Fuel Surcharges

[BlueRay]

I understand the airlines have all started to reduce the fuel surcharge yet British Airways has maintained the massive August Hike in this charge.

What really concerns me is that the cargo side of British Airways was reduced their fuel surcharge to reflect the reduction in oil prices. THis reduction was 2 weeks ago on the 2nd of October.

BA WORLD CARGO TO REDUCE FUEL SURCHARGE (http://http://www.americanshipper.com/news/news_carrier_story.asp?news=104644)

Is this just another example of BA squeezing a little extra profit out of those few people still flying with them? Personally think all these surcharges should be banned and a simple transparent ticket price paid by the consumer.

[AMEandPPL]

(apologies if wrong area, not sure where to put this thread)

BlueRay continues to lambast the national flag carrier, whenever and wherever he can. Doesn't dare post in R&N now.

[BlueRay]

WHat the National flag carrier? I thought that was Virgin since BA gave it up some years ago.

I also that a motion has been raised in parliament for BA to have the British removed from your title, since you have pulled out of all the regions.

Yet soon you probably won't be British anymore the rate the Spanish are buying up your worthless stock.

Now back on thread, what do passengers think about BA reducing the fuel surcharge for freight business but keeping it high for their (as these pilots call you) self loathing freight?

[Llademos]

BlueRay

You have made a good point on the fuel surcharges, but for the wrong reason. The freight vs pax surcharge is unrelated - pax pay for the flight, freight is a nice to have extra that gives BA around £20m a month.

But why have you poinsoned your remark with another anti-BA diatribe? If your age wasn't displayed I'd put you at 17 (and an immature 17 at that).

By the way, 35 million is not 'those few people still flying with them'.

Also, your argument seems to suggest that Virgin should be the national flag carrier rather than BA because BA has pulled out of the regions makes no sense at all. How many UK airports outside London do Virgin operate to/from compared to BA?

[PAXboy]

Many folks still cling to the notion of a 'national carrier'. Since the national carrier was privatised over 20 years ago - we do not have a national carrier!

However, the myth and the romance is still found in every day life in many countries. Look at the way Alitalia survives due to nothing more than the idea that they have to have a national carrier. [insert smiley icon: shrugging shoulders]

[L337]

I have just operated a BA B747-400 to the USA. My First Officer was Scottish, the heavy FO was English, and I was born in the colonies. The Cabin Crew came from all parts of the UK, France, Spain, and Hong Kong.

Seems very British to me.

I assume BlueRay is Australian.

(as these pilots call you) self loathing freight?

In all of my career, from Britannia Airways, Loganair, Dan Air, and BA I have never heard any pilot ever use that phrase. Just more utter rubbish.

[AMEandPPL]

Many folks still cling to the notion of a 'national carrier'

Actually, I referred to the "national flag carrier" which BA still is, on all their tails !

[rothin]

British Airways (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/britishairways) today reduced its fuel surcharges (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/30/britishairwaysbusiness.theairlineindustry), bringing relief to some passengers following similar moves by rivals and a prolonged dip in the global oil price.BA follows rival airlines in cutting fuel surcharge | Business | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/15/theairlineindustry-britishairways)

Move along now, nothing more to see here.

[jotape]

I know this has been debated before and in different places, but it really is time now for BA and all other airlines to just simply stop identifying the "fuel charges / security charges / taxes and fees etc etc" as a separate item, and include them in the total price. The whole thing is just unreal. Nobody cares at the end of the day, and all people want to do is know how much it will cost from A to B. As we are returning to simpler ways of doing things (banking etc), why not make this simple as well. I might actually write to my MP about this - nothing to lose.

[raffele]

jotape - you are right, however one little point - BA include all taxes, fees and surcharges in the price. If you go to BA and go through the processes of getting a quote, you will see that at the first stage, the price per way is shown with "Lowest price including taxes, fees and surcharges" highlighted in red, with an estimation of the taxes portion at the bottom of the page. Then, when you go through to the stage before booking, it shows the total price followed by a breakdown into fare, taxes etc.

Apologies for going off topic slightly, but I just noticed that BA are highlighting when they are selling the last few seats per fare class as you book. Don't know if it's new, but it's certainly a very good idea!

