Not at all bizarre

Post #353,601 by beepster 1/26/12 9:07:43 AM Reply	Not at all bizarre And while I've very rarely agreed with Ben, on this one he is probably correct. My thought is simple. The argument for the rule is all about "deceptive" advertising. But, I (and Ben) see this as step one to making sure all ancillary fees be treated under the classification of "base fare". Once that happens, all those fees become subject to the excise tax. I, as the consumer, have long since understood that the price I see advertised is NOT what I will end up paying after taxes. The same goes for the adverts in the local paper for buying a TV at Best Buy. They are not required to quote tax, nor disclose the cost of the optional protection plan, optional installation, etc. All that said, this will make a portion of my job easier, as fewer folks will send me email complaining about how much they can "save" by buying their tickets from someone other than the company's designated agency...usually based on adverts they see in the paper or on the front page of an airline website...where we quote inclusive. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #353,612 by crazy 1/26/12 12:38:10 PM Reply	I (the consumer) know MOST products may have some tax They are based on what state (and sometimes what locality). And we usually know what % to expect. And we don't expect additional individual fees/taxes above that baseline. I have NO IDEA what plane tickets cost until I've hit the final checkout, and sometime even then I'm not sure. This is an "about damn time" rule.
Post #353,613 by malraux 1/26/12 12:43:53 PM Reply	That's fine, but... I think the point is that the taxes should be shown separately, not wrapped up in the supposed base cost without any way of knowing what comes from where. I would support a full disclosure at the point of selection as long as it's clearly shown what is fare, what is tax, what is an additional charge, and so on. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #353,614 by crazy 1/26/12 12:49:00 PM Reply	Agreed - show the breakdown There is NOTHING stopping them from showing it according to the article, just that the Airline PR guy was blathering about it being buried. Unbury it and quit bitching.
Post #353,619 by beepster 1/26/12 1:48:38 PM Reply	Then you are buying on the wrong site the airline sites all give est. of taxes and fees...and comparison sites such as orbitz list in in the first availability view. You have ample opportunity to understand the full price before you buy a ticket. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #353,616 by lincoln 1/26/12 1:15:16 PM Reply	The bizarre part is that Ben claims that this is a way for the government to raise taxes on airplane tickets without the consumer knowing about it. "Chicago to my mind was the only place to be. ... I above all liked the city because it was filled with people all a-bustle, and the clatter of hooves and carriages, and with delivery wagons and drays and peddlers and the boom and clank of freight trains. And when those black clouds came sailing in from the west, pouring thunderstorms upon us so that you couldn't hear the cries or curses of humankind, I liked that best of all. Chicago could stand up to the worst God had to offer. I understood why it was built--a place for trade, of course, with railroads and ships and so on, but mostly to give all of us a magnitude of defiance that is not provided by one house on the plains. And the plains is where those storms come from." -- E.L. Doctorow
Post #353,618 by beepster 1/26/12 1:46:47 PM Reply	Re: The bizarre part What part of my post didn't you get. Force all the ancillaries into "base fare"...with no breakout. Then, gov gets to excise tax all of it, instead of what is now listed as base fare. Right now, consumers complain about the bag fee, for example, at $25. That bag fee becomes 26.88 after tax...because its now "base fare". Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #353,620 by drook 1/26/12 1:51:18 PM Reply	The article didn't say anything about "base fare" The two terms used were "posted fare" and "stated fare". In other words, they have to tell the customer what they'll end up paying. And as stated in the article, nothing would prevent the airlines from providing a breakdown. Just like my phone bill has been doing for years. -- Drew
Post #353,622 by beepster 1/26/12 3:50:24 PM Reply	They do that already. At least as part of the booking process, perhaps not in advertising..when they talked about "fares as low as xxx"... However, the only outlier in that was taxes and fees...and the fact that they make an appreciable impact in the total number should highlight to you just how much tax you already pay (7.5% plus 3.70 per person per segment plus another 16.30 if you are leaving the US (8.20 if leaving CONUS)...so the fact that you bought a $29 ticket that ended up costing you $75 wasn't the airline's fault. What Ben is saying is that if the gov hikes the excise tax to 10...it will now appear to all as an airline price increase, not a tax increase...because he well knows, as well as you..that you look at the big number and not the detail underneath. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #353,624 by drook 1/26/12 4:52:19 PM Reply	Think of a "normal" traveler I don't fly every week. If I need to buy a ticket I have no idea when the price last changed. So if the price is $5 higher than it was last week, I don't even notice. All I know is that the TV commercial said $29 but I'm paying $75. Besides that, prices vary depending on what site you book it through, time of day, how far out you're booking, and all the other factors airlines use to calculate variable prices. So like I said, "normal" travelers won't be upset about the price increase, because they won't know there was one. People who travel a lot, or work in the industry, are the only ones who will notice when the price goes up. And they already understand why. -- Drew
Post #353,625 by beepster 1/26/12 5:50:45 PM Reply	You've just stated his point if the government wants to increase taxes in this "new" model..they can, and noone will notice. from the Spirit site... "If the government can hide taxes in your airfares, then they can carry out their hidden agenda and quietly increase their taxes. (Yes, such talks are already underway.)" And you just stated, consumers won't notice...and even if they do notice the price to visit grandma next year went up 10 bucks, they will blame the airline...not the government. The low cost airlines, like Spirit, Frontier, Southwest, etc...don't price like the big boys (yield mgt faring, leading to 100 different prices on one flight)...usually its last minute, 7 day, 14 day and "wanna get away" specials...thats why the big complaint comes from Ben at Spirit. No longer can they say Fares from $29..which was their fare...that came to 50 or so each way post taxes and security and pfc charges and all the other stuff uncle sam has loaded them down with. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #353,627 by Another Scott 1/26/12 6:24:09 PM Reply	It's a stupid point, IMHO. It's an "OMG TEH SEEKRIT TAXES!!!" argument that a teabagger would use. Or someone who thinks that viral marketing is the way to run a business for the long term... http://en.wikipedia....al_advertisements "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." - C.H. Cheers, Scott.
Post #353,629 by beepster 1/26/12 6:54:21 PM Reply	Well then, for consistency the government should assert that ALL ADVERTISEMENT, not simply airlines, should include all applicable taxes and fees and lets include shipping for all those online retailers. After all, we're too stupid to know all by ourselves that the price isn't the price until we actually pay for it. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #353,646 by S1mon_Jester 1/26/12 10:53:46 PM Reply	A few thoughts when I worked for a big computer consulting firm and traveled each week, I ignored the taxes...and only cared about the total cost. That's all the company cared about (and they didn't care much, they billed my traveling costs back to the customer) Same with extra bag fees, getting in the front of the line fees and fees to sit in the big comfortable seats. Some of that was annoying, because I couldn't justify those fees when traveling back to the customer...but flying twice a week and you get status and those fees are automagically waved anyway (and you upgrades to first class). The only people these fees are going to affect are recreational travelers - and they're already price sensative anyway. But I'm not sure why the government doesn't get to taxes these ancillary fees anyway. When I worked in international tax, governments who regularly tax anything and everything they felt like. (No joke, if you send packages from Mexico to Guat..they actually tax Mexico's tax.) Shrug.

Welcome to IWETHEY!