Hidden costs to be exposed

[Dave Noble]

MISLEADING advertising by airlines, car dealers and websites will be banned under a plan by the Federal Government to stop companies promoting the cost of goods and services without revealing all hidden surcharges
.
.
..
.
On the website travel.com.au Qantas charges $229 in fees, including a $120 fuel levy, for a discounted return ticket from Sydney to Auckland - on top of the $226 base fare. On Thursday Qantas will increase its fuel surcharges for the ninth time since May 2004.

"It's a blatant rip-off," said the managing director of the travel agency Flight Centre, Graham Turner. "It is very misleading to the public and I'm absolutely staggered the ACCC [Australian Competition and Consumer Commission] hasn't taken action here."

.
.
.
.
.
Frequent flyers are also being stung by the fuel levies. Even after points are claimed, a Qantas return trip to London can cost a frequent flyer more than $600 in levies, including a $420 fuel surcharge from Thursday.

Mr Borghetti said it was "reasonable that the fuel surcharges should apply to all customers, as do other taxes and charges".

Full article at Hidden costs to be exposed - Travel - smh.com.au

Dave

 

[Platy]

Go the Ruddster! Hopefully, some more common sense changes are to come in aviation...

No doubt QF will find a way to keep the levies on the award redemption tickets so they don't miss out on their 20 sheckles...

 

[Mal]

Wow, a pretty good article by "Scott Rochfort and Jacob Saulwick".

It's good to see that people identify Fuel Fines as a rort, and are happy to be vocal about it. Borghetti is a bit of a fool really though:

(regarding frequent flyer tickets)
"Mr Borghetti said it was "reasonable that the fuel surcharges should apply to all customers, as do other taxes and charges"."

I thought Frequent Flyer points were a cash equivalent when redeeming flights. Obviously he doesn't really think so, nor does he get any better than trotting out the well worn Qantas spiel: ""As has been said repeatedly, the reason for having a surcharge rather than building this additional cost into the base fare is so we can reduce or remove it when and if fuel prices go down," Mr Borghetti said." Hahahaha. I have a pig that can fly too.

 

[Platy]

"Mr Borghetti said it was "reasonable that the fuel surcharges should apply to all customers, as do other taxes and charges"."..... I have a pig that can fly too.

Perhaps it is also reasonable that the growing profits of QF should apply as bonuses to the salaries of all employees, as they do to Mr Borghetti, Mr Dixon, etc...My pig just flew so high I think it may be lost!

 

[simongr]

Not sure Rudd can take all credit for this as it was an existing Liberal policy.

It is good news but if they are forced to include fuel surcharges then they will just use that to increase the "price" of award flights...

 

[Platy]

Not sure Rudd can take all credit for this as it was an existing Liberal policy....

Indeed there is policy, but there is also statute, a watchdog body and the will to apply the statute via the watchdog...

Evidently the statute needed strengthening, furthermore, organisations like the ACCC and ASIC simply do not have the resources to do anything but cherry pick key issues and cases to champion...

 

[oz_mark]

"Dealer Delivery" has long been a charge that has irked me, because of how much it is, and you don't really seem to get much for your $1000 or so.

I wonder what the consensus view on whether oil prices will ever drop back to where they were.

Also, what is so hard about reducing a ticket prices? Why is it easier to remove a fuel surcharge than reduce a fare?

 

[wrldtrvllr]

Full article at Hidden costs to be exposed - Travel - smh.com.au

On Thursday Qantas will increase its fuel surcharges for the ninth time since May 2004.

Dave

better ticket those circle pacific and rtw flights!
thanks for the heads up dave!

ps: i guess that would mean one should use up those accumulated qff points before they increase the requirements for award flights...[sigh] always the end user that suffers

 

[Travel Guru]

It's about time the government intervene and do something about this....there's nothing quite as uncomfortable for an agent as quoting a JAL fare of $1250 only to have to say, oh sorry, the taxes on that to London are going to be $950...its a joke.

Fuel is an expense and as such should be included in the fare.

I doubt i'd get away with adding a water levy to my clients taxes for the water they consume while we're booking their flights, neither should the airlines with fuel.

I congratulate Skroo Turner for being so vocal about sorting this rort out.

TG

 

[moa999]

I think though the Flight Centre comment is a bit selfish.
Reason - comissions are paid on base fare not fines and taxes

 

[Travel Guru]

I think though the Flight Centre comment is a bit selfish.
Reason - comissions are paid on base fare not fines and taxes

Yes and no.

Why shouldn't commission be paid on the fuel surcharges?

