When an English person visiting the US for the first time buys a baguette priced at 99 cents, they are usually confused why a dollar is not enough to pay for that.

Why isn’t a dollar enough to pay for something that costs 99 cents?

I think the US system of sales tax add-on pricing is at least partially responsible for the ease with which airlines and car rental companies are also able to tack-on ancillary fees. The average US consumer grows up knowing that everything always costs more than it says. In that world, why wouldn’t any company see how much further they can stretch it? If a seven percent add-on is accepted without the blink of an eye, how about eight percent? Ten percent? Fifteen? Twenty?

The problem of honest transparent pricing in the US runs far deeper then just air, hotel, and car rental companies.

What you are describing is known as a negative check-off, i.e. getting a discount for declining certain goods and services. I suspect that the airlines would LOVE to go to that business model. For a variety of economic reasons, a negative check-off makes a lot more money and is generally received better than add-ons which are perceived as nickel and diming. Of course, a negatice check-off is indistinguishable from add-ons from a financial position. The same goods and services cost the same under either system.

The reason why airlines don’t do this is because their prices will show as initially higher in the various search engines.

For example, my $39 trip from SFO to LAX will initialy read as $69 with a $30 discount for not paying for luggage. But someone will see the $69 and believe its higher than someone else who is charging $39 with a baggage fee.

Thus the negative check-off will have difficulties being implemented.

How would people feel if the milk was free but the container fee, ‘stocking fee’, transportation fee, staffing fee (in order to collect the fees), store access fee, security fee (because SOMEONE has to keep order for free milk), and then, when they’re not making enough, a ‘cow comfort fee’ etc etc etc

The risk of this business model goes beyond the airlines and travel industry. They are the canary. If the canary lives, then practices spread.

Right now they are just wreaking havoc with my ability to get around quickly. Of course, after the Christmas incident, travel’s going to get a lot more painful anyway….maybe I WILL just drive for a while. Come on, high speed trains!

“The truth is a little more complicated. Airlines took the fares and, without lowering them, unbundled.”

While I agree with truth in fare publication and much of what you write, this is misleading at best. (While agreeing that airlines are also misleading.)

The truth *is* more complicated. Fares are TOO LOW. Airlines cannot raise their fares to an appropriate level because of internet pricing and the fact that they are trying to put each other out of business. Rather than charge the customer an appropriate level fare to match the cost, they are charging additional fees for things that the customers use to make up the difference.

Sure, it would be better if they did what Jonathan is suggesting and put in a total cost and allow you to take off the price for what you don’t use. That, however accomplishes the same end but you won’t get all airlines to follow that model at once. Capitalism and all.

Now if you use this idea, I’ll accept free snackage and luggage on all my future flights in compensation!

This is not about just the travel industry and USDOT needing to get involved. What needs to happen is that the US government, reinforces the normality of putting the actual price on a product. The price, you know, the amount of money you need to hand over to get the product.

And the clicking down is such a cumbersome process – we’re not talking just a few clicks. We’re talking entering in all kinds of information and passing through several screens, almost to the point of buying the damn ticket, before you get a final price. How can anyone comparison-shop that way? It takes HOURS just to get real prices…and you have to carefully do your homework, bookmarking links and jotting down figures, before you actually have real numbers to compare.

The DOT says they can’t regulate fares. But we KNOW they can regulate unfair and deceptive selling practices – they just slapped a few (trivial) fines on some airlines for just these types of consumer rule violations. I say trivial because I’m quite sure the airlines realize that in the end, they made many times more in increased sales to snookered customers than they had to pay in fines. These penalties are just a minor cost of doing business, and I have no doubt they will have zero impact on these deceptive selling practices.

And it’s not just the airlines. Online travel agencies are doing the same thing. While some of them post “base” fares along with a “total” fare on the first display, too many others do the same things as the airlines themselves – they post just the “base” fare, and then make you click-enter info-click-enter info-click before you actually get to the “total”. Nobody with a brain could possibly consider this NOT deceptive.

Where is the DOT? Why are they allowing this to happen? Do they really think these miniscule fines will have any impact at all? And why aren’t they slapping fines on these online travel agencies that are practicing the same type of deception?

If so, that’s probably a violation of their merchant agreement, and should be reported to the various credit card companies (Visa and Mastercard).

I’m flying Southwest anyway.