Grrrr - Really Annoying Shit .com Really Annoying Shit .com
about | join | Log In
Subscribe to this feed
Featured Blogger

Blogger: Mark
Blog DOB: 22 Aug, 2006

Name: Mark O'Connor
Location: London

Me in the Antarctic

 
 

Really Annoying Sh##
This is my blog where I can dump all the sh## that really annoys me. It stays here, I can get on and enjoy myself. It's like therapy, and you can join too for free. Just add yourself as a blogger and get rid of all your sh##. 

My Categories
Business (35)
Government (104)
Life (20)
People (19)
Products (18)
Technology (20)

Recent Posts

Archive

Tag Cloud

Click tag to retrieve blogs
  1. Gordon Brown
  2. Tesco
  3. Tony Blair
  4. Customer Service
  5. Labour
  6. Marketing
  7. HMRC
  8. Alistair Darling
  9. Ryanair
  10. Ken Livingston
  11. Christmas
  12. Banks
  13. Microsoft
  14. Aer Lingus
  15. Virgin Media
  16. VAT Registration
  17. London Mayor
  18. Internet
  19. Computers
  20. Labour Party
  21. consumers
  22. energy
  23. ignorance
  24. People
  25. Cars
  26. Recession
  27. Spin
  28. Respect
  29. Shite
  30. 10 Downing Street
  31. Apple
  32. Windows Vista
  33. Big Brother
  34. Government
  35. Supermarkets
  36. Power Product
  37. carbon footprint
  38. Advertising
  39. politics
  40. Budget

Airline Scams

By Blondie
Friday 05 Jan, 2007 - 15:03pm | 2 comments |

Doing some recent internet browsing in an effort to book some quality time away from my hectic work schedule I have been intrigued by the blatant "Scam" currently in operation by all major airlines. Lets take a trip to Washington in March.

 With Delta Airlines it will cost テ「つャ383.76 + taxes of テ「つャ62.82 . With Airlingus it will cost テ「つャ718.00 + taxes of テ「つャ78.99 (thought this was a lowfair airline???). With Brittish airways will cost テ「つャ263 + taxes of テ「つャ216.84 and finally with Airfrance will cost テ「つャ240 + taxes of テ「つャ200.10.

Why the difference in "taxes" I asked myself. Unpon investigation I discover that the last two airlines include circa テ「つャ80.00 fuel charge in their taxes while the first two incorporate the same fuel charge into the fare charge. 

If we take an average 777 which is the typical plane used for trans-continental flights what benefit does this give to the airlines. A 777 -200 can carry 320 passengers with a 777 - 386 has capacity for 386 passengers. This additional fuel charge equates to between テ「つャ25,600 and  テ「つャ30,880 PER FLIGHT  and is in addition to the fare averaging around 500 euro per passenger or テ「つャ193,000 per flight.

It is also worth noting that the Boeing 777 is reputed as being one of the most cost effective airplanes..... extract from Boing Frotiiers

Fuel efficiency. Carriers that operate the 777 and 787 will benefit from lower overall operating costs, thanks to the airplanes' dramatically reduced fuel consumption. The 777 is renowned for its operating economics; the 787 will be the most fuel-efficient airplane flying. Cogan said the 787 will provide 3,700 kilometers (2,000 nautical miles) more range and will consume 20 percent less fuel than its competitor on comparable routes.

Now I understood that the fuel surcharge introduced by Airlines was a s result of the increase in fuel prices in 2006 experienced by all of us. I as a "driver" also understand that those fuel charges have decreased substantially and the benefit has been passed on to the consumer (me buying my petrol in the station).

So why haven't the airlines reduced the surcharge on fuel or indeed eliminated it completely. What a scam and what really annoying S***!!

Happy Travelling - B 

 

Blogger: Blondie | View full blog
Tags:Delta |Aerlingus |Brittish Airways |Air France |Boeing

Add a comment
 | Link | Back to top | del.icio.us digg it furl reddit

© Eriginal Ltd 2010, all rights reserved