THE ORIGINAL J'ACCUSE PAGE

SEARCH THE ARCHIVES

Chargement...

vendredi, septembre 16, 2005

Cheap'N'Cheerful Flights (the Saga Continues)

I last spoke of the MIA v. Ryanair issues in my answer to I.M.Beck (that's bocca when he is catching up with Lorna's writing) at the end of August. This article by the journalist among the Galea Debono sisters has opened another chapter in the insignificant sage of cheap and cheerful travel. It would seem that MIA has circulated a report among stakeholders and that a copy of this report has been seen by the times. It would seem that MIA is challenging the allegations that its airport fees are not among the obstacles faced by low-cost carriers. Here is a snippet from the Times' article:

"In the report, which has so far not been published, the company says that its aircraft landing charges are among the least costly in Europe and cheaper than many other airports, used by leading low-cost carriers, in Spain, Amsterdam and Slovenia, for example. The report was drawn up in view of the controversy regarding the relationship between low-cost carriers that may consider Malta a potential destination and MIA. It seems the aim behind the report is for MIA to dispel misconceptions on its competitiveness and any erroneous understanding that it is, in any way, impeding low-cost carriers from including Malta on their list of destinations. ."

Now I do not know about you, but I am eagerly awaiting the publication of the report. I would love to know what exactly is meant by vague phrases such as "among the least costly" and "cheaper than many other airports". Even more , I would like to know how MIA will justify its recent action pinpointing those wonderful destinations of Girona, Barcelona and Geneva as destinations from where we would all like to receive more tourists (we have enough tourists from the North African coast I guess). I already asked the question and will ask it again... Why is MIA taking on MTA's responsibilities? Can it? Should it?

"The report was drawn up in view of the controversy regarding the relationship between low-cost carriers that may consider Malta a potential destination and MIA. It seems the aim behind the report is for MIA to dispel misconceptions on its competitiveness and any erroneous understanding that it is, in any way, impeding low-cost carriers from including Malta on their list of destinations."

... and the best way to dispel misconceptions is to show it to stakeholders and to the Times. I've said this in the August post and will say it again too (yes it is repeat my phrases day).... they do not care about the taxpayer... they care about the stakeholders.

"The problem is that the consumer still confuses issues, such as the origins of other taxes, including the Lm20 government tax on each ticket, the report argues. Furthermore, the adherence to EU regulations now compels the abolishment of any monopoly in favour of healthy competition, meaning, for example, that Air Malta and Servisair Globeground operate alongside each other as ground handlers on a level playing field."

This report argues very much like Beck argued on that hot August Saturdayduring the Great August Blog Snooze. For an answer to this issue of confusion go back to my August post. The point is not the confusion....

The simple, uncomplicated, unhidden issue is this - and I will not couch it in any metaphors or allusions or stats:

AIRPORT CHARGE + GOVERNMENT TAX + MONOPOLIST PRICE =
MIA CHARGE + GOVT TAX + AIRMALTA PRICE =
a) the base ticket price is doubled by charges and tax combined
b) the basic message is STAY HOME

I'm off to book an Airmalta ticket for a visit home in November. The other option for flying to Malta is Luxair and they are even worse than our very own so stop whinging! Hehe!

Aucun commentaire: