Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Almighty Buck Transportation Businesses

Airlines Will Make a Record $118 Billion in Extra Fees this Year (fastcompany.com) 200

It's not your imagination: Airlines are piling on more fees and extra charges, driving up the cost of air travel. From a report: Across the industry, revenue from what's known as ancillary sales -- fees for selecting seats, checking bags, and buying food, to name a few -- will reach a record $117.9 billion in 2023. That's a 7.7% increase from pre-pandemic records, according to a recent study from airline consultancy firm IdeaWorks and B2B car rental company CarTrawler.

As plane ticket prices have become more competitive, airlines have turned to ancillary sales to boost profits. And where these fees were once largely confined to low-cost carriers, practices like charging customers for seats and checked luggage are now widespread across all airlines. As the IdeaWorks study points out, carriers like British Airways, Air France, and KLM are now even charging fliers to secure 'better' business class seats.

It's not simply the fees that are raising hackles. It's also how they're sold online. Due to the time sensitive nature of airfares, as well as the dozens of upgrades and extras offered as you click through the sales process, airline websites can be ripe environments for what's known as dark patterns. Coined in 2010 by Harry Brignull, a UX designer with a doctorate in cognitive science, dark patterns are design strategies used to trick consumers during their purchasing experience and guide them to decisions they would not make otherwise. Airlines employ a range of tactics on their websites, ranging from manipulation to deception, Bringull says. "People need to be aware of their tactics if we want to see changes in the way they operate."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Airlines Will Make a Record $118 Billion in Extra Fees this Year

Comments Filter:
  • Reinvest. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @12:24PM (#64024541)

    How about spending a little of it to fix the problem of almost 1% of luggage being damaged or lost?

    If you google it, you'll find phrases like "relatively rare" - but there's nothing rare about a 1% failure rate. If planes flew with 1% failure rates, you could run a whole 24 hour channel devoted to airline disasters happening "right now".

    • I think it was already done. Series called "Mayday" [questtv.com]
      • I like that show. Mayday was the US title. I think it was called Air Crash Investigations abroad.

    • How about spending a little of it to fix the problem of almost 1% of luggage being damaged or lost?

      1% is mishandled. Very little luggage overall gets actually lost. The overwhelming majority of that 1% figure gets returned to the owner within a week. It's something the airlines spend a *lot* of money on.

    • Lost luggage is usually an airport problem, not an airline problem.

  • This year airline travelers who don't need services other people use saved $117B.

    • It adds to the degrading feeling over all. Want to sit with your friend/spouse/kid? That's a fee. Checked luggage? Fee, so everyone brings plumped up roller bags that overstuff the overhead bins. Over 5'6" and don't have foldable femurs? Sure, we have Economy Plus or First class or more fees (probably excluded from above). Want to fly out of an airport? Mandatory taxes/fees, another ~30% that should just be baked in. Want your plane to be fueled? Fuel surcharge fee. It is harder and harder to tel

      • Re:In other news (Score:5, Insightful)

        by rogoshen1 ( 2922505 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @01:01PM (#64024651)

        the "money left on the table" mindset is the death of civilization =/ The constant erosion of anything consumers might get value out of by corporations or other entities able to extract the maximum amount from consumers is exactly how we get a corporatist run dystopia (but not the cool, eating ramen in the rain kind of dystopia)

        I think the term is "enshittification", but somehow that's not strong enough.

        • Re:In other news (Score:5, Insightful)

          by nightflameauto ( 6607976 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @01:34PM (#64024739)

          the "money left on the table" mindset is the death of civilization =/ The constant erosion of anything consumers might get value out of by corporations or other entities able to extract the maximum amount from consumers is exactly how we get a corporatist run dystopia (but not the cool, eating ramen in the rain kind of dystopia)

          I think the term is "enshittification", but somehow that's not strong enough.

          We slipped through capitalism and entered into an era where profit is god. Try having a rational conversation with some of the true believer capitalists today. It always ends the same. Them having some sort of mental breakdown about how profit is the only motivation that matters, and there's no emotional, logical, ethical, or moral argument to be made against it. Profit. Is. God. PERIOD! Don't question it. Don't think about how it may have negative consequences. Profit above all, and stay out of the damned way.

