit their routine as a homebody who prioritizes local family stability." (Slightly negative)
**uniqueness**
- "This feels very similar to other budget airlines I already know, making it hard to tell apart from standard low-cost options. There is nothing distinct enough to change my current habits." (Slightly negative)
- "The separation of underseat and overhead pricing stands out from what I usually see in regional carriers. It feels notably different from standard bundled options I am used to." (Slightly negative)
- "This stands out from what I usually see because most airlines include at least a small carry-on without extra charges. It feels notably different from the standard options I have considered before for regional travel." (Slightly negative)
- "This stands out from what I usually see because most airlines include at least a small carry-on in the base fare. The separation of seat selection and baggage into paid add-ons feels notably different from my past travel experiences." (Slightly negative)
- "This feels very similar to options I already know from other budget airlines so it is hard to tell apart. The idea of paying extra for overhead space is familiar and does not offer a new benefit for me." (Slightly negative)
- "The model feels familiar since many budget carriers already charge for overhead bins. It does not stand out enough compared to what I see on Shopee travel promos or other airline apps." (Slightly negative)
- "The fee structure mirrors other budget airlines I have encountered, offering nothing distinct compared to what I already navigate. It feels like a standard cost-shifting tactic rather than a new value proposition." (Slightly negative)
- "This model feels similar to other budget airlines that have added extra fees over time. It does not stand out as a genuinely different approach to travel pricing in my experience." (Slightly negative)
- "Seems just like every other budget airline trick I've seen popping up recently. Nothing here stands out as new or better than what's already around." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels similar to other low-cost carriers I've seen, just with a stricter baggage policy. Hard to tell it apart from the usual fare tricks unless they offer something unique like priority boarding." (Slightly negative)
**usability**
- "They worry the app check-in and bag rules might be confusing, especially if they need to move quickly through KLIA like they do for work." (Neutral)
- "This seems somewhat hard or inconvenient for how I usually do things since I prefer straightforward transactions without multiple decision points. The added steps for baggage selection complicate a process I normally keep simple during busy work weeks." (Neutral)
- "The app check-in is fine but I worry about the random seat assignment making it harder to settle in quickly." (Neutral)
- "They expect the app check-in and random seating to be frustrating during busy travel times. They value simplicity and worry about missing steps or paying at the counter." (Neutral)
- "This seems somewhat hard or inconvenient for how I usually do things because I prefer checking in at the counter to avoid mistakes. Using an app for check-in feels risky when I am not sure about the rules." (Slightly negative)
- "This looks easy enough for me since I use apps for my business daily. I would not struggle with the check-in process, but the extra steps for baggage bother me." (Slightly negative)
- "I expect the app check-in to be smooth, but the baggage payment flow might be confusing during a busy work week. Simplicity matters to me after long days managing meetings and family tasks." (Slightly negative)
- "The app check-in is convenient but the extra costs for bags create friction when I am trying to finalize plans quickly. I prefer a process where I can see everything in one place without worrying about hidden steps." (Slightly negative)
- "Checking in at the airport for a fee adds friction to a process I like to keep simple. I manage my calendar well and do not want extra steps or delays at the terminal." (Slightly negative)
- "Checking in on the app seems fine, but I hope the airport counter doesn't charge extra when I arrive. I prefer clear steps without sudden surprises at the gate." (Slightly negative)
**credibility**
- "They find it trustworthy enough to consider, as the pricing structure is transparent even if it feels restrictive." (Neutral)
- "I’ve seen hidden costs before so I’d check the final price carefully before I commit." (Neutral)
- "I am skeptical because the separate fees for basic needs make the offer feel over-claimed and less trustworthy. I would need a lot more proof that the total price remains reasonable before believing it." (Neutral)
- "The transparency about fees makes this feel trustworthy compared to hidden charges I have encountered elsewhere. I rely on clear terms when managing my limited income and appreciate knowing the full cost upfront." (Neutral)
- "This seems believable and professional enough for me to take seriously because it aligns with what I know about airline business models. I trust it enough to research further but I will not rely on the headline price alone." (Neutral)
