Always guessed this one was gonna fail.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16983943

But the head of Nigeria's CAA, Harold Demuren, said he would pursue the case.
"As far as we are concerned, the two airlines are guilty," he said.

Good luck mate, you're gonna need it.

BOGUS is the only "fair' word to describe the efforts of Nigerian authorities to shake down BA & VA.

@readytotaxi. You are right. God help anyone who tries to destroy BA's stranglehold on it's most profitable route.

@jfk77 if the nigerian stance is bogus your statement is misguided. BA and VS charge more per mile on their nigerian routes than on any other on their respective networks. Why? It cannot be allowed.

I'm not surprised though.

A real pity. How first world airlines continue to profit from emerging markets by colluding in keeping airfares artificially high (through fuel surcharges) is shady business. But it seems Sir Richard, champion of the underdog likes it that way. BA's little Willy will take whatever he can.

Shocking

ebbuk

Don't know if you've ever heard of market forces, or the freedom of choice. Suffice to say, that's what at stake here; BA and VS are charging what the market is willing to pay, and if you don't fancy it you're welcome to take your business elsewhere.

http://www.opodo.co.uk/opodo/flights...Ages%5B6%5D=-1&childAges%5B7%5D=-1

Prices from London to Lagos direct in March vary from £523 to £542, (BA/VS/Arik).

That does not sound excessive.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 2): @jfk77 if the nigerian stance is bogus your statement is misguided. BA and VS charge more per mile on their nigerian routes than on any other on their respective networks. Why? It cannot be allowed.

Sadly, this happens all the time by a majority of carriers. Return J fares from Australia are always more expensive (by significant amounts) than a return journey that starts from the arrival port. eg. Aust-UK-Aust is more than UK-Aust-UK

It is called price gouging. It is a combination of market forces, and complacency. The main culprits are the corporate giants that are prepared to pay higher fees because they can, and because they cannot be bothered to take their suppliers to task. Us poor leisure travelers never stand a chance of affording the high fares for a more comfortable seat, unless we commence our journey out of Australia.

B777LRF. Market forces happen where there is an abundance of choice. An unlikely scenario in the emerging world. So the concept doesn't apply.

In the west we screw the emerging economies royally up their behinds, paying little for the natural resources, pouring mountains of aid to prop up dodgy governments that allow us to get our loot to boost our returns on capital employed to pay the dividends that keep our children in private education. So charging exorbitant fares to Nigerians shouldn't really be an issue should it?

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 3): Don't know if you've ever heard of market forces, or the freedom of choice. Suffice to say, that's what at stake here; BA and VS are charging what the market is willing to pay, and if you don't fancy it you're welcome to take your business elsewhere.

There is no such thing as market forces in a regulated market such as Europe to Nigeria.

With that said I dont understand why the Nigerians are having a go at BA-VS. Prices are better these days then they used to be.
If Nigeria wants lower fares all they have to do is declare Nigeria open skies and remove the legal and illegal requirements that restrict any service to Nigeria.
At the same time they would be reducing the bribes, corrupt practices and other shady business that comes with flying to Nigeria.

But somehow i dont see that happening and until then were stuck with Nigeria being an expensive destination and certain Nigerians benefitting a lot from that.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 2): BA and VS charge more per mile on their nigerian routes than on any other on their respective networks.

BA, like all airlines, charges more per mile on ALL of its short haul routes than it does on any of long haul routes. For LHR-CDG-LHR, out on 1 March returning on 8 March (selected at random) the lowest economy price offered on the BA web site today (13 February) is £140. With each leg having a great circle distance of 216 miles this works out at £0,327 per mile.

Compare this with LHR-ABV-LHR on the same dates.. The return fare is £504. The great circle distance is 2,959 miles. The cost per mile ££0.085. So the cost per mile on the Nigerian flight is almost exactly one quarter of that on the French flight. And, of course, both CDG and ABV are on the BA network.

