[HN Gopher] Why does a plastic-wrapped turkey sandwich cost $15 ...
___________________________________________________________________
Why does a plastic-wrapped turkey sandwich cost $15 at the NYC
airport?
Author : raybb
Score : 249 points
Date : 2023-04-15 14:20 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (hellgatenyc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (hellgatenyc.com)
| trafnar wrote:
| This article is not asking "Why would a store at the airport
| charge extra?" (pretty obvious), it's asking "Exactly how did
| these stores arrive at their prices given the pricing rules that
| are supposedly imposed on them by the government?"
| hm-nah wrote:
| Why does a double mezcal at Slims Last Chance cost $24.50 before
| the tip?!
| canucker2016 wrote:
| How about a ham & cheese sandwich that costs $29+tax ($31.57
| total) in Upper East Side Manhattan?
|
| I thought the large pastrami sandwiches for almost $20 was crazy
| before the pandemic. But for a regular size ham & cheese?
|
| see https://nypost.com/2023/04/14/inflation-raises-price-of-
| ham-...
| smelendez wrote:
| But they don't have a monopoly and that's not normal Manhattan
| pricing. As the article mentions, you can go down the street to
| Panera or McDonald's or anywhere else more easily than in the
| airport.
| xwdv wrote:
| It's really not difficult to build sandwiches that won't require
| refrigeration and can be packed into a container for consumption
| on long trips, people just don't really know how to make them.
| But it will vastly improve the quality of your life.
|
| Just stop buying these expensive sandwiches.
| ufo wrote:
| What's your favorite such sandwich?
| bluedino wrote:
| Peanut better and jelly
| osnium123 wrote:
| PDX in Oregon has reasonably priced food. I wonder what their
| secret is.
| fisherjeff wrote:
| Vendors aren't allowed to charge higher prices than at their
| off-airport locations, for one.
|
| https://thepointsguy.com/news/pricey-airport-food/
| rolph wrote:
| perhaps they were done with seeing good food expire on the
| shelf, and paying to have it destroyed
| asah wrote:
| Palm grease is an experiment ingredient, and exempt from FDA
| labeling rules.
| cafard wrote:
| In the late 1980s, when I traveled a lot for work, I thought of
| airports as similar to the debtors' prisons depicted by Dickens:
| it was unpleasant, it was sort of your fault you were there, and
| you could purchase comforts, but at inordinate prices.
| arnejenssen wrote:
| "The reason that X costs Y, is that (enough) people buy it".
|
| It has less to do with the actual price of making the goods or
| service
| dplgk wrote:
| Doesn't really explain it. If X cost less, more people would
| buy it. Less people would plan around avoiding eating at the
| airport.
| lifeisstillgood wrote:
| It's rent.
|
| The airport knows how much foot traffic there is, how much spend
| per person and can therefore adjust rent to gouge everything
| except 10%.
|
| But on a square foot revenue basis that's store is the best
| performing of whatever chain we talk about - and it has a
| guaranteed yearly revenue which makes nice for the bank loan and
| the volume deal for the suplliers and ...
|
| it's a win win for everyone apart from the customer
| asah wrote:
| More subtly, why is Newark so much more reasonable? I had a
| perfectly decent shot down meal at Saison and the prices were
| high but not crazy.
| logicallydurrrr wrote:
| [dead]
| spacemule wrote:
| It's pretty obvious why the one in the picture at the top is
| $14.99. It's from the kosher stand that has a small selection and
| higher prices because kosher meat is generally pretty expensive
| in America. Mind you, I wouldn't normally buy that sandwich for
| $15, but the last time I traveled through Newark, I gladly payed
| that much for something kosher to eat. It's about the same as I'd
| pay outside the airport for something similar if freshly made. I
| can't say much about the other products listed, as I'm not the
| target demographic.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| This is why I just bring along a few protein bars when I travel.
| $15 for a shitty airport sandwich? _Fuhgedaboudit!_
| nemo44x wrote:
| I figured it's because so many travelers are business travelers
| that expense things like meals. The prices are very high but not
| enough to raise the alarm on whoever approves expense reports.
| casenmgreen wrote:
| I remember being in one of the NYC airports and needing a plug
| socket adapter for my laptop, for the flight.
|
| On Alibaba, 50 cents.
|
| On Amazon, maybe 1.5 USD.
|
| In the airport, 35 USD. This was back in about 2015.
|
| I did not buy it, and got by as best I could.
|
| Such extraordinary prices materially impact the experience of
| traveling. To my eye, they seem shortsighted.
|
| I also finally realised some years ago all the "duty free" shops
| are a giant con.
|
| Yes, they are duty free - but they're all charging about twice
| the high-street price.
|
| I never buy in airports, which can inconvenient, and it is always
| unpleasant to witness when I travel. If I were running an
| airport, I would look to make the experience of travelers as
| pleasant as possible, rather than actually making it unpleasant.
| xyzelement wrote:
| You may have noticed in general that convenience costs you
| money. A charger which is in China and you will get in a month
| is indeed worth 50 cents because all that's worth to you.
|
| A charger right this second, at the exact location (airport,
| past security) is obviously going to cost more.
|
| Both because you are being charged a convenience premium, and
| because chances are nobody would bother setting up vending for
| 50 cents (just think about hiring cleared employees, supplying
| your store on that side of security, rental of that very
| limited space)
|
| In general, I find myself much less outraged at what things
| cost once I became versed in market dynamics.
|
| If you are a businessman who forgot his charger in the hotel
| and your flight got delayed, you are thrilled to pay $35 for it
| (vs not having it at all since nobody would bother selling it)
| kevviiinn wrote:
| When I was younger and dumber I made the mistake of buying some
| halfway decent ear buds for $95. Huge ripoff but I rode those
| things for years until they stopped putting out sound to repent
| for my mistake. Never again
| grishka wrote:
| > To my eye, they seem shortsighted.
|
| These prices work in airports because there are little to no
| repeat customers, AND there is no competition to drive the
| prices down.
| ornornor wrote:
| > Yes, they are duty free - but they're all charging about
| twice the high-street price.
|
| Same as ZERO COMMISSION EXCHANGE outfits that, yes, charge 0%
| commission on the receipt but have jacked up all exchange rates
| by 10% instead...
| ZephyrBlu wrote:
| I travelled recently and when I got some foreign cash I
| noticed this. I was thinking, well if the fee is 0% you're
| clearly giving me a shit exchange rate and making your money
| there.
|
| It seems bizarre to shuffle around the cost structure like
| that, but I guess it's a marketing thing that works because
| most people don't know any better?
| oriettaxx wrote:
| and what about the planned maze to reach your gate? planned
| so you are forced to pass in front as many shops as possible?
| The gate may be 50 meters away if you turn left, but the sign
| says you have to turn right... and it will become 200 meters
| and many shops
|
| then, even worse, the fact that they "announce" your gate
| only 30 minutes before embarking! .... they do not want you
| to sit in a chair if front of your gate.. absolutely not!
| they want you to hang around and spend.
|
| but, the worst: when they heat the water in the toilets so
| you cannot drink it! In Greece they even put a fake "not
| potable" sign, so you sure buy the world's higher overpriced
| bottle of water.
| lvkv wrote:
| Do you mean "sinks" instead of "toilets"?
| jffry wrote:
| Maybe "toilets" was meant more in the sense of
| "bathrooms"?
| cortesoft wrote:
| Or the comment was written by a dog
| jstarfish wrote:
| Or Duke Nukem.
| sleepychu wrote:
| The toilet can mean the bathroom, at least where I'm
| from.
| indymike wrote:
| The toilet is in the bathroom where I live. Only the
| local rustics say warshroom.
| sundvor wrote:
| Please just say toilet sinks.
|
| It seems to me it might have been a cost cutting thing to
| simplify the plumbing, by having only one button to
| supply a preset lukewarm water for hand washing.
|
| The airports I've been at typically have had water
| fountains. But it's been a minute now, and they were not
| in the US.
| gadders wrote:
| Toilets are what Brits call the room that America's call
| a bathroom. I guess at least that has the virtue of the
| room actually having toilets in it and not baths.
| quietbritishjim wrote:
| I'm a Brit (as my handle suggests) and technically I
| agree with your comment but if I read you can't drink
| "the water in the toilets" it sounds pretty literal even
| to me.
| ipaddr wrote:
| washroom is American but bathroom is Canadian
| PebblesRox wrote:
| I've always heard and used bathroom as an American.
| Restroom is also used for public facilities that don't
| actually have bathtubs.
| pxc wrote:
| 'bathroom' is extremely common in the USA.
| grepfru_it wrote:
| >planned maze
|
| Is actually to maximize surface area for airplanes to park
| in a single terminal. Next airport trip, pull out a gps and
| look at where you are walking.
|
| >announce your gate 30 minutes
|
| The airline you are flying on only has X number of gates
| but X+y planes at that given time. So they will hold off on
| gate numbers to optimally fit you in. Lots of pilots
| talking to ATC telling them they don't have gate info from
| their carrier yet
|
| I understand it may appear as though they are trying to get
| you, but they are trying to be efficient
| Y_Y wrote:
| What I've found is that often a flight will take the same
| gate as it took yesterday, and failing that a nearby one.
| I think people like to be near their gate to feel safer
| about missing the flight. You mightn't know know the
| exact date, but since airports won't even give you the
| general area.
|
| Also I don't believe your efficiency story, there are
| plenty of cases where it's possible to know the gate
| ahead of time, and plenty of reasons for airports not to
| want people congregating at the gate as soon as they get
| airside.
| ornornor wrote:
| Yep. I hate everything about flying. It's miserable. I plan
| my vacations to avoid flying, it's just not worth the
| aggravation for me.