Perhaps if the airlines paid the commission on the fuel surcharges, which they should be, the end user would be paying a lower service charge to make up the difference the airline's keeping.

TG

 

[dajop]

What is also annoying is the inconsistency of the hidden costs. I didn't realise until recently that the fuel fines/taxes on a LHR-SYD/MEL return are about $150 cheaper than the fuel fines/taxes on a SYD/MEL-LHR return. QF are sure ripping us Australian FF's off as much as they possibly can. My rule of thumb now (for Y redemptions) is that for every 10,000 pts it is $50 in fuel fines etc.

 

[Mal]

I think though the Flight Centre comment is a bit selfish.
Reason - comissions are paid on base fare not fines and taxes

I don't really think it's selfish. They have to deal with peeved off customers who can't grasp why the 'taxes' are so high, they lose commission on the fuel part and they have to inform their customers to ticket now to avoid the next fuel surcharge increase... They hurt as much as we do I think. I don't like FC at all, but am happy they're on my side when it comes to Fuel Surcharges, because they're the type of company who gets noticed by our elected members

 

[JohnK]

We can only hope!

Emirates has argued that fuel, unlike airport taxes, is part of an airline's operating costs and should be factored into the base cost of a ticket.

Good on you Emirates. I think we have been debating this fact on AFF for a long time now.

"As has been said repeatedly, the reason for having a surcharge rather than building this additional cost into the base fare is so we can reduce or remove it when and if fuel prices go down," Mr Borghetti said.

There have been 9 increases in fuel surcharges since they were introduced in 2004! They must think we are all fools with a short memory.

Isn't it just as easy to adjust the base airfare, rather than a fuel surcharge, when and if fuel prices go down?

Mr Borghetti said it was "reasonable that the fuel surcharges should apply to all customers, as do other taxes and charges".

Are you struggling with this concept Mr Borghetti? Award tickets on the majority of FF programs do not incur fuel surcharges. Only genuine taxes and charges....

 

[bambbbam2]

No-one has mentioned that you don't ever seem to get taxes refunded on say a JQ fare that was cancelled..

 

[dajop]

No-one has mentioned that you don't ever seem to get taxes refunded on say a JQ fare that was cancelled..

Or that you can occassionally book entire fares on JQ for less than what the "taxes and surcharges" are for a redemption booking on the same flight ....

 

[Hvr]

Given that these charges have been extras for so long I guess it wouldn't be too hard to have a total breakdown of the costs rather than just a total which could be used to hide anything.

For example if one part of the total fare goes down, eg fuel then we should be able to see an immediate reduction in the price.

Same thing used to justify an increase, for example if engineers' wages rise then the increase in ticket price chould be justified if the wages component only was increased.

Oh and please stand clear while the pigs are preparing to take off.:evil:

 

[Mal]

As I posted in the "Frequent Flyer points a big con" thread, I am now of the belief that Fuel Surcharges will be removed from the Qantas menu in the nearish future (by mid year).

I have seen a lot of press recently hitting Qantas about them, there is also moves from the Government that mean that there is a lot of negative press about them at the moment. With people like the Flight Centre boss hitting out about the fines and some other political savvy people also complaining, then the right political and social waves are happening.

My best guess is that FF redemption rates will go up by a % to cover the losses in fuel fines, and also fares will rise by $X to cover the loss of this additional revenue.

I could be wrong about this, but have a feeling consumers, the Government and business are getting to the point where Fuel Fines aren't acceptable any more and the changes have to occur. Remember you heard it from me first Then again, I'm currently slimming up my fleet of pigs ready for their maiden flight BNE-SYD in the not too distant future. The airworthiness certificate is the hardest bit that I'm dealing with at the moment

 

[JohnK]

As I posted in the "Frequent Flyer points a big con" thread, I am now of the belief that Fuel Surcharges will be removed from the Qantas menu in the nearish future (by mid year).

Now we would all love to see that happening. Just your analysis or have you heard a rumour?

My best guess is that FF redemption rates will go up by a % to cover the losses in fuel fines, and also fares will rise by $X to cover the loss of this additional revenue.

I am quite happy to accept both of those situations in exchange for dropping fuel surcharges.

Then again, I'm currently slimming up my fleet of pigs ready for their maiden flight BNE-SYD in the not too distant future. The airworthiness certificate is the hardest bit that I'm dealing with at the moment

Classic....

 

[Mal]

Now we would all love to see that happening. Just your analysis or have you heard a rumour?

Analysis of the situation. Like I said, I could be completely wrong, but I do feel the tide is changing...