However, for the reason I stated above this is an unfair comparison. In general (but not always) the longer the flight, the cheaper the cost per mile. With the great circle distance between LHR and ABV being 2,959 miles and that between LHR and LOS being 3,101 miles the only reasonable comparison is with fares to destinations about 3,000 miles from London.

I identified five such destinations in addition to ABV and LOS. Here are the figures again for a return flight out on 1 March, back on 8 March to these destinations plus the Nigerian flights:

ABV: 2,959 miles. Fare £504. Cost per mile £0.085
ACC: 3,160 miles. Fare £694. Cost per mile £0.110
BAH: 3,169 miles. Fare £527. Cost per mile £0.082 (but £0.072 with return on any other day in week of 5 March)
JED: 2,951 miles. Fare £559. Cost per mile £0,095
KWI: 2,969 miles. Fare £594. Cost per mile ££0.100
LOS: 3,101 miles. Fare £498. Cost per mile £0.082
RUH: 3,073 miles. Fare £598. Cost per mile £0.0973

So clearly the BA charge per mile to the two Nigerian destinations is not higher but is in truth lower and sometimes significantly lower than to any other destination of a similar distance excepting BAH and even there this does not apply on the dates I randomly chose but does so on other dates, which, again for fairness, I have included.

Here it should be noted that a "reverse" booking, for example LOS-LHR-LOS, could possibly show a very different pattern. This is because of the day to day fluctuations in currency exchange rates. Neither BA nor any other airline adjusts its fares on a daily, weekly or monthly basis nor, probably even on an annual basis to reflect such changes. If a currency strengthens against sterling BA and all other airlines will tend to pocket the gain on such bookings. On the other hand if a currency weakens against sterling the airlines will take the hit. It is "swings and roundabouts". Some they win, others they lose.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 2): @readytotaxi. You are right. God help anyone who tries to destroy BA's stranglehold on it's most profitable route.

There are 21 weekly flights between LHR and LOS and BA operate 7. Hardly a stranglehold!

I am sure that as the reasonable person that you are you are also campaigning against Emirates' stranglehold on the LOS-DXB route. 14 weekly flights and they are all operated by Emirates....how dare they!

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 2): @jfk77 if the nigerian stance is bogus your statement is misguided. BA and VS charge more per mile on their nigerian routes than on any other on their respective networks. Why? It cannot be allowed.

I have said this before in another post, but I'll say it again anyway. The reason why fares are high is because demand is high but capacity is restricted. The Nigerian government seems unwilling to loosen the bilateral agreement most likely because it believes foreign carriers will benefit more than Nigerian ones. In any case, the Nigerian carriers are not in a position to expand, so you either have to put up with high fares, or have low fares but lots of flights by foreign carriers.

As indeed MillwallSean has already said:

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 7): With that said I dont understand why the Nigerians are having a go at BA-VS. Prices are better these days then they used to be. If Nigeria wants lower fares all they have to do is declare Nigeria open skies and remove the legal and illegal requirements that restrict any service to Nigeria. At the same time they would be reducing the bribes, corrupt practices and other shady business that comes with flying to Nigeria.

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 4): Prices from London to Lagos direct in March vary from £523 to £542, (BA/VS/Arik).

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 7): With that said I dont understand why the Nigerians are having a go at BA-VS. Prices are better these days then they used to be.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 8): So clearly the BA charge per mile to the two Nigerian destinations is not higher but is in truth lower and sometimes significantly lower than to any other destination of a similar distance excepting BAH and even there this does not apply on the dates I randomly chose but does so on other dates, which, again for fairness, I have included.

Note that the alleged price collusion took place in the period from 2004 to 2006, when BA and VS (later also VK) were the only airlines flying directly between LOS and LHR. So, current pricing doesn't prove anything about the past.

The case was thrown out because of procedural issues: "He said that the panel could not uphold the allegations against the airlines as put by the NCAA because the violation occurred between August 2004 and March 2006, while the provision of the law at that time prescribed a penalty of cease and deceased order."

Anyway, Arik Air out of the blue got seven additional slots allocated at LHR in December. Even in the UK, if the PM makes a few calls, rules can be bent...