| tracker1 wrote:
| I find road trips pretty pleasant... don't plan on having
| to drive too far in one day, and when you aren't in a
| rush to get somewhere by a certain time, it's pretty
| relaxing just listening to music, and the general scenery
| for most of the driving. After a few days, most daily
| life stress tends to melt away.
| ativzzz wrote:
| Just show up the airport an hour earlier than needed and
| go grab a beer. Less stress, more relaxation
| polio wrote:
| It's also a perverse incentive for the airport to not
| improve security times. The less predictable the security
| experience is, the earlier people have to show up, and the
| more time they spend getting hungry airside.
| zmmmmm wrote:
| not to mention security requirements ... the more
| paranoid they make people about what they can bring, the
| less likely they are to attempt to bring food or drink in
| themselves and end up resigning yourself to buying it in
| the terminal.
|
| There seems to be a deliberate fog of war around travel
| requirements. The specifics of the rules are different
| everywhere (take my shoes off? belt off? laptop in my bag
| or out of my bag? ...). Which is slightly annoying in
| itself but what is really annoying is the lack of
| explanation of _what those specific requirements are_ at
| any one airport. Which means inevitably being yelled at
| by security staff, feeling stupid, setting off scanners
| accidentally etc. It 's all very unpleasant.
| hgsgm wrote:
| TSA took over airport security.
| elicash wrote:
| It's been years now since I checked, but I remember a Best Buy
| airport vending machine having the same price as their stores.
| nobody9999 wrote:
| >It's been years now since I checked, but I remember a Best
| Buy airport vending machine having the same price as their
| stores.
|
| It's been years now since I checked, but I remember needing
| (within hours) a specific ethernet card (for a box running
| Solaris x86 -- back in the late '90s/early noughties driver
| support for Solaris was quite limited) and went to a BestBuy
| store as they had it in stock near me.
|
| I checked later on and found that the price _in the store_
| was 30% over MSRP.
|
| As such, the fact that the price was the same at an airport
| vending machine vis-a-vis an actual store doesn't surprise me
| that much.
|
| Which is why, unless I'm in a situation like I described
| above, I stay far, far away from BestBuy.
|
| Obviously, this is anecdotal, so I imagine YMMV.
| largepeepee wrote:
| Depends on the country as well, some country airports with high
| item tax make it worth buying at the airport.
|
| Take the vice tax for example, most Islamic countries probably
| at alcohol cheaper at their airports.
|
| Same goes with countries that have items with pricing power, I
| always get certain gifts at Japanese airports since the price
| it usually cheaper with tax free comparative to the rest of the
| country.
|
| US airports though... Never worth it. Overpriced af
| Ekaros wrote:
| Went to Dubai, I don't do drugs, but prices seemed not
| horrible.
|
| Then I checked if I would spend my local money for some
| candy, but I noped right out. On principle I weren't going to
| pay those prices.
| Eisenstein wrote:
| I'm not sure if your comment makes sense and I can't think
| straight, or maybe you are using 'drugs' and 'candy' in
| some way that I don't understand.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Ethanol is a drug. No different really from fentanyl or
| crack cocaine or THC. So I just referrer it as such.
| traverseda wrote:
| Or blueberries or aspirin? I'm confused as to where you
| draw the lines between those items.
| Danieru wrote:
| Yes that's fine; but that's the "candy" in your context?
|
| We're all confused about the candy thing.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Actual candy, like chocolate. I think price was multiple
| times what you would expect anywhere.
| conductr wrote:
| > If I were running an airport, I would look to make the
| experience of travelers as pleasant as possible, rather than
| actually making it unpleasant.
|
| You'd also need to find a revenue source to maintain the
| airport and pay salaries which is kind of important
| actionablefiber wrote:
| I think another point is that thanks to TSA measures it will
| pretty much always be unpleasant, so you can make money
| squeezing people with layovers who don't want to, or don't
| have time to, go through security an extra time.
|
| If you have a layover in a train station, e.g. with Amtrak,
| you can just leave the train station and go to a nearby shop
| if you need something.
| [deleted]
| gretch wrote:
| Isn't this very simple?
|
| It's just basic supply and demand. Travelers are already
| exhausted from travel so they are willing to pay high prices for
| small comforts. Also, some travelers are business travelers and
| their company foots the bill.
|
| If all travelers collectively stopped buying these foods, the
| price would drop. But people keep buying them, understandably.
| jtefera wrote:
| The article mentions that according to the Port Authority
| rules, vendors can't charge more than 10% of the street price
| of the equivalent products. So no, you can't charge whatever
| you want just based on supply and demand.
|
| The article is trying to understand how they determine the base
| price.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| If you read the article (you should) you'll note that the shops
| with the concession do not have the freedom to arbitrarily set
| such high prices (which would make it that simple), and that
| the Port Authority who is supposed to ensure that prices adhere
| to the set guidelines, is apparently not doing its job and is
| withholding documents that can proof this despite these
| documents generally being considered open information for
| citizens to request.
| dafelst wrote:
| The issue discussed in the article is that the NY Port
| Authority has regulations to clamp the prices of these items to
| comparable items in NYC (based on the average of the 3 lowest
| cost comparables), and they are not being transparent on which
| comparable items (if any) they are comparing to.
|
| So no, it is not just a simple issue of supply and demand, it
| is an issue of lack of governmental transparency.
| davidkuennen wrote:
| Was able to enjoy the Business Class Lounge a few weeks back in
| JFK Airport. The lounge sounds almost like a steal in comparison
| when reading those prices.
| beej71 wrote:
| "Charge what the market will bear."
| ElfinTrousers wrote:
| Not everything in this article is outrageous. $27.85 to drink a
| Sam Adams would be...
|
| ...wait, they want _me_ to pay to drink a Sam Adams? Sorry, my
| misunderstanding. No deal.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| Melbourne airport makes more money from car parking than
| anything.
| djhope99 wrote:
| In most cases (especially with food prices like this) paying for
| lounge access looks like a great option.
| ericpauley wrote:
| The addition of restaurants to Priority Pass has been an
| especially nice addition here. After deductions (and plus tip)
| you can often get a nice sit-down meal for the price of
| plastic-wrapped garbage elsewhere in the airport.
| listenallyall wrote:
| Lounges have jacked up pricing as well. Used to be a $25 add-on
| to a ticket... well worth it when traveling internationally.
| Recently I've seen $49 or $59 for entry. If you're willing to
| drop that coin, you can eat pretty well at airport restaurants.
| tpmx wrote:
| The handful of international business class lounges in the US
| that I've visited were comparatively quite stingy/basic with
| food items (compared to typical counterparts in e.g. Europe or
| Asia).
|
| Anyone got a recommendation for a JFK lounge that's a good deal
| when you're paying for access?
| awinter-py wrote:
| Fascinating comparison to health pricing -- CMS has been trying
| for years to get hospitals to disclose their _own_ prices (not
| even the methodology /formula deal from port authority), and they
| just haven't
|
| People spill a lot of ink about _whether_ regulators should force
| industries to be markets. Feels like we don 't focus enough on
| the downstream case where regulators try to impose markets and
| fail
| DerekL wrote:
| The title is incorrect. As the article states, there is more than
| one airport for New York City, so the phrase "the NYC airport" is
| misleading.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| I've seen these prices at many airports - I'd say every airport,
| IIRC. It's not new and it's not local to NY. It's not only in
| airports, but anywhere there is a captive audience, such as
| sporting events, museums, etc.
|
| Can anyone name airports where these aren't standard prices?
| manual89 wrote:
| When I was flying out of Narita Airport, the vending machines
| within were the exact same prices as those on any street corner
| in Japan: very reasonable.
| genocidicbunny wrote:
| Portland International (PDX)
|
| Many/most of the restaurants are ones that you could also find
| locations for outside the airport, and their prices are the
| same as outside the airport.
| riffic wrote:
| Corruption, plainly put in New York parlance, " _f_ you, that 's
| why."
| jononomo wrote:
| On my last trip, I noticed that a cup of coffee in an airport is
| now $4. And that's just for a paper cup with black coffee in it
| -- not any kind of special latte, etc.
| SMAAART wrote:
| It's $29 in Manhattan
| https://www.instagram.com/p/Cq_FJyDMYoU/?igshid=MDJmNzVkMjY%...
| switch007 wrote:
| I've only flown through JFK once but still, my initial thought
| was "oh only $15?"
| Algemarin wrote:
| > Why does a plastic-wrapped turkey sandwich cost $15
|
| Because people keep paying for them.
|
| The fault of price gouging lies firmly with consumers. If
| consumers are willing to tolerate ridiculous prices, then guess
| what, vendors are going to keep charging ever-higher ridiculous
| prices. Why in the world would they not?
|
| If no one, or at least much fewer, people were willing to shell
| out $15 for a sandwich, then that sandwich would not cost $15.
|
| If you're going to be hungry, bring food with you to the airport.
| If you don't want to deal with being hassled while going through
| security about it, then eat it before you go through security.
| It's very simple.
|
| Sure there are always going to be exceptions--flight delays,
| you're running late, your kids' blood sugar is dipping, etc, but
| if you adhere to this very basic principle more often than not,
| sandwich prices will go down.
| prottog wrote:
| I agree with all of your points, but in cases of monopoly or
| oligopoly you can't place all of the blame on the consumer. It
| seems like a simple way for this problem to fix itself is for
| the Port Authority to allow more competition among
| concessionaires in the terminals; the article doesn't make it
| clear how much competition there really is.
|
| As noted elsewhere in this thread, the Port Authority is one of
| the most corrupt government organizations you could find, so it
| would be unsurprising if it ended up being that there were two
| or three parent companies behind all the concessionaires.
| bluedino wrote:
| They are $4 in the vending machine at the office
| seb1204 wrote:
| Make it a home for even less I guess
| spacemannoslen wrote:
| I can offer some insight onto this, as I used to be in close
| proximity to a friend who worked in the concession group at the
| LAX version monitoring this policy.
