34 ms·
FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- gnabgib 2y agoFrom the FTC (9 points, 1 comment) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42441347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42441347
- munk-a 2y agoAn excellent change. It's unfortunate that stewardship of the committee will soon change hands as Khan has been a great advocate for fair contracts between companies and consumers during her tenure.
- mentalgear 2y agoIndeed, Khan has been the first real pro-public steward of the FTC for decades.
- nodesocket 2y ago[flagged]
- kevin_thibedeau 2y agoThe higher price will be displayed up front and affected companies will have to compete on the real pricing.
- specialp 2y agoThat is fine because then someone decides to buy something based on what it costs. The status quo is that some company decides to backload the cost with hidden fees and then all competitors need to follow by doing the same or they will be "undercut". This is just bad for consumers because it makes it very hard to determine what they are paying for something and how to compare it with other prices.
- rozap 2y agoThat's fine. Just tell me the price up front.
- hcal 2y agoYou're right that businesses might roll fees into the base price, but that’s the point: transparency. When all costs are upfront, customers can more easily compare prices between competitors. Hidden fees make price comparisons difficult and misleading. Take airlines, for example—if one shows a $200 ticket and another shows $180 but sneaks in $30 of fees later, the second one appears cheaper. By requiring prices to reflect the full cost upfront, businesses compete on the actual price rather than deceptive practices. This won’t magically lower costs, but it will force clarity and reward companies offering genuine value. Consumers should have a clear picture of what they’re paying, not a surprise at checkout. Isn’t that just fair competition?
- tippytippytango 2y agoYes! Markets work better when deceptive price signals are not inhibiting price discovery. When deception is not rewarded.
- KumaBear 2y agoSo which is better? Ticket price shows at a price of 100 dollars upon checkout you get a ton of fees and it balloons to 140 dollars. Or ticket price shows as 140 dollars you can choose to buy it at said price or not no surprises later in the checkout process. If prices are perceived as high from the moment someone searches for it they may be more tempted to check elsewhere or opt out.
- BurningFrog 2y agoAs a free market fan, Khan seems to have been pretty terrible. But this looks genuinely good! It's basically banning fraud. ---[EDIT], since everyone is asking for reasons here are two libertarian/conservative critiques: • https://reason.com/2024/11/07/good-riddance-lina-khan/ https://reason.com/2024/11/07/good-riddance-lina-khan/ • https://archive.ph/IjNmZ https://archive.ph/IjNmZ
- RajT88 2y agoAh, Reason. The paragon of good and sensible arguments like, "Legalize Insider Trading". This author has not written one of those pieces, but she is in good company with the ones who did.
- m_ke 2y agoPlease name some of the terrible parts EDIT: to make it easier here's a list of actions from perplexity: Here are more explicit actions taken by the FTC under Lina Khan's leadership: Lawsuit against Amazon (2023): The FTC filed a landmark antitrust case accusing Amazon of monopolistic practices in its online marketplace and Prime subscription service. Meta (Facebook) lawsuit (2023): The FTC sued Meta to block its acquisition of virtual reality app maker Within Unlimited, citing concerns about monopolization in the VR market. Microsoft-Activision merger challenge (2023): The FTC attempted to block Microsoft's $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard, though it ultimately failed. Kroger-Albertsons merger: A U.S. district court judge ruled in favor of the FTC to block the proposed $25 billion merger between these two major supermarket chains Nvidia's acquisition of Arm: The FTC sued to block this merger, though it's not explicitly mentioned in the search results Amazon's acquisition of iRobot: While not explicitly mentioned in the search results, this is another high-profile merger that the FTC has challenged under Khan's leadership. Enforcement against data brokers (2022-2023): The FTC took action against several data brokers for selling precise geolocation data that could be used to track people's movements. Zoom settlement (2021): The FTC finalized a settlement with Zoom over allegations of deceptive security practices. Right to Repair initiative (2021): Khan's FTC unanimously voted to ramp up law enforcement against repair restrictions that prevent small businesses, workers, and consumers from fixing their own products. Made in USA labeling rule (2021): The FTC finalized a new rule cracking down on marketers who make false, unqualified claims that their products are Made in the USA. Penalties for fake reviews (2022): The FTC imposed multi-million