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 2): @jfk77 if the nigerian stance is bogus your statement is misguided. BA and VS charge more per mile on their nigerian routes than on any other on their respective networks. Why? It cannot be allowed.

"bogus" are the fines which were trying to be imposed by the Nigerian Government.

Its not BA's fault Lagos is only 3,100 miles from LHR and they charge the same as routes which are 5000 miles. Also many are flying LOS-LHR -XXX, so those passengers may not be paying much more LOS-LHR.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 11): "bogus" are the fines which were trying to be imposed by the Nigerian Government.

How do you know that BA and VS are not guilty of price fixing in the mentioned period? Do you believe they are too good to do that? The past proves otherwise.

The fines were not imposed by the Nigerian Government, but by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority. The NCAA accused the airlines of price fixing and imposed a fine. Subsequently, the Nigerian Government set up a judicial panel, so that BA and VS could appeal against the fines. You should at least credit the Nigerian Government for the way in which the matter was handled. It's telling that BA attacked the legal authority of the NCAA rather than questioning the claim as such. So, the question whether BA and VS are guilty of price fixing is still open. And unless you have information to prove either side of the story, your claim about 'bogus fines' lacks any basis and just shows your bias against Nigeria.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 2): God help anyone who tries to destroy BA's stranglehold on it's most profitable route.

I'm sorry ebbuk but Nigeria is one of the most corrupt countries I've ever been to.

I notice you don't mention that many Nigerian passengers virtually empty the Duty Free bars (often with bogus credit cards) to sell the items on to their countrymen at vastly inflated prices.

Or that LOS is one of the stations where the most is stolen from the aircraft/stores etc

Get down off the cross mate, somebody else needs the wood.

Quoting ENU (Reply 10): Note that the alleged price collusion took place in the period from 2004 to 2006, when BA and VS (later also VK) were the only airlines flying directly between LOS and LHR.

Note that I was not commenting on the past but on the present. Furthermore I was not talking of any possible collusion between BA and VS back them or at any other time. I was simply illustrating the fact that the statement

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 2): BA and VS charge more per mile on their nigerian routes than on any other on their respective networks. Why?

is totally wrong. Please note that this statement, which purports to be fact and not opinion, talks of the present - "charge" and not "charged" - and purely references the cost per mile of BA flights between LHR and Nigeria. It is wrong and therefore misleading and required correction.

Quoting ENU (Reply 12): The fines were not imposed by the Nigerian Government, but by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority. The NCAA accused the airlines of price fixing and imposed a fine. Subsequently, the Nigerian Government set up a judicial panel, so that BA and VS could appeal against the fines. You should at least credit the Nigerian Government for the way in which the matter was handled. It's telling that BA attacked the legal authority of the NCAA rather than questioning the claim as such. So, the question whether BA and VS are guilty of price fixing is still open. And unless you have information to prove either side of the story, your claim about 'bogus fines' lacks any basis and just shows your bias against Nigeria.

well said!

- I think fuel surcharges are ridiculous and a money grabbing exercise by airlines - but this issue is not Nigeria's alone.

Quoting mikey72 (Reply 13): I notice you don't mention that many Nigerian passengers virtually empty the Duty Free bars (often with bogus credit cards)

Perhaps BA should do what VS do on the LOS route and only accept cash for duty free?

Quoting ENU (Reply 12): The fines were not imposed by the Nigerian Government, but by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority. The NCAA accused the airlines of price fixing and imposed a fine. Subsequently, the Nigerian Government set up a judicial panel, so that BA and VS could appeal against the fines. You should at least credit the Nigerian Government for the way in which the matter was handled. It's telling that BA attacked the legal authority of the NCAA rather than questioning the claim as such. So, the question whether BA and VS are guilty of price fixing is still open. And unless you have information to prove either side of the story, your claim about 'bogus fines' lacks any basis and just shows your bias against Nigeria.

