Originally Posted by
superangrypenguin
I'll refrain with what I think about accountants so I don't get banned
In all seriousness, the first few statements I disagree with. We are talking about a carrier surcharge, so the assumption is that the passenger will be taking up real estate on the aircraft, thereby occupying a seat, thereby nullifying statements 1 and 2. Because that pax will be sitting in a seat, the total weight of the pod and the pax is higher than a Y seat + the pax. So unless i'm missing something, the surcharge should be (and is) higher for the pax to fly in J than Y
The cost difference is zero between the two scenarios: passenger sitting in Y while J seat stays empty, vs. passenger moving to J and a Y seat remains empty.
(But eh, our daughter in law is an accountant, and we are quite happy with her. And surely so is our son. But I don't mention creative writing to her...)