Anyway, I dont think the airport tax is determined by Tiger Airways..... so wats this argument all about??
Anyway, I dont think the airport tax is determined by Tiger Airways..... so wats this argument all about??
Same or cheaper airport tax, Tiger Airway's PR department ought to give a response to the letter. At least one discerning consumer has made his dissatisfaction known, and the ball is now in their court.
My stand is to wait for a reply then decide on the next step. Justifiable or not, we will only know when TA or SATS (or whoever's the organision charging the airport tax) gives a reply. When you vote with your wallet, you also got to vote intelligently, right?
NOW that this letter has made us aware of the situation (assuming that you didn't know before) - would any one of us continue to pay the airport tax without a hint of suspicion?
Last edited by Ah Pao; 12th April 2006 at 04:23 PM.
erm the spokesman for Tiger Airways replied to Philip in ST today.
actually on top of the air tix (whichever airline we decide to take), i checked with my agent and she told me the extra charges are mainly : airport tax, airline insurance tax and fuel surcharge. she told me lately the fuel surcharge increased and hence more ex. so basically the rates would fluctuate due to the variations of any of the charges/taxes
Taxs are definately not determined by the airline , but think of this. What is the rational behind airport tax? Is it to tax the traveller for the use of airport facilities?
Now, if we use something of "higher" class, we should be paying more. So, relating to airport facilities, the 2 main terminals are higher class than the budget terminal and cost more to run. So, logically, if we use the main terminals, we should be paying more than when we are using the budget terminal. So, shouldnt the authority impose a smaller airport tax for travellers going through the budget terminal? This might be the reason why only tiger air has moved to the budget terminal. Someone forgot to address the tax issue.
Next, part of the purpose of having a budget terminal is such airlines pay less on ground handling fees. Hence it will be more financially viable for a budget airline to operate. Moving from the main terminal to the budget terminal will definately save the airline money. However, if the airline is willing to pass on this savings to the travellers, it really depends on market forces.
The reply seems to be highly evasive lah................
Refusing to give a public reply..............
think the issue is on "airport tax" + "airline insurance" + "fuel charge". And not how they price their tickets lah
Such things should be above board, wonder why it is so evasive even though they say it is a company policy...........
i think my above post tied in with yours. basically what you meant was, Tiger Airways has saved on their operating costs (parking of their planes for servicing , landing, departing, etc.. hahaha..errr...) when they move to budget terminal but if they pass on the savings to the consumers, it'll be nice if they do, isnt it?Originally Posted by Ren_Hao
can't say they are evading but they try to be more ....upfront and personal with Philip, since Philip already pointed out that he did call their hotline before he wrote to ST and now they indicated that they only responded to snail mails ? i guess their hotline service's use is in question now
pertaining to the tax's matter, i'm also quite shocked & speechless now when my agent quoted me the total price for my air tix last week hahahaha
Good to ask them for a breakdown of the costs of the 2 flights u booked.
See how they respond.
Do update us..
I remember back to the those days, when budget airline is taking off, they are negotiating with Changi airport for a cheaper airport tax? because the tax is said would have contributed big amount.
At that time, i have heard that it will have an simple airport, without aircon, and u walked to the plane, exactly like what they are doing now. (that's seem like the reason Airasia didn't take off from Changi at first, people needs to take bus to Sinai)
Well, some people may mind or may not mind the cost, but we definitely want to know more.
I think the airpot tax they refering to is the plane's airpot tax, not the passenger's.Originally Posted by LENS
This sort of reply seems to tell me they have something to hide. I've already called their hotline which gave a stupid answer. So if writing in means getting a different answer, then something wrong with their hotline right?
And this sentence... "We will answer every letter we receive in the order that it arrives so as to maintain our customer service at a level appropriate to our being Singapore's largest low cost carrier, while optimising scarce resources."
Scarce resources? So they got no time to respond to public feedback? But they did respond , so why not respond with an answer? By the way, it was a public relations consultancy who replied... scarce resources but able to hire a PR consultancy? Hardly scarce.
Last edited by philliptan; 12th April 2006 at 06:39 PM.
I'm not sure how you guys plan a vacation, but in general I look at the total integrated cost of the trip, i.e. flights + transport + food + accomodation. I see if the location is to my liking, and if it is good for my budget. Of course, I would do some comparison shopping to see which airline/hotel or combination thereof would give me the best value for the level of comfort I desire. As long as they are up front about all the chargeables including service tax, airport tax, sales tax etc. etc., and I don't get nasty surprises, I'll make a decision and will be happy with it. Would I break it down to the nitty gritty? Rarely. It seems crazy to go on a vacation and spend half the time fretting about whether I over-tipped a waiter or if the Tuk-tuk driver overcharged me by S$1. I certainly would not scrutinise what an airline puts out as an airport tax, as long as the nett cost is transparent to me, and I had decided that nett cost is the best value I can get for my purposes. The rest I simply don't have the time or inclination to think about.
Let me try and illustrate with an example. Imagine you were buying a camera. Store A is a solo store with low economies of scale. They are selling Canon Model XX at $600, and they tell you that they "absorb" GST for you. The true cost of the camera to them may be $450 from the wholesaler and in fact they did have to pay GST because they have registered with IRAS and the cost is now approx $480. So they made $120 from you. Store B is a chain, they tell you the camera is $550 but GST is chargeable, so the cost of the camera to you is $575.50, which is $22.5 cheaper than Store A. In fact, because they are the top reseller of the camera in Singapore, they leverage a better price from Canon and are getting the Model XX at $400 + GST = 427.9. Store B makes $130 from you.Originally Posted by dkw
Based strictly on costs to you, which store do you buy the camera from? Store A or B? Do you care if the GST is taken on top of purchase price or "absorbed"? Should the company profit even have any bearing on your decision (i.e. do you say I buy from store A because they make less profit)?
You see where I'm coming from? All the ancillary factors are to a certain extent, irrelevant. The final price is what matters, the rest I don't see any reason to fuss about.
I've gone thru all the arguments put up by philliptan and dkw. I find them all so convincing - both of them have their points of view and I think that they are valid points of views. However what I find (as if I'm a judge ) is that after moving to a low cost terminal, Tiger (TA)should have offered a lower price because of their savings. Whether it's $2 or $5 or whatever amount, its irrelevant. What is important for their passengers is that they have lowered their charges. They can put on surcharges, like fuel, etc. but this is irrelevant as long as passengers like philliptan feel that TA have passed on cost-savings to their passengers and to make up for the very obvious lack of facilities compared with T1 & T2. This would have been good PR for them but they missed it.
Just my POV.
just something i noticed... Tiger's "taxes and surcharges" seems to be higher than the regular airlines. Not too sure whether this is due to new incrased fuel surcharges or not though.
I guess the PR is just stalling for time. If they have a good logical answer, getting it published for all to see beats answering it "personally".
Maybe they have no answer, and refuse to let the public see what a lousy answer they have.
Can I ask if you know whether the before and after airfares of Tiger airways changed?
Originally Posted by dkw
As someone who does business, albeit a small one, I'd just like to give my 2 cents worth.
It may offend and if it does, you have the option of not reading further.
Disclaimer outta the way, here's what I have to say.
Businesses big or small have running costs. They have big things to worry about, like where do I find money to pay my overheads, which includes rent and staff. They charge based on what the market can bear, and more importantly, what they deem a fair price. I think in many instances, there're alot of costs that have come into the picture, through no fault of the company, in this case, the airline.
I might come across as uncaring, unsympathetic to the common man or even clueless. Well the truth is, if you're running a business, you'd like to think you charge a fair price for your services and in many cases, businesses DO charge a fair price for their services. We cannot compare apples to oranges.
As someone who often has to face clients telling me to go lower, I know how everyone wants the best deal but on the other hand, I've also turned down jobs that ask for too low a price, a price I know I am not prepared to drop to. I may be desperate for business sometimes but I also need to know that I am not planning to run a charity. Heck, even charities sometimes have a little reserve on the side to pay their staff.
At the end of the day, as dkw illustrated, it's the nett price you should concern yourself with and not the nitty gritty. Life's too short for that.
Was there a change in nett price after Tiger switched to the Budget Terminal?
Originally Posted by G-man
Ok, let's talk abt nett prices...
It's also still the same. Before or after the move. Everything is the same. So why move? Why do I have to use budget facilities while still paying the same price? What's in it for the passenger? If nothing, then can I ask to fly from T1? I can't, can I, despite paying the same tax? So my point is, if you wanna move to the Budget Terminal, who gets the benefit? Definitely not the paying passenger.