 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
Just out of interest, how many people have a "coffin style" bag that can carry a pair of skis and the rest of your luggage to get you under 23kg?
|
I've got a dakine one. Cost about 80USD in a sale about 15 years ago and still going strong.
Never get anywhere near 23kg though as that is too heavy for me to comfortable carry on the train to the airport.
Even if I had had to pay £120, it would still have paid for itself after 2 or 3 BA flights!
If you have to take lots of gear like crampons and ropes then you would prob need to pay for a second bag. But for your average skier/snowboarder even with 'standard' off piste gear you should be OK for 23kg + hang luggage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| kat.ryb wrote: |
If you have to take lots of gear like crampons and ropes then you would prob need to pay for a second bag. But for your average skier/snowboarder even with 'standard' off piste gear you should be OK for 23kg + hang luggage. |
You mean the average skier doesn't have an 11 ski quiver to agonise over (even before we get to snowboard quiver)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
This is the exact wording on the document received a few days ago;
CARRIAGE OF SKI/SNOWBOARD EQUIPMENTS:
Customers travelling in World Traveller have a free allowance of ONE BAG weighing up to 23kgs. If you intend to take skis or snowboard equipment IN ADDITION TO THIS ONE BAG you will be charged £55 per ski bag per sector (£110 return).This is payable directly to the airline at the airport. PLEASE NOTE -CLOTHING AND OTHER PERSONAL ITEMS ETC CANNOT BE CARRIED IN SKI OR BOARD BAGS.
So, as I said from the beginning, and which some find hard to understand, the cost for ski-carriage on this BA flight is £110. I believe this to be an unreasonable charge for what is a ski holiday flight. It is purely a ski holiday flight in our case since we booked a ski holiday package with Inghams and we assumed that they would provide a suitable flight as part of the package for such a holiday.
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Wed 27-01-16 21:29; edited 3 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Gaza wrote: |
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Although my point is all about the high cost of ski carriage on BA, your point about taking ski boots in hand luggage to save hold luggage weight is something I would never do now. I have been stopped twice at security in the past and made to return to check-in (and pay excess baggage charge) because ski boots in a bag in an aircraft cabin 'are a potentially dangerous weapon'!!!!! |
Where did this happen? I have hauled mine between Edinburgh and Stansted for weeks and was never even queried. They went straight through the scanner and out the other side. Same applied to Geneva. The only reports on here of people having an issue is at Grenoble.
If I had had an issue I'd have asked for the Security Manager and to be shown where in the DfT, CAA or IATA security guidance it says ski boots are considered a dangerous weapon. |
Once at Stansted and once at Southend. Both about two years ago. However, one of our party took ski boots in a ski boot bag through Southend just two weeks ago and was not challenged! Due to past experiences I now always pack mine in my hold luggage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Why dont you send all your groups skis together by one of the ski carriage companies? They will get picked up before you go and will be waiting for you at the chalet.
It will be much better than hiring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Downhill Sailor wrote: |
Why dont you send all your groups skis together by one of the ski carriage companies? They will get picked up before you go and will be waiting for you at the chalet.
It will be much better than hiring. |
The logistics of organising this would be a nightmare with just a week's notice. Anyway, as I previously said, the 4 or 5 who originally planned to take their own skis have now decided to hire since it will be cheaper than £110.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You never know unless you give them a call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are you all so attached to the idea of 23kg of clothes and toiletries you won't consider the option that most of us take when flying with BA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Are you all so attached to the idea of 23kg of clothes and toiletries you won't consider the option that most of us take when flying with BA? |
If you mean by taking skis as part of the basic 23kg allowance, i think it would be possible if All the members of our group who wanted to take skis had a suitable bag and they ignored the warning that ski / snowboard bags didn't also contain clothing or other personal items. But it doesn't matter now they have all decided to hire skis in the resort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| This is payable directly to the airline at the airport. PLEASE NOTE -CLOTHING AND OTHER PERSONAL ITEMS ETC CANNOT BE CARRIED IN SKI OR BOARD BAGS. |
Yes but your problem is with Inghams not BA. Ingham have put in some "standard t&c's" that do not apply to BA. So yes you would have had to check the specific airline as Inghams can't be arsed to do it for you (which is pretty hopeless) but as we have been saying BA would be simple and free.
