Fares go negative (briefly)

[cwatters]

According to the Times Sunday 22nd Oct...

"Sky Europe which flies from Birmingham, Edinburgh, Manchester and Stansted to destinations in Poland and Slovakia has reduced fares to minus £1 for departures between November 1 and December 15, and January 9 to March 24."

..and now the catch...

"Passengers have until midnight tonight to book..."

[OltonPete]

I think this will not go down as one of the best offers for us Midlanders!

Lets see....1st November to 15th December, exactly how many flights
would that be? Well..........one from BHX :}

The flight is not operating between 1/11/06 and 14/12.

Okay it is back to 2 a week from 14/12 then but the best you can
call it is a short window of opportunity in 2006 ;)

Not so bad for EDI, MAN & STN I assume :*

Pete

[spanishflea]

Good bit of PR there, its only £2 less than the normal base fare, but as far as I am aware its the first time any airline has offered anything like this and marketed it as such?

[GoEDI]

OltonPete

With regards to EDI, well, no actually! There's no flights at all from EDI during the winter season!

[Cyrano]

Looking on the SkyEurope website the actual offer seems to be "flights for free plus one pound off the taxes and charges".

So just a typical bit of economy-with-the-truth, I fear, which some gullible journalist has swallowed. Anyone expecting to be paid for flying will be disappointed, just like anyone expecting a "free" flight to actually be free... :cool:

[runawayedge]

Are there any legal implications for not charging?

[Cyrano]

Are there any legal implications for not charging?
You raise an interesting point. The LCCs have been working so hard to partition off "taxes and charges" from "fare" that perhaps this will come back to haunt them.

I stand to be corrected by any lawyers out there but as I recall, one of the requirements of a valid contract under English/Irish law is 'consideration', i.e. you're paying something in return for what you get. If the airline is offering flights for free and claiming that what you pay is all "taxes and charges" which are (supposedly :cool: ) entirely passed on to third parties, does that mean that there's no valid contract because - according to the airline - you haven't paid them anything for the flight itself?

[VanBosh]

thats why Ryanair always charge 1c or 1p.

[Globaliser]

I stand to be corrected by any lawyers out there but as I recall, one of the requirements of a valid contract under English/Irish law is 'consideration', i.e. you're paying something in return for what you get. If the airline is offering flights for free and claiming that what you pay is all "taxes and charges" which are (supposedly :cool: ) entirely passed on to third parties, does that mean that there's no valid contract because - according to the airline - you haven't paid them anything for the flight itself?You're correct that for any contractual promise to be enforceable against the person making the promise (eg the airline), there must be consideration from the person to whom the promise was made (eg the passenger).

However, there are two common fallacies about consideration that ought to be debunked:-
1. Contrary to popular belief, consideration does not have to be monetary or even in money's worth.
2. Also contrary to popular belief, consideration does not have flow to the promisor (eg the airline). All that is needed is that the consideration must flow from the promisee (eg the passenger).

Usual disclaimers, including: This is a very general statement and does not constitute legal advice. Do not rely on this. If you have a legal problem, please see a solicitor or other legal advisor who can give you advice tailored to the facts of your particular case.

[alexss]

You raise an interesting point. The LCCs have been working so hard to partition off "taxes and charges" from "fare" that perhaps this will come back to haunt them.
I stand to be corrected by any lawyers out there but as I recall, one of the requirements of a valid contract under English/Irish law is 'consideration', i.e. you're paying something in return for what you get. If the airline is offering flights for free and claiming that what you pay is all "taxes and charges" which are (supposedly :cool: ) entirely passed on to third parties, does that mean that there's no valid contract because - according to the airline - you haven't paid them anything for the flight itself?
But of course the taxes and charges AREN'T passed on to 3rd parties. :)
eg. on a Sky Europe fare STN-Bratislava, "taxes and charges" plus "service fee" total £20.06. The only per-passenger tax or charge that would be passed to anyone else are UK APD (£5) and STN PSC (max £7.89). Even if the fare was zero, the airline is taking a minimum of £7.17 in this case.

[jongeman]

Whether or not there were legal implications for not charging, I did notice when I searched for MAN-KRK flights, that the outward journey was -£1, but the return was a more healthy figure, usually in the region of fifty quid, regardless of date.
Being on the SkyEurope e-mailing list, it's obvious that they employ a pretty energetic marketing department. In the same way that Ryanair have spectacular offers left, right and centre, Skyeurope regularly invent magnificent deals for travel which have encouaged me to use them on a couple of occasions. It works.