|
| It was called the 18% price protection policy program where
| concessionaires had to quarterly list 3 comparable vendors for
| each item sold showing how their item offered was only less than
| 18% above that of those found within a 10 mile radius of the
| airport. In reality, it was too much asked of low skilled and low
| margin vendors with power to enforce not being exercised due to
| managements prioritization of more pressing matters.
|
| In reality, there was little by way of enforcement, it was too
| much regulation to pass down to those vendors even, with that
| being only 1 of 5-10 policies an excel sheets they had to provide
| quarterly data on, entered manually. They vendors had so much
| turnover themselves and employees who didn't specialize in
| providing that sort of data, they would always fall behind with
| all the policies and regulation they had to comply with that
| enforcing it on them was hollow and without power. And when they
| did provide data, it was poorly formatted, required man hours to
| read and research and in the end might not even have been a valid
| "comparable" data that was provided, but, to verify their data
| provided would require manual audits of physically inspecting
| 10-100 individual comparables that were given that it was a
| nightmare, and thus, never got done. There wasn't enough staff at
| either the vendor nor the airport authority to properly see the
| implementation of the price protection policy.
|
| The city could technically use its power to make it a priority,
| but, there were always much more urgent matters at same position
| that it was a on the back burner, it seemed.
| listenallyall wrote:
| What does "used to be in close proximity to a friend" mean? I
| mean your comment is pretty detailed, down to the formatting of
| Excel documents and the internal workings of the regulators.
| People have conversations with friends, but rarely to this
| degree of detail, kind of makes it sound like you're just
| making shit up. Or, that you yourself are the "friend."
| bckygldstn wrote:
| I've had plenty of conversations like this with friends over
| a beer or coffee, incredulously diving into some bizarre
| aspect of their work or life!
| seb1204 wrote:
| Same
| floor_ wrote:
| [flagged]
| pwg wrote:
| > Why Does a Plastic-Wrapped Turkey Sandwich Cost $15 at the
| Airport?
|
| Despite the "port authority" rules on 'street pricing', the real
| reason is lack of competition.
|
| A single vendor receives the food contract for the airport, and
| they now have monopoly positioning and a captive audience. When
| business X is the only seller, and when the customers are held
| captive and unable to "go elsewhere" [1] then prices will
| naturally rise to the maximum the captive audience is willing to
| pay.
|
| [1] How many air travelers are willing to exit the security
| perimeter, to then need to take a cab to somewhere (most airports
| are not located near dense shopping/restaurant areas) to purchase
| food, to then have to go back through security to return to their
| flight? And what few even have enough time between flight legs to
| even consider that "go outside the airport for food" trip as even
| possible? Plus by the time the "cab fee" is factored in, even if
| they could find the identical sandwich for 5.50 on the outside,
| the $10 + tip or more cab fee there and back would make the
| sandwich $15 or more in the end anyway.
| lostlogin wrote:
| > the real reason is lack of competition.
|
| If my limited experience with hospital shops is anything to go
| by, yes, but it's not the shop killing your pocket.
|
| The landlord says some variation of 'you'll be the only coffee
| shop' and the rent is about 8x what is sane.
|
| The shop gets guaranteed business but has to charge a lot to
| pay the rent.
| woobar wrote:
| I am not sure why do you think it is a single vendor. JFK has
| 50+ shops in just the "Grab and Go" category. [1] I've been to
| a plenty of airports that have a lot of different vendors of
| overpriced crappy food.
|
| It is not the competition. It is about extracting maximum of
| what the customer could pay. Same reason beer is expensive at
| the event venues. The second part of your comment explains it
| perfectly.
|
| [1] https://www.jfkairport.com/at-airport/shops-restaurants-
| and-...
| Overtonwindow wrote:
| I think this sums it up best. Airports charge more for food
| because, well, they can. Travelers or a captive market, and
| have no other choice. I'm old enough to remember when people
| thought you couldn't bring food through security.
| lordnacho wrote:
| But the contract itself is also sold by a monopolist. The
| sandwiches have to pay for rent somehow.
|
| In the end you can extract X amount of money from all the
| passengers and that gets split between the landlord and the
| vendor.
|
| So it's not just that the vendor has a monopoly, if they didn't
| have a monopoly there would still be some amount they'd pay in
| rent for the captive audience.
| treeman79 wrote:
| Same reason raising taxes on companies doesn't work. It
| either gets passed onto the consumer or company goes under if
| business drops too much.
| dsr_ wrote:
| Raising taxes on income doesn't work. Workers will just
| demand higher wages to compensate.
|
| If this logic doesn't work, then there are some unstated
| assumptions.
| hgsgm wrote:
| That's the opposite of true in a monopoly environment.
| stu2b50 wrote:
| Only if the product has completely inelastic demand? Also,
| that'd depend on the goal of the tax in question?
| fuckingbonkers wrote:
| It works in the sense that some people feel better about
| paying higher taxes if they pay them by paying higher
| prices to corporations that then pay the tax.
|
| And other people feel better about raising taxes on people
| if they do so by raising taxes on corporations that then
| raise prices on people.
| bandyaboot wrote:
| Doesn't the blanket statement that "raising taxes on
| companies doesn't work" naturally imply that the only tax
| rate that "works" is zero?
| PebblesRox wrote:
| I think the implication is that it doesn't work as a way
| to avoid raising taxes on regular people.
| martin8412 wrote:
| Why award the contract for the entire airport to a single
| company though. My local Spanish airport has a bunch of
| different options. It's way cheaper, while definitely more
| expensive than outside the airport. The only price control
| enforced is on bottled water which can't cost more than 1 EUR.
| jrockway wrote:
| If you're the contract negotiator, finding a single company
| that won't complain about the kickbacks you ask for is easier
| than finding a bunch of them, right? And what's the point of
| working for the Port Authority if you're not going to be
| corrupt? This is the agency that snarled traffic in the town
| of a mayor that wouldn't endorse a candidate of the opposite
| political party, mostly just for the lulz. Predictably, the
| structure of the Port Authority ensures that nobody can ever
| be held accountable, and indeed, nobody was.
|
| (If you didn't follow Bridgegate when it was happening, strap
| in for the most petty government overreach you've ever read
| about. I've read this article a number of times and honestly,
| you start reading and you can't look away. It's so good!
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Lee_lane_closure_scandal)
| hgsgm wrote:
| Read the link. You got it backwards. NJ Governor Christie
| closed the bridge. Port Authority reopened it.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| Why would the airport enforce competition within their
| property and reduce the profit it can take from the sellers?
|
| I bet the government is involved on that decision from your
| local one.
| bombcar wrote:
| What's really fun is when you have a ton of apparently
| completely different stores at an airport and then you
| realize they're all just fronts for the same company.
|
| Part of the answer is that people going through airports are
| often buying expense account ones, and they're quite price
| flexible.
| pastacacioepepe wrote:
| > Despite the "port authority" rules on 'street pricing', the
| real reason is lack of competition.
|
| The real reason is greed. Competitors can work together to fix
| prices and they usually do. The reason again is greed.
|
| Competition lowering prices only works when the barrier of
| entry to the market is very low and it's possible for many
| actors to compete. For SaaS businesses, where competition can
| virtually scale infinitely, that's true. Not at all for
| airports, where competition can only be very limited due to
| material constraints.
| [deleted]
| chongli wrote:
| _How many air travelers are willing to exit the security
| perimeter, to then need to take a cab to somewhere..._
|
| It doesn't need to be anywhere near that extreme. Lots of
| people pay exorbitant prices for food at movie theatres and
| those facilities tend to be in commercial high traffic areas
| with tons of food service options such as malls, downtown
| streets, etc.
|
| It's really not hard at all to grab a bite before going into
| the theatre yet people still end up buying the ripoff theatre
| food!
| standardUser wrote:
| People like the distinct food offerings that movie theaters
| have and are willing to pay more because it's part of the
| experience. Not true at all with airports.
| chongli wrote:
| The only thing distinctive is the popcorn. Everything else
| is candy you could buy at any grocery/convenience store or
| fountain soft drinks and mediocre burgers/hotdogs that can
| be beaten by any fast food joint or street vendor.
|
| And most theatres don't even give you real butter on the
| popcorn anymore. It's now this "artificial butter sauce"
| junk.
| standardUser wrote:
| The candy offering is absolutely distinct. You can find
| some of it at standard stores, but not all of it, and not
| necessarily next to a theater. The popcorn is of course
| an iconic part of the experience. And if you want your
| Twizzlers and popcorn, why not just buy the $6 soda to
| make life simple?
|
| But all that aside, the process of going to the theater
| and standing in line and getting your overpriced junk
| food does add to the experience for many people, even if
| just due to nostalgia. Waiting in line to buy an
| overpriced sandwich at the airport is not an experience
| many people crave or are nostalgic for.
|
| EDIT: I don't know what to tell you all. The specific set
| of junk food at movie theaters in the US is a culturally
| significant phenomenon. Like most cultural phenomena, it
| is not universal, but it is universally known (or close
| to it by anyone who grew up in the US). And for some
| people, sneaking food into theaters, in response to those
| high prices, is a culturally meaningful experience! The
| point being, food and theaters have a cultural history
| that is meaningful and nostalgic for many Americans. Not
| so with airports - where hungry people buy shitty food at
| outrageous prices because they have no choice.
| geodel wrote:
| Well, when it comes to justifying choices people can
| pretty much justify anything. For airport it can be
| simply said the kind of people who travel so much and
| often have to eat at airport a 15 dollar sandwich is very
| very low in term of consideration. Further frequent
| travelers usually pay through expense accounts.
|
| And for infrequent traveler like me, I had no problem in
| eating airline food when I am coming home from long
| distance travel or eating outside after leaving airport
| when there is no food served in plane. If am starting
| from home its not too much of hassle to wrap a few rolls
| or sandwiches to carry.