- "It feels untrustworthy because the hidden costs remind me of deals that end up being expensive. I do not like surprises when I am already stretching every rupiah." (Neutral)
- "The concept seems believable enough as a airline option but the extra costs make it less trustworthy for my budget. I take it seriously as an option but it is not practical for me." (Neutral)
- "I am unsure if this is fully credible because I worry about hidden fees at the airport. Trust is important to me, especially when I am planning for my child's future security." (Neutral)
- "I'm wary because hidden fees often end up costing more than the initial headline price. Need clear breakdowns before I trust this with my travel plans." (Neutral)
- "The low headline price catches my eye, but I need to trust the total amount won't jump later. I've been burned by hidden fees before when booking online." (Neutral)
#### Mid fare with overhead cabin bag included
**purchase_intent**
- "I would likely choose this option when traveling with extended family for weekends. The included bag reduces unexpected costs, making it easier to fit within our monthly budget." (Neutral)
- "I'd probably book this if I'm planning a short trip soon since saving on bag fees helps my monthly budget. It's not a must-have right now but I'll keep it in mind for when I travel." (Neutral)
- "I might buy this someday if I need to carry more stuff, but right now I'm saving money for my business tools. The price difference isn't huge for me since I pack light.
    "relevance":" (Neutral)
- "I am willing to book this for family trips or business travel once I verify the terms. The price is competitive and the bag inclusion makes it a good value for my needs." (Neutral)
- "I won't book this unless I have to travel soon; right now I'm waiting for a promo that fits our tight family budget. Better prices at the checkout counter matter more than the included bag for me." (Neutral)
- "I might book this later when I see a clear need to visit Bangkok, but right now I’m waiting to see if the total cost beats the budget airlines. My savings goal means I can’t rush into anything without a backup plan." (Neutral)
- "Given my budget and habits, I would not buy this — it is a clear no for me. The extra cost for a bag doesn't make sense when I travel light anyway." (Slightly negative)
- "Saya belum akan langsung beli karena masih menunggu kebutuhan mendesak seperti acara keluarga besar atau liburan sekolah anak. Kalau memang perlu, saya bandingkan dulu harga tiket termurah tanpa bagasi." (Slightly negative)
- "If I ever needed to visit family out of town, this would be a safe bet to try since the total cost is clear upfront." (Slightly negative)
- "They would skip this offer since the extra cost doesn't justify a trip they don't plan to take anyway. Their money stays with the farm supplies and their mother's medicine bills." (Slightly negative)
**relevance**
- "It fits my routine perfectly because I travel often for work and hate hidden fees popping up when I’m already juggling deadlines." (Slightly positive)
- "This fits my workflow as a digital nomad who needs to move quickly between cities without worrying about extra baggage charges." (Slightly positive)
- "It fits my SEA travel habits well since I often visit Bangkok or Jakarta for work. Having the bag included helps when I need to carry gear for shoots without checking in." (Slightly positive)
- "It doesn’t fit my usual routine since I mostly stay local or visit nearby temples. The overhead bag is useful, but I rarely need to carry much when I do travel." (Neutral)
- "Travel is not a priority right now since I focus on housing and kids' education first. This fare might fit better once we have more savings, but today it feels like a luxury we can't afford." (Neutral)
- "This is somewhat relevant, but it is not a priority in my day-to-day. I travel mostly for business or family visits, so mid-tier fare features are not a main focus." (Neutral)
- "This is mostly irrelevant to me since I can barely see where it would fit in my life. I focus on the cheapest options to ensure my children and parents eat well." (Neutral)
- "This fits my need to travel with family occasionally, but I don't fly often enough to justify the mid-fare upgrade. We mostly save for big trips like Eid or school holidays." (Neutral)
- "This feels relevant to how I live or work since I can see myself using it for weekend visits. It helps me budget better without sacrificing comfort for my wife and child." (Neutral)
- "This fare misses their life completely as they rarely leave the village unless necessary. Flying sounds like a luxury reserved for others, not for someone managing household harmony." (Slightly negative)
**uniqueness**
- "This is a bit different from alternatives since the bag is included, but not in a memorable way that changes my choice. It feels familiar enough that I would still compare it against other simple fares." (Slightly negative)
