cbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1508 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2737 times:
HAHA...that is hilarious! I hate flying out of YVR, its far cheaper to head to Seattle or something and catch a flight out of their. It will save at least a 100+ in taxes, IF you can find a cheaper fare. It is ridiculous though to think that a 199 airfare could then be followed by another 300 odd in taxes! Gotta love it!
smoot4208 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1224 posts, RR: 12 Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2680 times:
Departing Flight - Tango Plus ----$98.99
Returning Flight - Tango Plus ----$98.99
Surcharges NAV ----$30.02
Fuel Surcharge ----$210.00
Canada Airport Improvement Fee ----$15.00
U.S Agriculture Fee XA ----$ 5.00
Air Travellers Security Charge ----$25.91
U.S Passenger Facility Charge ----$4.50
Mexico Intl. Arpt. Departure Tax ----$25.57
Canada Harmonized Sales Tax ----$ 1.80
Mexico Tourism Tax UK ----$21.53
September 11 Security Fee AY ----$2.50
U.S.A Immigration User Fee XY ----$6.99
Total (before options) ----$546.80
All of those except the fuel surcharge are, that does taxes; that the airline has to put in your ticket. As for the fuel surcharge, it does seem a little high, but oil is up 20% from what it was in Feb 2010. The bottom line however you look at it, the customer has to start paying the actual price
auroralives From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 172 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2433 times:
Quoting smoot4208 (Reply 2): As for the fuel surcharge, it does seem a little high, but oil is up 20% from what it was in Feb 2010.
I've said it before... so I'll say it again here:
Fuel Capacity of A319 - 6303 usg
Range of A319 - 2760 miles
YVR - MEX - 2454 miles
For arguments sake... this trip takes a full load of gas...
6300 * $2.68 gallon for Jet-A is $16,884 for a full tank of fuel
This configuration of A319 seats 120 pax.
120 * $105 fuel surcharge = $12,500.
This is NOT a surcharge. The passengers are paying 75% of the entire cost of the fuel. This only makes sense if AC is operating under the assumption oil will forever be priced at $25/barrel.
klm77 From Canada, joined Sep 2009, 154 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2417 times:
This reminds me of when AC also had on their front page YYZ-LHR one way for $199. So I did the same thing as you, one way 199 and the other 199. That's 398 total right? Seems like a steal....plus 436 taxes... the taxes are more then the ticket!
My recommendation: pull out the pen and paper and start writing letters to these three governments.
Don't put this on AC, as you can see that they are willing and able to charge a low fare to the consumer for this service. It is proven in the $1.80 (or should it be $18.00....either way) HST. You could knock about $20.00 of your fare by not connecting in the US on the way back. Point is, airports are expensive to run, and the money has to come from somewhere. I think it is more fair to charge those using those facilities than those who don't. And, seeing as I am on this website, I am clearly not a non-traveler. I pay enough of these fees yearly, but being near YYZ, BUF is used when available and feasible.
YYZRWY23
If you don't stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, RR: 24 Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2405 times:
Quoting cbphoto (Reply 1): It is ridiculous though to think that a 199 airfare could then be followed by another 300 odd in taxes!
Note that $210 is a fuel surcharge. That's not a tax. It goes to the airline and is really part of the fare.
I don't know why Canada still permits airlines to advertise fares like that. In Europe it's a legal requirement that all advertised fares include all taxes/fees/surcharges. The only exceptions are optional charges (e.g. for carriers that charge for checked baggage etc) and for usually small fees for payment by credit card. Passengers only care about the grand total.
auroralives From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 172 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2384 times:
Quoting YYZRWY23 (Reply 5): Point is, airports are expensive to run, and the money has to come from somewhere. I think it is more fair to charge those using those facilities than those who don't.
No dispute whatsoever. The people who use should pay for the services / facilities.
The problem here is an "advertised" price, and the price one eventually pays. The cost of doing business should be rolled into the final advertised price.