There were some "low cost airlines" stopping ski boots in hand luggage but again not BA. If you can lift it into the locker, you can put what you like in the carry on - provided it is the right dimensions.
Extra bags booked direct with BA for none Gatwick is £60 per bag so it would have been £120 and this is advanced. £65 at the airport. Why is Gatwick £35?
Round and round we go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| foxtrotzulu wrote: |
I can't help feeling, now that @Gaza seems to have discovered the route of the problem, that this was simply a breakdown in communication/cockup by Inghams rather than any profiteering. I also think that it should have been pretty obvious all along that this was a scheduled flight. Why did you asume it wasn't? In fact, I'd suggest that the whole concept of 'charter flights' has pretty much disappeared anyway. Maybe less so for the biggest TO's going to the biggest resorts but all the usual suspects like Monarch, Thomas Cook etc. are now just LLCs. |
I assumed it would be a charter flight since every single ski holiday I have booked with a TO for the past twenty years has included a flight that appeared, at least, to be full of skiers and boarders. This has even included a previous flight that had a BA aeroplane and crew. Mostly there were customers from a mixture of different TO rather than all from one TO. I'm pretty sure that there were only skiers/boarders on the flights by the way they were dressed and the things they spoke about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Are you all so attached to the idea of 23kg of clothes and toiletries you won't consider the option that most of us take when flying with BA? |
If you mean by taking skis as part of the basic 23kg allowance, i think it would be possible if All the members of our group who wanted to take skis had a suitable bag and they ignored the warning that ski / snowboard bags didn't also contain clothing or other personal items. But it doesn't matter now they have all decided to hire skis in the resort. |
The lack of a suitable bag is an understandable problem. I don't have a suitable bag and wouldn't buy one for just one trip. I could probably manage to borrow one though if I really need to. It's unlikely to be worth buying a coffin bag just for one use.
Taking skis as part of the 23kg allowance doesn't involve ignoring any warning. The key wording is:
"Customers travelling in World Traveller have a free allowance of ONE BAG weighing up to 23kgs. If you intend to take skis or snowboard equipment IN ADDITION TO THIS ONE BAG"
There's no restrictions preventing you putting clothes and skis in the 23kg bag.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Jake43 wrote: |
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| This is payable directly to the airline at the airport. PLEASE NOTE -CLOTHING AND OTHER PERSONAL ITEMS ETC CANNOT BE CARRIED IN SKI OR BOARD BAGS. |
Yes but your problem is with Inghams not BA. Ingham have put in some "standard t&c's" that do not apply to BA. So yes you would have had to check the specific airline as Inghams can't be arsed to do it for you (which is pretty hopeless) but as we have been saying BA would be simple and free.
There were some "low cost airlines" stopping ski boots in hand luggage but again not BA. If you can lift it into the locker, you can put what you like in the carry on - provided it is the right dimensions.
Extra bags booked direct with BA for none Gatwick is £60 per bag so it would have been £120 and this is advanced. £65 at the airport. Why is Gatwick £35?
Round and round we go. |
And the document is headed as FLYING WITH BRITISH AIRWAYS and the details are headed CARRIAGE OF SKI/SNOWBOARD EQUIPMENT and clearly states the cost will be £110.
I'm not looking for a way to get around the problem. It s too late to organise for a group of 10 people at this late stage and the point is that if the options highlighted that could provide a way of avoiding the £110 were not known by others there would be a charge of £110 for ski carriage. I believe this to be an unreasonable charge for ski carriage. You clearly do not, and That is fair enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| sugarmoma666 wrote: |
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Are you all so attached to the idea of 23kg of clothes and toiletries you won't consider the option that most of us take when flying with BA? |
If you mean by taking skis as part of the basic 23kg allowance, i think it would be possible if All the members of our group who wanted to take skis had a suitable bag and they ignored the warning that ski / snowboard bags didn't also contain clothing or other personal items. But it doesn't matter now they have all decided to hire skis in the resort. |
The lack of a suitable bag is an understandable problem. I don't have a suitable bag and wouldn't buy one for just one trip. I could probably manage to borrow one though if I really need to. It's unlikely to be worth buying a coffin bag just for one use.