dollar penalties on companies for using fake reviews and suppressing negative reviews. Action against "dark patterns" (2021-2023): The FTC has taken action against companies using deceptive design practices known as "dark patterns" to trick consumers. Increased use of Penalty Offense Authority: The FTC has revived its Penalty Offense Authority to seek civil penalties for violations of FTC administrative orders. Ban on hidden junk fees: The FTC announced a rule requiring companies to show full prices for items like hotel rooms, concert tickets, and sporting events upfront, rather than hiding fees until the end of the checkout process Changes to merger review process: The FTC has altered principles, practices, and policies of merger review that had been in place for decades Expanded scope of enforcement: The FTC has taken a more holistic approach to identifying harms affecting workers, independent businesses, and consumers, with a focus on addressing power asymmetries and unlawful practices Rulemaking changes: Chair Khan has orchestrated wholesale changes in FTC rulemaking practices and policies Proposed ban on noncompete clauses: The FTC has proposed banning noncompete clauses in employer agreements Increased focus on data privacy: The FTC has sued multiple companies for allegedly sharing customer data and warned about the "hidden impacts" of advertising tools like third-party tracking pixels
- idopmstuff 2y agoI think she's done such great work on the administrative side of things with junk fee bans, etc., but I feel like she has also burned an enormous amount of taxpayer money on lawsuits that don't have value (like suing Meta for acquiring the tiny VR fitness company). It feels like she's just against any acquisitions by large companies, and I think that's both too broad of a stance for the FTC to take (as opposed to really looking on a case-by-case basis of whether consumers would be hurt by an acquisition) and also harmful to new companies being created, since suddenly an important option for exits is a whole lot less likely as large companies hesitate to be acquisitive.
- lobsterthief 2y agoLawsuits are one of the few enforcement mechanisms the FTC has.
- idopmstuff 2y agoOf course, not disputing that, just saying that I think she uses that enforcement mechanism in a way that is more harmful than helpful to American consumers and the to the economy.
- jjeaff 2y agoShe also blocked the huge grocery conglomerate merger. I don't think most of their cases were of tiny acquisitions.
- idopmstuff 2y agoTrue, but even on the big ones, she blocked Spirit/JetBlue. Now Spirit's declared bankruptcy. She spent a bunch of taxpayer dollars to block a merger and made the American consumer worse off as a result.
- bsimpson 2y agoTangential, but I was looking into this yesterday and couldn't find the answer: How does her term work? Seats on the FTC are supposed to last for 7 years. She was nominated in 2021 and her term technically expired a couple months ago. Apparently she gets to remain in it until a replacement is appointed. Has she just been filling in the remainder of someone else's term, like Laphonza Butler as CA Senator?
- zerocrates 2y agoFTC terms work like that, a replacement for a commissioner who leaves mid-term only gets the time remaining on the original appointment, not a new full 7 years. But they also can hang on past the nominal end date until a successor is actually confirmed. The prior chairman, Joseph Simons, had this same seat that Khan has now, so for him his term was also nominally set to expire September 2024. He resigned when the administration changed over in 2021.
- libertine 2y agoThis whole new fantasy that billionaires know best for consumers is quite concerning. The idea that these institutions, like FTC, are bad for consumers, and this new blind faith that things must be deregulated because the market will solve it for the better is going to be interesting. By the way, when things turn bad, it's we who will pay the price again for this deregulation, not billionaires. It's like people are choosing fantasy and magical thinking over History... 2008 wasn't that long ago.
- jjeaff 2y agoThe idea of the wealthy robber barons knowing better is actually no new. It's a renewal of what the old robber barons like Rockefeller and Carnegie et al espoused.
- mentalgear 2y agoNow waiting for a webapp that autoscans your bill for junk fees and can report them to the FTC.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago[flagged]
- mentalgear 2y agoUnder Trump, there will be a roll-back for every other industry.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- pianoben 2y ago...for the next four weeks, anyways. Good effort nonetheless!
- guidedlight 2y agoThey should ban hidden taxes too. The sticker price should be the final price.
- drdec 2y agoDo you want to put in your shipping address to every website before you can shop?
- poorlyknit 2y agoA zipcode should be plenty and grocery websites do that already.
