BDSC
Contributor
I know when we did the NAI'A last year they reduced the fuel surcharge by quite a bit. Also, I have the Caribbean Explorer II booked for June and they reduced the fuel surcharge from like $125 to $35 or something like that.
Fuel Surcharge
- Thread starter simcoediver
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Oh wow - thats really not on. I understood when they put them in but not to take them off now the prices dropped is just asking for trouble
We'd like to think it's just asking for trouble but I believe the fuel surcharges t be a new day in the revenue stream. It's not going to go away now. Grrrrr
This first bit isn't live aboard related but we've had issues here in NC with a couple boats that tack on a fuel surcharge upfront when you book. Then on the day of the trip, they discover it's too windy and rough and rather than running 20-25 miles off shore, they drop you 10 miles off shore, and do 2 dives on the same inshore wreck. The net result is you got crappy Labrador current diving rather than the Gulf Stream diving you paid for (which is a known risk, so no big deal) but you don't get your fuel surcharge back despite the boat only going about 40 percent of the distance it would have otherwise.
Our solution to the problem was to just stop booking on those boats.
The moral here is that if you don't like being abused with a fuel surcharge on a live aboard, book with a boat like the Spree that doesn't operate that way.
-----
Choice is how the free market works and unfortunately as long as a majority of customers are dumb enough to be swayed by a lower up front price that is misleading and does not factor in all the additional costs, we'll continue to see companies marketing and pricing this way.
Just as an example and not to focus on Frank, I've heard the same "The Spree is more expensive!" comment a lot recently as the local shop is booking a trip with the Spree. The first conversation was with the shop staff, pointing out the advantages of the Spree, in terms of where they go, the consistently good diving, their knowledge of the sites, the potential for 5 dives a day, the lack of any extra hotel fees (as you board the night before and leave the boat the morning after arrival), the all inclusive food, drink and nitrox, and the lack of a fuel surcharge. Plus of course the other associated costs that are minimized by cheap airfare to MIA or FLL and cheap shuttle rides to the Keys - or the option of the shop chartering a shuttle for a group. At the end of the day, the Spree is a good deal even before you consider the quality and consistency of the diving and the transparent all inclusive cost that you can actually budget for.
Does it mean anything to some people? Sadly, no. Some people are just short sighted. Consistent with what Frank says, we've still got people who won't book the trip as they are hung up on the higher upfront quoted all inclusive price and would probably book if the up price were a couple hundred dollars less, with a few hundred dollars for nitrox, food, fuel, etc, tacked on just before departure or during the trip. Those folks pay more in the end and they complain if/when they figure it out, but the operator still fills the boat so the practice continues.
Our solution to the problem was to just stop booking on those boats.
The moral here is that if you don't like being abused with a fuel surcharge on a live aboard, book with a boat like the Spree that doesn't operate that way.
-----
Choice is how the free market works and unfortunately as long as a majority of customers are dumb enough to be swayed by a lower up front price that is misleading and does not factor in all the additional costs, we'll continue to see companies marketing and pricing this way.
Just as an example and not to focus on Frank, I've heard the same "The Spree is more expensive!" comment a lot recently as the local shop is booking a trip with the Spree. The first conversation was with the shop staff, pointing out the advantages of the Spree, in terms of where they go, the consistently good diving, their knowledge of the sites, the potential for 5 dives a day, the lack of any extra hotel fees (as you board the night before and leave the boat the morning after arrival), the all inclusive food, drink and nitrox, and the lack of a fuel surcharge. Plus of course the other associated costs that are minimized by cheap airfare to MIA or FLL and cheap shuttle rides to the Keys - or the option of the shop chartering a shuttle for a group. At the end of the day, the Spree is a good deal even before you consider the quality and consistency of the diving and the transparent all inclusive cost that you can actually budget for.
Does it mean anything to some people? Sadly, no. Some people are just short sighted. Consistent with what Frank says, we've still got people who won't book the trip as they are hung up on the higher upfront quoted all inclusive price and would probably book if the up price were a couple hundred dollars less, with a few hundred dollars for nitrox, food, fuel, etc, tacked on just before departure or during the trip. Those folks pay more in the end and they complain if/when they figure it out, but the operator still fills the boat so the practice continues.