[PAXboy]

AMEandPPL, my apologies, I had not read your post closely enough. Of course, Virgin Atlantic have been carrying representation of the Union Jack on their 744 winglets for some years. It may not be an exact rectangular 'flag' as it is shaped to fit but it is unmistakable.

jotape, it would indeed be very nice to have all the components wrapped up into the one price but it is never going to happen. For the simple reason - that you would have to get every other carrier in the world to do the same thing on the same day. If BA are flying to (say) 25 European destinations, then you have to get every other airline with whom they compete (directly point to point or indirectly from airfields near by) to change their way of presenting fares. That means getting all those other goverments to legislate in the same way at the same time.

Human beings like to see a low 'headline' price and every line if business, from supermarkets to motorcars to airlines have ways of catching the punter's eye. If the price turns out to be a bit higher - then you can decide not to buy. It was always that way and will always be. Each time the rules inthis country are changed to try and make pricing less ambiguous? They find another way to present it. I agree, it is highly irritating and I would prefer it to be the way that it was. But it won't be.

Changing the basic human desire to advertise and secure a bargain? That is not going to change!

[Globaliser]

Nobody cares at the end of the day, and all people want to do is know how much it will cost from A to B.Actually, as I understand it, some "people" could care enormously. And they have enormous clout with BA. But the evidence suggests that they don't in fact care enough to kick up a big fuss.

I believe that the reason that TFC remain split off separately is almost certainly because of the big volume of business that qualifies for discounts. Those discounts are generally applied to the base fare only. So Big Bank may theoretically appear to buy the same £3000 + £350(TFC) = £3350 fare as Joe Public. But in reality, they are paying a base fare of £3000 - 60% = £1200, and therefore pay £1200 + £350(TFC) = £1550.

If the TFC were included in the discount, Big Bank would pay £3350 - 60% = £1340. This is despite the fact that BA still has to hand over the same £80 APD to the government whether or not there is a discount. And so BA would take a disproportionate hit even in relation to items which are undoubtedly genuine taxes.

Big Bank might well have cause to complain about the fact that £250 of the £350 TFC is fuel surcharge, which it might say ought to be part of the base fare, and that it ought to pay only £100 fuel surcharge instead of £250. Big Bank is the sort of customer who could care enormously about this practice. But the enormous clout that they wield with BA is demonstrated by the sort of discount that they get (60% discount is not out of the question for this sort of customer, as I understand it). If they really did care a lot, they would probably kick up enough to make a difference, but there doesn't seem to be much movement in that department. Indeed, the fuel surcharge hasn't even been reduced for F and J tickets.

It does leave the question whether any retail customer gets misled. If so, there would be a valid complaint. But I don't see why there is any cause for a UK retail customer to complain. Pretty much all UK marketing is done on a total price basis now, as raffele says. The customer is never misled into thinking that they're going to pay £x, only to have £350 or whatever of TFC whacked on afterwards.

Incidentally, this is the reason why I always think of award flights as using miles to get a 100% discount off the base fare.

[Runway 31]

I'm off to Australia in January with my wife, flying Qantas and have been charged £652:40 for the fuel surcharge. If they reduce the surcharge before I fly, do I get a rebate?.

[raffele]

Nope! World doesn't work that way I'm afraid

[Brian H]

I checked BA prices last week for a flight NCL-MUC, and was quoted £216, checked the price today and it is down to £198, so it seems the fuel surcharge reduction has happened.

[raffele]

Yup definitely happened. Checked a flight to Miami on thursday last week (after fuel charges reduced) and the TFS portion of the fare had dropped a fair bit

[Seat62K]

I can't see BA incorporating fuel surcharges into their basic fares. That would mean using the Executive Club Miles sitting in my account for European trips would actually be cheaper than flying, say, Ryanair or easyJet and that wouldn't do! So redemption flights end up costing an arm and a leg. (Yes, I know that "book and upgrade" on longhaul looks more attractive.)

[raffele]

No one incorporates fees/surcharges into basic fares. BA show you the overall price when you get a quote, and then break it down into the different parts.

This compares with Ryanair who used to (illegally) add the fuel on to the fare. They now itemise it to build up the whole fare price