- syndicatedjelly 2y agoThe zip code I live in spans two different cities (as well as different counties in my state). It's stupid but also it's reality
- kaonwarb 2y agoEven within a state a single 5-digit ZIP can have multiple tax rates if it spans multiple cities; true where I live.
- itake 2y agoUnfortunately, there are 13 zip codes that span across multiple states.
- mawif 2y agoThere are 41,000+ zip codes.
- jazzyjackson 2y agoAnd 13 of them do not uniquely identify which state you're in.
- 2y ago
- legitster 2y agoSeems like a no brainer. Can they tackle sales tax next?
- itake 2y agoand service fees at restaurants. The price on the menu in Seattle or SF is ~25% lower than what the product actually costs.
- hamandcheese 2y agoCalifornia was set to ban that, until Scott Weiner carved out an exception for restaurants.
- sedatk 2y agoHis name sounds exactly like someone who'd sabotage a public benefit.
- hnburnsy 2y agoYeah, I love that healthcare surcharge at SFO restaurants.
- itake 2y agoHealthcare surcharge: 6% tip: 20% tax: 8.625% = total: 34.625%
- zten 2y agoThe healthcare surcharge is taxable, because it shouldn't exist, it should just be a 6% increase in the menu price.
- trustinmenowpls 2y agowhat is a healthcare surcharge?
- nirav72 2y agoWonder if this going to be permanent or will be reverted as soon as the new FTC head is in office.
- munk-a 2y agoTime will tell - the change I'm really hoping will stick is the outlawing of non-competes without consideration.
- delecti 2y agoI would not be hopeful. From AP news: > Four of the FTC’s five commissioners voted to approve the rule. Commissioner Andrew Ferguson, – who is President-elect Donald Trump’s choice to replace Khan, was the one dissenting vote. https://apnews.com/article/ftc-junk-fees-rule-hotels-tickets-085606d99f137040e9a86e5b1ac04068 https://apnews.com/article/ftc-junk-fees-rule-hotels-tickets...
- hnburnsy 2y agoOne republican commissioner voted with the rule, and Ferguson dissented based on lame duck rule making, not the merits, while agreeing that the FTC rule making was valid for businesses like tickets and short term lodging.
- Cornbilly 2y agoThat's a moronic dissent. It's either valid or not, lame duck or no. Edit: The full decent reads like choosing fealty to Trump over good rule making. https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ferguson-junk-fees-dissent.pdf https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ferguson-junk-f...
- ghaff 2y agoA lot of people probably weigh this too much. Forcing companies to have some skin in the game is good. But, in practice, if a company really wants to enforce a non-compete--even with consideration--it's probably not great unless you're in a position and want to take a sabbatical with substantially reduced compensation.
- spockz 2y agoIm all for this. I’m worried though that now the junk fees will just be added to the normal price without ultimately changing anything.
- eterm 2y agoThat does change things though, it gives you a fair point of comparison.
- munk-a 2y agoAnd that comparison is important - when junk fees are allowed more honest companies suffer because consumers might shop around and end up choosing the option that is actually more expensive. Those consumers might be on page 12/13 of a form and just accept the fee to avoid the hassle - or they may assume everyone (including what looked like a more expensive competitor) is baking the fees in late in the process and not bother investigating deeper. Hidden fees create market inequities.
- adra 2y agoNo, the reason they tack on the fee as a "tax" is literally to confuse and otherwise mislead the public to the true cost of the product they're buying, or mislead where the money is directed. they're buying from. If you believe in the Tennant's of capitalism at all, then you must have clear price representation.
- smaccona 2y agoNitpick: "tenets"
- olddustytrail 2y agoNitpick: Scottish lager only please
- morkalork 2y agoIsn't Airbnb a good example of this? In some locations you have to open each listing to get the true price and it's a huge waste of time. In locations, what you see on the map is the real value, cleaning and other, fees included.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ChrisArchitect 2y agoOfficial release: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/federal-trade-commission-announces-bipartisan-rule-banning-junk-ticket-hotel-fees https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42441347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42441347)
- arrowleaf 2y agoGreat! My wife was reading me ticket prices for an event on Ticketmaster yesterday, I kept telling her she needs to add them to the cart and start checkout to know the real price. She did just that and to my surprise the price didn't change at all!
