Dave Noble

It isn't a co-pay, it is a charge applied by BA rather than a fee charged by AA. If BA ever finally drops fuel surcharges, then the fee will drop

Dave

HeadInTheClouds

When something looks like a duck and walks like a duck, you call it a duck.

AAExPlat

Well...might as well throw in my 2 cents...

The good:

- mileage earning on BA/IB TATL
- Bonus EQM on BA/IB TATL

The bad:

- Fuel Surcharges on BA Awards TATL
- New fuel surcharge on any other BA award
- Less AA flights to redeem on TATL
- Less AA seats to redeem due to BA fliers grabbing them
- Higher ticket prices TATL
- Unequal benefit application between BAEC and AAdvantage programs

Overall, I think the situation changed for the worse for almost all of us. The reality is that this now brings us inline with Star Alliance and Skyteam redemption schemes in terms of fuel surcharges, etc. If this comes with better availability, it may be OK. If it comes with worse availability, then I predict AA ffs leaving in droves.

As much as I hate flying CO, Star alliance redemptions are a dream...great availability, but the fuel surcharges can be silly.

brp

While it's not a pleasant thing to have to pay, it still makes sense to understand what it it and where it comes from, rather than simply ranting about it without a coherent argument. Thanks, Dave, for being a calm voice of reason on this one.

Cheers.

Dave Noble

Well, it doesn't seem very duck like to me at all. It looks like AA has finally agreed to charge the BA fees again rather than just not collect them

bernardd

It could equally be the other way round. I really can't see why BAEC members would choose the smaller number of AA destinations.


What's unequal? It sounds like the JV takes away some of the disadvantages of BAEC relative to AAdvantage but it's hard to see it as being superior.

HeadInTheClouds

It also helps to call something by a description that resembles its purpose. That is essential to understanding what it is. This charge behaves much more like a co-pay than a fuel surcharge.

That is an observation that you are free to disagree with and even discuss, without referring to differing opinions as "ranting without coherent arguments", which isn't polite.

Dave Noble

The BA fuel surcharges are onorous and excessive, but I suspect that as part of all the dealing by BA/IB/AA , part of the requirement by BA was that AA start collecting the fuel surcharges on BA bookings rather than AA sitting down and going, "Hey, let's start charging people these fees"

Remember, this whole ATI milarky was being done by the airlines for *their* benefit

Dave

bernardd

Yes, basically it's leveled the playing field rather than having it tilted in favor of AAdvantage.

MilesMark

See Post #154 to reference this request.

Recalling that this was BA outbound BOS/MUC and IB return, business class, the "International Airport Tax" was a whopping $323.20 per person plus, of course, the $20 ticketing fee. The CSR I just spoke with confirmed that it would be much more if I used BA on the return, but could not confirm how close to double it would have been. I suppose someone could do a hypothetical routing and see what that runs.

Dave Noble

It doesn't. It behaves *exactly* like BA's fuel surcharges which BA charges for bookings on BA. It just happens, that apart for a brief period, AA did not use to charge the fuel surcharges even for paid bookings on BA making AA.com a great place to book BA flights. Eventually BA started putting fare rules in place for many cheap fares which required that they be issued on BA stock which meant a lot of these options were lost

Dave

MGW2000

Amex Plat. takes care of that, and to me domestic upgrades are pretty valuable.

Matt

brp

A) It is definitely a rant on the topic. I can't think of anything else to call it.

B) This fuel surcharge (imposed by BA) has been around for quite some time. There is no basis (what I'm calling a "coherent argument") for calling it anything else. You might as well call the base fare a "copay" as that would be just about as valid.

I understand that you don't like it. I'd prefer not to have it there either. But trying to call it something else does not make it so any more than we can have a "disagreement" about whether France is in Europe or North America.

Cheers.

Mark_T

How though can a 'fuel surcharge' be justified when the price of fuel has not suddenly risen dramatically since the fares were loaded?

It is being used as a fee to extract cash income from Award bookings, not as a reflection of volatile fuel costs hence it really does seem to quack from my point of view

HeadInTheClouds

Of course, and there is no argument.

BA leverages this fee against award tickets in the same way AA leverages copays - to raise the price of these tickets. One (AA) just refers to it honestly.

To compare a revenue ticket which includes the cost of operating the flight, to an award ticket which to any layman is the entire point of what you are getting in a "free ticket" as they are promoted, is misleading in its most generous description.

I fully understand everything about where these fees originate, why AA will now charge them, and I don't blame AA for doing so. But the value of AAdvantage just dropped in my eyes as a result of this JV - around $1000/year to me.

I stand by calling it a "co-pay" in purpose and intent. A judge someday will likely come to the same conclusion and end the doublespeak.