|
| Now for concession food to have _authentic movies
| experience_ looks more of what marketers would say. I
| think besides streaming another reason cinema theater
| attendance is slimming is outrageous price of that
| authentic experience for large majority of people.
| chongli wrote:
| $6 soda? That was the price 15 years ago. Now they're at
| least $10. I've seen popcorn, soda, and candy combos go
| for over $20 now. You can count on spending $100 to go to
| the movies with a family of 3 (2 parents and a child),
| including tickets and one of those combos for each
| person.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| _Why_ is popcorn "an iconic part of the experience?"
|
| Of course it isn't. You're not going to enjoy a movie
| more just because you're shovelling puffy sweetened carbs
| into your face - unless you've been Pavlov'd into it.
|
| Airport food is different, because there's a good chance
| some of the people who buy it genuinely need to eat.
| indymike wrote:
| No... there's a sign on the door saying you aren't allowed
| to bring food or beverages in with you. So you have to pay
| $9 for a Diet Coke.
| standardUser wrote:
| Right, but people sneak food in constantly.
| brianwawok wrote:
| Not really, it's part of why I don't go anymore.
| Swizec wrote:
| > even if they could find the identical sandwich for 5.50 on
| the outside, the $10 + tip or more cab fee there and back would
| make the sandwich $15 or more in the end anyway
|
| And there you have it, a perfect description of value. The
| sandwich costs $15 at the airport, because _at the airport_
| it's worth $15. It may be worth less elsewhere, but that's its
| value there.
|
| They're not selling a sandwich, they're selling a sandwich you
| can have between flights.
| chatmasta wrote:
| This doesn't account for all the people who simply don't buy
| the $15 sandwich, because they planned in advance and ate at
| home. Nor does it account for the people who decide that a
| $15 beer is a better value at the airport than a $15
| sandwich. The value being measured is the markup, not the
| full price in isolation.
| KMnO4 wrote:
| I think the fact that you're allowed to bring most[0] foods
| on a plane is not well advertised.
|
| I always travel with sandwiches that I either make at home
| or buy. Throw it in your carry on bag and eat it whenever
| you want.
|
| [0]: some restrictions on liquids or if you're crossing a
| border with certain foods
| Swizec wrote:
| > who simply don't buy the $15 sandwich, because they
| planned in advance and ate at home /../ or beer
|
| Correct. A sandwich is worth more if you want a sandwich
| than if you don't.
| bluedino wrote:
| You still have to buy the $4 bottle of water
| tshaddox wrote:
| Given that staple food likely has fairly low elasticity of
| demand _and_ food sellers in airports likely have extensive
| market power, I wouldn't really make any conclusions about
| "value." If sellers increase the price from $10 to $15 and
| the quantity of sandwiches demanded doesn't decrease much at
| all, that's a pretty good indicator that "value" to the buyer
| didn't increase much. If the sellers' economic profits went
| up about the same proportion as the price did, that's another
| dead giveaway.
| Symbiote wrote:
| That's true, but doesn't mean they aren't also jacking up the
| price because they have the monopoly on selling a sandwich
| you can have between flights.
|
| Without the artificial barrier of the security perimeter,
| you'd be able to order food to be delivered to the airport.
| sowbug wrote:
| It's OK to take food through security.
| Symbiote wrote:
| Except liquids or gels.
|
| But I meant ordering a pizza and having it delivered, or
| having a street food van selling sandwiches outside.
| Neither of those are possible.
| listenallyall wrote:
| Food delivered to the airport, lol. Where would the
| delivery person park? Why would any driver subject
| themselves to the traffic snarls of an airport, even if you
| were to meet them outside? No matter how you justify it,
| having individual drivers deliver individual orders to an
| airport would cost far more than even the monopolistic,
| jacked-up airport food. Honestly, just the idea "food to be
| delivered"... like seriously, dude, the world isn't here to
| deliver shit right into your lap.
| TheCoelacanth wrote:
| The value is no higher at the airport than anywhere else. The
| difference is who is able to capture the surplus value.
|
| At the airport, the vendor captures most of the surplus value
| due to their monopoly. Elsewhere, the consumer captures a lot
| of the surplus value due to robust competition between
| different vendors.
| medvezhenok wrote:
| That's stretching the definition of value a bit. Value is
| certainly situational - you wouldn't say that someone
| selling the last parachute on a plane that's falling is <<
| capturing the true value of the parachute >> - or someone
| selling a bottle of water to someone dying of dehydration
| in the desert is capturing the true value of the water
| TheCoelacanth wrote:
| I believe I'm using value[1] in the standard economic way
| as "measure of the benefit provided by a good or service
| to an economic agent" often framed as "what is the
| maximum amount of money a specific actor is willing and
| able to pay for the good or service?".
|
| It's not the same as market price or market value. Market
| price is what you actually pay, value is the maximum you
| would hypothetically pay. The difference between the two
| is the "consumer surplus"[2].
|
| It is situational, but I don't think it varies much in
| this scenario. You aren't any hungrier inside the airport
| than you are outside. If food was equally scarce in both
| locations, you would pay the same amount.
|
| The value is the same in both locations, but the price is
| higher in the airport. That means consumer surplus is
| higher outside the airport. The cost to the producer is
| also roughly the same, so the producer surplus is higher
| in the airport. The producer has used their monopoly
| position to take a larger portion of the economic surplus
| inside the airport.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(economics)
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_surplus
| ska wrote:
| > but I don't think it varies much in this scenario. You
| aren't any hungrier inside the airport than you are
| outside.
|
| I think the poster was claiming that in fact the value is
| not the same. You aren't hungrier, but you are typically
| more tired, more rushed, and focused on bigger problems
| than what to eat for lunch, etc. It's a reasonable
| argument. That doesn't mean it's thing going on.
| yibg wrote:
| That's why there are price gouging laws in place.
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| My god the fact that people here argue for the LTV is sad.
|
| Literally every bit of theoretical marxism, including the
| Labor Theory of Value, the "absolute general law of capital
| accumulation", the "tendency for the rate of profit to
| fall", and the entire set of predictions around
| "dialectical materialism" are all debunked by more than a
| hundred years of history. Can we drop it now, or do we have
| to be enamored by his fashionable nonsense for another
| hundred years?
| kelipso wrote:
| More like a hundred years of obvious capitalist
| propaganda. Marxist theory is taught in normal economics
| courses in China, a country projected to be the largest
| economy by the end of this decade, largest economy by GDP
| PPP, largest number of people who escaped poverty in the
| last x decades, etc etc. Argue it's because of capitalism
| sure but LTV or Marxist theory are not "debunked" lol.
| robocat wrote:
| What is taught in school and what people learn are often
| vastly different, in any culture.
|
| In Shenzhen every single person seemed to be running a
| business, and it felt like one of the most truly
| capitalist places I have ever been. In New Zealand people
| are dependent on their government, and few people try to
| run their own business. You don't need to risk much in
| New Zealand, so most people don't.
| robocat wrote:
| Consumer Surplus and Surplus Value have their
| similarities. Flaming someone for using some words that
| appear to trigger you is unproductive. Maybe give them
| the benefit of the doubt, especially since their last
| sentence seems to argue for capitalism.
|
| https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_surplus#Consumer_surp
| lus
|
| https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_value
|
| Perhaps review:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| freediverx wrote:
| That's a very pro-capitalist way of saying you don't really
| care about free markets. If the airport authority allowed
| competition and/or if they only granted exclusivity tied to
| reasonable pricing, then this issue wouldn't exist.
| bannedbybros wrote:
| [dead]
| karaterobot wrote:
| I believe you when you say there is a lack of competition, but
| it seems like the system is set up to prevent that from being
| consequential: as I understand it, the price should be set as a
| function of the prices of competitors _outside_ the airport,
| per the Port Authority 's own pricing rules.
|
| So, lack of competition inside the airport would not by itself
| be able to explain this pricing.
|
| Corruption or incompetence within the Port Authority would
| explain it, and though I will withhold judgment, it's hard to
| think of what else it might be. It's even easier to jump to
| that conclusion when they also deny and conceal when asked for
| an explanation.
| moomoo11 wrote:
| I've never seen a sandwich store sell sandwiches (talking
| normal sized sandwich not whatever small bite size they sell as
| "regular size" with shrinkflation) for less than 12-15 bucks in
| big cities.
| tempusalaria wrote:
| In London or Paris it's $5-6 for a decent sandwich
| Scoundreller wrote:
| One thing I love about France is that they have a pretty
| good supermarket-store ready-to-eat sandwich culture as the
| inexpensive on-the-go meal option. At a US 7-11, you never
| know if the sandwich might be a week old or not.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| QFC and Whole Foods in the states are similar. At least
| here in Seattle, although not quite as nice as LA, or
| abroad.
|
| 7-11 is ok in Japan or China (or say a Co-op Pronto in
| Switzerland). I wish we could get those in the states.
| AndrewOMartin wrote:
| This might explain the $29 ham and cheese sandwich [1] in
| NYC, gives airports the right to charge up to $31.9 for a
| sandwich.
|
| [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/12i4fot/29_ham_and_
| che...
| standardUser wrote:
| I live in Manhattan and see lots of "shocking" prices. But
| I have never seen anything this absurd. Not by a longshot.
| Is it real?
| pengaru wrote:
| Eli Zabar's EAT; for when Whole Foods' prices are too low
| standardUser wrote:
| I appreciate the warning!
| ericabiz wrote:
| I guess it depends on the city. I live in Austin (metro
| population 2.28M), and most places price sandwiches around
| $10 or less here.
|
| Here's Thundercloud, a popular chain (often described as "a
| step up from Subway"):
|
| https://thundercloud.com/main-menu/
|
| I also checked Jersey Mike's, another familiar chain, and a
| regular size "original Italian" is $9.95 here.
