3 ms·

So, perhaps instead of making the flight, the airlines should be allowed to pay a tax equal to 80% of whatever it costs to actually operate the flight?

by ilyagr 5y ago

lapsedacademic 5y ago
1. It would have to be much higher than 80%. Airlines aren't software companies; their margins are horrible ;-) 2. "whatever it costs to actually operate the flight" is... well, good luck negotiating that bill :) NB: they are not flying empty because no one wants a seat! They would be able to sell some seats! Even at previously-prevailing market rates! And of course could fill the plane if they sold the seats at any price! They are flying empty because they can't sell enough seats at a high enough price to justify the fixed cost of the number of cabin staff required if there are customers on the flight. It's about cabin staff regs, not about literally no one wanting to fly. So... that 20% does matter.
- version_five 5y ago
  Thank you, this is an interesting insight that I hadn't considered. So planes are flying without cabin staff or catering, and potentially with less fuel (no idea if the weight of passengers is material here). And in return, they are maintaining a complex system that has no central authority and is not easy to change. It doesn't sound ideal, but I also know that it's not something the single "they should just" solutions that outsiders propose will actually work in. Hopefully things get closer to normal soon and we won't have to worry about it.
umeshunni 5y ago
Ah yes, let's tax airlines for following rules imposed by overregulation. If there's something Europe needs, it's more taxes and more regulation.
- shkkmo 5y ago
  The airlines are currently paying a "tax" by running the flights empty but that cost is just being burnt as fossil fuel and helps no one. By switching to a tax for unused gates/ flight slots that is 80% of the cost of flying an empty if plane, the Airline saves money, the airport makes money, and the environment has fewer CO2 solutions. It is a win-win-win on all sides.
  - avar 5y ago
    It helps everyone involved in fuel delivery, airport operations etc. Don't underestimate the government incentives to maintain the status quo. If you switched this over to a tax you'd also need government programs to deal with the unemployment, lack of pilots and other ramp-up issues when this situation ends etc.
    - dataflow 5y ago
      Thanks for writing this. It did not occur to me at all and it really made me rethink the situation.

So, perhaps instead of making the flight, the airlines should be allowed to pay a tax equal to 80% of whatever it costs to actually operate the flight?

by ilyagr 5y ago

So, perhaps instead of making the flight, the airlines should be allowed to pay a tax equal to 80% of whatever it costs to actually operate the flight?

lapsedacademic 5y ago

1. It would have to be much higher than 80%. Airlines aren't software companies; their margins are horrible ;-) 2. "whatever it costs to actually operate the flight" is... well, good luck negotiating that bill :) NB: they are not flying empty because no one wants a seat! They would be able to sell some seats! Even at previously-prevailing market rates! And of course could fill the plane if they sold the seats at any price! They are flying empty because they can't sell enough seats at a high enough price to justify the fixed cost of the number of cabin staff required if there are customers on the flight. It's about cabin staff regs, not about literally no one wanting to fly. So... that 20% does matter.

version_five 5y ago
Thank you, this is an interesting insight that I hadn't considered. So planes are flying without cabin staff or catering, and potentially with less fuel (no idea if the weight of passengers is material here). And in return, they are maintaining a complex system that has no central authority and is not easy to change. It doesn't sound ideal, but I also know that it's not something the single "they should just" solutions that outsiders propose will actually work in. Hopefully things get closer to normal soon and we won't have to worry about it.

umeshunni 5y ago

Ah yes, let's tax airlines for following rules imposed by overregulation. If there's something Europe needs, it's more taxes and more regulation.

shkkmo 5y ago
The airlines are currently paying a "tax" by running the flights empty but that cost is just being burnt as fossil fuel and helps no one. By switching to a tax for unused gates/ flight slots that is 80% of the cost of flying an empty if plane, the Airline saves money, the airport makes money, and the environment has fewer CO2 solutions. It is a win-win-win on all sides.
- avar 5y ago
  It helps everyone involved in fuel delivery, airport operations etc. Don't underestimate the government incentives to maintain the status quo. If you switched this over to a tax you'd also need government programs to deal with the unemployment, lack of pilots and other ramp-up issues when this situation ends etc.
  - dataflow 5y ago
    Thanks for writing this. It did not occur to me at all and it really made me rethink the situation.