          • Re:In other news (Score:4, Informative)

            by dave314159259 ( 1107469 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @04:07PM (#64025159)

            The problem isn't profit in and of itself (profit is necessary for the business to continue), but Maximize Short-Term Profit Right Now behavior, regardless of the long-term effects.

            Long-term profits come from serving your customers well so they want to continue doing business with your company and recommend it to their friends and co-workers because of the good service and value. The airlines have forgotten this principle.

            • The problem isn't profit in and of itself (profit is necessary for the business to continue), but Maximize Short-Term Profit Right Now behavior, regardless of the long-term effects.

              Long-term profits come from serving your customers well so they want to continue doing business with your company and recommend it to their friends and co-workers because of the good service and value. The airlines have forgotten this principle.

              Yes, which is why the "profit above all" thing is such a dumbass way to go about doing things. It's the MBA driven, "next quarters profits MUST be better" shit that drives really horrible decision making. Horrible for humanity (cutting corners, safety last garbage), and horrible for long-term stability even for the companies themselves. It's profit as its own driver, with no other concerns that causes horrible decisions. Which is why I refer to is as Profit as God.

            • There is little brand loyalty in airlines today. The experience for most low-cost airlines is terrible at this point, and most companies compete solely on price.

              I don't think that anybody really LIKES flying on Spirit or RyanAir, but they'll do it when the flight to Miami is $89 and American and JetBlue want $300 for the same ticket.

        • Re:In other news (Score:4, Insightful)

          by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @02:17PM (#64024873)
          Millenials and Z honestly have no clue how seldom it was for the generations immediately before theirs to fly.

          Yet out come the inevitable tropes - dystopia, enshittification, blah blah.

          But the fact is, airline travel keeps getting more affordable [usinflatio...ulator.com], as additionally evidenced by the fact that people keep flying more and more [statista.com].

          • Re:In other news (Score:4, Insightful)

            by rogoshen1 ( 2922505 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @02:55PM (#64024985)

            packed in like sardines with rude, arrogant, obnoxious people, after suffering through a strip search and a 5 hour wait in line to board your plane and I'm sure other vagaries that are totally acceptable nowadays..(for reasons?) but hey, it's a little bit cheaper!
            i mean while we're at it, I'm guessing taking a bus or riding the subway is probably cheaper relatively speaking than it used to be, but is it better now?

            You're in a roundabout way helping me make my point. All the dehumanizing crap can be justified to save a bit of money, right? And because you're such a good (b|g)oy some of those savings might be passed on to you, loyal consumer!)

            • by skam240 ( 789197 )

              To be fair to the poster above you if airline A is able to lower the cost of a ticket by cramming customers closer together and airline B doesn't follow suit they're going to lose a lot of business as their tickets will now seem over priced.

              We're probably at the limit of what they can do with cramming people in so now they're doing things like adding extra fees to lower the base ticket price. I hate it but when an airline's competition is able to offer a $20 cheaper ticket most folks are going to go with t

            • packed in like sardines with rude, arrogant, obnoxious people, after suffering through a strip search and a 5 hour wait in line to board your plane and I'm sure other vagaries that are totally acceptable nowadays..(for reasons?) but hey, it's a little bit cheaper!

              That is a *choice* you made. You can skip the strip search (pay for it), not be packed in like sardines (pay for it), not have rude obnoxious people around you (pay for it), and not wait in line (pay for it). The end result is a none of the problems, and the same price ticket you used to pay for in the late 80s (a time before your complaints).

              Your suffering is 100% your own doing.

        • And yet people keep flying, especially those with more disposable income. Guess it's working as intended.

          Personally I can't stand flying anymore and a lot of this is why. I'll likely never get to go visit some of the places around the world I would like to anyway but that's life.

        • by Jeremi ( 14640 )

          Less dramatically, it's how you train consumers to avoid travelling by air whenever humanly possible.

          If flying cars ever become a thing, it will be because you can get into your flying car and not have to play stupid pricing games over where to put your luggage.

        • I think the term is "enshittification", but somehow that's not strong enough.

          There's nothing shit about the lower middle class or upper poor being able to afford airline tickets. I have been flying regularly my entire life and asside from a small post COVID price increase airlines are incredibly cheap now.

          You want to pay for that seat selection, do so. You're literally no worse off than you were before just because someone else has the option of a cheaper seat. That's not "enshitification" that is "user choice".