This is politically driven investigation. The Nigerian Government feels "taken advantage" of by the British Airlines, its not the Uk's fault if Nigeria has bad airline industry For most recent history the airline from the former colonial power cleans up in the former African colony, sorry but thats the truth. That has changed in the last 10 years as some African airlines are now "quality" airlines, Ethiopian, Kenya Airways and Arik are "quality" airlines. But Arik has 2 long haul A340-500 which have to cover lots of ground. Virign Nigeria is history.

Then there is the matter of Delta Airlines, for some reason the Nigerian Government didn't like Delta's 767-300ER and DL had to fly a 777 on its Atlanta to Lagos flight. Arik flies a 737-800 from Abuja to LHR, could you imagine the Nigerian newspapers if the UK government decided a 737 was not "worthy" of a flight from LHR to Nigeria ? They would say "who the hell are the Brits" telling us what airplane we can fly. It seems as if the Nigerian like to "investigate" the western airlines, but not when they are investigated.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 17): They would say "who the hell are the Brits" telling us what airplane we can fly. It seems as if the Nigerian like to "investigate" the western airlines, but not when they are investigated.

Sound reasoning is seldom used when African countries decide to challenge former colonial powers. its too easy to play victim.

[Edited 2012-02-13 11:44:07]

Oh god not this again!

Everytime anything relating to Nigerian aviation is raised, all Ebbuk has to say is poor Nigeria , it gotten old now my friend much like the rose tinted glasses you must be observing this situation with.

If BA/VS are 'ripping off' Nigrerians, then why on earth do Nigerians still fly these airlines in their thousands?
If you can tell me why Arik are not therefore charging £100 round ticket including taxes then might be prepared to listen to
your argument - but are they? NO

So now does that mean that a Nigerian airline is ripping Nigerians off? Also NO.

You also have to remember that BA and Virgin are legacy airlines with a high cost base, not forgetting that crews are paid
'danger money' on the LOS route which is a cost Arik does not have to face for its crew.

So if anything, Arik should be cheaper using your logic- my question to you is this - why are they usually dearer!?

There is no wrong doing here, hence why it's all been wrapped under the carpet. Egg on face yet again for the
Nigerian 'authorities' indeed. Shameful really.

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 19): You also have to remember that BA and Virgin are legacy airlines with a high cost base, not forgetting that crews are paid 'danger money' on the LOS route which is a cost Arik does not have to face for its crew.

Actually I don't believe VS or BA receive danger money - just normal allowances... and as for Arik - most of their crews are portugese so hardly the model Nigerian airline.

Iv just done a random search of flights between LHR-LOS-LHR departing 23rd April and returning the 25th April. BA and Virgin both came to EXACTLY £1666.76 in economy. Odd that they both came to the same fare. But then I checked Arik and it was £517.76. What I cannot fathom is how they are almost 3 times the price of Arik yet always chockers (and I certainly know BA is always chockers on that route)!

Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Clearly BA and Virgin are worth it, or is that far too simplistic a few?

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 19): You also have to remember that BA and Virgin are legacy airlines with a high cost base, not forgetting that crews are paid 'danger money' on the LOS route which is a cost Arik does not have to face for its crew.

LOL Not at all true!!!! Cant speak for VS but LOS isnt even a high earning trip.
Arik does however have to provide accomodation to its crews at base in Lagos (often in the same hotel as the foreign airlines) for up to several weeks at a time! At least the european airlines only provide accomodation for the duration of the trip!

It seems for some reason that the price for BA/VS suddenly jumps just before the date that you selected.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 17): for some reason the Nigerian Government didn't like Delta's 767-300ER and DL had to fly a 777 on its Atlanta to Lagos flight.

Not that this is related to the topic at hand, but it is still amazing how people choose to forget (perhaps conveniently) the clearly stated issue with the 767-300ER on the ATL-LOS route. It was the wrong aircraft for the route.

IIRC, there was no safety issue with the B767.

