Southwest (LUV) introduces 'skimpy' fares to honor Kyla Ebbert

Posted Sep 14th 2007 8:42PM by Peter Cohan
Filed under: Good news, Consumer Experience, Southwest Airlines (LUV)

The Associated Press reports that Southwest Airlines Co. (NYSE: LUV) is turning its lemon-like decision -- to boot a short-skirt wearing passenger from one of its flights -- into lemonade. On Friday Southwest offered 23-year-old Kyla Ebbert two free round-trip tickets and issued a news release announcing "skimpy" sale fares of $49 to $109 each way, available for 10 days.

I am not surprised that Southwest did this. It has distinguished itself by the sense of humor of its flight attendants and pilots. And I was thrilled to learn that it decided to take advantage of the attention it was getting for what appeared to be a dumb decision.

Ebbert said she was on a Southwest plane ready to take off from San Diego on July 3 when an airline employee asked her to change her miniskirt, top and sweater or get off. In a compromise, Ebbert was allowed to stay on the flight to Tucson, AZ after pulling her skirt down a bit and her top up.

Update: While this fare sale was fabulously popular with customers, but Kyla wasn't so pleased. To spite them -- or perhaps to take advantage of her 15 minutes of fame before it went away, leaving her still-penniless -- Kyla agreed to pose nude for Playboy.

Southwest CEO Gary Kelly said the airline apologized to Ebbert in August and thought the affair was over. But in the past two weeks, Ebbert went on NBC's "Today Show" and was scheduled to tape an episode of "The Dr. Phil Show" on Friday to recount her tale.

Kelly now sees the irony -- noting that "given that we were born with hot pants -- [referring to its first flight attendants] -- we're trying to be good-humored about all this."

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates, a management consulting and venture capital firm. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in Southwest.

Print this

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

9-14-2007 @ 10:45PM

John said...

I was the first to say Hot Pants on the original thread.

9-15-2007 @ 7:33AM

wgcorwin said...

It is a shame when you have to be asked to pull down your skirt and raise your top. When will our morals improve or do Americans still believe in them? Besides all you hear is what impact our young people are having on our children. I feel it was a good thing for SW to have asked her to alter her attire. It had to be really short and low if she was able to comply after the request.

9-15-2007 @ 8:22AM

Kevin Wexler said...

I like Southwests attitude. So, If they asked her to change her clothes or alter her apperance and she did that really should have been the end of the story. They couldn't have paid for the exposure they are got or are going to get because of this. Good for their marketing people. And good for the flying public. The only problem is they should have gone skimpier on their prices.

9-15-2007 @ 10:22AM

Mort said...

No question the woman may have been dressed
"improperly" but Southwest over-reacted.

9-15-2007 @ 11:02AM

Bucky Beaver said...

Your comments: I watched the Kyla Ebbert interview on the Today Show. Matt ask her to stand and show her outfit. She says the skirt "rides low". It couldn't have been no more than 9 inches in length. I guess it forgot to stay low when she sat down, because she gave us a good look at her jewelry box on national TV. Check out video interview with little Miss Ebbert. Oh yeah...NBC apparently cut some of it out later in the day after they realized they had helped make SW's case. Gotta hand it to Matt, though. A hardy Cartman for you...sweeeeeeet!

10-11-2007 @ 6:10AM

Aine said...

I could have worn the same outfit, and with my natural B cup, received not a problem. The skirt wasn't that short and isn't even a "mini" by the standards of the 1980's and before.
She was wearing a bra, a shirt and a sweater over it, and she's allowed to dress attractively without "covering up those jugs."
That's the only problem here: Breast size. I can see where it might make the outfit suggestive. But that doesn't give a company the right to make a bigotted response. Nor should paranoid, undersexed parents, try to pretend that seeing a welldressed woman, unashamed, suggests braizeness to their children.