- YaBa 2y agoNow do the same with airline companies. WizzAir charges the crap out of you for everything they can. Do not fly with WizzAir!
- bigstrat2003 2y agoA significant difference here is that the airline fees are ostensibly optional. You could, in theory, fly Spirit with nothing except the clothes on your back and they wouldn't charge you extra. But with event ticket sales and the like, there is often no possible way to avoid the fees. That means there's a much stronger argument for requiring that the fees be rolled into the price.
- FateOfNations 2y agoOr they do something silly where there is an "Online Convenience Fee" when you buy online, but if you try to buy it at the box office, there's a different "Box Office Ticketing Fee." The event promoter should pay the cost of their ticketing service provider(s) out of the money they make, not have the purchaser pay it separately.
- Symbiote 2y agoA recent WizzAir flight was advertised (when I searched for the route on their website) for €21. I rejected all optional extras, and that was the total price I paid. No checked luggage, probably only a small cabin bag that fitted under the seat in front, no priority boarding, no seat selection. It's a budget service, but the advertised prices aren't deceptive.
- YaBa 2y agoTrust me, you got lucky, they "randomly" selected passengers with those kind of bags for inspection due to measures, 1mm above? charged! Emphasis on randomly, because the pattern was simple: foreigners? charged, locals? go on. We've saw a poor guy squeeze the hell out of his backpack to no avail, it fitted the measuring box, still, charged because "you had to squeeze it"; guess what, plenty of room under the seat, the guy could put two of them. On me? bag had wheels, foreigner, automatically selected for inspection, took the wheels away, still charged because "it had wheels first". I've flew a dozen companies, not even Ryanair, the low of the lowest treats passengers like this.
- dchichkov 2y agoI wish that "Online Coupon Price Tags" in stores would also be banned. I'm talking about these yellow price tags that show lower than "Club" prices, which are only valid if you collect a coupon online. Like FTC, I estimate that banning these would save U.S. consumers millions of hours they currently spend searching and clicking on pointless coupons on their phones before making purchases. It would also increase happiness, as it's extremely annoying to pay $20 extra, knowing that a lower price is available if only you spent ten minutes struggling with a store's website on your phone. Whoever invented this is evil and is destroying happiness.
- floxy 2y ago>I'm talking about these yellow price tags that show lower than "Club" prices, which are only valid if you collect a coupon online. Which store is that with the yellow price tags?
- dchichkov 2y agoSafeway, Walgreens.
- wlesieutre 2y agoKroger too You have to log in with an account and “clip” the imaginary coupons in their app for the price to apply when you scan your card
- crazygringo 2y agoI'm glad (if it doesn't get reversed by the next administration). But I'm also baffled... how did this take this long? Why wasn't it done way back when they did it for airline tickets, in 2012?
- bluGill 2y agoBecause details matter and are hard. If you don't get the details just right a court will strike the whole thing down for good reason.
- whamlastxmas 2y agoIt’d be a shame to ask hard work of our government that spends a trillion of our dollars every year
- bluGill 2y agoThey did do the hard work - it took many years.
- dylan604 2y agoNot sure about going all the way back to 2012, but maybe they were more worried about the Mayan calendar? /s But as far as under this administration, it seems like it took half the term to right the ship and get the leadership moving in the right direction. I think a second term would have been impressive.
- tzs 2y agoThe House passed a bill [1] earlier this year covering these fees for hotels. It passed 384 to 25 suggesting there is pretty good bipartisan support for ending such fees at least for hotels. Here was the vote breakdown: Yeas Nays Not Voting Republican 180 25 12 Democrat 204 0 9 Total. 284 25 21 [1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6543 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6543
- OptionOfT 2y agoI'd be interested to see whether a movie theater is considered an event. Our local one charges a convenience fee when buying online because ... they can? I wish they banned all mandatory add-ons. If I don't have the choice it should be part of the base price. The touristic railroad near me advertises a price, and then slaps on a mandatory Fuel Surcharge and Historic Preservation Fee. Excuse me? How can I compare what I'm going to spend my money on if you're just allowed to lie to me? Sidenote on fuel cost: Fuel is almost back to pre-COVID costs https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=emm_epmr_pte_nus_dpg&f=m https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=e... and once you add in inflation it's even cheaper.