Please let us know which lob you book when you finally get around to diving Maldives. Thanks
Shasta_man
Contributor
You can't get hung up on the word surcharge as the only cost that matters is the total trip cost of an apples to apples comparison. You add up everything that it takes to achieve the same trip and compare costs. If the food costs you $300 on one boat and is free on another, that means nothing until you look at all the costs because that savings could be lost elsewhere in the total cost, so you can't evaluate gaining or losing until you look at the total cost or at least total cost for the same set of achievements.
Note that a surcharge, when implemented fairly, COULD mean you pay less overall because it should be geared to the actual cost while the flat rate developer must charge a rate which will guarantee profitability, which means they must cover to the high end of the range. If fuel cost is at the high end (and the surcharge is high), then you have paid a similar price, but when fuel cost is low along with surcharge, the flat rate costs can't react to that unless the flat rate developer changes the rate periodically to stay competitive and even then essentially by definition, the flat rate must still be higher to account for possible increases. In numbers, I'm saying that if the cost of fuel can range betwen $85 and $120, then the flat rate user must price the trip closer to $120 to avoid losing money when costs are $120, while the surcharge structure can drop to the actual cost of $85 if that happens. Whether the surcharge does reflect actual cost is a separate question. Changing the flat rate has its own risks as to alienating customers by charging some people more for the same trip. The flat rate user has a final level called acceptance of risk where they can price the trip lower by betting their costs will be lower, but they risk losing money if costs are higher.
Long story long, Frank's boat can certainly be a better overall deal for tangible and intangible reasons, but it's not automatic that surcharge = bad and flat rate = good. It depends on the level of risk you also want to take on.
but finally, hey, it's a drop in the trip bucket. Do things, enjoy yourself while you are out because we could be gone at any time.
Note that a surcharge, when implemented fairly, COULD mean you pay less overall because it should be geared to the actual cost while the flat rate developer must charge a rate which will guarantee profitability, which means they must cover to the high end of the range. If fuel cost is at the high end (and the surcharge is high), then you have paid a similar price, but when fuel cost is low along with surcharge, the flat rate costs can't react to that unless the flat rate developer changes the rate periodically to stay competitive and even then essentially by definition, the flat rate must still be higher to account for possible increases. In numbers, I'm saying that if the cost of fuel can range betwen $85 and $120, then the flat rate user must price the trip closer to $120 to avoid losing money when costs are $120, while the surcharge structure can drop to the actual cost of $85 if that happens. Whether the surcharge does reflect actual cost is a separate question. Changing the flat rate has its own risks as to alienating customers by charging some people more for the same trip. The flat rate user has a final level called acceptance of risk where they can price the trip lower by betting their costs will be lower, but they risk losing money if costs are higher.
Long story long, Frank's boat can certainly be a better overall deal for tangible and intangible reasons, but it's not automatic that surcharge = bad and flat rate = good. It depends on the level of risk you also want to take on.
but finally, hey, it's a drop in the trip bucket. Do things, enjoy yourself while you are out because we could be gone at any time.
Shasta man, I agree with you in part but if one is already taking one of the more expensive lobs that provide a delightful experience, why do they then charge another $100-300 fuel surcharge when fuel is so low? It's not the amount or percentage of overall cost, It's the principle of the matter that offends my sensibilities. It hasn't stopped me obviously but it still irks.
As for enjoy while we can, I'm in 100% favor and certainly do my best not to let little irritants spoil my "in the moment" experiences.
As for enjoy while we can, I'm in 100% favor and certainly do my best not to let little irritants spoil my "in the moment" experiences.
admikar
Contributor
Problem with surcharge is not a surcharge as such, but a practice to keep it at a level like it is a flat rate. I don't know how things works in US, but here, on a petrol station, whenever global fuel price drops, end price is kept the same because they are still selling old, costlier, fuel. On reverse, when global fuel price rise, end price increases immediately, because "WE NEED TO FOLLOW GLOBAL FLUCTUATIONS".
Similar threads