|
| I will say that generally Texas tends to have lower prices on
| food than coastal metros like NYC/SF/LA, but the airport
| prices mentioned in the article for NYC still seem absurd.
| moomoo11 wrote:
| Is Austin still worth moving to from CA or has it gotten a
| lot more expensive? I've only spent a couple days in Austin
| many years ago, so I don't know much.
| bsder wrote:
| Depends from where in CA. Austin cost of living is not
| very low anymore. It's not San Francisco stupid levels,
| but I didn't feel a lot of difference between San Diego
| and Austin in the last couple of years.
|
| Texas makes up for not having income tax by having big
| property taxes. So, you may make out on that exchange
| depending upon what your family situation is. If you're
| earning are closer to median, California is probably
| better than Texas. If you're a high earner, Texas is
| probably better because California is biting you via
| income tax.
|
| However, if you're coming to Texas, make _damn sure_ your
| healthcare situation is sorted out. California is good
| about healthcare--the exchanges are decent and you can by
| healthcare _retail_ for the price advertised on the
| exchange. This shocked me at one point as it meant that a
| friend could completely bypass the exchanges for
| healthcare and just _buy it_. Yeah, you wouldn 't get
| reimbursement like the exchanges, but you could just whip
| out a credit card and _purchase it retail_.
|
| Texas, on the other hand, is terrible at healthcare. The
| Republicans have sabotaged most things from the Federal
| government. Most of the hospital chains are mediocre and
| below, and many publicly available health plans are
| ferociously bad.
| thefourthchime wrote:
| Austinite here too. Articles like this make me thankful for
| our airport, honestly one of the best in American as far as
| food and drinks are concerned.
| lowkey wrote:
| Notably the price of a similar wrapped sandwich at the ATX
| airport is $16
| sys_64738 wrote:
| Essen in Manhattan was 8 bucks.
| smelendez wrote:
| This isn't really a sandwich shop sandwich though. It's more
| like something you'd grab off the shelf at CVS or 7-11, where
| it would be under $10.
|
| A comparable, frankly better looking, sandwich at Whole Foods
| in Columbus Circle is $7.99.
|
| https://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/product/whole-foods-
| market-...
| nobody9999 wrote:
| >A comparable, frankly better looking, sandwich at Whole
| Foods in Columbus Circle is $7.99.
|
| Don't be a cheapskate! head over to Zabar's Cafe and pay
| $29[0] for a ham and cheese sandwich! /s
|
| [0] https://gothamist.com/news/why-does-this-ham-and-
| cheese-cost...
| effingwewt wrote:
| Can we all just take a minute to realize how we now
| normalize a 10 dollar sandwich made with less than a
| dollar's worth of ingredients?
|
| 7-11 is the worst offender I've seen. Cheap sandwiches or
| salads for $8+. $3+ for a 20oz soda. No prices listed on
| anything. Or if they are it's only when you buy two or
| more.
|
| Profiteering plain and simple.
| DerekL wrote:
| This is just false. Even forgetting about all of the
| overhead of making sandwiches, it's more than just a
| dollar's worth of ingredients. The skimpiest sandwich
| will probably have more than 2 ounces of meat, more like
| 3 or 4 ounces. The cheapest turkey from the supermarket
| is about $0.50 per ounce. So that's more than a dollar
| right there.
| morsch wrote:
| Wait, what? The product (or its shelf, whatever) isn't
| labeled with the price? Is that common in the US or is it
| a 7/11 thing? I guess it's communism to make displaying
| the price a legal requirement. Competition will sort it
| out...
| stametseater wrote:
| 7-11 shelves have price labels, except for when the
| employees at that shop are too lazy to put those labels
| up, which is fairly often in my experience. The
| franchised 7-11s seem to be better at it, the 7-11s owned
| by corporate are a shitshow because many of the employees
| don't care and there's no owner around to make them care.
| prottog wrote:
| I don't know about not listing prices (that seems shady),
| but surely you realize that the cost of the ingredients
| have very little bearing on the final price of the
| product? Unless you assume that running a 7-11 or any
| other store or restaurant that might sell food has zero
| overhead, with no rent, utilities, taxes, or employees to
| pay.
|
| In a further note, profit has got to be one of the most
| misunderstood things in economics. Every endeavor of
| human commerce has to involve profit for at least one
| party, otherwise the transaction would not occur at all.
| If you can put together a sandwich for $1 in ingredients
| and, say, $4 in your time and labor, why would you sell
| it for less than $5 plus some profit? At exactly $5 you
| may as well not engage in this business at all, since
| you've effectively gained nothing.
| undersuit wrote:
| It's because the sandwiches are made in a central
| location and distributed. You're paying for the
| convenience of not having a sandwich made at point of
| sale.
| MikusR wrote:
| Here are instructions how to get much cheaper sandwiches:
| https://youtu.be/jtqpuYvOfHY
| pdntspa wrote:
| Not my 7-11, nor any of the other ones nearby...
| everything is clearly labeled, 20oz soda is a 99c (or
| 1.49). San Diego.
|
| For the love of god what freakin city are you guys all
| Stockholm Syndromed on?
| nordsieck wrote:
| > I've never seen a sandwich store sell sandwiches (talking
| normal sized sandwich not whatever small bite size they sell
| as "regular size" with shrinkflation) for less than 12-15
| bucks in big cities.
|
| I guess it depends on how posh you want your sandwich.
|
| You really have to try to get a Subway (the chain) sandwich
| that expensive. Same with a burrito from Chipotle, although
| that may be heretical[1].
|
| ---
|
| 1. https://flowingdata.com/2017/05/02/sandwich-alignment-
| chart/
| jononomo wrote:
| What about McDonald's? They sell a chicken sandwich for about
| $5, and I'm sure there is a McDonald's in every city you've
| been in.
| pdntspa wrote:
| Jesus christ, what cities are you in? Like come the fuck on.
| Here in San Diego overpriced sandwiches are $6-$10 at the
| local 7-11, and that is still way too much.
| pduan wrote:
| It's not about the lack of competition or the inconvenience to
| the traveler.
|
| It's about the port authority not publicly revealing what the 3
| market comparable prices are.
| prepend wrote:
| I expect they won't reveal because the inspector just takes a
| bribe and there are no valid comparisons done.
| smelendez wrote:
| The only reason I could think of not to reveal would be the
| fear of collusion. If they know the comparison stores are
| Alice's Deli and Bob's Bodega, they could either collude
| with those owners to raise prices on select items or simply
| go and look at prices and only offer copies of the most
| marked up items in those stores (which could be as simple
| as loading the sandwich with cheap toppings that would be
| extra at the comparison shops).
| prepend wrote:
| The policy says lowest price. Not lowest price of three
| specific vendors.
|
| So if the three vendors names tried to collude, then they
| would no longer be the lowest prices.
| toyg wrote:
| Any sane policy would rotate data points. How many
| sandwich shops are there in NYC, hundreds? Thousands
| even? How often do they shut down, open, change
| owners...? Burning a couple every year is not an issue.
| 13of40 wrote:
| The really silly thing is that unlike at a movie theater, you
| can make yourself the same sandwich for $1.50 and bring it with
| you to the plane. The US has plugged this loophole, at least to
| a certain extent, by seizing your food even if you just have a
| stopover between two other countries. (They took my banana in
| NYC on a flight from Paris to Vancouver and I'm still bitter
| about it.)
| nobody9999 wrote:
| >The really silly thing is that unlike at a movie theater,
| you can make yourself the same sandwich for $1.50 and bring
| it with you to the plane. The US has plugged this loophole,
| at least to a certain extent, by seizing your food even if
| you just have a stopover between two other countries. (They
| took my banana in NYC on a flight from Paris to Vancouver and
| I'm still bitter about it.)
|
| Whether it's silly or not, this isn't some new thing to boost
| revenue at airports. The US has long prohibited the
| "importation" of food items through airports. In fact, that
| was a key theme to the 1971 film, La Mortadella[0].
|
| I'm not saying it's a good policy (I even "smuggled" some
| wonderful Dutch gouda into JFK myself a few years back), nor
| am I saying it makes sense in this day an age, but it (IIUC)
| has nothing to do with trying to make you pay more for food
| at the airport.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Liberty_(film)
| walterlb wrote:
| You can bring food into a movie theater without too much
| trouble in my experience.
| pixl97 wrote:
| Many places don't allow the transfer of uninspected fruit and
| vegetables to prevent the spread of disease.
| docandrew wrote:
| Fresh fruit is usually subject to customs restrictions for
| international travel due to concerns about agricultural
| pests, I don't think this particular case was collusion with
| the airport vendors (but these days you never know).
| 13of40 wrote:
| Yeah, I know that, but the import restrictions for Canada
| should apply, and they're different from the ones in the
| US. (I'm not trying to imply collusion so much as
| overreach.)
| mcv wrote:
| > unlike at a movie theater, you can make yourself the same
| sandwich for $1.50 and bring it with you to the plane
|
| You can do that at a movie theater too. At least, I did it
| back when I was poor. Well, not with a sandwich, but I got
| some M&Ms and a drink at a nearby supermarket to take into
| the theater, because that saves a lot of money.
| LorenPechtel wrote:
| No, this isn't malice. There's plenty of stuff you could
| legally bring. Fresh fruit is decided not permitted, though--
| while the odds of a pest coming along are low the
| consequences can be severe. We don't permit food to come in
| that might be carrying pests that are not endemic to the US.
| Australia is more isolated and thus even more strict because
| there are more things they want to keep out.
| 13of40 wrote:
| I was walking between two planes in the US, one coming from
| a foreign country and the other leaving for one, without
| leaving the building. The only way I could have let the
| banana loose to destroy New York would have been to run
| outside and huck it over a fence.