- ToucanLoucan 2y ago> How can I compare what I'm going to spend my money on if you're just allowed to lie to me? You're not supposed to, that's the point. It's frankly shocking (and also not, but you know) how much businesses in America are allowed to bullshit you. I signed on with a telco for high speed internet when we bought our house for $65 a month and by the time we got fiber and I could finally tell them to kick rocks, the bill had soared to nearly $200 for the exact same service over the course of 4 years. Why? Because they can, and go fuck yourself. A hotel stay for a vacation was supposed to cost $851, but they demanded a $300 pre-authorization on top of that. Why? Because they can. I wasn't notified ahead of time, absolutely nowhere was this information given to me. And I could take that on fine, but why is this allowed? What if I wasn't so fortunate and was traveling by air, do I just sleep in a box because the hotel can't guarantee I'll be able to pay for $300 worth of room service I have no intention of buying? I feel like this just happens everywhere now, I just expect it. I expect to get fucked over in one way or another, and on the one hand I'm sure it's my anxiety, but on the other hand there is so much expensive arbitrary nonsense that's just plunked down in front of me, and yeah, most of it I can handle fine, because I work in tech and make good wages. So I guess just fuck everyone who grew up at the income level I got, because I am fucking sure that my single mother trying her hardest as she was, wouldn't be able to get by if I was born like 15-20 years later than I was. Edit: Oh and FUCK every politician who has ever farted out words something like "responsible consumption of healthcare" because sweet Jesus, healthcare billing is an utter nightmare. I don't think I have EVER, EVER in my entire life had some kind of medical event where I knew the costs going in that were then reflected afterwards. It's just all made the fuck up on the fly with no respect for the patients, when they are already stressed out and scared.
- user3939382 2y agoHopefully this does away with the fraudulent “cleaning fee” when you book a hotel for $200 and then get a charge for $450.
- bluGill 2y agoMaybe. If they document how dirty the room was after you leave, and how clean it was before hand they can get away with this. Generally smoke smell is the only thing they would bother doing this for though. If you just leave the normal mess behind they shouldn't be charging extra.
- user3939382 2y agoYeah I’m talking about an existing practice where the fee applies to all bookings and is just a way to fraudulently advertise the booking price.
- a13o 2y agoIt’s a start. I’m bummed at how narrowly scoped this is. When the RFC period was open I wrote in to highlight how apartments charge surprise pet rent fees that don’t appear until the application process.
- benreesman 2y agoLina Khan is my second hero in life after Evariste Galois. Even if they throw her out it won’t change what she’s done: she put fear in the bellies of some truly terrible people who had almost forgot what the word “restraint” means. Ms Khan, I salute you.
- FireBeyond 2y agoAgree. Somewhat. But given that Elon Musk (who wants to shut down the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau completely) is likely to have a lot of say in these type of things, I think they'll forget that fear.
- benreesman 2y agoAnd the public will just accept arbitrary oppression with no limit? No, the investor class will arrive at the negotiating table one way or another on a long enough timeline. It will be up to them if they still have legs to walk on. The really scary fascists aren’t stupid: Thiel and those guys are buying bunkers in New Zealand as fast as the checks clear. They understand something that the American public lost sight of for a moment: the American Public is terrifying, the American public is slow to wake but arbitrarily brutal once roused. Pushing the American public into a corner has been the last mistake of a great many men better than Elon Musk.
- dayvid 2y agoIf the podcasts spin it well enough, they'll have a large leeway
- benreesman 2y agoRogan and Lex went from interesting Internet shit to terrifyingly effective accomplices of aspiring fascists really abruptly. I’m not sure even they realize how dangerous they’ve become. I’m sorry: we’re past the point where you can normalize Thiel world and not be a menace. I like both of those guys in general, I hope they have the moral courage to take a stand against the really scary shit. But until they’ll flat renounce this psycho aspiring despot shit they’re net negative.
- dheera 2y agoCan we be done with "resort fees" and "taxes" as well? Hotel prices should include all of this
- coderjames 2y ago> The rule would require service fees, resort fees, and other charges commonly added to bookings to be included in advertised prices. Sounds like that's what will be happening if the rule sticks.
