Read the forum code of contact
By: - 24th June 2005 at 15:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Why don't all airlines just include all the ancillary costs into the ticket and gives us a total ticket price?
It's not like when I get a taxi they say, 14p for tyre ware, £6.28 for fuel, 1p for light bulbs etc etc......
dme
By: - 24th June 2005 at 15:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Why don't all airlines just include all the ancillary costs into the ticket and gives us a total ticket price?
Not so easy to change published fares really quickly. Don't just blame BA - blame the anarchic manner in which IATA airline fares are filed and distributed.
Andy
By: - 24th June 2005 at 15:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not so easy to change published fares really quickly. Don't just blame BA - blame the anarchic manner in which IATA airline fares are filed and distributed.Andy
Don't buy that, if they can change / notify folk of fuel surcharges then they can change the fare to incorporate a total charge....
I wasn't just blaming BA.
dme
By: - 24th June 2005 at 15:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Easyjet and Ryanair are doing it all right. They dont impose a fuel charge, they get all the positive publicity out of not doing so against BA which helps their appeal in the eyes of the public.
Then, to fund the defecit in profits due to fuel costs they just adjust their yield management systems to make them a bit more money on the late booking fares, and make more money out of that.
Of course theres no way of actually proving thats their strategy, but I'd be very surprised if it wasn't.
By: - 24th June 2005 at 16:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Easyjet and Ryanair are doing it all right. They dont impose a fuel charge, they get all the positive publicity out of not doing so against BA which helps their appeal in the eyes of the public.Then, to fund the defecit in profits due to fuel costs they just adjust their yield management systems to make them a bit more money on the late booking fares, and make more money out of that.
Of course theres no way of actually proving thats their strategy, but I'd be very surprised if it wasn't.
Plus Easyjet and Ryanair don't waste money by giving away food and drinks.......
dme
By: - 24th June 2005 at 16:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Then, to fund the defecit in profits due to fuel costs they just adjust their yield management systems to make them a bit more money on the late booking fares, and make more money out of that.
BUT, why do you say that when BA also uses yield management??? Infact BA has one of the most complex yield management systems going. Before EZT/RYR started there were as many as 700+ fare levels in BA's yield management system. They have now simplified that to match the systems used by RYR/EZY and all other airlines now.
Don't buy that, if they can change / notify folk of fuel surcharges then they can change the fare to incorporate a total charge....
Skymonster is absolutely right, the fact is that BA's fares have been declared to IATA for months, so changing the ACTUAL fares is the problem, not changing the booking system. These have to be in the IATA system because this then allows bookings to be made across a variety of airlines (which don't have their own partnerships for example).
RYR and EZY do not have to declare fares to IATA and so they can simply alter the fares in their systems.
Plus Easyjet and Ryanair don't waste money by giving away food and drinks.......
I'm sure if this was aimed at Ryanair Shamrock would have jumped at the chance to say "you don't have to fly with them if you don't like it". The same is true here, what people pay for is the extra backup etc and for many the ability to book fully flexible fares..something LCCs can't offer the business community. The fact that BA and similar need to keep seats available for these fully flexible pax is what pushes their actual fares up, and also it means that their Yield Management systems are more complex as they ahve to account for this!
By: - 24th June 2005 at 17:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Skymonster is absolutely right, the fact is that BA's fares have been declared to IATA for months, so changing the ACTUAL fares is the problem, not changing the booking system. These have to be in the IATA system because this then allows bookings to be made across a variety of airlines (which don't have their own partnerships for example).RYR and EZY do not have to declare fares to IATA and so they can simply alter the fares in their systems.
So if I book a fare that has been declared with IATA with a different airline than the one imposing the levy, but flying with the lvy imposing airline, can they pass the fuel surcharge onto me at a later date?
Logging it with IATA seems useless then, you book the basic logged fare, only for BA etc to add fuel costs on at a later date.... essentially upping the fare.
dme
By: - 24th June 2005 at 19:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
:confused: Can someone explain this "declaring/logging fares with IATA" to me? Do you mean the GDSs instead of IATA? :confused:
By: - 24th June 2005 at 20:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I totally agree DME. Why in the name of god anybody needs a meal on a flight of 2-3 hours or less is simply beyond me. If you want it then you can buy it-simple. BA must spend £5+ feeding every passenger on every sector so if they dropped that it would save £10 on a return ticket and your fare drops a good bit espeically on a route like London-MAN and other domestic flights.
