Other North & South America Frequent Flyer Programs - Spirit campaigning against federal fare regulation




RustyC
Jan 24, 12, 2:35 pm
Received today in e-mail:

WARNING:
New government regulations require us to HIDE taxes in your fares.
This is not consumer-friendly or in your best interest. It's wrong and you shouldn't stand for it.

Starting January 24, 2012, fares are distorted.

Why?
Thanks to the U.S. Department of Transportation's latest fare rules, Spirit must now HIDE the government's taxes and fees in your fares.

If the government can hide taxes in your airfares, then they can carry out their hidden agenda and quietly increase their taxes. (Yes, such talks are already underway.)

And if they can do it to the airline industry, what's next?
As the transparency leader and most consumer-friendly airline, Spirit DOES NOT support this new USDOT mandate. We believe the better form of transparency is to break out costs so customers know exactly what they're buying.

What can you do to help stop this injustice?
Join us in keeping government taxes and fees low and transparent by contacting your elected officials


I thought about contacting my elected official in support of the new regulations. :p:p:p

Hopefully this'll get Spirit passengers asking questions about the "Passenger Usage Fee" and whether that is a tax, since the $33.98 size of it on most tickets makes it the largest single "tax" item in most cases. It absolutely doesn't belong as listed with taxes and named as it is, and that kind of thing makes Spirit calling itself the "transparency leader" sound a bit like Newt Gingrich calling himself a one-woman man (well, maybe one at a time, most of the time :p)

What they really need is more transparency in airline-imposed fees. Using the "TicketMaster" rationale and business model that you can avoid it by buying a ticket at the airport (which in ATL they're utterly unprepared to handle in any quantity) and therefore it's optional doesn't address the disclosure issue. Clearly they wanted to "hide" this one in with the taxes and hope that people thought it was another tax.

If it gets "outed", then more people will insist it should be in the fare, where it should have been all along. They could also call it the Not Buying Ticket at the Airport "Optional" Fee (a MUCH more accurate name), but of course if they did that then passengers would rebel, and they know that.

As for the issue of taxes being included leading to more taxes, I'm fine with airlines, including Spirit, providing breakdowns of what people paid on travel documents and online. This used to be the case with paper tickets, where airlines years ago followed through on a threat and listed tax items separately. Even if they have to include them in a fare quote they can provide breakdowns on request at any time.

And as for the taxes that actually are taxes, the ticket tax is defensible inasmuch as it supports the infrastructure (though there's a real potential fairness issue there vs. general aviation, and even Warren Buffett sez taxes on the latter are too low). The passenger facility charges and multiplier effects are problematic (even if capped), especially with leisure-traveling families. Segment taxes have the same problem, and were put in place because legacy airlines wanted to take a dig at Southwest. The Sept. 11 security fee can't cover the cost, so the debate is whether it should be increased, the government should absorb the remainder, or they try to reduce expenses which would inevitably cut into labor costs and risk a return to the disgraceful pre-9/11 situation where airport security was a dead-end job at McDonald's wages. It'll probably be a split-the-difference situation where it's hiked a bit but still won't cover costs.

BTW, Spirit prices with everything included today indeed are showing quite a bit higher, but they've still got the "Passenger Usage Fee" in with the taxes, as before. Because of that PUF, the new regulation hits Spirit harder than other airlines, and I'm sure the other airlines have noticed that. Few things engender cynicism like airline behavior in this area, plus the tendency to try to recruit passengers for some very self-interested political fights.


aubreyfromwheaton
Jan 24, 12, 2:55 pm
If Spirit would have ANYTHING remotely cheap from DTW like they used to, I would be heartbroken about the change.

But since Spirit has NOTHING cheap I can use from DTW, they just appear as cheap in the ITA results of my searches, but you need to add the BS USAGE FEE etc so I am ECSTATIC that they now have to compete with the biggies.

(I am fine with the unbundling of everything like luggage, seats, drinks, kiosks etc. The usage fee is just plain wrong however)

I especially like their CHUTZPAH that the GOVERNMENT is HIDING taxes, when they AT WILL increase their "PASSENGER USAGE FEE" to ridiculous levels and are super opaque about the fees.

So +1 to the GOVERNMENT on this round!

volvo99
Jan 26, 12, 6:45 pm
Really Spirit? The best thing the gov't could do is make ancillary fees (checked bag, early check-in, etc.) subject to the same tax as tickets are.


GSPexit102
Jan 26, 12, 8:17 pm
I like Spirit's fares. I HATE their RIDICULOUS practice of creating BS fees and then trying to bury them in with actual taxes and government-mandated fees.

I always laugh out loud when I get an email or read anything on Spirit's website touting their "transparency". This airline is THE WORST in practicing transparency!

This whole campaign Sprit is attempting is COMPLETELY OFFENSIVE to any passenger who has half a brain!

Hey Spirit: Your fares are generally pretty great. Stop playing games with your BS fees and simply give the public the low fares that you promise!

