Air Flight Fee - Impact on Cruisers

[sail7seas]

Fox has reported today the government now thinks they will be increasing the fee all flyers now pay for airport security from $10 per round trip to $15. BUt in addition, by the year 2017, there is now talk of Air Flight FEE of $100 per FLIGHT which will be added for every flight that takes off. Of course, if the airlines are charged this fee, there is no question but that the customers will pay it.

 

With airfares sure to continue rising and baggage fees, charge for blanket, charge for food, charge for headphones etc, at what point does flying go back to being something only the more well off will be able to do as it was in the early days of air travel?

 

Cruise lines cannot like when they hear things like this to add to their worries of how to fill their ships.

 

Anyone else hear these reports today as pertains to flights to/from U.S.?

[Nasmas]

I haven't heard that but I can't say I'm surprised. I think the time will come when only the well-to-do will be able to do anything and that includes flying & cruising. And, they will have to pay for it, because the middle-class & poor people wont' be able to afford it. The airlines are already to the point that we are almost paying them to abuse us. I fly Southwest when I can because I feel like I'm getting less ripped with them.

[Pokeynose]

sail, just heard it on Fox. One of the reasons we are not cruising this year is the increase in airfare. Even SW is expensive. If we could drive we sure would but way too far especially during the winter months. We are looking at 12-9-2012, that is if we can get a good price for airline tickets. I usually book our tickets early but the cruise is iffy at this time. I have reserved our cabin already since this is for our 55th aniv. but if the economy gets worse I'll be canceling since we are retired and lost alot of our savings in the last round of the stockmarket losses. I could go on and on and what for, everyone else is suffering the same way.

 

We need to keep our money here not sending it to other countries. I hope I'm not opening a can of worms with this last statement but it's how I feel, too many people without jobs could use that help. Sorry I got off the original topic.

[aliaschief]

President Barack Obama’s administration proposed a $100 per-flight fee on corporate jets and other turbine-powered planes that use the U.S. air-traffic system.

The fee would raise an estimated $11 billion over 10 years, according to the president’s recommendations to the 12-member congressional committee charged with finding ways to trim the deficit. The fee is aimed at private aircraft, which currently don’t pay their fair share of costs of operating the aviation system, the administration said today.

Here's the Fox story: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/19/new-government-fees-in-deficit-proposal-would-hit-airline-passengers-military/

[Taxguy77]

I saw on the news that there are a lot of ground-to-air missles missing in the East. Some idiot in congress (sorry for the double idiot&congress) is talking about putting missle defense on each plane to "Help You". The defense only costs One Million $$$ per plane. Guess who will have to pay that?

I gave up flying (may make one small exception for a particular charter) as I have an artificial hip, and resent being treated like a criminal by the people whose salaries I am helping pay.

" See the USA in your Chevrolet!"

Doris Day

[sail7seas]

Pokeynose........ A GREAT argument why PVSA should be changed as pertains to cruise ships. Let the ships board people in one U.S. port and sail to other U.S. ports and kep the money in the U.S. :) At this point in time, I agree we need to do whatever we can to get as many people working as possible. Every decision made in this country today should make job creation first point considered IMO

 

But many folks still will have to fly if they don't live close enough to a port to drive. If things continue to not making it easier vs harder for people to cruise from/to U.S., how many ships will simply stop embarking and cruising here? Not out of the question by any means IMO

 

I did not get the message on the Fox Report I heard that it was airmed only at private/corporate jets. Either it was incomplete reporting or I missed that part of the message, which is certainly possible.

 

[Boytjie]

I haven't heard that but I can't say I'm surprised. I think the time will come when only the well-to-do will be able to do anything and that includes flying & cruising. And, they will have to pay for it, because the middle-class & poor people wont' be able to afford it. The airlines are already to the point that we are almost paying them to abuse us. I fly Southwest when I can because I feel like I'm getting less ripped with them.

 

A lot more people are flying and cruising now than say 30 years ago, and it keeps getting cheaper (relatively). The airlines and cruise lines are expanding and need customers to stay in business so I don't see them all just going for a luxury/rich market.

 

This sounds like malarkey to me. Like how Facebook is going to start charging a fee. Can they even institute taxes to take affect 16 years from now?!

 

Edited to add: OK, read other comments posted later and understand it a bit better. $100 per flight is not that bad compared to how much the flight as a whole costs.

[CowPrincess]

President Barack Obama’s administration proposed a $100 per-flight fee on corporate jets and other turbine-powered planes that use the U.S. air-traffic system.

The fee would raise an estimated $11 billion over 10 years, according to the president’s recommendations to the 12-member congressional committee charged with finding ways to trim the deficit. The fee is aimed at private aircraft, which currently don’t pay their fair share of costs of operating the aviation system, the administration said today.