- trustinmenowpls 2y agoI need this for my internet provider, advertised price is $25* ** *** Network access fee: $2.65 Municipal upgrade fee: $16.30 Fees end up costing nearly 80% of the entire bill. There are no taxes or gov surcharges of any kind. *(with autopay discount) **(with autopay direct deposit discount) ***(will not be reflected on first 3 bills) ETA: here's their current promotion: https://i.imgur.com/TfwsdQv.png https://i.imgur.com/TfwsdQv.png $20 for service, $20.49 in fees! fees are 102% of the supposed price!
- breadwinner 2y agoMy Internet provider charges $50 per month exactly, and even the taxes are included! How cool is that? They aren't doing that out of goodness of their heart though. It is due to competition from T-Mobile 5G internet, which also has this policy.
- fn-mote 2y agoAgreed. The FCC should act even more broadly. Why doesn't it?
- ssl-3 2y agoWell, at least we're now in a modern enlightened time when there's a standard FCC-required Broadband Facts "label" that can be referred to. It does make it easier to compare. It still seems kind of new and I can't find one for Spectrum (my ISP) or I'd share it here myself, but: I pay exactly $59.95 per month, as the service is advertised in my area, and that's that. There are no itemized fees/taxes on my bill. I don't remember the last time I had an ISP with weird fees associated with it -- it seems like it has had to have been around a decade now, at least. (Cellular, too: My cheapskate all-you-can-eat cellular service costs me $35 per month, flat -- to the penny.)
- quotemstr 2y agoEven the most fundamentalist of free market fundamentalists should be cheering transparency in pricing. The price signal works best when it's not obfuscated.
- breadwinner 2y agoThis shouldn't be controversial. FTC isn't banning these fees, it is only requiring merchants to disclose the fees. Why would anyone be against that? Another good rule is click-to-cancel. Just a couple of days ago I logged into my Dish Network account to cancel it (after they hiked prices). There is no way to cancel online. There is no way to cancel via chat. You have to call. As soon as you call you're told the wait time is over 45 minutes. There is no call back option. Why should a consumer have to be on the phone for 45 minutes to cancel? (Typically they will drop the call after 45 minutes and you have to call again.) If you call Dish to sign up service the wait time is 0 minutes: they answer immediately. If you then tell that you're actually calling to cancel, they forward you to the cancellation number with the wait. This is an abusive business practice, and banning it should not be controversial.
- Terretta 2y agoPeople should have ensured click-to-cancel was passed before demanding subscriptions outside Google Play and Apple's app stores. Well, depends which people, I suppose: subscribers or providers...
- protimewaster 2y ago[dead]
- LoganDark 2y agoMy preferred way to cancel these types of services is to close or pause the card they're charging. If you use a virtual card service like Privacy.com, this is easy, if you don't, then maybe not so much. But using virtual cards for everything you can is typically a good idea anyway, imo.
- breadwinner 2y agoBut then that becomes unpaid bills and they send you to collections.
- sudoshred 2y ago
- seatac76 2y agoWould love to see what gymnastics the incoming FTC head uses to undo this rule.
- coderjames 2y agoDo restaurant service fees next! "Here's the bill, with a 10% service fee added so we can pay our staff more without raising menu prices."
- FateOfNations 2y agoWe almost eliminated those here in California until they chickened out and exempted restaurants.
- Terretta 2y agoNarrator: It's not so they can pay their staff more.
- waldrews 2y agoDoesn't look like they got to DoorDash hidden fees in this decision?
- njarboe 2y agoThis is great if it gets rid of the "resort fee" or "urban fee" that I have had to pay at hotels. Happened last week. An extra $40 a night. It is almost impossible to refuse and find a new hotel right when you are checking in.
- madhacker 2y agoWTF! Definitely paid corporate shill. Legalized corruption in the USA. "A judge in Texas blocked a rule that would cap credit card late fees, and an appeals court in New Orleans blocked a requirement that airlines disclose baggage and other fees upfront."
- kazinator 2y agoGotta love that TicketMaster convenience fee that is for online ticket purchases --- which you still have to pay if you get your ticket at the door, because that is also convenient!