      • I had no idea about this on other airlines.

        Pretty much everywhere I go, I fly Southwest Airlines.

        Until the problems they hit last year with HUGE Xmas delays, I'd never had complaint "1"....they were on time, my luggage checked always arrive with me, etc.

        I hope they have their kinks in computer/scheduling fixed for this year.

        But I like them...I generally book my tickets early, so I get early seatings, and I almost always seem to get my favorite seat near the side emergency exits with all the foot room.

        P

        • by Bahbus ( 1180627 )

          Southwest has not fixed any kinks in their scheduling because there are no kinks. Their entire problem comes down to being one of the only airlines specifically and purposely using a scheduling system that is temperamental and doesn't handle the unexpected well. It's a great system when nothing is going wrong but fails spectacularly at the drop of a dime.

          Meanwhile, I will not fly Southwest because their planes tend to be disgusting with little to no cleanup in between flights while the comfort of their plan

    • Don't forget the 5 quid fee to drop someone off at Heathrow terminal 5. Wonder if BA gets that, since they are the only airline serviced?

  • Fees (Score:4, Insightful)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @12:27PM (#64024561)

    "Amount we're going to charge you after we've reeled you in on false pretenses."

    It should be considered a type of fraud.

    • "Amount we're going to charge you after we've reeled you in on false pretenses."

      It should be considered a type of fraud.

      I'm sure a lot of people - perhaps even a majority - do consider it to be fraud. The trick is to get legislators on board with that thinking. I suspect various forms of bribery - among them even legalized bribery, such as lobbying - are preventing that from happening.

      • I'm sure a lot of people - perhaps even a majority - do consider it to be fraud.

        I'm sure those are the same people unironically complaining about cable bundling fees. There's nothing fraudulent about not being forced to take extras when flying. Flying is cheaper than ever. Go book your bag, you're no worse off than you were before. Just don't bitch about having the option of a lower fare if you don't need seat selection, bags, food, extra legroom, etc, etc.

    • "Amount we're going to charge you after we've reeled you in on false pretenses."

      It should be considered a type of fraud.

      Absolutely not. Flying is cheaper than ever. Having to be forced to include various options that I won't use in the ticket price should be a type of fraud, it's akin to bundling on cable subscriptions.

      These aren't hidden fees. You can pay exactly the ticket price you see on the website right up front (maybe not in America, I don't know, do they tack on taxes and fees at the end there like everything else?) But the default these days on short trips is that you don't need a bag per passenger, so why would you

  • All the fees, small seats, and other degradations have added up to me avoiding travel, and dreading it when we do fly. Like many things the "price" is no longer available to compare. Too many fees are excluded, and each airline has different items included/excluded to the point where it is too much of a hassle to actually price shop properly. We need some floor to this spiral, some basic limits to ensure the race to the bottom doesn't go any further.. Human sized seats that a 6' person can comfortably s

    • It's not just airlines but hotels too. A friend of mine booked a stay at a hotel in Vegas and the mandatory "resort fees" were higher than the room cost. When they started introducing resort fees (20 years ago?) you could just ask politely and they'd remove the fee. Then it started being that you have to throw a small tantrum and maybe start to call a competitor hotel for a room to get them to take it off. A short time late, it was you'd have to throw even bigger tantrums .. like a rolling on the floor foam

      • Oh, it's definitely frog boiling. One company tries these fees and deals with the cranky clients but makes a nice little extra income stream, so the rest of everyone in that industry starts doing the same, claiming that it's just the industry standard now. We all get pissed but there's nothing to be done, because literally everyone is doing it.

        The temperature keeps climbing until that water is boiling your bank account into uncontained vapors.

    • I hate flying also. All baggage and ticketing fees should be up front. I shouldn't have to dig through the process before having them revealed. Can we have a federal regulation forcing airlines to make seats that fit actual modern humans? I'm actually considering wearing knee pads on my next flight because my knees are jammed against the seat in front of me for hours.

      • by hey! ( 33014 )

        It's not that all that stuff is all that costly, it's just a nuisance and turns what used to be a straightforward process into a complicated one.

    • My contribution to the reduction of CO2 emissions is to give up flying.

      I'm also not interested in cruise ships. That should save some carbon emissions too.

