Are Fees/ Taxes really nearly 1000GBP on a J TATL these days
Oct 17, 2017, 10:56 am
#46
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,550
This is to enable a level playing field. BA encourages fairness in all aspects of its business. The surcharges are necessary for it to compete in terms of quality of service with airlines across Europe. I don't think anything untoward is going on here. It is always easy for passengers to see free flights, but the reality is that taxes and other charges a lot of the time will still need to be paid. BA doesn't make the rules in this regard - it is a product of the environment within which it must operate.
There is no fairness in it - BA just does it because it feels it can get away with it - there is everuthing untowards - BA introduced fuel surcharges as a temporary measure to do with sudden rising fuel costs but then refused to remove them
I find it incredible that anyone woiuld try defending BA on this
Luckily there are programmes which do offer award flights
Oct 17, 2017, 10:57 am
#48
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,464
Seriously? you are trying to defend that award redemptions stopped being redemptions and became cash plus points awards?
There is no fairness in it - BA just does it because it feels it can get away with it - there is everuthing untowards - BA introduced fuel surcharges as a temporary measure to do with sudden rising fuel costs but then refused to remove them
I find it incredible that anyone woiuld try defending BA on this
Luckily there are programmes which do offer award flights
There is no fairness in it - BA just does it because it feels it can get away with it - there is everuthing untowards - BA introduced fuel surcharges as a temporary measure to do with sudden rising fuel costs but then refused to remove them
I find it incredible that anyone woiuld try defending BA on this
Luckily there are programmes which do offer award flights
Oct 17, 2017, 11:00 am
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brighton. UK
Programs: BA Gold / VS /IHG Diamond & Ambassador
Posts: 14,176
This is to enable a level playing field. BA encourages fairness in all aspects of its business. The surcharges are necessary for it to compete in terms of quality of service with airlines across Europe. I don't think anything untoward is going on here. It is always easy for passengers to see free flights, but the reality is that taxes and other charges a lot of the time will still need to be paid. BA doesn't make the rules in this regard - it is a product of the environment within which it must operate.
Level Playing Field? Fairness?
You need to read up on the 'dirty tricks' BA did previously !
You are conflating government and airport imposed charges (APD/Transport taxes/Airport Fees) with those that the airlines CHOOSE to make such as 'carrier imposed surcharges'.
Oct 17, 2017, 11:05 am
#52
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 355
It is perfectly natural that people will not always agree.
Let me say that if you book a business class flight from London to anywhere and pay in avios, assuming avios = 1p, and assuming tax is applies equally. Isn't there a significant shortfall in revenue for first and business cabins if there is no surcharge? Am I wrong?
Let me say that if you book a business class flight from London to anywhere and pay in avios, assuming avios = 1p, and assuming tax is applies equally. Isn't there a significant shortfall in revenue for first and business cabins if there is no surcharge? Am I wrong?
Oct 17, 2017, 11:20 am
#54
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,550
It is perfectly natural that people will not always agree.
Let me say that if you book a business class flight from London to anywhere and pay in avios, assuming avios = 1p, and assuming tax is applies equally. Isn't there a significant shortfall in revenue for first and business cabins if there is no surcharge? Am I wrong?
Let me say that if you book a business class flight from London to anywhere and pay in avios, assuming avios = 1p, and assuming tax is applies equally. Isn't there a significant shortfall in revenue for first and business cabins if there is no surcharge? Am I wrong?
Oct 17, 2017, 11:27 am
#55
Join Date: Sep 2013
Programs: BAEC Gold, EK Skywards (enhanced Blue !), Oman Air Sindbad Gold
Posts: 6,395
This is to enable a level playing field. BA encourages fairness in all aspects of its business. The surcharges are necessary for it to compete in terms of quality of service with airlines across Europe. I don't think anything untoward is going on here. It is always easy for passengers to see free flights, but the reality is that taxes and other charges a lot of the time will still need to be paid. BA doesn't make the rules in this regard - it is a product of the environment within which it must operate.