Here's the Fox story: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/19/new-government-fees-in-deficit-proposal-would-hit-airline-passengers-military/

 

Thank you for tracking down and posting an accurate report.

[E-500]

Now that it costs more to fly coach to Europe from the Mid-West than to book a veranda stateroom, the cruise lines have got to be concerned.

 

Back in the day, the lines used to provide "bucket shop" pricing for airfare to make it affordable for cruisers. At some point they stopped this and just book scheduled routes at the airlines price point.

 

They must find a way to get N. Americans to Europe and Asia, they can't survive on citizens locally to sustain them. N. Americans comprise more than 50% of cruisers worldwide.

 

Suggest they go the charter route or go back to block discounting.

 

Europe was soft this season for two reasons, more ships repositioned from Alaska which added capacity and high airfares.

 

I don't have the answer, just hope the men and women in the board room do.

[Krazy Kruizers]

I hadn't heard anything about this.

But if it is for Private Airflights -- probably be long and it will be on all commercial flights (I hope not).

[sail7seas]

Maybe this summer's cruise season was poor, IF it was, because of U.S. Economy, stockmarket, joblessness, Egypt, Libya et al, and economical concerns in Europe?

 

[E-500]

Maybe this summer's cruise season was poor, IF it was, because of U.S. Economy, stockmarket, joblessness, Egypt, Libya et al, and economical concerns in Europe?

 

 

To expand on my first post (#9). Yes, to all your points, they were contributing factors and pretty much out of the control of the cruise lines. My direction was to attempt to focus on what the cruise lines could do to drive business and attract N. Americans to fly to international departure ports.

[Nasmas]

A lot more people are flying and cruising now than say 30 years ago, and it keeps getting cheaper (relatively). The airlines and cruise lines are expanding and need customers to stay in business so I don't see them all just going for a luxury/rich market.

 

This sounds like malarkey to me. Like how Facebook is going to start charging a fee. Can they even institute taxes to take affect 16 years from now?!

 

Edited to add: OK, read other comments posted later and understand it a bit better. $100 per flight is not that bad compared to how much the flight as a whole costs.

You are right about more people flying now than ever before, but the number of people flying out of our airport is way off this year, but the cruise we're on is almost full, and a lot of the resorts in FL we tried to book this summer were full for the summer, so all is not bad for a lot of people, but if the prices keep going up, a lot willl not go. Last year, we paid almost as much to get to FLL as our cruise cost. This year, we booked SW and its $89 one way. A lot cheaper than driving for us @ $4.00 a gal. But, no one else was even close to that price.

[3rdGenCunarder]

I saw on the news that there are a lot of ground-to-air missles missing in the East. Some idiot in congress (sorry for the double idiot&congress) is talking about putting missle defense on each plane to "Help You". The defense only costs One Million $$$ per plane. Guess who will have to pay that?

I gave up flying (may make one small exception for a particular charter) as I have an artificial hip, and resent being treated like a criminal by the people whose salaries I am helping pay.

" See the USA in your Chevrolet!"

Doris Day

 

I agree, "idiot in congress" is redundant. Nobody will spend that kind of money on commercial aircraft.

 

Flying has become an incredible hassle, especially for people who can't get through security without ringing bells or needing assistance. It's amazing how bad some of the security people are.

 

BTW, you must be younger than I am. "See the USA in your Chevrolet" was Dinah Shore, not Doris Day.

[Padraic]

Like how Facebook is going to start charging a fee.

 

The story of Facebook charging a fee was a hoax.

[Jemima]

The flying affects our cruise choices or even if we cruise. We're in the US southwest. Anything other than San Diego or Los Angeles is a problem. That means mostly Mexico and Hawaii for a roundtrip. We've done Mexico too many times and with the current problems there the ships are reducing cruises and port stops. Hawaii now has just 4 port stops for a 14 day cruise. Cruises out of Florida or anywhere east coast require a precruise overnight because of the time difference. We like going a day, but we'd like to get there early enough to do something in the precruise city - that would require a 2 day precruise for us.

In addition any flights to the east coast add several hundred dollars per person for the flights.

Currently we will fly to non-west coast embarkation ports if the itinerary is interesting an includes new-to-us ports. We'd also prefer that those new-to-us ports have interesting historical sites. Especially if flight costs go up more, we'll nix any east coast cruises unless the ports of call are all or mostly new to us. We love Canada/New England and also the Florida to or from Canada/New England repos, but please please please some new ports and more US ports.

We also like transats, but the flight times, schedules and prices are horrible and then HAL's itineraries for those are not nearly as interesting as they used to be. We'd now have to combine it with a European cruise to make it sufficiently interesting and that frankly goes way over what we can spend on a cruise.

More US and Canadian ports are needed and cruise itineraries need to be more varied to make up for the added flight problems. The itineraries also need to be more geared to people other than east coasters.