  • by DarkRookie2 ( 5551422 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @12:32PM (#64024579)
    People keep telling me that I should. I point out I just can look up pictures online if I really wanted to see it and that traveling is too much a pain in the ass to make any trip enjoyable.
    This will just add more ammo for to say that traveling is a stupid gimmicky waste of time.
    • Even with the shit with airlines travel is still worth it. My best experiences are not found in online photos.

      • Nothing will out weigh the fact that I had to spend hours locked in a metal box to get there and have the prospect of doing the same thing again in a short amount of time.
        • by skam240 ( 789197 )

          A number of my life's finest experiences have been had while traveling.

          You do you but there's a lot to be said for getting out of ones daily rut, exploring new places, trying new food, and meeting new sorts of people. Airlines would have to get one hell of a lot worse for me to ever give up travel

          To be fair to you though the way some people travel where they sprint between major sites without spending any real time to soak up local culture and the like does seem like something that could be easily given up.

    • by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @04:36PM (#64025251) Journal

      The photos you take are the least interesting thing that happens on literally any trip worth taking. And then you can add to that the fact that experiencing it on your phone screen is a totally different thing to actually being there and seeing whatever it is in full accurate color and not bounded to a 5" screen, and without JPEG artifacting.

      You should get out there and learn that for yourself.

      • To see what exactly? Trees? Grass? Buildings? Stupid touristy nonsense I dodge around here?
        I see all of that on my way to work. If I want to look at something slightly different, I can always look online.

        Travel! Go see something different!
        I can do that online
        It is not the same.
        It what way
        It is not the same
        Cool. I will stick with my pictures, not sitting in a metal box for hours on end, and not wasting $1000s.
  • Betwen the pat downs, the proctology exams, the ridiculous restrictions on what you can carry onto the plane (if a pen is a weapon, so are my fingers), the unruly, uncouth slobs you have to fly with, and of course the fees, flying is nowhere near what it used to be and not worth the effort.

    As an aside, despite all the supposed security theater taking place, there is a giant gaping hole (no, not that one) at all airports which the TSA and all the other three-letter agencies are aware of, and there's nothing

    • Don't forget the other passengers acting like psychos and ego maniacs

      • As a pretty frequent flyer this is the real killer for me. The TSA and the airlines are annoying but it's all very predictable and a few times through the process it becomes fairly easy to go through the motions.

        The people though, everyone trying to shortcut themselves ahead of everyone else just ends up slowing everybody down including themselves. It's a constant psychological experiment in how quickly societal norms can break down due to a small minority of people.

      • Don't forget the other passengers acting like psychos and ego maniacs

        That's the unruly, uncouth slobs part.

  • I got an email asking me how much I would like to pay for ..... They collect offers, and take and charge one offering most :).

    • Interesting. For my recent flights, I'm usually offered a flat fee to upgrade during checkin if there are open premium seats. Usually it's a pretty reasonable cost.

      No auction involved. I hope auctions don't become the norm here... I usually buy the upgrade.

  • I actually look forward to the day they charge for carry-ons.
    It would cut down on the ridiculous hogging of overhead
    space by people trying to avoid checked bag fees.

    On my last flight there were people with *two* backpacks
    each - one worn normally, one on the chest. ("My carry-on
    and my personal item".) Long delays caused by rearranging
    the bins to accomodate them.

    Assholes. No wonder loading the plane is so slow.

    • by superdave80 ( 1226592 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @12:52PM (#64024641)
      By 'assholes', I assume you are referring to the airlines that created this mess by charging for bags?
      • Just about everyone involved in the process of flying is an asshole of varying degree with the possible exception of the airport bartender.
      • by Pascoea ( 968200 )
        Both. Both parties are assholes. The airlines are assholes for charging frankly absurd amounts for baggage. And the assholes that think rules don't apply to them. (Although I do get a small amount of satisfaction watching Karens and Kevins re-packing their "personal item" that's the size of a checked bag, while arguing with the gate agent as if they have the power to change a federal rule.)
        • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          Both. Both parties are assholes. The airlines are assholes for charging frankly absurd amounts for baggage. And the assholes that think rules don't apply to them. (Although I do get a small amount of satisfaction watching Karens and Kevins re-packing their "personal item" that's the size of a checked bag, while arguing with the gate agent as if they have the power to change a federal rule.)