Quoting ssublyme (Reply 24): Not that this is related to the topic at hand, but it is still amazing how people choose to forget (perhaps conveniently) the clearly stated issue with the 767-300ER on the ATL-LOS route. It was the wrong aircraft for the route.

what was wrong with a 767 on the Lagos-Atlanta route ?

Quoting VV701 (Reply 14): Note that I was not commenting on the past but on the present.

My bad. I just wanted to point out that there is no claim being made that BA/VS currently fix their prices.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 17): This is politically driven investigation. The Nigerian Government feels "taken advantage" of by the British Airlines, its not the Uk's fault if Nigeria has bad airline industry

Again, what makes you think that BA/VS aren't possibly guilty of price fixing in the specified period? Basically, you are saying that since Nigeria doesn't meet all standards of good governance, they shouldn't be allowed to investigate/criticise any foreign entity active in Nigeria. I am not defending the way the Nigerian aviation authorites handled the matter nor argueing that everything is perfect in Nigeria, but that doesn't mean that they aren't entitled to investigating foreign airlines operating into their country (or that it is all politically motivated).

Also, you don't really understand how the whole case developed. The case was initiated by the NCAA and not by the Nigerian Government, so you can't blame the government for everything. The playing field is quite complex in Nigeria: ministers, aviation agencies, the public opinion: they all have their own role. The Nigerian elites are actually very loyal customers of BA, so they would protest any restriction of BA's operations in the country.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 17): Then there is the matter of Delta Airlines, for some reason the Nigerian Government didn't like Delta's 767-300ER and DL had to fly a 777 on its Atlanta to Lagos flight.

It was not the government. There was a public outcry about the state of Delta's aircraft (particularly because the B767 couldn't carry all the luggage), and the NCAA/minister of aviation responded to that. What's wrong with customers asking value for money or lobbying with the government to protect their intersts? You can even argue that the Nigerian government was right to require a certain aircraft, since Delta had a monopoly on the direct US-Nigeria market at the time. Anyway, as pointed out earlier, this case has nothing to do with the BA/VS case. So, why bring it up?

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 19): There is no wrong doing here, hence why it's all been wrapped under the carpet. Egg on face yet again for the Nigerian 'authorities' indeed. Shameful really.

Are you aware that you imply that the British 'authorities' are then involved in a deal behind the curtains (if there is any)? Legally speaking the whole process has been very transparant and the outcome was predicted (the problem was that the NCAA is not authorised to investigate matters that precede its existence (as the agency was reorganised in 2005)).

But let me ask you: how come LHR suddenly had 7 weekly slots for Arik Air at favourable times? What were the British trying to save? Why don't BA/VS leave the Nigerian market if they are having such high costs?

Quoting ENU (Reply 27): Basically, you are saying that since Nigeria doesn't meet all standards of good governance, they shouldn't be allowed to investigate/criticise any foreign entity active in Nigeria.

Blaming, investigating, accusing or fining foreign entities is one of the favorite tactics of questionable governments trying to divert attention from their own misdeeds. If Nigeria started cleaning its own stoop, it would be much easier to take their supposed attempt at holding foreign companies to account seriously.

Quoting ENU (Reply 27): What's wrong with customers asking value for money or lobbying with the government to protect their intersts? You can even argue that the Nigerian government was right to require a certain aircraft, since Delta had a monopoly on the direct US-Nigeria market at the time.

KLM has a monopoly on AMS-BRU. Does that mean the Belgian government has the right to demand, and KLM the obligation to comply with, that a particular model be used on the route?

There's nothing wrong with customers asking for value for money, but customers need to remember they have a choice. No one has ever forced them to fly Delta and Delta's arrival in LOS didn't deprive them of any other option they previously had. So if they were unsatisfied with Delta's choice of aircraft, all they had to do was pretend that Delta didn't exist and continue flying in and out as they were before.

It is reasonable of them to ask their government to intervene, but the minister of aviation should have realized that the aircraft choice was a commercial decision and could not in any way be an attempt to "take advantage" of Nigerians when the same aircraft were flown all over the remainder of Delta's network. He certainly should not have imposed conditions above and beyond the bilateral agreement negotiated between the two countries.

