5 ms·
Doesn't this mean that they'll just include the fees in the price for everyone?
by stavros 1y ago
Doesn't this mean that they'll just include the fees in the price for everyone?
- jmercouris 1y agoYes, in practice this increases price transparency. Imagine everything could be monetized. They could charge for access to the bathroom, or water. What is the minimum expectation of what is included in the price of a ticket?
- userbinator 1y agoWhat is the minimum expectation of what is included in the price of a ticket? A seat.
- ajmurmann 1y agoI'd include air and a seatbelt
- dale_glass 1y agoCertainly a bathroom has to be included, you can't lock people in a tube in the sky and then not let them pee. But I believe Ryanair considered trying not to use seats at one point.
- sidewndr46 1y agoActually you can do exactly that, at least in the US. I've been stuck on a plane more than once and told I couldn't use the restroom
- johnisgood 1y agoThen they will have to hire cleaners, because I will shit and pee all over the seat.
- sidewndr46 1y agoI've never personally seen someone do that but I have heard stories of this happening before.
- johnisgood 1y agoI have incontinence, so I either wear diapers (still going to pee and defecate regardless), or I have access to the bathroom in time. If I wear diapers, there is going to be odor contamination in the area. It is bad for others, and for me, and their business too, I assume. Depends on the length of the trip; I try to limit fluid intake to zero before I go outside.
- ndsipa_pomu 1y agoThat sounds unlikely - did they give a reason (e.g. toilet cannot be used when the fasten seatbelt light is on during turbulence/landing/take-off)
- sidewndr46 1y agoThe reason was because they said so. Keep in mind, I also had a flight attendant tell me that using Zoom on a plane is a felony.
- ndsipa_pomu 1y agoWhich airline(s) was that, so that we can avoid them?
- rjh29 1y agoRyanair also considered charging for bathrooms. Although in both cases, it's hard to tell if they were serious, or just doing PR.
- JimDabell 1y agoIt’s not hard to tell at all. At peak season every year, O’Leary says something crazy like they are going to charge for the bathroom, or charge fat people extra, or get rid of arm rests, or have standing room only. The tabloids run the story, and always mention how cheap the flights are, including whatever the cheapest deal at the moment is. It’s very, very obvious advertising. The tabloids go along with it because it makes people angry, which drives traffic.
- jopsen 1y agoSeats are not included in all bus or train tickets :)
- userbinator 1y agoThe only reason the seat is necessary on a plane is for safety.
- baq 1y agoin a more civilized time there would be a bit more than that.
- ajmurmann 1y agoUp until 1978 there was a lot more than this in the US. This is where we see photos of carts that brought prime rib to passengers and people in suits toasting with champaign glasses and there was so much space in the aisle that you could pass by service carts. It was like that because airlines were extremely regulated and not allowed to compete on price. So they competed on what was included. The result was photos of "a more civilized time" but also that almost nobody could afford to fly.
- CamperBob2 1y agoWhat is the minimum expectation of what is included in the price of a ticket? The expectation that you eventually reach your destination alive. That's it, from the airlines' perspective.
- jopsen 1y ago> The expectation that you eventually reach your destination alive. Tell me, when you fly as freight do pay to have the box labelled "fragile" :)
- dheera 1y agoI'm against charging for bathrooms, water, or other such basic human needs while you are in the custody of the airline for the duration of travel. There should be a basic standard of human care that includes those things. Food should also be included for flights over 5-ish hours. Carry-on fees are a whole another level of shittiness though. I, the customer, am the one carrying the bag, there should be no reason to charge for it. It's like charging extra for wearing a red shirt or charging extra for wearing a hat.
- kelnos 1y ago> I, the customer, am the one carrying the bag, there should be no reason to charge for it. It's on the plane, so it takes up some of the limited storage space, and increases the weight of the plane, which means more fuel burned. Saying you carry the bag so there's no reason to charge for it is like saying you carry yourself onto the plane, so there's no reason to charge you for the flight ticket. So either they build the average per-passenger cost into the price of every ticket, or they charge a fee only for people who want to take on the extra bag.
