[openfly]

Of course for BA the “fuel surcharge” has proved a useful tool on Avios bookings. The so-called free Avios tickets have the mandatory taxes added, but the fuel-surcharge is added by BA as a continuing historical charge to counteract very high fuel prices. Now this is extra revenue on a “free” ticket. I bet that BA had never envisaged the price of fuel dropping so massively and are now in a somewhat embarrassing position.

If, like many other airlines, BA just charged an honest fare, plus taxes, then fine. But the BA “fuel surcharge” is now proving to have an edge of dishonesty. I don’t like that.

[TominScotland]

Interesting piece here, focusing on Air Canada and their somewhat underhand practices with regard to fuel surcharges

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/airline-fuel-surcharges-may-decrease-but-will-the-ticket-price-1.2822577

[Charles-P]

I find this adding of extra charges rampant in the music business for live concerts. I recently looked to buy tickets for a concert in Brussels. They are advertised as Euro 75 each but as I went through the online procedure more and more charges appeared.

Booking fee Euro 20 per ticket
Credit Card Fee 5 Euro per ticket (no other payment option)
Cancellation insurance 12 Euro
Processing charge Euro 5 per ticket

I voted with my feet and stopped the process.

[rferguson]

I don’t think the airlines are acting any different than the fuel companies really….I haven’t seen much of a decrease at the pumps when filling up my car. Is George going to clamp down on that also?

Airlines will go on with high fuel surcharges for as long as they can – it’s not just BA, it’s all of them. It’s a source of revenue as we all know. Once they are forced to drop it (it will take a few majors to announce they are reducing it to put pressure on others to follow suit). And even once they do drop the fuel surcharge mark my words – they will find another way to add a ‘fee’.

A BA staff travel return ticket from LHR to GLA is £17. Once the taxes and fees are added in – £102.

Unfair – definitely.

[TominScotland]

rferguson +1

Interestingly, an ordinary ‘punter’ can fly Glasgow – LHR/ LGW/LCY return for just £78 return (sans baggage) which means less by way of extras than staff pay?

[rferguson]

Tom you are right! Hence why there is a good number of commuting crew with silver and gold cards. 🙂

Reading an article about Qantas ruling out reducing their fuel surcharge despite the lower cost of fuel it’s interesting to see the view of the Qantas manager quoted. Basically, he says that the current fuel surcharge comes nowhere near covering even the reduced cost of fuel.

So there you have it – at Qantas at least, they don’t seem to view fuel as a necessary cost that should be shouldered by them but instead one that should be paid for by the passenger on top of their fare. Which seems a bit crazy. Surely no one would accept that the fare paid in a taxi is simply for the purpose of getting to A to B with the petrol for the trip being added on top. We’d assume that petrol is a cost factored into the fare charged. Airlines obviously take a different view.

Initially airlines said fuel surcharges were to contribute a little to the massive cost of soaring fuel prices. Now Qantas is saying it wants fuel surcharges to cover the bulk of it’s fuel cost. Have these surcharges morphed into fuel now being a non optional fare ‘add on’?

http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-no-plans-to-drop-fuel-surcharge?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=flipper&utm_campaign=home-flipper

[BrotherJim]

rferguson

Of course fuel should be shouldered by the passenger as should all costs. But as a part of the overall fare, not as a surcharge.

About the ONLY thing that makes sense being separate is taxes, but only for transparency reasons. Everything else is basically a cost of providing the ticket.

[rferguson]

Totally agree BrotherJim. Fuel should not be an ‘added extra’.

What next? A ‘legacy crew’ surcharge on specific routes? 😉

[TominScotland]

… or maybe a discount for legacy crew, rferguson???

[Tom Otley]

Threads joining….

http://www.businesstraveller.com/discussion/topic/Fuel-surcharge-reduction#post_133947

http://www.businesstraveller.com/discussion/topic/Osbourne-tells-airlines-to-pass-on-fuel-cost-savings#post_133949

and for a discussion on APD (but mostly fuel)

http://www.businesstraveller.com/discussion/topic/Walsh-the-cynicist….

and here

http://www.businesstraveller.com/discussion/topic/Oil-Prices

and here

http://www.businesstraveller.com/discussion/topic/Fuel-surcharges-to-drop

[insider]

I think you’ll find BA has made some behind the scenes changes recently. The fuel surcharge has been removed on shorthaul flights and ‘rolled into the fare’. It also looks like the fuel surcharge on longhaul flights has been reduced (but not by much)

[HarryMonk]

Do BA have a “fuel surcharge” ? ,-)

[canucklad]

No they don’t Harry ……
Their brilliant marketing team, headed up by Sir Humphrey have re-branded it as a “ Carrier Imposed Charge”

Based on other topics on this forum, this could justify a multitude of excuses to fleece us !

[HarryMonk]

My point exactly. Osborne’s threats will have little effect, in fact they may possibly be peeing themselves laughing at him

[Ah,Mr.Bond]

Simple – Fuel surcharge comes down by £200…. the base fare increases by £200. Does he honestly think that the saving is going to be passed on?
What he fails to realise is that as fuel surcharge has been going up, the fares have been coming down to compensate, in some instances a published fare even being “Free”.
….. Oh, and this by the way comes from those that implement the highest global departure tax.

[Author]

Posts