Michael here: Spirit kept fares down.

Spirit was cheap and unpleasant, and far more important to airfares than most travelers realized. Its collapse exposed the limit of winning an antitrust case without a plan for what came next.

Kendria Talton had flown from Dallas to Atlanta with her daughter for a dance competition. When Spirit shut down the next day, she found herself at the airport looking for another way home. Her assessment of the airline, reported by the Associated Press, was harsh but not unusual. Spirit had never asked to be loved. It asked passengers to tolerate it for the right price.

At 3 a.m. on May 2, the bargain ended.

Spirit stopped flying after 34 years. About 17,000 employees lost their jobs, more than 1,300 crew members had to be brought home, and roughly 50,000 passengers had traveled on the airline’s final day. Its last flight left Detroit and landed in Dallas shortly after midnight.

Three days later, a bankruptcy judge approved the dismantling of what remained. Spirit’s assets included 114 Airbus aircraft, along with engines, airport gates, landing slots and spare parts. Most of the planes were leased, some were owned, and all had suddenly become somebody else’s property problem. (Associated Press)

Spirit’s business model had been built around separating the flight from almost everything passengers once assumed came with it. The base fare covered transportation and very little else. Bags, seat selection and even a printed ticket could cost extra.

Former chief executive Ben Baldanza defended the model by arguing that passengers had always paid for those services. Spirit simply showed them the itemized bill. Passengers did not always appreciate the transparency.

The larger airlines appreciated the economics. Spirit’s approach became so influential that established carriers introduced their own basic-economy tickets, giving travelers fewer rights and more restrictions at the cheapest price. Spirit helped prove that customers would accept an inferior product when the number at the top of the search results was low enough.

The industry borrowed the model without assuming Spirit’s entire risk. Delta and United could sell a few stripped-down seats while earning more from first class, corporate contracts, international routes, loyalty programs and credit cards. Spirit had cheap fares, add-on fees and little room for a bad year.

It eventually had several.

In January 2024, a federal judge blocked JetBlue’s proposed $3.8 billion purchase of Spirit.

JetBlue argued that the merger would create a larger fifth airline capable of competing with American, Delta, United and Southwest. The Justice Department saw something else: Spirit’s planes would be reconfigured with fewer seats, its no-frills model would disappear, and passengers who depended on its lowest fares would pay more.

The government called the competitive pressure created by the airline the “Spirit Effect.” Spirit entered a market, and other carriers lowered their prices. The Justice Department said the merger would eliminate half of the country’s ultra-low-cost capacity and weaken competition on hundreds of routes, according to U.S. Department of Justice.

Judge William Young agreed.

His ruling included the line that would appear in almost every account of Spirit’s collapse:

Spirit’s stock fell 47 percent after the decision. JetBlue’s rose, the Associated Press reported.

The ruling protected Spirit from becoming a more expensive version of JetBlue. It did not give Spirit cheaper fuel, working engines or a balance sheet that could survive another shock.

That distinction barely registered while the government was celebrating the case. It became harder to ignore once Spirit returned to bankruptcy.

People misunderstood Spirit. The easiest way to misunderstand Spirit is to judge its value by the experience of flying it.

Its broader value appeared on the screen before anyone boarded a plane. A traveler searching from Fort Lauderdale to Las Vegas might choose Delta, JetBlue or Southwest. Spirit’s fare still affected the result.

Its cheap seats forced the other airlines to decide how much of a premium they could charge for a better schedule, a less hostile baggage policy or a seat cushion that did not seem personally offended.

The Justice Department’s case rested on this pressure. Regulators argued that travelers benefited from Spirit even when they booked another airline because its presence forced competitors to lower fares and offer more choices.

The reverse became visible as Spirit withdrew from routes.

A Business Insider analysis of Cirium schedule and fare data examined about 90 domestic routes Spirit left during 2024 and 2025. Average fares rose about $19, or 14 percent. In markets where Spirit kept operating, the increase was closer to 6 or 7 percent. Prices went up in about 80 percent of the exit cases.

Some increases were much larger. The average fare between Oakland and Newark more than doubled, from about $135 to $288. Fort Myers to San Juan rose from $92 to $219. Other routes moved only slightly, and a few became cheaper, but the overall direction was plain: when seats disappeared, the remaining airlines gained room to charge more.

Spirit’s customers lost their airline. Everyone else lost a bargaining chip.

Spirit’s collapse does not prove that the JetBlue merger should have been approved.

JetBlue planned to change the airline. Spirit’s planes would have fewer seats, and the combined company would have moved away from the ultra-low-cost model the government was trying to preserve. The Justice Department had a credible case that the purchase would raise prices for Spirit’s most price-sensitive passengers.

The failure came after the ruling.

Washington had identified Spirit as a company with unusual importance to competition, then returned it to the same financial conditions that had driven it to seek a buyer.

By its first bankruptcy filing in November 2024, Spirit had lost more than $2.5 billion since the start of 2020. It faced higher wages, mounting debt and the grounding of dozens of aircraft because of problems with Pratt & Whitney engines. Larger airlines had also become better at matching cheap fares while extracting more money from passengers willing to upgrade.

Spirit entered bankruptcy again in August 2025. Its restructuring depended on cutting costs, reducing its fleet and surviving long enough for the changes to work.

Spirit had built its 2026 plan around fuel costing roughly $2.24 a gallon. By mid-April, the price was around $4.24. The airline was in poor health before the shock. Double-priced fuel was the piano falling from the window.