- "This stands out from what I usually see; it feels notably different. Including the overhead bag without extra fees is a clear distinction from the budget airlines I usually consider." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels different from the cheapest tickets I usually search, but not in a way that stands out to me. Other airlines already include basic baggage if I book through their official sites." (Slightly negative)
- "This stands out because most budget airlines charge separately for overhead bags. It feels notably different from what I usually see when I book tickets for work or family trips." (Slightly negative)
- "It stands out because most airlines push baggage fees as extra upsells I have to click through. Knowing the locker spot is included feels different from the usual surprise charges." (Slightly negative)
- "This stands out because most airlines make you pay separately for the cabin bag, which I find annoying when budgeting. It feels different, but I still wonder if it's truly necessary for my needs." (Slightly negative)
- "This feels similar to other mid-tier fares I have seen, though the explicit baggage inclusion is a welcome clarity. Most airlines charge separately, so this transparency is the main differentiator for me." (Slightly negative)
- "This is the same as what I already see everywhere as nothing new for me compared to legacy carriers. The main difference is the transparency, which I value but does not feel revolutionary." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels familiar, similar to standard economy-plus options they've seen before. There isn't a distinct advantage that sets it apart from what their corporate booking tool already shows." (Slightly negative)
- "The offer feels familiar as many airlines now include cabin bags, so it does not stand out as particularly novel to me." (Slightly negative)
**usability**
- "Random seat assignment at check-in makes me nervous since I usually prefer picking seats early when I travel with family. It adds friction when I’m trying to plan around kids and luggage." (Neutral)
- "This seems somewhat hard or inconvenient for how I usually do things because I prefer simple booking steps. Using an app for check-in is okay, but I worry about making mistakes without help." (Neutral)
- "App check-in sounds clear and simple, which I appreciate since I keep my digital stuff straightforward. Less friction means more time for my weekend hobbies." (Neutral)
- "Checking in through the app seems straightforward for my routine. I appreciate not having to queue at the counter for bag fees when I am tired." (Neutral)
- "This seems somewhat hard or inconvenient for how I usually do things because I prefer simple, predictable budgeting over add-on features." (Neutral)
- "This looks easy enough for me; I would not struggle with it. Checking in on the app is familiar since I already use my phone to manage my small business." (Neutral)
- "From my experience, this would be confusing or frustrating to use since I already find digital check-ins stressful on my iOS phone when I am anxious." (Neutral)
- "They trust this concept because it is transparent about what is included, unlike some offers they have seen that add fees later. Their past experience with trust being fragile makes them value clear terms over promises." (Neutral)
- "Check-in lewat aplikasi cukup mudah kalau saya sudah paham settingannya. Tapi saya masih ragu kalau ada masalah teknis karena saya hanya pakai WhatsApp dan berita harian." (Neutral)
- "The app check-in is fine, but they worry about confusing rules at the gate without clear instructions. They prefer simple processes that don't require reading fine print on a small screen." (Neutral)
**credibility**
- "It feels trustworthy because the terms are clear and straightforward. No sneaky add-ons, which aligns with how I prefer to plan my spending." (Slightly positive)
- "I remain cautious about the total price being transparent at checkout since airlines sometimes add unexpected charges later. I would need to see the final breakdown before trusting this claim fully." (Slightly positive)
- "I am skeptical and I would need a lot more proof before believing the no fee claim. Transparency is key when I manage operational budgets." (Slightly positive)
- "The transparency about fees makes it feel trustworthy, similar to how I rely on established brands for my daily needs. It doesn't feel over-claimed, just straightforward about what I get." (Slightly positive)
- "This feels highly trustworthy to me — solid, credible, and well put together. The transparency about fees aligns with how I evaluate business offers for my own ventures." (Slightly positive)
- "The offering feels solid and trustworthy because it aligns with how I expect transparent pricing to work. It does not over-promise, which matters to me." (Slightly positive)
- "It seems believable enough given how airlines operate, but I would check the fine print before booking. I have learned to verify details after my experience with the pandemic closures." (Slightly positive)
- "It feels trustworthy because it's clear about what's included. I don't like hidden fees, so this honesty puts my mind at ease." (Slightly positive)
