KoKoBuddy

By definition, yes. Regulation impedes commerce. You can argue whether that's good or bad for society. But you can't argue that regulation isn't a barrier to commerce.

mikeef

Just like an ATM charge. The bank discovered something that saved them money and discovered that the consumer likes the service so much that he/she is willing to pay for it.

The last concert tickets I bought actually let me print them for free, so I did. In the case where I get charged for doing so, I pick one of the alternate measures.

Mike

GUWonder

Let's see how this goes over on "award" tickets using miles.

GUWonder

If only, then that would be a definition of nonsense.

KoKoBuddy

No you're right. Adding regulation to commerce helps commerce. That's why businesses always clamor for more regulation at every chance.

Ted S

There's really no need for regulation here, transparency of fees is inevitable in this digital market.

10 years ago airline fees were pretty minimal. Maybe a meal, but not a bag, not E+/E-, blanket, etc. This is a new way of driving revenue while appearing cheaper but as consumers grow frustrated with being "nickled and dimed" smart businesses will respond on the opportunity.

One of the third party travel sites [that's watching the airlines kill their profit] will create an "all in" comparison option. This will catch on because people like comparing the full cost, not just part of the cost. Other travel sites will follow and the tools will become better at understanding what options people want and what's charged. Airlines will eventually see this and add this to their own sites to insure they don't lose direct sales. Someone will even snake SN prices into their system just to prove a point [yay].

And there you have it, pricing transparency.

The best part, all of this is amazingly simple to build. Any VCs reading this thread?

pinniped

OK, I'll play dumb: how would regulation requiring that hotels halt dishonest hidden-fee practices present a barrier to commerce? How exactly would that prevent even one consumer willing to pay the true rate from booking a room?

Second, if I was an ethical hotelier competing in a market with unethical hoteliers, why would I oppose the legislation? If anything, it would result in more commerce. Either more traffic to my hotel or higher rates for me as the market is allowed to function correctly and supply-demand equilibrium price for rooms migrates slightly upward as all hoteliers are forced to quote honest rates.

Finally, we can observe actual hotel markets where all properties actually do behave ethically, with respect to these kinds of charges anyway. Those markets function normally without the deception.

I've heard a lot of twisted logic before but I think the notion that taking away garbage fees will be a "barrier to commerce" is really, really wacky.

Jebby_ca

It is a barrier to commerce because you have now mandated what hotels must do when displaying the price of a room.

Unimatrix One

Yes, we're proposing to prohibit lying in advertising. Do you think lying is an important element of commerce that should stay unregulated?

Jebby_ca

I never said that. I was responding to the question "how would regulation requiring that hotels halt dishonest hidden-fee practices present a barrier to commerce?"

I'm from one of those evil "socialist" countries... but yet even here, we have fuel surcharges and resort fees. I wish the government would take action and regulate how businesses advertise their pricing.

pinworm

Sure you can, commerce can actually be increased with restrictions on monopolization. This increases competition and commerce across the economy more broadly than monopolization.

Unfettered, unregulated capitalism will self-consume and provide diminishing returns over the long term, for example the reduction in domestic manufacturing in favor of short term profits through offshore production diminishes market buying power domestically and increases national debt while reducing the value of currency. You can kill your own market off when you export production.

pacer142

Easier just to ban fuel surcharges and similar nonsense. If a fare increase is required, the fare should be increased.

When travelling by train, I wouldn't, for example, expect to pay a "station fee" or an "electricity fee". It's all nonsense, it's just the fare. The one exception is Government taxes, but having those excluded from prices is more of a US thing.

The EU has recently legislated on this issue - finally.

Neil

rochel

I don't get this either. As an aside to this topic, we don't go to nearly as many concerts as we used to due to the excessive fees. A fee to print my own ticket is ridiculous. It doesn't cost the ticket broker anything for me to do this.

We were planning to see a concert at a smaller venue in Denver recently and were in the area about a month ahead of time so stopped by the venue box office in person to buy the tickets, in an attempt to get around the fees. No luck - we still were dinged a fee of $7.50 per ticket. This was by TicketsWest, which is a smaller ticketing firm out here.

evanderm

Despite things being more regulated in Europe there's still the Ryanair Phenomenon.

I find it absolutely ridiculous that one has to pay €5 to print their own boarding pass. There is no free option at all (having it printed at the airport will cost you €40) so one has to pay an additional fee to simply use the product that you have purchased. This is one of an almost endless list of reasons I don't fly Ryanair and I really wish more people would vote with their feet and wallets.

letsgostlcardinals

Actually willcall even costs money through ticketmaster (at least for some sporting events). These kind of things are ridiculous and whats even worse is when you are searching for airfares and you come across something that looks cheap and you click next to type in your info and it adds 500 dollars worth of surcharges and taxes! it is ridiculous and I'm so happy it's going to be stopped.