          Unless I'm missing something, it isn't a federal rule. The relevant section of the FAA rules is 121.589 [ecfr.gov], which just says:

          "(a) No certificate holder may allow the boarding of carry-on baggage on an airplane unless each passenger's baggage has been scanned to control the size and amount carried on board in accordance with an approved carry-on baggage program in its operations specifications. In addition, no passenger may board an airplane if his/her carry-on baggage exceeds the baggage allowance prescribed

    • The bargain airlines like Spirit and Frontier do this exact thing. I want to say RyanAir was the pioneer of this model, super cheap ticket but everything is a charge; overhead bins, seat selection, boarding, baggage, food.

    • by ncc74656 ( 45571 ) *

      I actually look forward to the day they charge for carry-ons.

      I'm pretty sure Spirit does that already, and has for years.

    • It is exactly this kind of crap that makes me actually spend a bit more to be on an airline that doesn't charge millions of fees for every little thing, and does stuff like reserve overhead bins for the class of service I'm sitting in. The overall price ends up being about the same, but the level of service is far and beyond better, and I arrive much more happy and comfortable.

      Of course that doesn't stop assholes from still trying to put shit into those bins when there are big red labels saying it's reserv

    • When I do have to travel, I've made it a priority to only bring what is strictly necessary and will fit inside the single carry on. I do this to avoid my bag getting lost and to avoid waiting for it at the bag collection area.

      As other's have said, I'd rather just drive if it's at all possible and make the drive part of the travel experience instead of dealing with the airline experience. I've done enough of that the past 20 years that I am okay with no going to certain far away destinations anymore.

      I'm luck

  • Welcome to the "mandatory fees" ticketmaster model. Colleges have been doing it for decades with mandatory fees and not folding them into the tuition (which also means they aren't covered by tuition scholarships). If a fee is mandatory then it is part of the price. Breaking it out is a scummy way of pretending the cost is less up front and then slipping in the extra cost at the end of the purchasing process.

    • The solution is to simply legally mandate that the sticker price IS the price. If it isn't right up front on the sticker it's illegal and the company is liable for treble damages and criminal investigation.

  • by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @12:51PM (#64024635)

    To get a nicer flying experience, I use my disability. Most of the time I don't need assistance. But between the fucking TSA and the airlines, I'll admit I'll request assistance ahead of time just to bypass as much of the shittiness as possible.

    • by Zarhan ( 415465 )

      We "use" our child. Essentially, if you are traveling with kids, even without any paid extras, having a child on your ticket guarantees that at least one of the parents is located next to the child, and *usually* you all get to sit together.

      However, sometimes one of the parents gets to sit elsewhere (why on earth). Then, if at check in we find that one of us is placed on the other side of the plane, it's usually quite simple to ask the lonely passenger to switch (especially in a 3 + 3 configured plane, like

      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        However, sometimes one of the parents gets to sit elsewhere (why on earth). Then, if at check in we find that one of us is placed on the other side of the plane, it's usually quite simple to ask the lonely passenger to switch (especially in a 3 + 3 configured plane, like A320).

        Annoying as hell. Only explanation I can think of that they are *intentionally* running some randomization algorithm on passenger seats, shared tickets be damned.

        The problem is the lonely passenger might NOT switch. Especially if they

      • by sconeu ( 64226 )

        And if that solo is me, I won't switch. Failure to plan properly (i.e. pay for seat selection if necessary) on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part.

    • Don't sweat it. We can always wear a cast or crutches and pretend to be disabled and get the same perks!

  • Luggage fees (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Roogna ( 9643 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @01:08PM (#64024671)

    The one that drives me absolutely bonkers is the way they handle luggage is such a scam. My family will pack a "free" carry on only, because checking bags costs extra, but *every single time we've flown in the past few years* the airline as we're checking in is like "Oh no! The plane is busy! Please check your bags, free just because we're so busy!" Well you know what, if checking the bags was free in the first place, and you instead charged for the carry on, then it would encourage people to put the bags where you want them in the first place.

    But if I just want to check the bag? Nope they want to charge for that. So have to roll the dice and pack as if I'll be forced to carry the bag on.

    • Unfortunately due to the average 20-30 minute wait for bags people will cram the overheads regardless. Anecdotal but I have flown Southwest a lot over the past year and even with free checked bags the overheads are always full and last groups on end up having to check.