| selectodude wrote:
| Or you could throw it in the garbage and somebody will do
| it for you. They don't incinerate garbage on-site at
| airports in the United States.
| 13of40 wrote:
| I haven't spent too much time in New York, but I don't
| think there are a lot of commercial banana growing
| operations there that could be affected. The real reason
| is they can't be bothered to track who's going where, but
| what they can do is seize your stuff, so that's what they
| do.
| jltsiren wrote:
| American airports generally don't have international-to-
| international airside transfers. In order to take the
| connecting flight, you must first pass though immigration
| and enter the US. You were planning to take the flight to
| Vancouver, but at that point, you could have chosen to
| visit the US instead.
| zmmmmm wrote:
| > American airports generally don't have international-
| to-international airside transfer
|
| I'd like to see a write up on why that is, because it
| seems like an insanely stupid arrangement at face value.
| lp4vn wrote:
| >Despite the "port authority" rules on 'street pricing', the
| real reason is lack of competition.
|
| I guess that the lack of competition isn't the only answer, in
| many cases there are many restaurants/stores in an airport and
| all of them are very expensive.
|
| The price of the rent in the airport also has to be taken in
| account. In many airports the restaurants pay outrageous rent
| values that won't allow them to sell cheap food.
| Kalium wrote:
| It's my understanding that in most cases, the many
| restaurants/stores aren't actually separate and in meaningful
| competition with one another. I have often seen airports with
| the same packaged food for sale at every store. I'm pretty
| sure they're in effect many faces of the same business.
| ganoushoreilly wrote:
| This is usually the case, most of the restaurants are
| Franchised to the same company, so ultimately one company
| is dictating all of it.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| > in many cases there are many restaurants/stores in an
| airport
|
| If you lift the peel off, many times they're still operated
| by the one contractor that has a contract for the whole
| airport. Even restaurants that typically don't franchise will
| still run operations under a franchise arrangement in
| airports. E.g. The Starbucks employees at an airport will be
| employed by HMS Host (a common airport food concession
| contractor).
|
| Another captive element is alcohol. Many places only allow
| licensed establishments to sell it (ie: bars/restaurants), so
| no competition from the convenience store type concessions.
| And may be forbidden to consume alcohol outside licensed
| establishments so can't just buy a beer if convenience stores
| were legally allowed to sell it so they don't.
|
| (Can recall good times at Amsterdam Schiphol where you could
| buy a beer for a not-too-insane markup from the convenience
| store and consume wherever, while in Philadelphia, you were
| paying like $10+ for one to consume wherever, ugh).
| wolpoli wrote:
| Is the Port Authority also the landlord as well? If so, that
| means that the Port Authority has the incentive to find the
| highest 'street pricing' so that the store has the margin to
| pay higher rent.
| x43b wrote:
| For the past five years, I have a no eating on travel days
| policy. Not only do I feel like I am avoiding these high costs,
| my stomach is less active which is great on travel days.
| tracker1 wrote:
| Yeah, if you get used to not snacking between meals, you begin
| to learn that typical hunger generally passes, especially if
| you stay busy/distracted. I usually only eat once or twice a
| day, and have fasted as long as a week.
| tpmx wrote:
| Just stating the obvious: JFK Airport is owned by the City of New
| York. From that, draw your own conclusions...
| DerekL wrote:
| No, it is not owned by the City of New York. It's owned by the
| Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which is controlled
| by those two states.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| That would be too simple. It's owned by Port Authority of NY
| and NJ:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Authority_of_New_York_and...
| tpmx wrote:
| So this ranks high on Google:
|
| https://airportllc.com/who-owns-jfk-airport/
|
| > JFK Airport is owned by the City of New York and is managed
| and operated by the Port Authority which got the lease from
| New York City in 1947 to build an airport in Queens borough
| to serve the large NYC Metropolitan area
| t-3 wrote:
| That's... Not even really unreasonable compared to restaurant
| prices. I've seen eggs and toast for $20 at a diner in
| Minneapolis, and that place had a line out the door with a 30
| minute wait to get in. Wasn't even as good as the $5 or less
| Coney Island breakfast available pretty much everywhere in Metro
| Detroit.
| okokwhatever wrote:
| "Bring your food" policy is becoming a thing
| singron wrote:
| TSA will usually pull you aside and search your bag if you have
| food, so go ahead and take it out first.
| smcin wrote:
| No they don't, IME. Pack all your food in one bag in one
| compartment of your luggage. IME, TSA don't care unless they
| think it has liquid content. Keep your water bottle separate
| and empty.
|
| Things you can't get through security check ('liquids'):
| yoghurts, the salad dressing on a salad. Doubtful about
| hummus.
|
| On international flights: some fresh fruit (e.g. apples, US
| CBP), and some dried fruits and nuts, depends on country, see
| guidelines.
|
| Useful tip: buy trail mix in bulk and repack in a small
| ziplock food bag in your luggage.
| xwdv wrote:
| Not if you are TSA pre-check or better yet if you use Clear.
| toast0 wrote:
| Sure, and if you pay for general aviation, you can have an
| actual good experience flying.
|
| Paying the fees for TSA pre-check or Clear to opt out of
| unnecessary screening feels like paying the mafia to opt
| out of unnecessary physical injury and property damage.
| xwdv wrote:
| You can either live your life angry that you had to pay
| for better treatment, or angry that you didn't get better
| treatment for free, but only one of those options is more
| comfortable than the other.
| thedailymail wrote:
| Or you can be angry at an exploitative situation and try
| to change it for the better, rather than just resigning
| yourself to expect better treatment that is not
| conditional on price gouging.
| xwdv wrote:
| Or, I can let it go and simply accept this isn't a
| problem that will affect my life much even if it is
| solved.
| wellthisisgreat wrote:
| Don't use Clear, don't feed the enemy of the people
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| Clear does not change the screening, it only changes the
| identification check and puts you at the front of the line.
|
| At SeaTac, there's separate lanes for Clear with and
| without Precheck.
| xwdv wrote:
| In some airports Clear with precheck raises the chances
| you'll be directed into more favorable screening lanes
| where TSA are more relaxed, due to it being used
| exclusively by prechecks or crew.
|
| Sometimes with just precheck you'll still get into
| general use lanes with annoying requests such as removing
| laptops from bags, no matter if you are precheck or not.
| This is because there is no Clear employee who can ensure
| you only end up in the best lane.
|
| Regardless, my airport experiences after subscribing to
| Clear have always been far better than simply only having
| precheck alone, especially if you're the type who likes
| to arrive late to a flight to minimize waiting at the
| terminal. Really does feel like a pre-9/11 world.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| > In some airports Clear with precheck raises the chances
| you'll be directed into more favorable screening lanes
| where TSA are more relaxed, due to it being used
| exclusively by prechecks or crew.
|
| Clear itself isn't giving you access to Precheck, though.
| You are only allowed in the Precheck lane if you have
| Precheck.
|
| As I said above, the only thing Clear is doing (and
| claiming it does) is verify your identity so TSA doesn't
| have to. What lane you get sorted into is entirely based
| on what's available (ie. if the Clear lane you used feeds
| into Precheck or just regular screening) and whether you
| have Precheck or not. You can't get into Precheck using
| _just_ clear and you 'll be turned away if you don't have
| the Precheck status on your boarding pass. I have seen it
| happen at SeaTac.
| kyboren wrote:
| > Really does feel like a pre-9/11 world.
|
| Says the person opting into a biometric surveillance
| dystopia.
|
| Are you for real?
| kyboren wrote:
| > better yet if you use Clear.
|
| Fuck you very much for normalizing automated tyranny.
| xwdv wrote:
| Rest assured I have utmost respect for those fighting
| tyranny. I always take a moment to admire their patience
| as I pass by them on my way to the front of the line.
| bradleyjg wrote:
| They rebuilt LGA.
|
| Now it's pretty but it takes four times longer to get to your
| gate as you have to walk past all the stores whose rent is paying
| off the bonds used to renovate.
|
| I preferred ugly.
| bastard_op wrote:
| >> "To protect the integrity of the fact-finding process, as well
| as agency deliberations, the Port Authority's longstanding policy
| is to maintain the confidentiality of these types of Inspector
| General investigative reports."
|
| What requires protection here, other than the absurd consumer
| price gouging among a captive audience that occurs in EVERY
| airport across the country and those that let it occur? They are
| absolutely right in the article, this _should be_ something easy
| to be transparent about, and shouldn 't be a secret process run
| by lobbying restaurant companies, city management on the grift,
| and decrepit municipal process.
| ornornor wrote:
| FWIW most airports I've visited have a staff canteen that's
| actually open to everyone, albeit hidden.
|
| If you ask airport staff, they'll know where it is.
|
| There aren't a ton of options there and it's often in the
| basement but you can choose between a few options and get a
| decent meal (considering) without getting fleeced.
|
| That's where ground staff, baggage handlers, etc eat every work
| day.
| rippercushions wrote:
| If you're ever in Singapore, the staff canteens are pretty
| epic:
|
| https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/74945/is-there-a-...
| crazygringo wrote:
| Can you give examples at actual airports?
|
| I've never seen such a thing at JFK, LaGuardia or Newark. I
| can't even imagine what it would look like.
| Algemarin wrote:
| > FWIW most airports I've visited have a staff canteen that's
| actually open to everyone, albeit hidden.
|
| Could you please list which airports you've been to have this,
| and where it is located in them?
|
| It's not that I doubt airports have staff canteens, it's more
| that I have trouble believing anyone can just waltz into them.
| And a casual web search brings up only results about one
| airport actually having one open to the public.
| ornornor wrote:
| I've avoided flying like the plague for several years now.
|
| But I don't remember having trouble doing this in Europe or
| Canada.
|
| It's not publicly advertised because airports prefer you go
| to the overpriced airside concessions they can charge obscene
| rents for, and airport workers just know where it is; they
| don't look it up.
