Rental Cars: The Safety Mistake Travelers Often Make

Here's proof that when there's little competition at an airport, travelers pay a hefty price. Wanna clear demonstration of the so-called "Southwest Airlines effect" in action? The phenomenon describes the way airfares drop when big "legacy" carriers are forced to compete on routes with other airlines, specifically low-cost airlines such as Southwest. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune recently reported the findings of a study about the impact low-cost carriers had on the fares paid by passengers. The major local airport, Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP), is the 11th most expensive gateway in the country, according to the Department of Transportation. MSP also happens to be dominated by Delta Airlines, which accounts for more than 80 percent of the domestic flights in two of the airlines' terminals. On routes at MSP that only Delta flies, the average one-way fare is $218. When Delta competes on a route with another legacy carrier, such as United or American, the average fare goes down to $200. And when Southwest or another low-cost carrier competes on a route with Delta, the average price for a one-way ticket is $159. That's 27 percent cheaper than the average fare on Delta-only routes. This scenario, in which a monopoly yields higher prices for passengers, is hardly limited to Minneapolis. For years, Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG) has been infamous for consistently hosting fares among the highest in the nation, on average. Like at MSP, the routes flown to and from CVG are dominated by one airline in particular. Yep, it's Delta. Delta also has a huge presence in Atlanta. But ATL is among the country's biggest, busiest airports, and Delta must compete with low-cost AirTran (which has a hub there) and tons of other carriers that use the gateway. As a result, ATL winds up being a reasonably priced place to fly to, through, or from: It ranks as the nation's 45th most expensive major airport. MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL: What Makes Your Least Favorite Airport So Awful? ?src=blgrc">Should Airlines Have to Allow One Checked Bag By Law? 5 Airport Innovations Worth Praising

if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('40ed3393-59bf-4f4c-ab86-2f900217a19d');Get the Poll Creator Pro widget and many other great free widgets at Widgetbox! Not seeing a widget? (More info)I've probably come across two other people in my life who, like me, actually find air travel relaxing. Sleeping on the plane? Not a problem for people like us—on my last flight, I was completely out before the plane even took off. We're also the people who don't think twice when faced with the prospect of booking a red–eye. Since I live on the East Coast and have family on the West Coast, the red–eye has become a way of life for me. In fact, I'm on the hunt for them when I'm booking travel. Sure, an arrival time of 5:15am can be a little daunting, but for me, it beats losing an entire day—one that could've been spent basking in the California sun—sitting in a cramped seat with restricted airflow and, if I'm lucky, a tiny window. (Yes, somehow I do still manage to find flying relaxing.) I'll opt for the overnight even if it means rolling straight from the airport into work (or for years before that, into class). This habit has been good to my budget—many times, I've saved money by booking that time slot that no one else seemed to want. And there are plenty of other benefits to opting for red–eye flights—just take a look at how bloggers Julie Schwietert and Lynn Rosen go to bat for them in these 2008 and 2009 articles. Better records for meeting arrival and departure times, less crowded planes (and often, airports), and savings? But even in the face of all this reasoning, whenever I talk about taking a Sunday–to–Monday–morning red–eye, I still hear "Are you crazy?" a lot more often than, "Me too!" or, "Hmm, I should try that." So I'm curious: are there more of us out there? What's your take on red-eye flights: love 'em, or leave 'em? MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL Are quick trips abroad worth the travel time? Holiday Travel: To Go Home Or Go Away 5 Ways Travelers Can Avoid Crowds This Holiday Season