I LOVE THE NEW REQUIREMENT THAT THE FULL AND ACTUAL FARE IS SHOWN IMMEDIATELY WITH THE SEARCH RESULTS! IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE YEARS AGO!!!

AA_EXP09
Jan 30, 12, 7:51 am
I like Spirit's fares. I HATE their RIDICULOUS practice of creating BS fees and then trying to bury them in with actual taxes and government-mandated fees.

I always laugh out loud when I get an email or read anything on Spirit's website touting their "transparency". This airline is THE WORST in practicing transparency!

This whole campaign Sprit is attempting is COMPLETELY OFFENSIVE to any passenger who has half a brain!

Hey Spirit: Your fares are generally pretty great. Stop playing games with your BS fees and simply give the public the low fares that you promise!

I LOVE THE NEW REQUIREMENT THAT THE FULL AND ACTUAL FARE IS SHOWN IMMEDIATELY WITH THE SEARCH RESULTS! IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE YEARS AGO!!!


It already was done quite a few years ago in FRA.

sdsearch
Jan 31, 12, 5:25 pm
I LOVE THE NEW REQUIREMENT THAT THE FULL AND ACTUAL FARE IS SHOWN IMMEDIATELY WITH THE SEARCH RESULTS! IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE YEARS AGO!!!
It already was done quite a few years ago in FRA.
The full and actual fare was shown immeidately in Frankfurt airport??? :confused: Please explain!

RustyC
Jan 31, 12, 8:48 pm
I seem to remember newspaper ads in New Zealand also giving all-in prices. Certainly doing it that way wasn't the airlines' idea.

Yeah, the wording they're using now ("WARNING New government regulations require us to HIDE taxes in your fares") almost drips with cynicism.

A second one should be "WARNING! Lack of government regulation means we can HIDE fees in with the taxes!" :mad::p

That said, they might well be taking a hit on sales numbers based on not being able to populate the calendar with $9s and other low numbers you can't really get. Maybe they're celebrating at Greyhound headquarters.

The right thing to do would be to eliminate the PUF and raise the fare (so it's basically the same in the calendar, but with better transparency). Methinks, though, that their legal and marketing departments are working feverishly on a creative, stay-within-the-letter-of-the-law way to be able to display the single-digit "fares" again without running afoul of new regulations.

AA_EXP09
Feb 2, 12, 8:51 am
The full and actual fare was shown immeidately in Frankfurt airport??? :confused: Please explain!

When I was In the FRA SEN lounge, I logged into LH.de and all the taxes were down in the advertised fare.

swag
Feb 2, 12, 1:45 pm
Spirit Airlines has added a $2 "unintended consequence" fee to all of its tickets.
...
The carrier says in a release the "regulation requiring airlines to hold fares for 24 hours after booking without penalty comes with unintended consequences and is costing consumers millions. To cover the costs of this misguided and expensive regulation, Spirit is introducing the $2 DOTUC (D.O.T. unintended consequence) fee."

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/post/2012/02/spirit-unintended-consequence-fee/618553/1

sdsearch
Feb 2, 12, 3:53 pm
Is the government really requiring Spirit to "hide" its fees?

I know the government requires you to post an all-in fee, but does it require you to only post that? Ie, if Spririt wanted to, couldn''t they say "Fly XXX to YYY for just $NN which includes $MM of government fees and $ZZ of our own fees"?

But of course Spirit doesn't want to do that. They do want to hide the fees, just not inside the published cost of the flight!

Is Spirit's whole business model perhaps predicated on infrequent flyers who buy their "super low" fares because they don't realize they're not quite as super low as they think until "too late"? And if so, could upfront truth about total flight cost lead to a sinking of Spirit?

AA_EXP09
Feb 9, 12, 3:04 pm
Is the government really requiring Spirit to "hide" its fees?

I know the government requires you to post an all-in fee, but does it require you to only post that? Ie, if Spririt wanted to, couldn''t they say "Fly XXX to YYY for just $NN which includes $MM of government fees and $ZZ of our own fees"?

But of course Spirit doesn't want to do that. They do want to hide the fees, just not inside the published cost of the flight!

Is Spirit's whole business model perhaps predicated on infrequent flyers who buy their "super low" fares because they don't realize they're not quite as super low as they think until "too late"? And if so, could upfront truth about total flight cost lead to a sinking of Spirit?
I hope so.

uwr
Feb 14, 12, 12:29 am
I don't like Spirit's business practices.

1. In my opinion, Spirit's advertising has been deceptive.
They used to claim fares of $9 that may actually cost a couple of hundred dollars roundtrip when you add the fuel charge (for example, $59 each way), the passenger usage fee (for example, $44) and other fees.

2. They have sued the Dept of Transportation to overturn the new rule.

3. Rep Graves of Georgia is introducing a bill to overturn the rule.

4. Their website and their spokesperson claim that the new rule forces them to hide taxes in their all-inclusive fares. This is false. They are legally allowed to disclose taxes and other fees, but they need to show their all-inclusive price.

5. They still advertise their $9 fare club on the their website.



SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.