manxman8180 Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 At the weekend we booked a trip on the Ben for next month. I notice that the charge for a cabin is now £42 - last time we travelled (at the end of December) it was about £35. A 25% increase? A bit over the rate of inflation, I believe, and clearly not included in the fare/fair price agreement. With those Maths skills you should work for the Packet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 I guess they would argue the £70 fuel surcharge (stealth tax) is not part of the fare 'comparison', so that would make a 'rough' 20% increase since 2005.About £36 per head in 2005 and £45 now. 4 Adults and 3 kisds, geez, I'm glad I don't have your holiday bill! The £10 extra on each head makes a big difference for a fuel surcharge. I did include the fuel surcharge as I think that its relevant because it would be included in the total price if I booked today. IMO the fundamental issue is not how the IOMSPC technically breaks down elements of its charges including fuel surcharges and weekend supplements but what the total cost is to a family - that is what their customers see and experience! and what potential customers compare when they look at competitor destinations. The splitting of the costs is smoke and mirrors as far as the fare paying public is concerned. Incidentally when was the original fuel surcharge introduced in 2005? Would it have been included in the original fares Invigilator quotes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 At the weekend we booked a trip on the Ben for next month. I notice that the charge for a cabin is now £42 - last time we travelled (at the end of December) it was about £35. A 25% increase? A bit over the rate of inflation, I believe, and clearly not included in the fare/fair price agreement. With those Maths skills you should work for the Packet! Oops! But 20% is still a bit OTT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Godfather of Manx House Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Can't be arsed reading the whole thread but can anyone comment on the alledged fact that McQ / IOMSPCo hedged their upcoming fuel costs when oil was at it's peak cos their arse started squeaking ? Hence the fuel surcharge remaining ? ... ...GOMH*... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Can't be arsed reading the whole thread but can anyone comment on the alledged fact that McQ / IOMSPCo hedged their upcoming fuel costs when oil was at it's peak cos their arse started squeaking ? Hence the fuel surcharge remaining ? I can't answer your question but if they did they missed out in a BIG way... Cost of marine fuel has fallen dramatically since mid 2008. Indicative prices: Bunker Costs July 2008 - $767 per ton March 2009 - $262 per ton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman8180 Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Can't be arsed reading the whole thread but can anyone comment on the alledged fact that McQ / IOMSPCo hedged their upcoming fuel costs when oil was at it's peak cos their arse started squeaking ? Hence the fuel surcharge remaining ? ... ...GOMH*... I think that IOM Newspapers printed someting along the lines of this, which was subsequently retracted as the Packet had stated it didn't buy 'in advance', or hedge in this manner. They keep referring back to this agreed calclation which works on the costs incurred between 6 and 12 months previous. So, you are paying now, for the increase costs experienced last Summer, and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skig Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Just out of interest, last November Norfolk line were charging £4 surcharge each way per vehicle (regardless of how many passengers were travelling) on the Dover - Dunkirk route. Now the surcharge has dropped to 1p for each leg. Yes thats right, just 2p fuel surchage for a return cross channel trip with all the family. I know that those who post on MF in defence of the steam racket will say that its a much shorter route but the racket are just going to rob everyone travelling this summer because if you book a trip now, you will pay £10 return for each passenger and will not get any refund if this extortion is reduced before you travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Just out of interest, last November Norfolk line were charging £4 surcharge each way per vehicle (regardless of how many passengers were travelling) on the Dover - Dunkirk route.Now the surcharge has dropped to 1p for each leg. Yes thats right, just 2p fuel surchage for a return cross channel trip with all the family. I know that those who post on MF in defence of the steam racket will say that its a much shorter route but the racket are just going to rob everyone travelling this summer because if you book a trip now, you will pay £10 return for each passenger and will not get any refund if this extortion is reduced before you travel. The Packet prefer to compare themselves with Condor (another McQ owned company), but Condor do not have the same type of fare structure: Condor FAQ "Q. Do I have to pay a fuel surcharge? A. All our prices are inclusive of fuel surcharge, unlike airline operators who add the fuel surcharge on top of the original price. " Also see link re their frequent traveller discounts. Yes, discounts. Steam Packet did have a "Sail & Save" scheme to reward frequent travellers, which it ditched, causing a massive percentage increase in fares for those loyal customers. If you look at the Packet's diatribe over fuel surcharges and fares, it appears clear that we have been so wrong to blame them for overcharging - the worst overcharges were in 1995, before McQ even knew the IOM existed. The surcharges are apparently there because they haven't been allowed to charge "the going rate" for tickets. About time that the whole system was scrapped and reviewed. Meanwhile, we all have to pay for it while the fat cats continue to get fatter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 The Packet prefer to compare themselves with Condor (another McQ owned company), but Condor do not have the same type of fare structure: The surcharges are apparently there because they haven't been allowed to charge "the going rate" for tickets. About time that the whole system was scrapped and reviewed. Meanwhile, we all have to pay for it while the fat cats continue to get fatter. If I read the Condor Ferries site correctly they have one conventional ferry sailing per day to the CIs and one or two fastcraft sailings. The IOMSPC were trying to compare themselves for freight charges with Condor despite the fact that the BMC has 2 crossings per day, not one. On fuel puchasing if they are not hedging their costs they will have benefitted substantially from the massive drop in marine fuel prices. If the IOMSPC sets ticket prices so that it only runs 40% full on average it is no wonder that they have to look to everyone for 'extras' in one form or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 If I read the Condor Ferries site correctly they have one conventional ferry sailing per day to the CIs and one or two fastcraft sailings. The IOMSPC were trying to compare themselves for freight charges with Condor despite the fact that the BMC has 2 crossings per day, not one. Condor has a dedicated freight vessel as well - Commodore Goodwill. Vessels list So they do not have to rely on just one ship for deliveries, and as they are running more ships, their overheads will no doubt be higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.