Do yu think fuel surcharges are up much!!!

[casanovawa]

I had booked a RTW 140k OW award about a month back and the taxes and charges came to $561... i;ve called several times to try and change it but each time complications sent me back to the drawing board...

Anyway finally i just made all the changes to the guy over the phone (tried to change a few legs of the 16 flight segments to maybe save some money and make it work a bit better) and they want to add fuel surcharges to all the flights, even the ones i'm not changing and the fee would $874...

Just a lazy 56% increase... even the guy at Qantas was surprised by the amount and went off to query it but came back and said it seems to be right... so i think i will probably just leave it as it is...

 

[Moopere]

We shouldn't be surprised. I think we're going to see more and more of this until uniform regulation on advertising prices comes in across the board.

The issue is caused I think by competition with other airlines and wanting to be able to show the lowest possible dollar value price to consumers via advertising/web/etc. So, $200 return MEL-LHR + taxes + surcharges (in very small print).

We will eventually get to a point of ridiculousness where the ticket price will be essentially free of charge and all we'll be asked to pay is the surcharges and taxes, and, no surprise, these combined will be around what you would have paid as the full fare back in the day before this quirk of advertising hit us.

Nowadays, in so many purchases and consumer agreements, the onus is pushed back onto us, as consumers, to do a huge amount of background work in order to ensure we know what we're buying.

All you can do really is what you have done, try to manage your itinerary and eek out all the otherwise hidden costs then make a purchasing decision.

 

[ric_melb]

I think two issues are being confused here.

Moopere seems to be referring to flights that are being paid for in cash or by credit card. In fact the ACCC have taken care of any confusion by requiring all airlines to quote a final price in their advertising, including surcharges and taxes. Recently have made some airlines comply with that policy, that havent before.

The OP is referring to an award booking, where the flight is paid for by points, but surcharges and taxes have to be paid in cash, or by credit card. This is normal airline practice, though some airlines charge more than others.

Given that Qantas just recently increased their surcharge by $50 to Europe, and other airlines have been doing similar, the increase from $561 to $874 doesn't surprise. I think it will be part of life until present world instability recedes.
No good for the Op however, I am sure we all feel for them.

 

[oz_mark]

There have been two recent increases in fuel surcharges - the first effective from 19th Feb, and the second from 17th March (ie today!)

As an example:

UK/Europe (pre 19Feb) $95
UK/Europe (from 19Feb) $145
UK/Europe (from 17Mar) $190

so, depending on when the actual ticketing happened before, such an increase is quite possible.

 

[Moopere]

Moopere seems to be referring to flights that are being paid for in cash or by credit card.

Mainly but not only. To me points are stored value and so is paper money So my perception of a distinction is perhaps slighter than some others may have.

Presumably these surcharges and taxes are the same value whether you pay with money or points? I assume, perhaps wrongly that there is no loading placed upon surcharges for people who are redeeming rewards.

The OP is referring to an award booking, where the flight is paid for by points, but surcharges and taxes have to be paid in cash, or by credit card. This is normal airline practice, though some airlines charge more than others.

To my mind it amounts to much the same thing. They are discounting the flights seat cost whether it be dollar or points then adding non negotiable surcharges on top. If they include all this in a quote for a monied ticket why can't they include it all in a rewards ticket? Yes, the ticket price might cost more points, but its more truthful and up front.

Anyway, I'm not against the preservation of points, by those who choose to do so, by the implementation of points+pay type schemes, but this should be an option.

This whole surcharge thing is probably more linked to paying TA's less commission than it is an attempt to confuse and annoy direct customers I suspect.

 

[casanovawa]

Yeah i was trying to get the award redone on Wednesday night by reworking it, called up Qantas several times to do it to try to beat the hike in fuel charges on thursday but just kept running into issues as i tried to rework the RTW itinerary, specially the fact that Iberia flights were showing up as having seats available in economy on the qnatas site but when suggesting these flights to the operator they were showing no availability (they said this is a quirk, which makes it damn hard to do your planning!!!)... so didn't finally bite the bullet until Thursday by which time the second hike had come into effect i suppose...

on another point, hpothetically if you go into your booking section of your QFF and have a look at a booking and you have more miles and more segments than your allowed, will this raise flags or not?

 

[antycbr]

This issue has caught me out a few times with Award redemptions as well - you can typically change dates of flights ONLY within award availability and the ticket will not be reissued, only revalidated. If you change route, add or remove stopovers or change carriers on the same route, the whole ticket will be reissued which causes a complete Tax/Fee/Charge recalculation.

So the system is working as designed. I had an itinerary change that resulted in a $90 refund due to a decrease in fuel surcharges so it works both ways...

 

[anat0l]

Here's something: I wonder how the American based airlines can have such low fuel surcharges.

Sure, they must pay for fuel too and even if fuel is cheaper in the US than most other places.

Although this trend has started to have a few bumps in it. For example, AA FFs redeeming on some BA flights have found they have to pay an "exorbitance" more in fuel fines than they ever did before. And boy you can believe they are not happy about it.

On the other hand, high fuel surcharges (of course both on revenue and FF tickets) have been quite normal in Europe for ages now (with the exception of SAS).

The whole thing about surcharges affecting TAs' commissions was quite an issue, but I thought a court decision has sorted that out now? It doesn't stop airlines from charging fuel as a YQ component compared to say a Q integrated charge, but it does affect how they pay TAs.


Actually, for the OP how do we know that the entire difference stated was purely due to fuel (and not due to other kinds of surcharges)? Not that I'd be surprised, but just wondering...

 

[Moopere]

I just find it all a bit suspicious. I'd like to think there is more to it then just nickel and diming customers but my gut tells me this is all about revenue generation and price obfuscation.

We've had a similar discussion about car rental 'recovery' charges on this forum in recent times.

The thing is, why should customers even care about the cost of fuel? Why is it that we have this surcharge yet there is no surcharge for the high price of labour in Australia compared to other countries, what about a local company tax surcharge because our tax rates are also quite high? Airport facilities are not getting cheaper either, so what about an airport lease recovery surcharge? How about a maintenance and engineering surcharge, initial capital expense recovery?

All costs that affect a running business form part of that businesses financial plan, at least they will if the business is being run viably. There is simply no reason to involve your customers in your business planning by exposing individual costs of running your business or services.

A similar argument can be made for the exposition and on-charging of credit card fees. There is business cost in handling payments no matter how you accept those payments. Cash, cheque, direct transfer, credit card ... all this costs money.

I feel the presence of marketing psychology in all of this I'm afraid. Get the customer to make a buy decision first, then hand out the full price. Its marketing 101.

 

[anat0l]

Its marketing 101.

So now your beef should really be trying to seed and/or cleanse the gene pool of people that do Marketing so that they are more humanely responsible rather than learning to be masters (pun intended) of deception...

 

[Moopere]

So now your beef should really be trying to seed and/or cleanse the gene pool of people that do Marketing so that they are more humanely responsible rather than learning to be masters (pun intended) of deception...

haha! Yes, well, as a customer I'd have to agree. As a business owner though, no, they are extremely useful people.

Thats the thing I guess. not all practises which are conducive to increased business revenue and profit are necessarily good or appropriate for customers. This is why we, as a society, benefit from proactive umpires in the middle keeping business in line with socially acceptable practice.