- rawgabbit 2y agoI used to work for a major airline many years ago. I remember when they introduced these crazy fees e.g., seat change fee. I was really disappointed then and soon left. I learned Don Carty then joined Dell who soon started their Byzantine ordering process. I was again disappointed. I still buy Dell monitors because I like them but I never buy from their website. I remember an episode of the TV show Happy Days when the restaurant owner started charging money to use the toilet stall. It was a sad joke and many businesses are following suit.
- ipince 2y agoThis is awesome. There's more to do, but it's a step in the right direction. This law should really apply to all merchants in all industries, as the original 2023 proposal stated (allegedly). Still, I'll take it.
- leeoniya 2y agoi can't remember the last time i paid face value for a concert ticket. the scalping is absurd. it's worse than any fees, by far.
- Sammi 2y agoThe fact that sensible and fair rules like this that favor the consumer don't get anywhere in the usa is proof of the regulatory capture by the corporate elite. The us isn't a democracy, because it isn't ruled by the people, it is ruled by the corporation and rich. Americans keep voting for rich assholes who oppress them while telling them they are giving them freedom.
- alberth 2y agoThe hidden fees is what turned me off from AirBnb... Because it would display the nightly rate as $X. But then at checkout, it would add in "house cleaning fees" etc (which I don't dispute is a fair fee to include) but it at times can grossly misrepresent what your true nightly cost is when searching. Maybe this will be a step in the direction like Telco's have had to do with creating simplified & standardized "nutrition labels" for pricing.
- SparkyMcUnicorn 2y agoOn AirBnB just check the "Display total before taxes" box on the search results page. Not including fees in the nightly rate makes sense as some are fixed rate, and having the option to see the cost for the total stay (including fees) solves the problem.
- zippothrowaway 2y agoThat's still not the total! It can be done. Marriott show the total including taxes. Mind you, this was as a result of a legal settlement, so they get no credit.
- Erwin 2y agoIn EU, you see the total and per-night inclusive all of fees and taxes when searching and comparing. If you search for an area without dates, it comes up with some arbitrary dates and applies the fees and displays per night cost accordingly. So it's technically possible. They just don't want to.
- wodenokoto 2y agoI think it’s country dependent. At least on booking.com it depends on what settings you have.
- stainablesteel 2y agoironically a lot of people take issue with the cleaning fees as the hosts tend you require you to clean up before you leave
- sbochins 2y agoI’m not very confident this is going to survive our next “populist” administration. Whatever faults you can attribute to the current administration, the FTC has taken many actions that have been pro consumer over the past 4 years.
- HaZeust 2y agoThis will probably be what I'll miss most about Administration 46 - some crazy pro-consumer policies and motions for anti-trust, price gouging, and corporate transparency have happened in 2021-2024, and I'm certainly going to miss the strides. The next administration will remove what has been, or ignore the continuing proceedings in the bigger actions (a great example of where the latter is going to happen are the Google-Chrome breakup and TikTok ban.
- reverendsteveii 2y agoLooking forward to all the freedom and efficiency the market will reward us with when Trump rolls this back.
- lxgr 2y agoThe fact that it was ever legal to combine "taxes and fees" into one line item is baffling. One is a thing 100% under control of the business trying to sell me a thing, the other 0%. Why should anybody get to scalp me and legally be able to blame it on the state/city government?
- atoav 2y agoThe FTC could ban crushing alive puppies into a homogeneous paste and feeding it to toddlers — there still would be people who don't see it beneath them to get enraged over the proposition and somehow frame it as a fundamental infringement of business rights if they arenmt allowed to crush alive puppies into a homogeneous paste. I wonder what these people expect to get when they shill for corporations to whom they are nothing in the grand scheme of things.
- smsm42 2y agoThis is still not addressing the main problem. Why can they add those fees and make their UX annoying and hostile to the customer, without fearing that the customers would just turn around and leave? Because the customers largely have nowhere to leave to. If you want to book a hotel, you have very small number of providers (most are owned by one of the very small number of giant conglomerates) to choose from, if you want a concert ticket, you probably have one single provider to choose from, and this is the situation in many other areas. Of course, absent competition, market mechanisms can't work. There should be a way to enable them to work again, and this is not being addressed.