SAA, in response to a tour operator query, says its pricing on domestic and regional gateways to safari destinations is at the mercy of seat numbers and codesharing.
Onne Vegter, Director of Wild Wings Safaris, recently asked why both domestic and regional flights to safari gateways were so much pricier than those to more frequently travelled leisure and business routes.
Vegter offered two examples that he had encountered when making client bookings. On a one-way flight from Hoedspruit to Cape Town, SAA quoted R4 300 per person. “That's R8 600 return. You can fly to London for that price,” he commented, pointing out that the booking was scheduled for November 6 (then six months away), outside of school holidays and on a weekday. The flight was also non-Voyager upgradable.
“SAA has a monopoly on that route of course, so they can charge what they want, and no doubt they are pricing this for the tourist market. But that a domestic flight should cost as much as an international flight is really unacceptable,” he said.
In answer, SAA Spokesperson, Tlali Tlali, pointed out that direct flights were operated by SA Express with smaller aircraft. The fares referred to were due to the lack of availability for lower fares. This sector, he said, was serviced by a 40-seater aircraft and where 32 seats are taken, it became a case of supply and demand. Thus, at the time the quote was made, only higher fares were available for travel on November 6. The cheapest fare on this route was R2 853 all inclusive one way.
Vegter countered: “Both SAA and SA Express are owned by the government and should have the best interests of the country at heart. This includes supporting and encouraging the tourism sector, which is one of the most important drivers of economic growth, job creation and foreign investment. How often has the industry complained about high airfares and airport taxes limiting access to South Africa and growth in tourism? Domestic rates like these stunt growth and cannot be justified. Perhaps if they used a bigger plane and charged half as much, we could fly a lot more tourists between Cape Town and Hoedspruit.”
For a flight on SAA to Kilimanjaro, Vegter found that a return trip via Nairobi cost over R15 200 return. The same route on the same date on Kenya Airways cost less than half.
Querying how SAA could justify such prices, Vegter said: “I've now booked two people on Kenya Airways instead of on SAA, when I'd much rather support our national carrier. If SAA is always flying full at these prices, one can still understand these fees, but they're not flying full and they're not breaking even, and their solution is to hike prices even more, instead of lowering prices and getting more bums in seats.”
In response, SAA pointed out that Kilimanjaro could be reached via Dar es Salaam using a combination of the airline and Precision Airways, or via Nairobi using SAA and Kenya Airways. “It is important to note that Kenya Airways (KQ) can charge much less than SAA since KQ doesn’t need to share revenue with any carrier as they operate the complete routing. SAA on the other hand must pay KQ or Precision Airways (PW) for carriage to/from Kilimanjaro.”
Said Vegter: “The leg between Nairobi and Kilimanjaro is operated by Precision Air even when booking with Kenya Airways, so having to share revenue with another airline is no excuse. Charging double the price is pure profiteering on the part of SAA.”