And let's not pretend the fact that Delta was at the time, and still is, rolling out its new business class in its fleet of 767s while the 777s are all outfitted with the new seats already had nothing with the minister's decision to intervene, not in a country that is a paragon of rectitude and honesty. If you believe this has nothing to do with that, I know of a few millions on a dormant bank account in Nigeria I'd like to talk to you about.

[Edited 2012-02-14 02:02:55]

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 28): Blaming, investigating, accusing or fining foreign entities is one of the favorite tactics of questionable governments trying to divert attention from their own misdeeds.

So, have you actually read the complaint by the NCAA and the evidence they presented? You are making generalising propositions and thereby dismissing this individual case without any proper argument. Nigeria is obviously not the best example of good governance, but that doesn't mean that they don't have the right to investigate misdeeds by foreign companies (there are in fact many examples of foreign entities profiting from the bad governance and exploiting Nigerian resources and people). It's like saying I can steal from my neighbour, because he has a lot of problems of his own anyway. Moreover, western countries are still trying to impose their rules on so-called third world countries (in the end, some have to be poor for others to be rich). Do you know how many 'secrity' criteria Nigerian airlines have to meet before they are allowed to operate into Europe let alone the US? There is no equal playing field and existing international regulation is in favour of more developed countries. Just try to look at the issue from a Nigerian perspective to become a bit more understanding - choosing for your 'own' airlines is the easiest way (and they really don't care about you or your support for them on a forum).

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 28): It is reasonable of them to ask their government to intervene, but the minister of aviation should have realized that the aircraft choice was a commercial decision and could not in any way be an attempt to "take advantage" of Nigerians when the same aircraft were flown all over the remainder of Delta's network.

It was Delta's fault. They couldn't carry all the luggage of the passengers with the B767, which caused a lot of complaints from their customers. Customers have indeed a choice, but so do airlines. Why didn't Delta pull out of the Nigerian market if they were treated unjustly? I am not defending how the minister of aviation dealt with the problem, but in principle there is nothing wrong with a government defending the interests of its people. Delta operated B767/B757s to Abuja without any complaints from the Nigerian authorities, so you really have to judge each case specifically rather than to lump everything together in a way that confirms your bias.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 28): not in a country that is a paragon of rectitude and honesty. If you believe this has nothing to do with that, I know of a few millions on a dormant bank account in Nigeria I'd like to talk to you about.

This is just nonsense. It's as irrational as blaming all Americans or American businesses for the wrongdoings of the US army in Iraq and Afghanistan or for the criminality in the big American cities.

[Edited 2012-02-14 03:35:55]

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 28): No one has ever forced them to fly Delta and Delta's arrival in LOS didn't deprive them of any other option they previously had. So if they were unsatisfied with Delta's choice of aircraft, all they had to do was pretend that Delta didn't exist and continue flying in and out as they were before.

As simple as these two sentences sound, if you were ever able to achieve this globally, you would be credited with eliminating consumer protection agencies everywhere. Until then, lets not act like as long as there is choice, the actions of a service provider don't need to be looked into (by relevant agencies), monitored, made to meet certain requirements etc.

Quoting ENU (Reply 27): It was not the government. There was a public outcry about the state of Delta's aircraft (particularly because the B767 couldn't carry all the luggage), and the NCAA/minister of aviation responded to that. What's wrong with customers asking value for money or lobbying with the government to protect their intersts? You can even argue that the Nigerian government was right to require a certain aircraft, since Delta had a monopoly on the direct US-Nigeria market at the time. Anyway, as pointed out earlier, this case has nothing to do with the BA/VS case. So, why bring it up?

I bring it up because never have I heard a government tell a foreign airline to use a different airplane when the plane used is one of the most common on international long haul flights. The Nigerian Government has only itself to blame for the lack of USA to Nigeria flights, Continental tried from Newark a few years ago. Its also their fault that no Nigerian airline flew to the USA since Nigeria Airways closed.