|
| Next time you fly, ask a janitor or other airport employee
| (the ones in the shops don't always know and/or eat at the
| concessions because they have discounts) and see for
| yourself. It was typically ground staff, janitors, security
| guards, baggage throwers, public transit employees eating
| there.
| mcv wrote:
| But I guess this is outside the check-in area, isn't it?
| Beyond the whole check-in, passport check etc point,
| everything is pretty thoroughly locked in and regulated.
| The only place I could accidentally leave that area was in
| Casablanca. I doubt it'd work at Schiphol or Frankfurt.
| orf wrote:
| I've never ever heard of this. Seems like it would be a bit of
| a security nightmare?
| ornornor wrote:
| No, why? The restaurant isn't airside.
| yuppie_scum wrote:
| Don't allow a monopoly in the airport.. boom, problem solved
| Havoc wrote:
| Sounds like a bunch of bollocks. They clearly charge whatever the
| market will bear, which given captive audience is a lot.
| kingcharles wrote:
| As a serial FOIA litigator you have to sue. It's not too hard.
|
| Having battled jails and prisons on similarly vague local
| comparison pricing for their commissary items, my bet is that
| none of the comparison procedures are being followed. They
| probably just expected the stores to be good and regulate
| themselves. Which never happens.
| rolph wrote:
| this is plain gougeing being hidden by a veil of we cant tell you
| why because we are obeying the law.
|
| this is becoming a plague, for a further recent example, i cant
| ask an alexa instance what it just said, it will quote HIPAA as a
| reason to deny the command
| aj7 wrote:
| You pack your luggage, carryons, etc. So pack food.
| jonplackett wrote:
| I noticed a massive change in cost the last time flying in the UK
| too.
|
| Pret used to charge pretty much the same as a regular store. It
| would be the only place you could get a bottle of water for PS1.
|
| I flew over Easter and It's all fine up massively. PS3.50 for a
| bottle of water. Nearly PS6 for a (very average) coffee.
|
| Almost a doubling of prices. Especially great when the flight was
| delayed 3 hours - but we got out PS3 voucher from easyJet...
| IndoorPatio wrote:
| Capitalism.
|
| This is the price that generates the highest profit to those
| responsible for setting the price.
| nayuki wrote:
| Keep in mind that Profit = (Sale price - Production cost) x
| Quantity sold.
| tomcam wrote:
| I never buy those sandwiches but if I were tempted I'd consider
| that for the price of two of those I could buy a 6.1" screen
| Android smartphone at Kroger's, download some videos, and watch
| them instead of eating.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| Only possible because NYC airports _finally_ have free wifi as
| of 2018:
|
| https://www.cntraveler.com/story/new-york-airports-free-unli...
| throwaway4736 wrote:
| OTG is fucking garbage. There's more to it than that, but not
| much.
| reactspa wrote:
| [dead]
| larodi wrote:
| Because u can't help urself out of travel anxiety and event buy
| it to calm down.
| yusufnb wrote:
| That's capitalism. The optimization function works towards
| maximizing profit over value.
|
| For a $2 sandwich, I would need to sell 100 at $3 to make a $100
| profit and just 10 at $12 to make the same.
| twelve40 wrote:
| That's a feast! Laguardia happily shuts down at like 6 or so,
| after that if you have a connection you can look for food scraps
| on the floor or, you know, dive right into that intermittent
| fasting you always wanted to try.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| Because that's what the market will stand. Simple as that.
| prottog wrote:
| Market failure is a thing, and it seems like in this case there
| may be a monopoly or oligopoly among the concessionaires,
| enabled by the corruption of the Port Authority.
| [deleted]
| taeric wrote:
| Is a silly question if we don't know inventory levels and
| turnover. At face value, the answer is trivially because that is
| the best price for the seller to use that they have found.
|
| Lower could maybe sell more, but could also just clear the same
| inventory faster. Such that you need more information to answer.
|
| Could they be gouging customers? I mean, maybe? Gouging usually
| requires duress on the buyer, though. So probably not.
| nikanj wrote:
| If I had to guess: because fuck you, that's why. They don't care,
| because they know you'll be back regardless of the price
| drewcoo wrote:
| Because, and this is obvious from the sign in the photo, they
| value us.
|
| Otherwise, the sandwiches would clearly cost more.
| crazygringo wrote:
| This is a perfect example of an airport trying to have their cake
| and eat it too, and it's kind of diabolically clever.
|
| On the one hand, airports need to make money, and with people
| buying cheap airline tickets, airports have found a solution by
| turning themselves halfway into malls, and charging businesses
| extremely high levels of rent, which the airport justifies
| because it's a captive audience that can't go anywhere else. Most
| of the $15 sandwich is _ultimately going to the airport as rent,
| not to the CIBO food vendor as profit._
|
| But at the same time, there's public outcry over the absurd
| pricing, so the airport has to mollify lawmakers by insisting
| it'll come up with a policy where they won't charge more than 10%
| for what would be comparable in Midtown. The airport is trying to
| blame those greedy vendors! But _this is a trick_. Who could ever
| define that? Sure you can compare Starbucks with Starbucks... but
| you can 't compare a CIBO sandwich because it _doesn 't exist
| outside of airports_, which is _by design_. That 's the whole
| point, that easy comparables don't exist, and when a journalist
| tries to use a FOIA request to get at the comparables, they're
| stonewalled.
|
| The airport is trying to insist it's preventing jacked-up prices,
| when in reality it's the airport charging rent that generates
| those jacked-up prices in the first place, and it tries to
| pretend like it plays no part. Evil, but clever.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Airports are pretty expensive. To run and build. Managing and
| up keeping massive land area isn't cheap. And the buildings
| themselves are also big and have quite a lot of staff and
| specialised stuff going around.
| systemtest wrote:
| Your average international airport staffs tens of thousands
| of people.
| kevviiinn wrote:
| How much profit do airports report?
| brycelarkin wrote:
| Do cheap tickets actually impact airport revenue? My
| understanding is that airlines pay a set price per takeoff and
| landing. So airports should generate constant revenue
| regardless of fluctuation in ticket prices.
| tomrod wrote:
| Second order effects of higher airline fees would include
| airlines running less flights as people choose alternative
| options when facing higher passthrough pricing (tax by
| another name). This impacts airport profits.
| lozenge wrote:
| Is that per seat or per plane? Seats have been getting packed
| closer together.
| MAGZine wrote:
| any airport that actually cares will adapt a policy like PDX's
| street pricing, and then actually furnish the airport with
| places that exist out in the real world--not just these weird
| airport-only chains (who tf is wolfgang puck) or one-offs (e.g.
| "TrendyNeighbourhood Burger," "TouristDistrict Tavern")
|
| I guess a really nice, mall-like airport with amenities you
| don't want to use (because they're too expensive) is still
| slightly better than a smaller airport whose amenities you
| don't use (because they don't exist). At least you have an
| option, though it doesn't stop it from being annoying.
|
| Sidenote, maybe LAX needs $15 sandos if it means they can
| afford to unshit their airport.
| grishka wrote:
| > actually furnish the airport with places that exist out in
| the real world
|
| I clearly remember a Burger King in one of Moscow airports,
| probably DME. It is a regular Burger King serving everything
| one would expect, except the 1.5x prices.
| martyvis wrote:
| In Australia most of the airports have Macca's or KFC
| selling at street prices. I think that sets precedent for
| the other food outlets to not price gouge.
| inferiorhuman wrote:
| who tf is wolfgang puck
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_Puck
|
| Just a guy who's got three Michelin starred restaurants.
| reisse wrote:
| Haven't seen airport-only chains in Europe, do they exist
| here?
|
| In Stockholm (Arlanda) there is standard McDonald's (among
| other chains) in the terminal.
| george_808 wrote:
| Unfortunately, LAX already does have $15 pre-packaged turkey
| sandwiches in Terminal 5. Thankfully, there's a chick-fil-A
| and Einstein's in brand-new Terminal 1 with reasonable
| prices. This motivates me to fly southwest more often.
| amadeuspagel wrote:
| How is a system that enables cheap airline tickets for everyone
| by selling expensive sandwiches to people who can afford it
| evil?
| mcv wrote:
| It's luring people into flying more than they should (which
| is polluting), and then trying to make up the difference by
| trapping those people in an area where they can only by
| ridiculously overpriced stuff.
|
| The right thing to do would be more expensive airline tickets
| that account for the total cost of flying (including the
| pollution they cause) and then charging an honest price for
| the sandwiches.
|
| I mean, this sandwich costs almost as much as some airline
| tickets.
| kevviiinn wrote:
| Hey just bring your own food! Oh wait, I guess you can't
| thanks to security theatre. Guess you'll starve or fork
| over $15 for a shitty sandwich
|
| Too bad we can't have nice trains. I mean Amtrak is _okay_
| but it doesn 't even compare to the rail systems in other
| countries. Guess we're stuck polluting too. Thanks, Elon
| strus wrote:
| Food is not forbidden. I passed security gates with food
| multiple times on multiple airports - still sealed food
| like peanuts or candy bars, but also homemade sandwiches.
|
| Drinks are the problem, but water is not that expensive,
| and some airports have drinkable water for free near
| toilets.
| elijaht wrote:
| I've never been denied bringing food through security for
| US domestic flights. Do other areas prohibit that?
| kevviiinn wrote:
| Iirc it has to be sealed and new to get past security as
| long as they notice it, but I may be misremembering. I've
| never been able to bring food or drinks
| bluefirebrand wrote:
| I've never had problems bringing food, but drinks are
| banned as part of the liquids ban of security theater
| hgsgm wrote:
| Only drinks are secured. Not food. And water is free at
| airport and airplane.
| 88913527 wrote:
| If high sandwich prices are a tax to cover the operation costs,
| it's certainly an odd one. Why should people who pack their own
| travel food be subsidized by those who are not?
| TheSoftwareGuy wrote:
| Seems like a convenience tax to me. People who are willing to
| pay the high prices at the airport, are probably less price
| sensitive, (read: more wealthy). So yeah, let's let the rich
| subsidize the poor
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > The airport is trying to insist it's preventing jacked-up
| prices, when in reality it's the airport charging rent that
| generates those jacked-up prices in the first place, and it
| tries to pretend like it plays no part.
|
| But that's correct. The rent charged by the airport has no
| impact on prices inside the airport. They are high because of
| the captive audience.
|
| Store revenue within the airport is determined by customer
| willingness to pay. Willingness to pay does not take store rent
| into account; it is a function of prices and alternatives. So
| the stores set prices at the level that maximizes revenue, and
| the rent charged by the airport is a fight between the stores
| and the airport over who gets how much of the revenue. If you
| limited the amount of rent the airport could charge, the first-
| order effect would be that prices would stay exactly the same,
| the airport would get less money, every store would get more
| money, and customers would be completely unaffected.
|
| If you wanted to return money to the customers, you'd need to
| increase the level of competition between stores.
