Why airlines should pay the taxs not the passengers

[albatross710]

I've got this thought that the way the airlines price out the taxes and charges is allowing the airport operators and governments to keep increasing the charges.

We can all feel the drip, drip, drip of higher charges being extracted from our various wallets but because the amounts are individually small in the scheme of the total take, none of us individually can take action. In fact, as each airline passes on the charge to us directly they don't even compete on that cost which might be about 50% of the fare isn't actually competitive.

If the airlines had to wear the charge as a single cost for the year, then they would be in a far better position, be far more motivated to more agressively put downward pressure on the airport operators etc to keep prices down.

Any thoughts on how we get airlines putting more pressure back onto the operators?

 

[dajop]

Some airports (particularly the one stuck in the middle of Botany Bay) don't have any competition and by virtue of where they are located can basically dictate what they want to charge. However where there is competition for airlines to use airports (particularly amongst LCCs) I am sure airlines can and do put pressure on airport operators. MEL/AVV is a classic example of this, I'm sure Tiger Airlines considered AVV as a perfectly suitable alternative to MEL and were able to extract some much lower prices out MEL's operators than if AVV had not existed.

 

[albatross710]

That is a good comparison on Avalon v Tull for LCC in general.

Would Tiger have negotiated a lower cost per passenger than Jetstar? I'd be hoping that by leaving it as a single charge with the airline, not breaking it down to a per passenger marginal charge that the airline retains the incentive to negotiate.

I accept that I am probably asking the entire world airline industry to change the way they calculate charges, just to make it better for the paying passengers.

 

[simongr]

It's a nice concept that this might put pressure on airports if the airlines were getting a single annual charge. Conversely the airlines might hide additional profit in the cost that they passed on to pax. In working out their pre pax charge the airlines might build in a little slack just in case numbers are not as high as forecast...

 

[albatross710]

It would be good if the airlines can profit from their better negotiation with the airport operators. We would have to trust in the power of competition to keep them under control. At least the competition would be in play, at th emoment I fear that it isn't competitive pricing on airport charges.

 

[Chicken]

I think the whole airline industry had become a joke.

Airports charge landing fee for every flight. Isn't that supposed to cover the costs of having a plane in the airport? So why double dip?

You pay for your flight, then you pay extra for tax, then you pay extra airport charge, then you pay extra for blanket, then you pay extra for food, then you pay extra for ticket, then you pay extra for paying with CC?

Why don't you charge extra for the burning rubber wheels when landing? Why not charge extra for the FA in your carbin? Why don't you charge extra for flushing the toilet? Why don't you charge extra for inflight TV? Why don't you charge extra for air conditioning? How about extra charge for oxygen supply because they need extra fuel to convert oxygen? And how about extra for reading light? How about extra fee for vacuuming your seat?

 

[Dave Noble]

Why don't you charge extra for inflight TV? Why don't you charge extra for air conditioning?

There are airlines that do or have done this

How about extra charge for oxygen supply because they need extra fuel to convert oxygen? And how about extra for reading light? How about extra fee for vacuuming your seat?

Some airlines do charge for provision of Oxygen if it is required

Dave

 

[wallacej]

STOP giving them ideas Next thing I am looking for on my ticket is the rubber burning levy....

 

[albatross710]

One reason they get away with charging all of these fees is because individually we are not able to adequately negotiate. I hope the market corrects iteself every few years.

Then again what did we expect when a bank started running an airport.....fee creep!

 

[kiwitripper64]

Look at all the lovely services that the airport companies provide.
Taxi surcharge, seats that the spanish inquisition thought too deadly, queues for everything.
What are us users actually paying for?

 

[simongr]

Concrete so the when the aircraft lands it doesnt sink into the mud.

 

[NM]

Look at all the lovely services that the airport companies provide.
Taxi surcharge, seats that the spanish inquisition thought too deadly, queues for everything.
What are us users actually paying for?

The right to queue at the spanish inquisition.

 

[albatross710]

My original point was not about the all of the infrastructure needs to be financed, it was that by dividing the charge into small amounts across so many people that no one individual or entity is in a position to negotiate.

