Originally Posted by RChavez

I don't have a problem with a carrier pricing a product in a manner that compensates for the cost of providing that product.

There are more honest ways of including these price increases that don't attempt to deceive or exclude revenue from pre-existing contracts with their customers and partners.

I would have no argument whatsoever if the industry went back to including fuel surcharges as Q surcharges in the fare calculation, which do get summed back up in the base fare. But by specifically calling it a YQ/YR, they are taking back some of the discount, commission, and override money without officially renegotiating those contracts.

It's sneaky, and taking advantage of a loophole in the way ticket prices are constructed.

It would be the equivalent of pricing a product at $10 in a store. You also give your best customers a 20% discount off the sticker price, you give your distributors a 5% commission on that price, and then when a customer actually decides to buy the product, you tack on a $10 surcharge at the register alongside the sales tax.

Your best customers pay $18 instead of the $16 they should have been given as part of the discount arrangement, your distribution partners make a $.50 commission instead of a $1.00, and your customers start the purchase decision process from a basis of $10 instead of the $20 that it ultimately winds up being.

Again, it's just plain sneaky because that $10 surcharge you tacked on is going straight back into your pocket.