Although slighlty off topic does anybody know anything more about the rumours about BA transforming LGW flights into LOCO style flights.
By: - 25th June 2005 at 00:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Easyjet and Ryanair are doing it all right. They dont impose a fuel charge, they get all the positive publicity out of not doing so against BA which helps their appeal in the eyes of the public.Then, to fund the defecit in profits due to fuel costs they just adjust their yield management systems to make them a bit more money on the late booking fares, and make more money out of that.
Of course theres no way of actually proving thats their strategy, but I'd be very surprised if it wasn't.
You really think Easyjet or Ryanair dont incl a fuel levy???
Somewhere along the line its probably hidden in there charges etc etc, Credit card,Wheelchair (in the case of Ryanair) and all other costs in the "Extra's"
They just dont choose to say it's a fuel levy because it would be bad Press and would loose amunition against national/legacy carriers on imposing a fuel surcharge.
FYI. Ryanair has included an extra charge for wheelchair(which is supplied by handling comps) usage at airports, according to the book i have read on Ryanair, MOL was totally against it because it would be discrimination, untill he heard it would raise another £25-30million in revenue and improve the bottom line
By: - 26th June 2005 at 10:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
:confused: Can someone explain this "declaring/logging fares with IATA" to me? Do you mean the GDSs instead of IATA? :confused:
Nope, IATA is responsible for an element of the scheduling that legacy carriers, and as a part of this the airlines declare their fares to IATA, this is because then IATA can apportion money to airlines when passengers buy 'through tickets' on ailrines which have no agreements in place themselves.
It is not linked to the GDSs/CRSs which the airlines select themselves, and then link to their own databases and yield management systems.
BA must spend £5+ feeding every passenger on every sector so if they dropped that it would save £10 on a return ticket and your fare drops a good bit espeically on a route like London-MAN and other domestic flights.
BA won't be paying anywhere near £5 per pax/per sector for food. It is not like going to a restaurant, the money any company (or organisation) pays for the meals they offer is ususally very minimal. (In the UK, I think the budget for food per head in hospitals is something like 21p per day per patient).
So if I book a fare that has been declared with IATA with a different airline than the one imposing the levy, but flying with the lvy imposing airline, can they pass the fuel surcharge onto me at a later date?
No, maybe you are confusing the IATA system with purchasing fares on a CRS. It doesn't matter who you buy with, the charge will not be applied to any tickets purchased before the date the supplement is introduced. So if you bought a ticket from Amrican to fly JFK-MAN with BA and booked 6 months ago, then no you will not pay the levy. If you booked with BA 6 months ago then you also will not pay the levy.
By: - 26th June 2005 at 12:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Nope, IATA is responsible for an element of the scheduling that legacy carriers, and as a part of this the airlines declare their fares to IATA, this is because then IATA can apportion money to airlines when passengers buy 'through tickets' on ailrines which have no agreements in place themselves.It is not linked to the GDSs/CRSs which the airlines select themselves, and then link to their own databases and yield management systems.
BA won't be paying anywhere near £5 per pax/per sector for food. It is not like going to a restaurant, the money any company (or organisation) pays for the meals they offer is ususally very minimal. (In the UK, I think the budget for food per head in hospitals is something like 21p per day per patient).
No, maybe you are confusing the IATA system with purchasing fares on a CRS. It doesn't matter who you buy with, the charge will not be applied to any tickets purchased before the date the supplement is introduced. So if you bought a ticket from Amrican to fly JFK-MAN with BA and booked 6 months ago, then no you will not pay the levy. If you booked with BA 6 months ago then you also will not pay the levy.
Yeah, that's what I don't understand. If they can notify everyone on the fuel levy, why don't they just add it into the total ticket cost - give me a ticket price, the one that I'll end up paying.....
dme
By: - 26th June 2005 at 12:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I totally agree DME. Why in the name of god anybody needs a meal on a flight of 2-3 hours or less is simply beyond me. If you want it then you can buy it-simple. BA must spend £5+ feeding every passenger on every sector so if they dropped that it would save £10 on a return ticket and your fare drops a good bit espeically on a route like London-MAN and other domestic flights.Although slighlty off topic does anybody know anything more about the rumours about BA transforming LGW flights into LOCO style flights.
Airline Food would cost then £3 per meal and then another 14p for a soft drink!
Posts: 4,255
By: bmi-star - 24th June 2005 at 15:24
....rasing the fuel levy to £48 on a long haul ticket, and to £16 on a short haul. Starting to affect the prices now i think!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4617977.stm