- "The fare structure seems professional and believable, as it aligns with what I have seen from trusted carriers. However, I remain cautious about committing without discussing the details with my family first." (Slightly positive)
- "I am cautious about whether the bag size rules will change at the gate, so I would need clear proof before trusting this promise. My experience with hidden fees during travel makes me double-check every detail." (Slightly positive)
#### Cheapest headline; cabin-bag fee at airport gate
**purchase_intent**
- "They hesitate to commit now because the total cost is unclear until the gate, making it hard to justify against other family needs. They might wait for a transparent package before acting on the deal." (Neutral)
- "I would hesitate to book this because unexpected costs disrupt my careful financial planning for family vacations. I need to know the total price upfront before committing to any travel offer." (Neutral)
- "I will not book this fare because the risk of extra fees at the gate outweighs the small savings online. My household income requires me to avoid surprises that could strain our weekly budget." (Slightly negative)
- "I would not buy this ticket because the surprise fee at the gate makes it risky for our household savings. I prefer to pay more upfront for clarity so I can track our expenses without stress." (Slightly negative)
- "I will not choose this offer because the hidden fees make it impossible to plan my travel costs accurately. I need to prioritize my savings for debt repayment over risky pricing structures." (Slightly negative)
- "I am unlikely to book this fare because the uncertainty around baggage fees makes it risky for my family trips. I prefer airlines that are upfront about all costs before I commit my savings." (Slightly negative)
- "I am unlikely to buy this because hidden fees do not fit my careful budgeting habits. Keeping my household finances predictable is much more important than gambling on cheap initial headlines." (Slightly negative)
- "I am unlikely to buy this because I prefer to pay for essentials like travel once, not in hidden stages. Saving for my civil service exam requires me to avoid unpredictable costs that disrupt my monthly savings plan." (Slightly negative)
- "I would not choose this offer because the hidden fees create too much financial uncertainty for my household. I need clear total costs before I commit to spending." (Slightly negative)
- "They would not buy this offer since travel is not a priority and surprise charges add stress to their limited income." (Slightly negative)
**relevance**
- "Travel is part of my life but this specific fee structure doesn't really change how I book my regional holidays." (Slightly positive)
- "This misses the mark for them since they prefer airlines with clear baggage rules. They usually pack light for short trips to avoid stress, but this policy adds unnecessary friction." (Slightly positive)
- "This does not fit my current travel habits since I rarely fly and focus on local logistics work daily. My limited travel means unexpected gate charges would be a significant burden for my modest household budget." (Neutral)
- "This does not fit my current life since I mostly travel on a motorcycle or bus around the city. I rarely take flights and the need to worry about carry-on limits at this stage." (Neutral)
- "This does not fit my travel habits, as I prefer steady routines and avoid surprises when visiting heritage sites. My current focus is on security for my home, not risky airline deals." (Neutral)
- "This does not fit my life since I travel mostly for family events where I bring gifts and clothes. Unexpected charges make me avoid booking when I can plan differently." (Neutral)
- "This is somewhat relevant to my regional travel needs, but it is not a priority in my day-to-day operations. I focus more on stable expenses like stock and rent than on flexible travel deals." (Neutral)
- "This model does not fit my needs since I prefer clear total prices before committing to a trip. I usually visit local craft villages or fly only when necessary, so transparency matters more than a low headline." (Neutral)
- "This travel pricing model does not match their daily life as a homemaker focused on local grocery and utility costs." (Slightly negative)
- "This idea misses their daily life because they focus on family stability at home rather than flying often." (Slightly negative)
**uniqueness**
- "This stands out from what I usually see because most airlines are transparent about baggage rules in Vietnam. It feels notably different from the trusted brands I normally choose for safety." (Slightly negative)
- "This stands out because most airlines I know list bag fees earlier in the process. It feels different but not necessarily better than the usual options I've seen online." (Slightly negative)
- "This approach feels familiar because other budget airlines already use similar tactics to lower initial quotes. It is not memorable or distinct enough to change how I book travel." (Slightly negative)