Please tell us you're not serious here.
Oct 17, 2017, 11:27 am
#56
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 355
so what if there is? it is a redemption ticket and BA determined the number of avois for a redemption ticket - until BA started sucking on the teat of fuel surcharges, then the cost was points plus pay for actual taxes ( concorde redemption cost me points plus around GBP40 in taxes in 2003 ) ; what BA did was get addicted to surcharges and rather then do what it should have done and removed them as fuel prices dropped, it decided to rename them and keep it going
The other point to make is how much bigger the audience is now and that this ultimately puts pressure on low cost loopholes to be closed. This allows for BA to market more effectively. I think the redemption-side of BA is stronger than many of its competitors and can't fault it's RFS within Europe.
Oct 17, 2017, 11:29 am
#57
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,362
It all depends on what you call "small".
Every year there is a large number of award flyers on BA. if you multiply that number by a zero YQ or a large YQ, that can result in a "fairly" large impact on BA profits. This is pure profit with no associated cost. Other European airlines, like Air France, also have that policy.
Every year there is a large number of award flyers on BA. if you multiply that number by a zero YQ or a large YQ, that can result in a "fairly" large impact on BA profits. This is pure profit with no associated cost. Other European airlines, like Air France, also have that policy.
For YQ to be "pure" profit, this presupposes that the raw base fare (in case of revenue tickets) or the amount of miles redeemed (in the case of award tickets) suffices to cover all the costs associated with the carriage of the passenger. Without detailed analysis of the costs, I do not think that this can be assumed.
Oct 17, 2017, 11:50 am
#59
Join Date: Sep 2013
Programs: BAEC Gold, EK Skywards (enhanced Blue !), Oman Air Sindbad Gold
Posts: 6,395
I do wonder what would happen to the market if BA removed all surcharges. How would that work with business relationships with other airlines? And I reckon things would be going down pretty quick. I'm sure others will disagree and think that BA doesn't know what it is doing.. which is surprising as my understanding was that BA was profitable.
I'd say the RFS arrangement for BA s/h redemptions is pretty good. But ...
do you really believe, in comparison with other airlines, that you "can't fault it" ......??
I'm very conscious that the surcharges scam is not unique to BA. For instance, EK can be just as bad - perhaps even worse in some cases. But that doesn't make it right. It's wholly disingenuous.
Oct 17, 2017, 11:57 am
#60
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 355
Well, here's a quick example (and I have absolutely no doubt that other FT-ers have numerous such examples of their own, perhaps even more stark) of a redemption I quoted elsewhere on the forum earlier today : a s/h (2 hour) sector on JAL requiring just 4500 Avios + £4.10 taxes. JAL didn't ask me to pay a clearly-unwarranted fuel surcharge (now masquerading as 'carrier surcharges' with BA). Now... BA do of course have a business relationship, as per your post, with JAL - but I really don't see any sign of things "going down pretty quick" because of a different approach to surcharges. Another respectable carrier where low cash add-ons are concerned is QF.
I'd say the RFS arrangement for BA s/h redemptions is pretty good. But ...
do you really believe, in comparison to other airlines, that you "can't fault it" ......??
I'm very conscious surcharges scam is not unique to BA. For instance, EK can be just as bad, perhaps even worse in some cases. But that doesn't make it right. It's dishonest.
I'd say the RFS arrangement for BA s/h redemptions is pretty good. But ...
do you really believe, in comparison to other airlines, that you "can't fault it" ......??
I'm very conscious surcharges scam is not unique to BA. For instance, EK can be just as bad, perhaps even worse in some cases. But that doesn't make it right. It's dishonest.
It isn't clear the nature of the transaction between JAL and BA in terms of this redemption, but a positive has to be that BA has facilitated this low surcharge. My expectation is that the redemption cost in paid avios broadly represents the average cost that JAL is charging on that route and therefore does not require an additional charge to be made. Likewise, I think that it's business structure will be different, because of it's environment, operating model and location.