The Trump administration began discussing as much as $500 million in government-backed financing. The proposal included warrants that could have given the federal government a stake equal to 90 percent of Spirit’s equity. Washington came close to acquiring almost the entire airline it had spent years insisting should remain private and independent, Reuters reported.

Bondholders objected because the government’s proposal would have moved ahead of them in the repayment line. A counteroffer went nowhere. Spirit learned on the last Thursday in April that the federal financing would not proceed.

The airline carried 50,000 passengers the following day and shut down overnight, Reuters said.

The government had spent two years protecting Spirit from a buyer. When the company finally needed protection from insolvency, officials had a few days, an improvised legal theory and a room full of creditors arguing about who would be repaid first.

That is not a policy. It is what happens when a policy ends halfway through the story.

Other airlines began moving into Spirit’s former markets almost immediately.

They did not rebuild the airline’s network. They selected the pieces that suited them.

By May 11, the industry had replaced about half of Spirit’s earlier capacity reductions. Frontier accounted for roughly 40 percent of the capacity that returned and predicted Spirit’s exit would increase its revenue per seat by 3 to 5 percent. JetBlue expanded at Fort Lauderdale, one of Spirit’s strongest airports, Reuters reported.

This was neither surprising nor sinister. Airlines fly routes where they expect to make money. They do not inherit a duty to preserve another company’s lowest fares.

The market can recycle planes, pilots, gates and profitable routes. It is less reliable at replacing the competitive pressure created by a carrier willing to sell a seat for less than everyone else.

Spirit’s disappearance also left the remaining budget airlines facing the same conditions that helped kill it. Wages, aircraft leases and maintenance costs had increased across the sector. Fuel remained expensive. Customers attracted by the lowest price were also the customers with the least ability to absorb higher prices.

This is why allowing another airline to pick over Spirit’s routes is not the same as replacing Spirit.

The yellow paint was never the valuable part.

Any proposal for government action runs into a familiar objection: airlines are private companies, and poorly run private companies should be allowed to fail.

Spirit certainly earned a share of its fate. It took on debt, failed to adapt quickly enough and built a business with almost no cushion when costs moved against it. Keeping every struggling airline alive would reward bad decisions and invite the next airline to expect the same treatment.

Still, the United States abandoned a pure free-market airline system long ago.

The Essential Air Service program pays carriers to fly routes that would not otherwise be profitable. The Transportation Department selects airlines, approves schedules and aircraft types, sets annual subsidies and considers the views of local elected officials. The program exists because Congress decided some communities should remain connected even when passenger demand cannot support the flights. (U.S. Department of Transportation)

During the pa

ndemic, the Treasury Department awarded $59 billion through three rounds of payroll support for the domestic aviation industry. The government also received warrants from publicly traded airlines, including Spirit, American, Delta, United, Southwest, JetBlue and Frontier. (U.S. Treasury)

Airlines become private companies again once the emergency passes.

That arrangement may be politically convenient, but it is not intellectually honest. Washington regulates routes, reviews mergers, subsidizes small-city flights, supports payrolls during national crises and controls scarce airport access. Then it becomes shy when somebody describes air service as infrastructure.

So, Spirit exposed the performance.

The government does not need to keep Spirit’s name alive, operate its planes or turn Transportation Department officials into airline executives.

It needs a way to protect competition when the failure of one company would remove a meaningful share of low-cost capacity. That could include temporary bankruptcy financing tied to strict conditions. The government could receive warrants in exchange for taking the risk, limit executive compensation and require the recipient to preserve specified routes or seat capacity while it restructures.

The ownership interest would have an expiration date. Washington would sell once the emergency ended, rather than discovering ten years later that it still owned an airline because no member of Congress wanted to close a route in his district.

Airport gates and landing slots could also be reserved for other low-cost entrants instead of drifting automatically toward the largest carriers. A future buyer might be approved with conditions governing seat capacity and service for a fixed period.

There are risks in each approach. A rescue could delay an inevitable failure. Politicians could protect routes for political reasons. Competitors would argue, correctly, that federal help gives the recipient an advantage.

The alternative has risks too. The government can block a merger because a carrier is essential to competition, then watch that carrier collapse and assume the market will somehow recreate the thing it just lost.

Washington protected Spirit in court. It never decided what preserving Spirit’s competitive role would require outside the courtroom. That omission now appears every time a traveler searches a former Spirit route and wonders why the cheapest option is no longer very cheap.

Spirit’s aircraft can be sold. Its engines can be returned to lessors. Gates can be reassigned, crews hired elsewhere and spare parts placed in warehouses.

The fares those planes kept down do not appear in the liquidation inventory.

Feedback, thoughts, suggestions? Hit the reply!

Michael Wildes is the founder and CEO of Drive Phase Holding Company, home of Massif & Kroo. After leaving a career as a professional pilot, he spent a year as Business Editor at FLYING Magazine, writing 330+ articles on aviation's transformation. Now he focused on building permanent-capital companies focused on long-term trends in business, media and aviation. Based in Arlington, Virginia.

Connect: mikewildes.com | Email: [email protected]

Adam spent 20 minutes looking for a $36 receipt. His finance team sent three Slack messages. Someone made a sticky note.

Ramp would have matched it automatically the moment he swiped. Auto-coded, in-policy, synced. Nobody had to ask Adam for anything.

This is what finance looks like when it runs itself.

Your team can be Adam. Or they can not be Adam.

Don’t be like Adam