      Now this is also due to people taking advantage where they will pack 2 or 3 items in the overheads which for me is just enraging even when I am not using them since I checked (usually carrying tools). The poor flight attendants can't be ever

      • by taustin ( 171655 )

        Unfortunately due to the average 20-30 minute wait for bags people will cram the overheads regardless.

        That is precisely the point of charging for carryons, not checked bags. Getting off the plane and out of the airport 20-30 minutes faster is a premium service.

        Instead, airlines charge for the inferior service, and make everyone's experience worse.

        • I agree and the "cheapo" airlines like Spirit and Frontier do the charge for overhead but I think it's just a matter of logistics in that the planes were never designed for restrictions on the overheads and the staff would have to check every customer for payment and then watch like a hawk during load in for people not allowed to go into the overhead.

          I do think the newest models of plans have enough expanded overhead space where in theory there should be enough for one (regulation size) luggage piece per pa

      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        Unfortunately due to the average 20-30 minute wait for bags people will cram the overheads regardless. Anecdotal but I have flown Southwest a lot over the past year and even with free checked bags the overheads are always full and last groups on end up having to check.

        Now this is also due to people taking advantage where they will pack 2 or 3 items in the overheads which for me is just enraging even when I am not using them since I checked (usually carrying tools). The poor flight attendants can't be everyw

        • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          Maybe heaven should go to someone to invent dividers - since your carryon has to fit in a space anyways, why not divide the overheads and give each seat that amount of overhead space? That way you can't fight over it - it's got your seat number on it.

          Won't work. Until recently, most aircraft didn't have enough overhead bin space for one piece of standard-sized luggage per seat. The airlines kept cramming more seats in, but the overhead bins stayed the same size. The most recent configurations have improved that somewhat, but even now, they're *barely* big enough to hold enough bags, and only if you're able to turn the bags on their side. If you added dividers, you'd be back to not having enough space.

          And smaller planes can't be upgraded to have over

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I hate to defend them but isn't it because you have a much higher weight and size limit in checked bags? They cost more to transport than cabin bags.

  • No amount of complaining/bellyaching will help. This is the much praised "efficiency of private sector" that some politicians talk about when they talk about social security or health care. Remember that, next time they denounce government as inefficient. Efficiency for private sector is defined as the ability to squeeze the last drop out of the hapless customer

    Adam Smith's invisible hand providing the maximum goods and services at the minimum cost does not happen when there are monopolies, cartels and col

  • by Tony Isaac ( 1301187 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @01:24PM (#64024703) Homepage

    These fee increases reflect how airfares no longer include everything, such as checked baggage, carry-ons, meals, and so on. Air travel today is dirt cheap in the context of history. In the last 50 years, the price of air travel has gone down by about 90% in real dollars.

    https://www.travelandleisure.c... [travelandleisure.com]

    • Has it really gone down or has the government subsidized air travel more and more?
      • The only thing the government has done is increase the cost. Anywhere costs are going up despite technological improvements, government is to blame, if costs go down and prices stay the same, in true open markets, a company will be outcompeted. The problem is that due to regulation, the cost of entry for startups is too high so you end up with a state-sponsored monopoly.

        This eventually ends up in a government style called corporatism, itâ(TM)s how China and Nazi Germany operated, itâ(TM)s a style

        • Which specific regulations are to blame here though? Airlines are always going to require some degree of regulation in terms of maintenance and safety (wildly unethical to do it all post-incident) and there are only so many airports with so many gates so that is very inelastic to apply a market force to and an airline is extremely capital intensive to start (planes costs a lot of $$$)

          If the airlines all have to abide by the same safety regs and they are all competing for the same gates where does the govern

          • Trying to reason with a free-market believer is like trying to explain the mythology of the bible with an evangelical. It's a religion of the "invisible hand of the market."

      • US Airlines receive about $300 million annually in government subsidies. https://enotrans.org/eno-resou... [enotrans.org].

        Each year, US airlines carry about 800 million passengers. https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/f... [bts.gov].

        That works out to a subsidy averaging about 37 cents per passenger trip. I seriously doubt that this has been a major factor in ticket prices, other than for a small number of specific routs that are the targets of subsidies.

        • Did you include the discounted jet fuel? What about the bail outs?
          • OK, let's include those numbers.

