callum9999

They're talking about the Carrier Imposed Surcharge. Either whoever wrote that statement is mistaken, or they're just talking colloquially (the cost of fuel is of course relevant to the surcharge, there is merely no direct link).

Hoch

If I recall correctly, when BA and other airlines created an extra charge for fuel it was called a 'surcharge'. The initial idea was transparency with the explanation of increased costs related to fuel prices. As time went on consumers just got used to the idea and BA along with other airlines saw a new revenue stream.

I don't doubt that the fare components are an interesting beast and that what we see in the future contracts does not reflect the hedging nature of the airline industry. But if one compent is linked to a commodity such as oil, then it stands to reason that the fare changes.

H

shorthauldad

Assuming the direct quote in the first post is accurate, please YELL AT IAG not us mere mortals...

EDIT:

Right, the bit where they said "The fuel surcharge has never recovered...", the second and third words just never happened?

Mrs Thatcher: "....the Community Charge ..."
everyone else: "...the Poll Tax..."
Mrs Thatcher (face turning red): "...the Community Charge..."
everyone else (grinning): "...the Poll Tax..."

callum9999

IAG aren't constantly whinging about it on here. When they start to, I will "yell" at them too.

I don't doubt that happened, it's merely a mistake. Look at your ticket and you will see it is clearly labelled a carrier-imposed surcharge, not a fuel surcharge. Ergo, there is no requirement for it to drop with the price of fuel.

shorthauldad

When we're discussing a statement by IAG in which they talk about "the fuel surcharge" and how it "has never recovered the rise in our airlines’ fuel costs", I think it's highly appropriate that we all stick to IAG's decision and also call it a "fuel surcharge"

DLA330ER

Given that the cost of Oil has dropped dramatically....why do airlines get away with YQ's at astronomical numbers? Please bear with me as I make my point.

If you look at a Atlanta to Seoul the BA Airfare is $876.00 plus tax for a total of 2064.30. The YQ is $876.00 USD...the same as the airfare!

A few things to point out:

1. BA has retired many older, thirstier A/C for new less thirsty A/C which bring their overall cost down.
2. Oil has dropped dramatically and yet YQ remains the same or at the very least abnormally high based on costs today.
3. People are being penalized for award fares that are no longer free based on YQ being added to award tickets that have a zero fare. In some cases, you can buy an revenue ticket for less money on an alternate carrier than you can buy using your miles on a Coach ticket.

I read a story on a Business traveler website that said that the only airlines that have lowered the Fuel Surcharge are the ones in Japan that are forced to by Govt Regulators and the public benefit from this. ^

I am not trying to suggest that airlines go back to full regulation, but when do we draw a line in the sand with the YQ and say enough is enough and ask the Govt to step in, or investigate to cause the Airlines to flinch?

Thoughts?

SteveF

It's not a fuel surcharge...

corporate-wage-slave

Welcome to Flyertalk, and welcome to the BA forum DLA330ER. It's good to see you here, and there are many other FTers who enjoy a good debate. So please continue to post here and welcome on board.

BA no longer has a fuel surcharge, probably to head off this particular question and indeed many others. It has a carrier's surcharge, and it's a cost of doing business with BA. Fuel is no longer mentioned as a specific component of this. Some fares are remarkably cheap (overall pricing) at the moment, with people going to Japan and back in business class for under £1,000. Also fares to Australia are incredibly good value, so the fuel cost reductions are indirectly visible. But outside the usual suspects I really don't see this debate getting any traction, certainly not with governments.

layz

Do we really need the government interfering in a competitive marketplace? I'm more concerned about fees that the government has direct control of (APD).

If you're not happy with BA's offering most routes offer alternatives. Some alternatives may involve a change at AMS or DXB but the price is likely to be lower to reflect the inconvenience for having to change (the same reason BA is cheaper ex-EU).

There's only a few routes where you can truly say BA has a monopoly on them.

DLA330ER

Thanks for the welcome.

I have to say that it seems odd that so many carriers today still pass on massive fees outside the normal airfare. I look at the steady increase of the YQ with BA and now it is at record levels and yet no sign of a decrease any time soon as they say fuel prices are volitale at the moment. Even if they were to come up...it would be a slow progression and this would take time...why doesnt BA come down just a little?

The example I gave earlier on the Japanese carriers having to reduce their Surcharges based on the Govt direction was an extreme example, but also one where even the Japanese Govt (no where near a Socialist/Communist govt) realized that the prices were too high and took action.

The APD is no where near the costs that are passed with the YQ on a 4 segment longhaul itinerary but yet WW never misses a change to complain about that one!!

Here is another example of an airline doing whats right...

[I]Russian carrier Transaero Airlines is cancelling the fuel surcharge included in the price of tickets on its international routes.

Savings can be up to £30-40 one-way on the London-Moscow route.

The offer is subject to online purchase on the carrier’s website, sales at the airline’s ticket offices or the airline’s agent offices abroad.

The fuel surcharge depends on the range of flights and specific routes.

The airline’s deputy chief executive for commerce, Roman Vdovenko, said: “We are glad to offer our clients more affordable prices in the run up to the new year holidays.

“We are certain our clients will highly appreciate low airfares on international routes with the guaranteed high level of service.”

DLA330ER

Also,

Have you noticed that BA has cut corners on its Club cabin as far as Amenities go? I remember the Tweed Molton Brown kits when I first flew club, replaced by Elemis (cost driven most likely) and recently when flying club.....a shoe bag!!!

Then you see airlines like DL that have Westin Bedding and are fighting hard to catch up the likes of BA and are some succeeding!

I am not trying to trash BA trust me..I love flying them, but it seems like higher fares and whats on board starting to become less and less regal and more and more cost concious.

Am I off here?

Globaliser

But I thought BA has just this week abolished YQ on some routes and reduced it on others?

Aztec_Flyer

No, in fact I think you are spot on.

BA's current philosophy seems to be to compete on the basis of the route network provided out of LHR and the links through the transatlantic JV partners.

They have abandoned any notions of being an industry leader.

Their F cabin was an industry leader in 1996/7 and has evolved at a pace that would embarrass Darwin. They stack a similar amount of seats into the 747 nose as other do for a J cabin.

The CW cabin was revolutionary in 2000 and has gone through so many "NNNNNNCW" minor tweaks and changes that people have lost track and they are now behind AA and IB. Even AA's 767s are better now.

And finally, the premium ground experience provided in LHR would be described by a London estate agent as minimalist!

Great crews, great routes but just no where near an industry leader any more.....

paulwuk

Ba charge £0 YQ on the London/Moscow route.

What do people want? An increase in base fare and removal of YQ? There are good reasons that BA don't so this that have been posted time and time again. My suspicion is people think redeemingn their free chase Avios will become cheaper, which of course it won't. The total cash outlay won't go down, ba charge what people will pay.

Are you really all corporate accountants whinging about the fact your discounts aren't as high as they could be?

Prospero

It does look that way on short haul routes, and with little or no fanfare either