- "This feels familiar because many airlines use low headlines to attract customers. I have seen similar surprises before when booking for weekend trips." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels the same as other budget airlines I’ve heard about that hide extra charges. Nothing here stands out as different from what I already know to avoid." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels familiar because many airlines charge for bags even when they say the fare is cheap. I have seen similar rules before where the real price shows up only at the counter." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels familiar because many budget airlines already operate this way, so there is nothing distinct here. I have seen similar tactics before that make the initial price misleading." (Slightly negative)
- "This is a bit different from alternatives but not in a way that feels valuable. It mirrors the familiar pattern of hidden fees I avoid when choosing airlines for family vacations." (Slightly negative)
- "It feels like the same old budget airline tactic we all know and tolerate. Nothing distinct here compared to what I’ve seen on other regional carriers." (Slightly negative)
- "The fare looks similar to other budget airlines they have used before, offering nothing distinct in terms of service or value. They feel this is just another variation of the same low-cost model with extra charges." (Slightly negative)
**usability**
- "From my experience, unclear bag rules at booking will just make things confusing and frustrating. I prefer simple terms I can understand before I commit." (Slightly negative)
- "I’d find it confusing to figure out what counts as a cabin bag until the last minute. With my rough hands and busy schedule, I need clear rules, not guesses." (Slightly negative)
- "Having to check bags at the gate adds friction when I just want to board and relax with my minimal carry-on." (Slightly negative)
- "Unclear baggage rules would be confusing and stressful to navigate when traveling with limited tech support." (Slightly negative)
- "From my experience, trying to fit bags under the seat during rush hour at the airport would be very stressful. I expect this to cause confusion and delay for families traveling together." (Strongly negative)
- "Trying to measure bags at the gate while rushing with kids would be too confusing and stressful. I need a system that works smoothly so I can focus on my family instead of worrying about rules." (Strongly negative)
- "From my experience, this would be confusing or frustrating to use at a busy airport gate. I expect clear digital guidance before arrival, not stressful decisions when rushing to board." (Strongly negative)
- "I would find it confusing to measure my bag at the gate without clear signs or tools. This extra step adds frustration when I already have to manage my design orders carefully." (Strongly negative)
- "From my experience, this would be confusing or frustrating to use when I am trying to pack efficiently for a trip. Unclear rules about cabin bags add stress I do not need." (Strongly negative)
- "This seems somewhat hard or inconvenient for how I usually do things because I worry about the rules at the airport. I prefer simple bookings where I do not have to guess about bag sizes." (Strongly negative)
**credibility**
- "I’m skeptical because the headline price seems too low to be honest. I need proof before trusting airlines, just like I do when buying second-hand tech." (Slightly negative)
- "I do not trust this concept because the initial headline price seems misleading without full disclosure of fees. This feels low quality to me given my experience with unreliable transport services." (Slightly negative)
- "I am skeptical because the low headline price seems designed to hide the true cost of travel. I would need proof that the rules are fair and transparent before trusting this." (Slightly negative)
- "I am skeptical because the headline price does not reflect the real cost of flying with normal luggage. It feels like an over-claim designed to attract budget travelers without honoring their needs." (Slightly negative)
- "I do not trust this offer because the rules seem unclear until the final payment stage. My experience with platform work taught me that transparent costs are essential for trust." (Slightly negative)
- "I find it hard to trust a headline price that changes significantly at the gate. Transparency is important to me when I am making financial decisions for my family." (Slightly negative)
- "I am skeptical and would need a lot more proof before believing that the headline price is the true cost. In my village, we learn to check details carefully because things that seem too cheap often have hidden costs." (Slightly negative)
- "I'm skeptical because clear pricing builds trust like my halal snack sourcing does. Hidden charges make me doubt if this airline respects my money." (Slightly negative)
- "They distrust offers that hide potential costs until the last minute, as this contradicts their values of transparency and honesty." (Slightly negative)
- "They remain skeptical about the true total cost. Additional proof of transparency would be needed for trust." (Slightly negative)