Taking skis as part of the 23kg allowance doesn't involve ignoring any warning. The key wording is:
"Customers travelling in World Traveller have a free allowance of ONE BAG weighing up to 23kgs. If you intend to take skis or snowboard equipment IN ADDITION TO THIS ONE BAG"
There's no restrictions preventing you putting clothes and skis in the 23kg bag. |
I'm sure you must be right. But it doesn't make this crystal clear in the wording.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| sugarmoma666 wrote: |
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Are you all so attached to the idea of 23kg of clothes and toiletries you won't consider the option that most of us take when flying with BA? |
If you mean by taking skis as part of the basic 23kg allowance, i think it would be possible if All the members of our group who wanted to take skis had a suitable bag and they ignored the warning that ski / snowboard bags didn't also contain clothing or other personal items. But it doesn't matter now they have all decided to hire skis in the resort. |
The lack of a suitable bag is an understandable problem. I don't have a suitable bag and wouldn't buy one for just one trip. I could probably manage to borrow one though if I really need to. It's unlikely to be worth buying a coffin bag just for one use.
Taking skis as part of the 23kg allowance doesn't involve ignoring any warning. The key wording is:
"Customers travelling in World Traveller have a free allowance of ONE BAG weighing up to 23kgs. If you intend to take skis or snowboard equipment IN ADDITION TO THIS ONE BAG"
There's no restrictions preventing you putting clothes and skis in the 23kg bag. |
I'm sure you must be right. But it doesn't make this crystal clear in the wording.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
It's confusing but I still think a well stuffed ski or board bag plus hefty carry on would keep most people happy for a week's skiing. Assuming you were wearing walking boots and your ski jacket all the rest of your ski gear (except boots) and toiletries could go in a ski bag. ski boots, an additional pair of "après ski" trousers, a couple of tops and slippers for in house could be in a carry on.
To answer the question. If the inescapable cost of taking a pair of skis were £110 then yes. I thing that's excessive. But not as excessive as being unable to contemplate a week's holiday within BA's very generous baggage allowance. I've travelled a great deal in my time, mainly long haul business but also lots of holidays and never taken more than I could carry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
This is the exact wording on the document received a few days ago;
CARRIAGE OF SKI/SNOWBOARD EQUIPMENTS:
Customers travelling in World Traveller have a free allowance of ONE BAG weighing up to 23kgs. If you intend to take skis or snowboard equipment IN ADDITION TO THIS ONE BAG you will be charged £55 per ski bag per sector (£110 return).This is payable directly to the airline at the airport. PLEASE NOTE -CLOTHING AND OTHER PERSONAL ITEMS ETC CANNOT BE CARRIED IN SKI OR BOARD BAGS.
So, as I said from the beginning, and which some find hard to understand, the cost for ski-carriage on this BA flight is £110. I believe this to be an unreasonable charge for what is a ski holiday flight. It is purely a ski holiday flight in our case since we booked a ski holiday package with Inghams and we assumed that they would provide a suitable flight as part of the package for such a holiday. |
This is my last post on this thread as clearly you are going to keep quoting a document that is nonsense despite the overwhelming evidence that supports the assertion that it's nonsense.
Here are 3 errors in the document:-
First error: "Customers travelling in World Traveller" - World Traveller is long haul, Salzburg flights are Euro Traveller.
Second Error: "IN ADDITION TO THIS ONE BAG you will be charged £55 per ski bag per sector" - BAs scale of charges has been posted already; £35 in advance, £40 at the airport. £55 is the cost to upgrade to Club Europe.
Third Error: "PLEASE NOTE -CLOTHING AND OTHER PERSONAL ITEMS ETC CANNOT BE CARRIED IN SKI OR BOARD BAGS." - BA have no such rule as they simply have an additional bag charge.
And with that:-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Bye, Duncan!