[Globaliser]

... there is now talk of Air Flight FEE of $100 per FLIGHT which will be added for every flight that takes off.

Even if it were true, this would typically be less than $1 per passenger per flight. That's hardly going to break the bank for the average passenger, is it?

[kazu]

Now that it costs more to fly coach to Europe from the Mid-West than to book a veranda stateroom, the cruise lines have got to be concerned.

 

Back in the day, the lines used to provide "bucket shop" pricing for airfare to make it affordable for cruisers. At some point they stopped this and just book scheduled routes at the airlines price point.

 

They must find a way to get N. Americans to Europe and Asia, they can't survive on citizens locally to sustain them. N. Americans comprise more than 50% of cruisers worldwide.

 

Suggest they go the charter route or go back to block discounting.

 

Europe was soft this season for two reasons, more ships repositioned from Alaska which added capacity and high airfares.

 

I don't have the answer, just hope the men and women in the board room do.

 

 

This is quite true 'Ralph'. Frankly we have to fly everywhere to cruise. It's part of the cost. if any tax is added to the US flights, it's a lot less tax than we pay in Canada (why so many drive to the States to fly).

 

Flying is a big consideration for us and why we prefer longer cruises. and if I can use FF miles, it really makes it do-able, and even though we have to pay those awful taxes just the same, it does make it do-able:)

 

It's sad because Europe really does need the tourist dollars right now - too bad the Global gurus couldn't get together and figure something brilliant out:)

[sail7seas]

Even if it were true, this would typically be less than $1 per passenger per flight. That's hardly going to break the bank for the average passenger, is it?

 

 

I think my general point is the price of so many things related to our travel/cruising continues to increase in price but wages are not increasing and so many people feel less secure. To keep hearing this and that is going up in price /tax/fee makes some number of current cruisers hesitate and may fully dissuade those who were considering being first time cruisers.

 

I hear more and more people around us saying they plan to hold onto the money they have. They are not spending on 'extras' until they have a better grip on what is in the near future.

 

Of course, many of our contemporaries are in the ten or so years before retirement or approaching it now.

 

But no different for those facing college bills, assisting their kids get established in their independent lives...... and saving for retirement.

[tcook052]

Thank you for tracking down and posting an accurate report.

 

Indeed as accurate information is vital in discussing potential financial impacts that affect travel whether by sea or air.

[Boytjie]

The story of Facebook charging a fee was a hoax.

 

I know, that's why a put it after my malarkey comment. ;)

[jimmy2x]

BTW, you must be younger than I am. "See the USA in your Chevrolet" was Dinah Shore, not Doris Day.

 

Beat me to the punch!:D

[hypercafe]

We live in NYC so there are a lot of ships here to chose from, some all year. The only problem is we have gone on all the itinerary's more than once so flying is not an option at times. We are going to Fort Lauderdale in April for the Panama Canal trip. One of the problems I see with air fare is the vast difference and the fact that the cruise line wants to make money on them. HAL wanted 1200$ RT for two, I booked the same flight directly with the airline for 400$ RT for two. If they really want you to go and make it hassle free just pass through the fare, don't try and make 800$.

[gelo7]

I hadn't heard anything about this.

 

But if it is for Private Airflights -- probably be long and it will be on all commercial flights (I hope not).

You never know...

[YXU AC*SE]

Actual text of what is proposed is here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf

 

The fee is targeted to corporate jet travel - not passenger aviation.

 

Scott.

 

More equitably share payments for air traffic services.

 

Roughly two-thirds of the air traffic control system’s current costs are financed by aviation excise taxes. Most of the tax revenue is collected from commercial aviation through ticket taxes, segment fees, international head taxes, and fuel taxes. General aviation users currently pay a fuel tax, but this revenue does not cover their fair-share-use of air traffic services.

 

All flights that use controlled air space require a similar level of air traffic services. However, commercial and general aviation can pay very different aviation fees for those same air traffic services. For example, a large commercial aircraft would pay between $1,300 to $2,000 in taxes for a flight from Los Angeles to San Francisco while a corporate jet flying the same route and using the same Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic services would pay about $60 in taxes.

[emphasis added]

 

To reduce the deficit and more equitably share the cost of air traffic services across the aviation user community, the Administration proposes to establish a new mandatory surcharge for air traffic services. This proposal would create a $100 per flight fee, payable to the FAA, by aviation operators who fly in controlled airspace. Military aircraft, public aircraft, recreational piston aircraft, air ambulances, aircraft operating outside of controlled airspace, and Canada-to-Canada flights would be exempted.

 

The revenues generated by the surcharge would be deposited into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This fee would generate an estimated $11 billion over 10 years. Assuming the enactment of the fee, total charges collected from aviation users would finance roughly three fourths of airport investments and air traffic control system costs.