Imagine you went to Walmart and picked up a pair of pants with the sticker price of $1.25. You then went to the casher who said:
Cashier fee ---$0.25
Warehouse storage fee ----$0.50
Store Management fee ----$2.00
Transport from harbour to store -----$2.50
Fuel surcharge on local transport ----$1.25
Overseas shipping fee ----$1.68
Transport ship crew feeding fee ----$0.89
Upper management performance bonus fee ----$4.55
Local and regional taxes ---$1.10
Accountant to figure out taxes fee ---$1.30
etc, etc etc...
You get my drift...
Soon it will be $0.01 airfares, with all the rest in fees
Not a bad deal really, for about 5000 miles of travel.
Comparable fares, all taxes/fees in for SEA-MEX-SEA is about $410.00.
However, I agree fully with the above sentiment. And, if I am not mistaken, there are new consumer rules and protocols being enacted in Canada that will no longer allow such pricing. It's about time.
Quoting auroralives (Reply 3): This is NOT a surcharge. The passengers are paying 75% of the entire cost of the fuel. This only makes sense if AC is operating under the assumption oil will forever be priced at $25/barrel.
Indeed it is not, however, I am going to have to imagine that it would not be Politically Correct to call it what it really is ... an "It's about time you actually paid for what it costs to fly you from A to B" charge.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
I very well understand your view on this, and the point you are trying to make. But, in my opinion, this is fair marketing technique. It gets people onto the airline's site, and gets them looking at flights. Who knows, maybe someone sees that fare, and then sees it is really high, but then they go to the "Vacations" link on the airline site, and book a full vacation (usually cheaper then a la carte). Consumers aren't being mis-leaded, as it does says "plus taxes, surcharges, fees...etc).
The reason Wal Mart doesn't do that is because of the type of establishment it is. Wal Mart, known for its low prices, attracts foot traffic into the store just on brand image alone. Even though they do advertise, people wanting the cheapest option will still try Wal Mart first. So they do not need to advertise the actual cost, then tack on fees. Airlines don't have a "store front", so they need to get people onto their sites in the first place.
But I think this is a "agree to disagree" situation.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 9): And, if I am not mistaken, there are new consumer rules and protocols being enacted in Canada that will no longer allow such pricing.
I believe this is correct. While I can't find a source, I have heard of this for a while.
YYZRWY23
If you don't stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them.
VonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4621 posts, RR: 40 Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2324 times:
What pisses me off more than deceptive advertising is how bogus most of those taxes are. US Agriculture fee? What does somebody flying to or via the US have to do with their agriculture industry??
And don't get me started on the BS "security" taxes. Totally taking advantage of fear to milk the population even more. Call it "sept 11 tak" and nobody will question it!
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3126 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2203 times:
Quoting auroralives (Reply 3): This is NOT a surcharge. The passengers are paying 75% of the entire cost of the fuel.
AC calls it a surcharge, so why wouldn't we? The passengers are paying 100% of the cost of fuel, what is more accurate is that 25% of the cost of fuel is included in the initial fare, and the rest in a fuel surcharge, for the purpose of artificially lowering the initial ticket price.
Based on your excellent numbers, the fuel surcharge pays $12,500 out of an estimated total of $16,884 in fuel (probably less with rebates, etc), which leaves $4,384 as the estimated value of a full tank before surcharge. That means AC figured a cost of $0.70/gallon when pricing that particular trip! Look back two years and you'll see that at no time was the spot price less than twice that cost!
I don't think anyone can make the case honestly that AC (1) hasn't looked at its operating costs in two years .They know that they should plan on spending at least $8,600 in fuel for this trip, but that would mean adding $36 to the initial ticket cost per passenger (assuming a full plane) and that attractive $99 fare becomes a somewhat less appealing $135.
Better to continue advertising a $99 price, to vastly and purposely underestimate the cost of fuel necessary for the trip and to make up the difference through a fuel surcharge.
In my book, that is false, dishonest advertising, but I don't see it go away until merchants are either forbidden from advertising prices that are below cost, or are prevented from adding on unavoidable charges and fees that are not government-mandated to the price of a ticket.
(1) and pretty much any other carrier applying fuel surcharges.
WildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2435 posts, RR: 5 Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2177 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 6): I don't know why Canada still permits airlines to advertise fares like that.
I have a feeling Viscount724 that you've been away from Canada for too long time . Otherwise you would know that this is a common practice around here. Buying a car? You have the list price, but then you have to add:
- Fuel excise tax (as we don't pay enough tax in the fuel price)
- Air conditioning excise tax
- Delivery
- Tax
Or how about my natural gas bill:
- Gas price
- Gas price adjustment
- Storage
- Transportation to Union gas
- Delivery
- Delivery price adjustment
All of this is charged per cubic metre. Add to this the monthly charge and HST (both separate items on the bill).
So, AC is only doing what everybody else is doing. Not like I agree with it, I just take it as a fact of life. As far as AC's pricing is concerned, one has to be aware of this only when booking a ticket to EU on airline web sites. AC's prices are broken down like this, while the Europeans have final prices on their sites.
ACDC8 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 7598 posts, RR: 40 Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2169 times:
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 15): I have a feeling Viscount724 that you've been away from Canada for too long time . Otherwise you would know that this is a common practice around here.
Don't forget cell phones plans ... $XX a month plus $XX tax plus $XX system access fee plus $XX 911 access fee, etc.
But airlines charging almost 6 times their advertised price is beyond decitful. Thats one of the things I really miss about living in Germany, you see a price advertised you pay that price, not like here we you have to pull out a bloody calculator and start adding everything to figure out exactly what you really have to pay.
WildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2435 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2165 times:
Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 16): But airlines charging almost 6 times their advertised price is beyond decitful.
Sure, at least the fuel and Nav charges should be a part of the base fare. These are, after all, elementary parts of the airline business costs...
Otherwise we may see a base fare of $ 5 and with everything else added. Imagine:
Captain's fee
FO fee
CSD fee
FA fee (that may multiply, in dependence on the aircraft)
Aircraft usage fee
And the list would go further and further, until the full fare is built
Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 16): Thats one of the things I really miss about living in Germany, you see a price advertised you pay that price, not like here we you have to pull out a bloody calculator and start adding everything to figure out exactly what you really have to pay.
This is one of the few things I'm missing about living in the old country too. OTOH it's good to be reminded about all the parasites sucking on the businesses and consumers.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, RR: 24 Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2137 times:
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 15): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 6):
I don't know why Canada still permits airlines to advertise fares like that.
I have a feeling Viscount724 that you've been away from Canada for too long time. Otherwise you would know that this is a common practice around here. Buying a car? You have the list price, but then you have to add:
That's my point. It should be broken out on the receipt but advertising should only show the grand total.
It's the same for hotels. Book a hotel room in Europe and the quoted amount is all you pay. In Canada and the US, the total is often 15% or 20% more with GST, provincial/state and often local taxes added. In Europe you only see those amounts broken out on your final bill.
AirCanada787 From Canada, joined Nov 2010, 260 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2110 times:
Quoting YYZRWY23 (Reply 10): Quoting longhauler (Reply 9):
And, if I am not mistaken, there are new consumer rules and protocols being enacted in Canada that will no longer allow such pricing.
I believe this is correct. While I can't find a source, I have heard of this for a while.
There was a bill (Bill C-11) which the House of Commons voted unanimously on in February of 2007. In June of 2007 the Bill was passed and it amended the Canada Transportation Act so airlines will be forced to advertise the full cost of a ticket, including any fees, surcharges and taxes. When the bill was passed I believe that it was announced that the federal cabinet would set a date for its implementation after consultations with the industry and the provinces. This past June there was an article in the National Post about how the Transport Minister had still not held or set a date for the consultations. There was also a private members bill introduced to the house in 2009 that had all in pricing in it as well as a passengers bill of rights.
Also in Ontario and Quebec any advertising done by a travel agency must list a price that includes all fees and surcharges due to legislation in those provinces.
The mind, like a parachute, functions only when open.
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 172 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1508 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Mar 2010, 301 posts, 
. Otherwise you would know that this is a common practice around here. Buying a car? You have the list price, but then you have to add: 
Printer friendly format 