Shame you couldn't get your head around the fact that the information we were given is the information we were given! I didn't write the information, I clearly explained that this is what we had been told.
You are saying that the information we were given is factually incorrect. This may well be the case, but how would we know that, if you didn't tell us? How would others, not on this forum, have known this? The document clearly states ski carriage is £110. It makes no mention of including skis in standard luggage allowance. It makes no mention of upgrading to club class for extra luggage allowance. It clearly just states that ski carriage is £110.
I made it clear that I thought your ways around the problem were interesting, but of no use to us because we didn't have time to investigate them and maybe use them. I made it clear that none of us would now even bother taking skis because we had been advised it would cost £110. So your ideas were of no use to us, no matter how many times you repeated them.
Most importantly you had consistently ignored the fact that the original question was 'do you think £110 for ski carriage is reasonable?'
I won't miss you. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Go one at least one of your huge party could just try it then at least you would know how easy it is.
Instead of getting a suitcase out get your ski bag out put them in. Pack rest of stuff you normally do up to weight limit - then chuck rest and then some in a huge carry on.
Put your valuables in a "laptop bag" sorted.
Go on you do not need to even try and organise anyone just do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Mr Marmot, lots of people, including Gaza, answered your hypothetical question. If the time and effort you've put into this thread had been spent looking at the BA website and clarifying the confusing information from Inghams you'd no doubt have discovered that as Kat.ryb and others have stated above the BA allowance, one of the best in the business, is adequate for ski stuff.
Nobody thinks £110 is reasonable for ski carriage. But that hasn't saved you the cost and hassle of hiring skis, has it? An expensive rant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I think £110 is reasonable as a tax on people who are too stubborn and petulant to take advice on how they need not pay it.
If it were the only option for taking skis, of course it's outrageous, but it isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So most agree £110 is an unreasonable charge for ski carriage.
As previously explained, the information we received did not explain the options which were advised here on Snowheads. Obviously those Inghams customers who took everything at face value and didn't have the 'advantage' of Snowheads would be paying £110 for ski carriage.
I was never looking for advice on how to avoid the problem. I never asked for advice. I was never taking my own skis. When I advised those of our party, who had planned to takes skis, of the various options explained here on Snowheads, they 'stubbornly' and 'petulantly' all decided not to take up any of these options!
Some said they don't have a ski bag large enough to take a pair of skis to include them in their basic 23kg allowance, others said "if these options are available why aren't they explained?'
I despair at some people! Fancy not listening to unsolicited advice on how to live their lives from some helpful Snowheads and also some know-it-all Smugheads!
Of course, none of this matters because the question was only ever if £110 was reasonable for a ski carriage charge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| pam w wrote: |
@Mr Marmot, lots of people, including Gaza, answered your hypothetical question. If the time and effort you've put into this thread had been spent looking at the BA website and clarifying the confusing information from Inghams you'd no doubt have discovered that as Kat.ryb and others have stated above the BA allowance, one of the best in the business, is adequate for ski stuff.
Nobody thinks £110 is reasonable for ski carriage. But that hasn't saved you the cost and hassle of hiring skis, has it? An expensive rant. |
I was always hiring skis, which I have previously explained.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Jake43 wrote: |
Go one at least one of your huge party could just try it then at least you would know how easy it is.
Instead of getting a suitcase out get your ski bag out put them in. Pack rest of stuff you normally do up to weight limit - then chuck rest and then some in a huge carry on.
Put your valuables in a "laptop bag" sorted.
Go on you do not need to even try and organise anyone just do it. |
As previously explained none of those who planned to take skis have any luggage that would take clothing and skis together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feb half term has arrived early on here this year !
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| So most agree £110 is an unreasonable charge for ski carriage. |
Congratulations you win at the internet. Chapeau!
Apologies for actually trying to provide constructive advice rather than continuing to indulge the whining of someone who isn't directly affected by this egregious miscarriage or justice anyway.
Sorry that's a bit snipey but let's try to be more constructive. What I have learnt from a fair number or interactions with TOs over the years is that they aren't bad at bog standard stuff. If everything goes according to their standard recipe they deliver a fairly competent experience fairly competently. Where they struggle is when anything goes slightly off kilter.
