this post was submitted on 24 May 2025
79 points (97.6% liked)

chapotraphouse

13849 readers
596 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm mostly sure it's only that cheap:

  • because the train is a realistic alternative

AND

  • they're probably operating at a loss or near loss and covering the cost from other operations (like if they're a subsidiary of a US company, for example) in order to convince people of how cheap and convenient air travel is. See? You don't need trains! Just dismantle your rail system, you can trust us to have a monopoly on your long distance travel.
[โ€“] Keld@hexbear.net 4 points 1 week ago

You are absolutely right that this is only possible in part because the train exists as an alternative and there is therefore competition limiting their ability to price gouge.. But the specific flight is taken by a company that operates mostly regionally and this is one of most profitable routes.

The train company is price gouging to a much greater extent, and it is doing so because it has a profit motive and a natural monopoly on many routes.