If the airlines have to deal with (and be able to negotiate down) a whopping great annual "airport tax" then that would be better for all.

 

[chooms]

Ok I think I may have had a mini-brainwave.... dont know whether it is good or not.

What if airports offered a flat fee per annum that one could pay up-front to cover all surcharges for that airport (obviously this doesnt include the precious fuel and CC surcharges added by the airline) - to be paid by the passenger.

This one off fee, say around $1500, could save a lot of money for the passenger who travels regularly - they could also claim it as a work expense when its tax time!

Win for businesses, win for frequent flyers.

Now I think I might get a bit of a moan about my next part but as my home airport IS owned by a bank and is run purely for a profit... the airport must have a win too.

While there would be a lot of businesses and individuals who would opt for the pre-pay option, there are still the once-a-year/once-in-ten-year flyers who would still pay the airport tax when purchasing the ticket.

I dont see it as a problem if MacBank lifted the tax a little bit for these purchases. (I can hear the screams now!)

I dont think they would need to raise them much as they are guaranteed $1500 from each of the FF's each year so have a more stable income and will still get income from the infrequent flyers too.

You could run the pre-pay system like a credit card and name would have to match the ticket so no using one card for multiple people - or maybe companies could negotiate with MacBank Airports direct and get a one card for all employees system going.

There would have to be an addition to the airline websites where you could enter the card number (or something) to remove the airport tax from the total ticket price.

Is this too complex? Am I sounding a bit crazy? Let me know what you think.

I know the system would work well for me!

 

[albatross710]

Certainly opens the door for the larger travelling organisations to say "we'll have 3,000 staff transits thorugh your airport this year, what deal can we do." I like that.

We still aren't going to be in a good negotiating position given that there is only 1 Sydney airport. I guess if a company was on Central Coast, Newcastle might be able to be competitive.

 

[justin23]

Certainly opens the door for the larger travelling organisations to say "we'll have 3,000 staff transits thorugh your airport this year, what deal can we do." I like that.

We still aren't going to be in a good negotiating position given that there is only 1 Sydney airport. I guess if a company was on Central Coast, Newcastle might be able to be competitive.

Well i saw cheap flights from Melbourne to Sydney the other day advertised on TV. In brackets next to Mel and Sydney were Avalon and Wollongong

I mean Wollongong is further from Sydney than Avalon is from Melbourne. I guess if they ever wanted a second Sydney airport then a fast rail link to Wollongong/Newcastle or even Canberra could make it feasible.

Isn't Sydney the most expensive airport in the world or is it Heathrow? I think they'd be 1 and 2. For me personally if i could fly internationally just as easily via Mel or Bris i would. But there just isn't the flights to those 2 cities as there is to Sydney.

 

[NM]

What if airports offered a flat fee per annum that one could pay up-front to cover all surcharges for that airport (obviously this doesnt include the precious fuel and CC surcharges added by the airline) - to be paid by the passenger.

This one off fee, say around $1500, could save a lot of money for the passenger who travels regularly - they could also claim it as a work expense when its tax time!

but of course not all the airports are owned by the same entity. So who gets the $1500? How is it redistributed between the various airport owners who would otherwise be collecting their own revenue.

 

[moa999]

Well i saw cheap flights from Melbourne to Sydney the other day advertised on TV. In brackets next to Mel and Sydney were Avalon and Wollongong

On what airline ???
JQ doesn't fly to Wollongong
Thought only QFLink flew there

 

[justin23]

I thought it was Jetstar, mainly because it was on Sunrise, which is full of jetstar ads.

Maybe its a new service and Qantaslink is going away???
I'm certain the only service to Wollongong though is the Mel one.

 

[chooms]

but of course not all the airports are owned by the same entity. So who gets the $1500? How is it redistributed between the various airport owners who would otherwise be collecting their own revenue.

That fee would be for SYD only - with my dom flying last year I would have racked up more than $10,000 in airport taxes alone just for Sydney!

I thought $1500 was cheap compared to that. Other airports could offer the same program. Depends where you fly most - and I landed mostly in Sydney so I used it as an example.