In summer I took my parents away. My mother's case got completely trashed by the airline which was the TO's own. Of course first of all its all smiles and lightness and don't worry we'll sort out a replacement for you. As the week progresses it becomes clearer and clearer inexperienced rep is totally out of her depth in the internal political machinery required to process a simple baggage claim and late on the last night after loads of wasting our time effectively punts it all back to us in fact getting her boyfriend to email me because she now didn't have the guts to communicate directly. Now part of that is "pay peanuts" syndrome but part of it is that they don't trust or empower staff to actually deal with problems and/or believe customer loyalty and reputation means anything. So it's not surprising that they have a garbled means of communicating baggage rules or policy. I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't just think of a number when someone had to deal with it the first time and it became enshrined in docs.
Alternately if we give them credit for being organised enough to conspire in this case we can consider that they have decided "we can't outright say no ADDITIONAL ski bags allowed in addition to normal luggage allowance, but we really don't want them so let's give them a clear economic signal to that effect"
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Thu 28-01-16 17:17; edited 3 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Someone somewhere explained to me why that TOs like Inghams, have different rules than the ones normally used on the airline. If they rent seats, the rules of the airline apply. If they charter it solely for use of their own customers, they can specify their own rules, ie luggage allowance, free food/drink etc. I hasten to add, I don't know if this is true but on Germania scheduled aircraft you get free food, however, when we went a couple of weeks ago on a Germania charter with Inghams, we didn't. We also got a completely different drinks price list from the normal list. Yes, it was more expensive! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
I see what the OP is saying and if you look back i was one of the first to point out how much you can take with BA.
What he highlights is why so many travel independantly because some (not all) TO's try and maximise margins
Another top tip on BA longhaul is an upgrade to world traveller plus . this can be done for £150 (ish depends where and when) and gives you 2 hold bags each
Plus propper cutlery and crockery , better food and an old style business seat
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
an old style business seat
|
... only if you last flew in the 1970s!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Of course TOs will seek to optimize their margins. Why wouldn't they? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| snowdave wrote: |
| Quote: |
an old style business seat
|
... only if you last flew in the 1970s! |
you would have been surprised that some US carriers have still had those in the last 10 years
Granted BA havn't
I kid you not when we returned on an AA aircraft on our BA ticket the AA did not have sleepers in first (what they actually call business as it was a 3 class plane) and there was no seat back media system in any of the plane just fixed (correct not even drop down) 4:3 ratio tvs
Yes in 2016 on a scheduled flight !!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| So most agree £110 is an unreasonable charge for ski carriage. |
Congratulations you win at the internet. Chapeau!
Apologies for actually trying to provide constructive advice rather than continuing to indulge the whining of someone who isn't directly affected by this egregious miscarriage or justice anyway.
Sorry that's a bit snipey but let's try to be more constructive. What I have learnt from a fair number or interactions with TOs over the years is that they aren't bad at bog standard stuff. If everything goes according to their standard recipe they deliver a fairly competent experience fairly competently. Where they struggle is when anything goes slightly off kilter.
In summer I took my parents away. My mother's case got completely trashed by the airline which was the TO's own. Of course first of all its all smiles and lightness and don't worry we'll sort out a replacement for you. As the week progresses it becomes clearer and clearer inexperienced rep is totally out of her depth in the internal political machinery required to process a simple baggage claim and late on the last night after loads of wasting our time effectively punts it all back to us in fact getting her boyfriend to email me because she now didn't have the guts to communicate directly. Now part of that is "pay peanuts" syndrome but part of it is that they don't trust or empower staff to actually deal with problems and/or believe customer loyalty and reputation means anything. So it's not surprising that they have a garbled means of communicating baggage rules or policy. I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't just think of a number when someone had to deal with it the first time and it became enshrined in docs.
Alternately if we give them credit for being organised enough to conspire in this case we can consider that they have decided "we can't outright say no ADDITIONAL ski bags allowed in addition to normal luggage allowance, but we really don't want them so let's give them a clear economic signal to that effect" |
Thank you for the award. I will wear it with pride!