- ftth_finland 1y agoAirlines already use an average cost per passenger. What you are looking for is charging passengers per weight.
- whazor 1y agoIn practice, flights.google.com doesn't know the price of a luggage. So you might think a Easyjet/Ryanair ticket is cheaper, but I have had situations where actually after adding the luggage for every passenger the normal airline is €30 cheaper in total. And you get a free drink plus snack. Honestly, it would be much better for transparency reasons if budget airlines offer a discount for no luggage instead of an extra fee.
- toomuchtodo 1y agoYes, airfare will be slightly more spread across everyone who flies, vs everyone paying for this except those only traveling with a personal belonging. At some point, you have to say no to further enshittification and price discrimination optimization.
- epolanski 1y agoThat's what they are scaring everyone with: > Europe's airline market is built on choice. Forcing a mandatory trolley bag strips passengers of that choice and obliges passengers to pay for services they may not want or need In any case I'm for it, I'm sick of finding how much am I really paying after 10 minutes of form filling. Price comparators are absolutely useless since they don't include such basic fees like a small trolley.
- amarcheschi 1y agoRyanair is now introducing a sickness charge to better allow for flow management, if you're sick of dark patterns you'll have to pay 2€ more on top of the other charges
- byecancer21 1y agoEffectively, this is government-mandated bundling. Now you must buy the extra service when taking a flight, whether you require it or not.
- carstenhag 1y agoWhich is probably totally fine - the statistics would speak the truth here. Funny how the airlines have this data but are not presenting it here, curious thing...
- majormajor 1y agoI assume the motivation is to rein in something seen as semi-deceitful advertising. If you're advertising a lower price because you're excluding the cost of something that much of the competition already has baked in, that you know a high percentage of your customers will end up paying for, who is that really benefiting? A market isn't made more efficient by consumers having to do more research and homework around "what are the hidden fees that might surprise me?" I haven't flow budget airlines in the EU but in the US the budget ones often end up more expensive for the average customer after re-adding all the fees. So it's not just "don't charge people who won't use it," it's "have leverage to charge more for it by making people only realize they have to pay for it later." (Though to be completely honest, carry-on baggage has gone fairly nuts since airlines started charging for checked bags.)
- altairprime 1y agoPresumably. They truly want to bill per kilo of baggage and passenger per ticket but they’d be sued into oblivion for that.
- IshKebab 1y agoNo. That's not how pricing works. The price of a ticket might go up slightly, but it won't go up by the same amount as the fees cost. This is due to supply and demand. Basically the price of something depends partly on how much people are willing to pay for it. On average, people don't value the extra cabin baggage at the price the airline charges, so they can't charge everyone that fee. It would be inefficient and they would lose money if they tried. They might increase prices a little... But the most efficient price increase might be surprisingly small.
- mrtksn 1y agoIs there a cost for it though? They don't carry cargo when someone chooses not to buy carry-on baggage right and they don't charge people per kg anyway. It's not even like one of those tricks for upselling as for most people 0 baggage doesn't make sense and it turns into a hidden fee. So I guess they will increase the prices of 20 + 40 tickets to 50 to compensate for all the lost cabin baggage sales and some people will be really upset that they can't have the 20 tickets anymore. Meanwhile people will be able to compare the full cost of their flight with the cost of a train or bus alternatives. IMHO they should make it compulsory to display the minimum cost of transfer to the airport. Often those 9EUR Ryanair tickets actually cost 100EUR+ because they fly to airports that don't have reasonable transfer options and you pay multiples of your flight for transport to and from the airport. When you put in all the costs you realize that 9EUR plane tickets is more expensive than 100EUR+ train ticket.
- okanat 1y agoYes. At the same time though, the airline companies cannot infinitely increase prices.