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| I don't think this goes deep enough. The company ultimately
| putting the squeeze on is the company that makes the in-flight
| snack food. This company has raised prices consistently since
| 1960, and these price hikes are being passed on to consumers,
| by way of airlines demanding that airports take a smaller cut.
| If you want to look for blame, look there.
| hgsgm wrote:
| How can that be possible? The in flight snack company is in a
| highly competitive business -- airlines could buy store brand
| private label snacks.
| dlgeek wrote:
| I think GP is referring to the stores in the airports post-
| security that sell take-away food intended to be consumed
| on the plane - e.g. Hudson News, etc.
| grogenaut wrote:
| Show me an industry that hasn't raised prices since the 60s.
| simonebrunozzi wrote:
| You are spot on and correct. Airports make about 2/3rds of
| their money with rent, and only 1/3rd with flights.
| andsoitis wrote:
| Where is that information from?
| illiarian wrote:
| > ultimately going to the airport as rent, not to the CIBO food
| vendor as profit.
|
| In food services in general there's this weird thing that the
| ultimate price on the product doesn't matter. The food-selling
| place will have paper-thin margins regardless. It will either
| be rent, or equipment and cutlery, or the need for highly
| trained and specialised staff, or... (and often all of those,
| and more, coupled together).
| RC_ITR wrote:
| > But at the same time, there's public outcry over the absurd
| pricing, so the airport has to mollify lawmakers by insisting
| it'll come up with a policy where they won't charge more than
| 10% for what would be comparable in Midtown.
|
| My related take in this is that airports are expensive to
| maintain because you waste a ton of space on vendors and
| seating areas. If airports were just shacks next to a runway,
| they'd be much cheaper to run.
|
| So you can't really charge people for sitting/waiting (though
| the private clubs sort of do just that). Then you charge people
| for the other purpose (rent on vendors) _and that pays for
| everything._
|
| But you can't tell your customers "it's actually really
| expensive to build these giant buildings to just hold CIBOs and
| Dufry" since they won't believe you (or worse call for smaller
| more efficient airports to be built with fewer services).
|
| So you just sort of play this very bizarre merchandising game.
| anyonecancode wrote:
| > If airports were just shacks next to a runway, they'd be
| much cheaper to run.
|
| Flew Ryan air once to, I think it was some airport nearish to
| Venice, Italy. And it was pretty much a shack next to the
| runway. Walk down the steps off the plane into a small
| building, notice a conveyor belt. Walk through the next door,
| pick your luggage off the same conveyor belt. Walk through
| the next door, you're at the bus stop.
| raydev wrote:
| > with people buying cheap airline tickets, airports have found
| a solution by turning themselves halfway into malls
|
| This is entirely overlooking the fact that you are a captive of
| the airport as long as the TSA screening process exists. At
| best, going through security is annoying and adds anywhere from
| 5 minutes to 2 hours of wait time, and at worst it is
| legitimately traumatizing.
|
| Prices are high simply because people are punished for leaving
| on foot, and people are prohibited from bringing many goods
| through security.
| crubier wrote:
| Yeah, Airport security is not useless, I'm not against it,
| but at the same time it's undeniable that the airport
| shopping industry can thank terrorist groups for justifying
| the existence of this absolutely inefficient system that
| keeps millions of people captive of their greediness..
| noirbot wrote:
| I would be curious to compare to the 90s though. I remember
| when I was younger, I'd sometimes just go to the airport
| back when you could just walk out to the gates, grab a
| snack and then watch the planes take off and land.
|
| Obviously that's not a "normal" thing to have done, but in
| a world with lighter security, I remember airport food
| being around the same level as mall food court options, so
| it was an interesting option for getting out of the house.
| I'd be curious if there's some lower-security path towards
| making Airports more of a common space, not that there's
| any chance of it happening.
| lisper wrote:
| > people are prohibited from bringing many goods through
| security
|
| That's true, but sandwiches are not among them.
| marcins wrote:
| What if you have more than 100mL of Mayo on it?
| vkou wrote:
| Then you are almost certainly be detained as a threat to
| national security.
| jghn wrote:
| Even in the before times I didn't really leave airside. There
| was so rarely something worthwhile trekking to within the
| time I had available to me, that it wasn't worth it. Yes, the
| TSA security theater makes this worse, but I have very few
| layovers where *that* is the make or break reason I don't
| leave airside.
| jliptzin wrote:
| I am looking forward to widely available personal EVTOL
| aircraft. Unless the TSA sometimes makes it into there and
| ruins that too
| JPKab wrote:
| Former defense contractor here:
|
| This has similar econ dynamics to defense contracts.
|
| The market competition between companies is entirely limited to
| competing for the exclusive, government granted monopoly of
| winning the contract. This is known as rent seeking in economics
| terms.
|
| Once rent seekers win, the expectation is that the agency who
| governs the contract actually does their job and prevents price
| gouging. This can sometimes be done well, but usually, it isn't.
| My experience is that most govt regulators are complacent,
| mediocre, low energy desk jockies who default to doing as little
| as possible. This structure of management is why the US DoDs JSF
| (aka f35) program is such an absurdly horrific example of massive
| cost overruns and under performance.
|
| I have an econ background, and one did an internal presentation
| at Booz Allen about the pitfalls of BAHs rent seeking dynamics
| encouraging top engineers to get sucked out of real projects
| (causing them to under perform) to instead work full time on
| writing proposals in response to govt RFPs. After all that's how
| you get promoted at these companies because what they say they
| value isn't actually what they value.
| 4wsn wrote:
| > _My experience is that most govt regulators are complacent,
| mediocre, low energy desk jockies who default to doing as
| little as possible._
|
| Yep. But the upside is that they're often the only thing
| standing between you and more or less infinite profit; and
| they're hardly an obstacle if you have the right set of keys.
| atleastoptimal wrote:
| They would charge 400 dollars if they could. There is no
| principle to markets with artificial scarcity. They can do
| whatever they want when you're trapped there.
| ncphil wrote:
| Because New York City is like deep space: fundamentally hostile
| to life, especially human life. Once people get past their
| sensory overloaded twenties (or luck into the kind of wealth that
| triggers syncophantic personalities to suck up to them), it
| becomes clear that everything you try to do in the City involves
| a fight (and I'm not just talking about the days when you get
| multiple parking tickets, or the late nights when the F Train
| seems like it's never coming, or the kid behind the Deli counter
| gives you a sour look when you're counting out singles to pay for
| that double-digit sandwich on Seventh Avenue). A titanic struggle
| for survival in a high rise hellscape. And everyone is on edge,
| ready to pop off at any moment because they've reached their
| limit of being beaten down.
|
| OK. The real answer is that The Port Authority of New York and
| New Jersey that regulates vendors at its facilities is a more
| wretched hive of scum and villainy than Mos Eisley. Clearly
| George Lucas had experienced one too many visits to JFK. Or was
| it LaGuardia?
| sclarisse wrote:
| > Or was it LaGurdia?
|
| The OTG managed hospitality experience at LGA is the worst
| crime against aviation in the last 21-and-a-half years. Try
| their $20 burger. I dare you.
|
| JFK at least has ShakeShack.
| subpixel wrote:
| Same reason you can't buy anything but crap hotdogs in Central
| Park - vendors pay millions for the exclusive contract to sell
| and then they sell crap at high prices to cover their investment.
|
| No competition, no innovation, no reason to not gouge tbe
| punters.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| It's not just a Central Park problem: a lot of north america
| basically forbids the sale of anything from a cart beyond pre-
| cooked hotdogs and burgers (putting it on the grill is mainly
| for show and to warm it up).
|
| Kinda makes sense because of lack of hand-washing facilities,
| but those aren't impossible to set up.
| subpixel wrote:
| Not in NYC. Central Park should by rights be a cart-and-truck
| culinary wonderland.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| It's a monopoly in there or an ogligopoly. You are stuck inside
| and hungry, they will happily fleece you worse than most places
| on earth
| mwexler wrote:
| "Street prices" can also be surprisingly high in NYC. For
| example, https://gothamist.com/news/why-does-this-ham-and-cheese-
| cost...
|
| But when public groups restrict data even after an FOI request,
| it's hard not to wonder if something foul is going on.
| notjulianjaynes wrote:
| Their argument that they don't want to disclose the names of
| individual vendors is flawed but somewhat logical. I've seen
| redactions, for example, on the breakdown of a town's tax
| revenue by industry when there was only one small business
| working in a specific industry.
|
| Disclosing the price charged for a sandwich seems far less
| sensitive however. My hunch is there is likely no record of the
| comparison sandwiches, and I hope the author of this article
| appeals their records request to find out if that's true or
| not.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-15 23:00 UTC)