            Since 2000, US government airline bailouts have totaled $64 billion. Given an average of 700 million passenger trips per year since then https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com], that gives us an average of $3.97 per trip.

            Add that to the 37 cents above, and we have a total of $4.34 per trip.

            I don't see anything about government jet fuel subsidies, except for those supporting "green" jet fuels. https://www.reuters.com/sustai... [reuters.com] Sorry, that doesn't count.

            You do have Google, right? You

            • Jet fuel is not taxed anywhere near the the rate for every other petroleum fuel. This is not an insignificant sum. Even ignoring that, $4-5.00 is not nothing.
              • by Tony Isaac ( 1301187 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @06:06PM (#64025489) Homepage

                You've got me there, $5 per ticket is not "nothing." Given that the average plane ticket in the US is $382 https://www.moneygeek.com/cred... [moneygeek.com]., it's about 1.3%. So this comes close to answering your original question:

                Has it really gone down or has the government subsidized air travel more and more?

                Yes, yes it has. Since the cost of plane tickets has gone down by 90%, and subsidies and bailouts have a 1.3% impact, I'd guess that without them, prices would have gone down by only...88%, if it weren't for subsidies.

                On the other hand, ticket prices include about 30% in taxes. https://thepointsguy.com/guide... [thepointsguy.com] So if it weren't for that, ticket prices would be an additional 30% *lower.*

                So how much were those savings again, due to low tax rates on fuel???

  • These fees are not extra, they are part of regular fare they always charge. The fact that they subverted the consumer pricing rules and made it impossible to know upfront how much they are going to charge you is what these 'fees' are all about. So you can't price compare until you actually go through the booking process to the final payment step. Vast majority of people won't bother with that many steps, ending direct competition.

    In a few years we will probably see "Free flights!*** some fees apply" adver
  • If you fly more than once or twice a year then getting Precheck is by far the easiest and best thing to do for your sanity. Shoes stay on, laptop stays in bag, regular metal detector, shorter lines.

    It's like $80 for five years and yes it's annoying that there is effectively an extra travel tax but the amount of teeth gnashing and time in line it's saved me has made it essential. Highly recommend.

    • Or........ Get yourself an "FBI" Hoodie. :) You bypass everything!
    • And if you travel international, skip the TSA PreCheck and go directly to Global Entry - it's basically the same paperwork shuffle with a perfunctory in-person "interview" which also gives you TSA PreCheck (optionally) but allows you to completely skip the US Customs checkpoint coming back into the country in favor of scanning your passport at a kiosk, declaring you aren't smuggling shit, and then showing a receipt and your passport to the attending officer, and you're done.

      Worth every fucking penny if you'

  • lowest price (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CohibaVancouver ( 864662 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @02:38PM (#64024939)
    The problems the airlines face is this: The majority of the flying public have made it clear that *nothing* matters to them more than the lowest fare. Not legroom. Not blankets and pillows or meals or free drinks. Not status miles or good service. Nothing. Over the years airlines have tried reintroducing perks like meals for an airfare that's a few dollars more and people sort by price and flock to the ticket that is $30 cheaper. An airline could slap you in the face with a trout every 15 minutes and people would still book it if the fares were lower.

    Until people start voting with their wallets and make it clear through their actions that they're willing to pay just a little bit more for a better experience, nothing will change.
    • Re:lowest price (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Weirsbaski ( 585954 ) on Wednesday November 22, 2023 @04:33PM (#64025237)

      The problems the airlines face is this: The majority of the flying public have made it clear that *nothing* matters to them more than the lowest fare. Not legroom. Not blankets and pillows or meals or free drinks. Not status miles or good service. Nothing.

      That's because customers can only comparison-shop using the info they have. I have yet to see an airline's website tell me the seat-pitch size or blankets/pillows or amount of free food included with a given seat.

      If price and departure/arrival time are the only info the airline provides, then price and departure/arrival time will be used for comparison shopping.

  • The fees make everything more expensive, but those people who absolutely need to travel can now do so cheaper than ever.

    A round-trip flight from New York to San Francisco is now as low as $130. That's $0.0216 per mile.

    Is the flight going to suck? Sure. Does it cost another $100 to bring a carry-on? Sure. But if you're poor and really need to get somewhere, it seems to be cheaper now than ever.

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Working...