## Charts
### Panel mix
Directional panel mix from synthetic respondent profiles — not a census.

#### Respondent age range
Type: bar
n = 357. Synthetic panel age mix among successful respondents.
Labels: 18-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55+
- **Respondents**: 53, 87, 80, 81, 56

#### Respondent income category
Type: bar
n = 357. Region-adjusted relative income labels from synthetic profiles (not actual household income). 3 not categorised.
Labels: Low, Lower-middle, Middle, Upper-middle, Suppressed
- **Respondents**: 184, 74, 72, 14, 10

#### Shopping style
Type: bar
n = 357. Shopping style among successful respondents. 3 not categorised.
Labels: Pencari Promo Diskon Price Driven Deal Seeking, Belanja Terbujuk Media Sosial Social Commerce Live Stream Influenced, Price Driven Deal Seeking, Research Heavy, Riset Komparatif Research Heavy Value Prudent, Pencari Promo Diskon, Price Driven Promo Hunters Cari Promo, Price Driven Promotion Hunting, Convenience First Impulse Buying, Suppressed
- **Respondents**: 29, 14, 12, 12, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 237

#### Tech adoption
Type: bar
n = 357. Tech adoption among successful respondents. 3 not categorised.
Labels: Early Majority, Late Majority, Early Majority Mayoritas Awal, Late Majority Mayoritas Akhir, Early Adopter, laggards, Laggards Konservatif Tradisional, Early Adopters Pengadopsi Awal, Early Adopters, Suppressed
- **Respondents**: 97, 76, 33, 33, 24, 23, 19, 16, 16, 17

### Word cloud
- travel (2553)
- fees (2028)
- family (1832)
- budget (1717)
- hidden (1604)
- price (1575)
- clear (1375)
- costs (1346)
- see (1330)
- extra (1248)
- cost (1187)
- airlines (1159)
- check (1131)
- trips (1102)
- bag (1084)
- fare (1014)
- needs (938)
- fits (892)
- upfront (868)
- total (865)
- already (822)
- app (799)
- gate (782)
- offer (753)
- usually (749)
- hidden fees (721)
- booking (717)
- pricing (713)
- similar (710)
- enough (679)
- saya (679)
- transparent pricing (133)
- check-in fee (43)
- short-haul flight (41)
- headline fare (33)
- budget travel (32)
- hidden baggage fees (23)
- all-in bundle (3)
- carry-on allowance (1)
- overhead locker space (1)
- at the gate (575)
- yang (391)
- low (677)
- for family (566)
- check in (886)
- baggage (637)
- they see (522)
- rules (584)
- included (584)
- the app (528)
- household (617)
- makes (566)
- the total (663)
- see the (478)
- work (542)
- hidden costs (459)
- i usually (410)
- seat (513)
- similar to (450)
- at the airport (361)
- app check (450)
- stands out (442)
- buy this (440)
- habits (516)
- trip (514)
- headline price (413)
- short (503)
- familiar (527)
- trust (515)
- later (498)

#### Aspect gap — Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in vs Full-service style: bag and basics in the fare
Type: horizontal_bar
Shows the diagnostic usability and credibility advantages separating the all-in bundle from unbundled fare concepts.
Labels: Credibility, Usability
- **Mean difference**: 0.64, 0.59

#### Top themes — Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in
Type: horizontal_bar
Highlights key trust, pricing, and transparency drivers supporting Concept 3's market leadership.
Labels: Price, Trust, Usability, Fit For Me, Novelty
- **Mentions**: 340, 328, 311, 282, 62

#### Mean purchase intent by country
Type: heatmap
Geographic segment breakdown of mean SSR scores.
Labels: Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in, Full-service style: bag and basics in the fare, Mid fare with overhead cabin bag included, Ultra-cheap underseat-only + paid overhead, Cheapest headline; cabin-bag fee at airport gate
- **IDN**: 3.32, 3.09, 3.08, 2.64, 2.05
- **MYS**: 3.87, 3.55, 3.35, 2.57, 2.07
- **SGP**: 3.93, 3.43, 3.32, 2.54, 2.01
- **THA**: 3.56, 3.25, 3.16, 2.56, 2.03
- **VNM**: 3.42, 3.17, 3.08, 2.54, 2.01

## Actions
- Prioritize Transparent all-in bag + seat + check-in for further validation, then run a pricing pulse on the winning concept.
- Consider launching the product market fit scenario analysis next.

## Why they chose
We asked why: 357 people who made a choice. Percents are of these 357, so you can compare them to other runs.

### Most shared reasons
- **86%** total price upfront → no hidden surprises → pay premium for peace → choose Transparent all-in bag + seat + c
- **3%** basics in fare → fewer gotchas here → pay for reliability → choose Full-service style: bag and basic
- **2%** advance seat selection → avoid middle seat → comfort worth extra cost → choose Transparent all-in bag + seat + c
- **1%** free kiosk checkin → skip counter lines → value time over money → choose Transparent all-in bag + seat + c
- **1%** standard check-in → easier for everyone → simplify group travel → choose Full-service style: bag and basic
- **8%** Other reasons

Path percents are not market share. They are the share of people we asked why who stated that reason.