I think it is the TO's fault, rather than the airline, in our case. They initially gave us incorrect information and subsequently incomplete information. The outcome was that those who wanted to take their skis would either have had to pay £110 or buy a bag which could take skis and lose about 6kg of their allowance for other items. When we hire skis it won't be via the Ingham's rep.!!!
I feel we would have hit rock-bottom of stupidity if a ski holiday TO provided a flight with an airline which didn't want to take skis!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I have watched ski carriage cost go up and rules around what constitutes ski equipment tighten year on year. It is infuriating given the only reason most if the flights it effects only operate to carry skiers to ski resorts.
That said in reality I find the third party airport handling staff don't care for the ever changing rules. So when t&cs say only one pair of skis and max 15kg your usually fine with a couple of pairs of skis on all your gear for the week crammed in there and as many have said avoid the need to pay for a second bag.
I suspect for TOs increasing carriage thus encouraging hire in resort could be an underhand way for them to earn more commission as they sell you ski hire packs on your coach transfer?
Thankfully this year I discovered Swiss still have free ski carriage and booked with them, though I found it so hard to believe I phoned them to confirm!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| niski wrote: |
I have watched ski carriage cost go up and rules around what constitutes ski equipment tighten year on year. It is infuriating given the only reason most if the flights it effects only operate to carry skiers to ski resorts.
That said in reality I find the third party airport handling staff don't care for the ever changing rules. So when t&cs say only one pair of skis and max 15kg your usually fine with a couple of pairs of skis on all your gear for the week crammed in there and as many have said avoid the need to pay for a second bag.
I suspect for TOs increasing carriage thus encouraging hire in resort could be an underhand way for them to earn more commission as they sell you ski hire packs on your coach transfer?
Thankfully this year I discovered Swiss still have free ski carriage and booked with them, though I found it so hard to believe I phoned them to confirm! |
I very much doubt that there is any appreciable difference between the commission a TO might earn from ski hire and what they might earn from an airline. I suspect the issue relates more to the airlines themselves, who are all trying to streamline their operations. The likes of Ryanair encourage people to take hand luggage and discourage them from taking hold baggage precisely because they need to pay baggage handling costs and, more importantly, hold baggage slows down turnaround times. Skis are a nightmare as their transportation through the airport can't even be mechanised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, to late they've headed off minus skis.
Shame as (as repeatedely stated) it is v easy and free to take skis on BA flights, esp if travelling in a group.
Flown BA a few times and earlier this month, packed all my clobber, boots and skis in one twin ski bag (as regulations) , all heavy smaller items in a decent sized backpack (which I wear when skiing).
Ski bag weighed in at 24kg but that just got awarded a 'heavy' sticker, no charge.
Didn't even bother weighing the bag on way home!
Great system, I wish more airlines would do the same. (AND ITS FREE, FREE !! )
Just had to pay £35 for carriage this time, 2 sets tho' so not so bad, but not FREE !
Hope you have a great time Marmots group. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes to baggage handling fees, but it's not about turn-around times. That's limited by the spill and fill delay of the dawdling "self-loading cargo" (and cleaning up after them). Minimising passengers' free hold luggage entitlement is all about selling the remaining space for commercial air-freight, which loads and unloads way more efficiently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| shep wrote: |
| Yes to baggage handling fees, but it's not about turn-around times. That's limited by the spill and fill delay of the dawdling "self-loading cargo" (and cleaning up after them). Minimising passengers' free hold luggage entitlement is all about selling the remaining space for commercial air-freight, which loads and unloads way more efficiently. |
I dare say you are right, but there is also the a la carte element of the pricing strategy. Baggage handling costs money from check-in to bag delivery. Many travellers don't need it, so to remain competitive let people decide if they want it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What I found irritating about @Mr Marmot's approach was that he was still insisting that it was extortion and profiteering long after it became obvious to all and sundry that this was nothing more than a cock-up by the TO. A cock-up that the rest of us could see in five seconds flat. There was clearly more pleasure to be gained from righteous indignation about the immoral ways of airlines and TOs than from just getting the problem sorted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