Last week, the House of Representatives voted unanimously in favor of a preference system for the Armed Forces at public airports. Earlier this year, when United joined its merger partner, Continental, in allowing uniformed military personnel to board planes first—before, even, first–class passengers, disabled passengers, and families with infants—the news sparked a passionate response on our blog, with most comments in favor of the measure. Last week, the House of Representatives went a step further in helping to ease travel burdens for our servicemen. Members voted unanimously—404 to 0—to allow military travelers on official duty to move through airport security checks faster. According to the chief sponsor of the bill, Representative Chip Cravaack of Minnesota, that could mean troops not having to remove their boots, belt buckles, military jackets, and medals. Soldiers could be moved to the front of the security line, or a separate line could be created. "The main emphasis is expediting troops through a security process that wasn't made for them," Cravaack told the Associated Press. In the end, Homeland Security would establish the specific rules of the proposed preferential system. The legislation is now in the Senate. If it becomes law, the earliest recipients would most likely be troops returning home from Afghanistan in 2012, along with their family members, who also would get preferential treatment. So far, the move has earned raves from travel–industry groups. Already, the government has initiated a more intelligence–driven screening process for civilian passengers, allowing members of some frequent–flier programs to voluntarily register information about themselves ahead of time for expedited security screening. The new process is currently being tested at major airports in Atlanta, Detroit, Miami, and Dallas and will likely expand nation–wide in 2012. Echoing these moves, some supporters of the new House bill are advocating for these new, eased airport–security screening privileges to extend to law enforcement officers and firefighters, too. What do you think? Should policemen and firefighters be allowed to pass through airport security more quickly than other passengers, alongside members of the military? MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL 4 Common Airport Security Questions—Answered! 7 Surprising Items That Set Off Airport Security New Shoelaces Ready for Airport Security

Travelers often pay "tax recovery charges" instead of taxes when booking a hotel room in the US through a major online travel agency like Expedia, Orbitz, Priceline, and Travelocity. What are these mysterious charges? Say you book a night's stay at a hotel through a major online travel agency, and you pay $100 plus "tax recovery charges" and service fees. The $100 rate includes a profit margin for the website, which is typically between 15 and 25 percent, according to Daniel Toja, CEO of Myhoteloutlet.com. For our example, we'll say that's the wholesale rate is $80, and the travel website adds on $20 to the price and charges you $100. The hotel then calculates a tax on the $80. That tax is passed on to you by the website. (By tax, I mean the whole grab bag of taxes and charges municipal and state governments slap on hotels, such as the "room tax" that some cities add.) Interestingly, the travel website typically doesn't pay municipal or state taxes on its $20 mark-up on the $80 room or on its service fee. What is the service fee? It's an effort to disguise the wholesale rate. Without it, anyone could look at the tax rate and the price paid and figure out what the wholesale rate is. But the service fee adds an element of mystery, confusing any competitor company trying to figure out how much a rival is discounting a room. What does that mean for you? Let's say four major travel websites are selling the same exact hotel for the same exact night for the same rate of $100. When you attempt to actually buy the room from each site, you may be surprised to discover that each site charges a different final bill: Expedia might charge $100 plus $20 in taxes and fees; Priceline might charge $25 in taxes and fees; Orbitz might charge $30 plus taxes and fees; and Travelocity might charge $35 in taxes and fees. How can the final bills vary so much? After all, the tax rate is the same in every case (6%), and the retail rate is the same ($100) for each site. The answer is simple: Changes in the service fee and the wholesale rate cause the final bills to vary among the sites. Hotels may have cut special deals with one website, offering deeper discounts. Or the website itself is running a sale to attract business. (By the way, in my example above, I don't mean to imply that Travelocity typically charges more in service fees than the other companies; I randomly selected companies and prices to illustrate how all of these companies charge varied service fees. No one company is known to charge more than the others consistently.) Complicating things even further, taxes are changing a lot lately. Sometimes governments might change taxes between the time you book the room and the time you actually stay. When you reserved a room in October, the tax rate may have been 6 percent, but by the time you check in for your stay in January, the tax may have risen to 7%. To prepare for possible changes in the rate, the company estimates what the tax will be (based on the current tax rate) and calls this estimate the "tax recovery charge." An Expedia spokesperson explained to me that, "generally without exception," when a change happens, the tax goes up, not down. When the tax rises, the hotel—not Expedia—makes up the difference on the customers' behalf. But what if the opposite situation happened? What if the tax rate actually dropped instead? Might Expedia keep any leftover the customer overpaid for "tax recovery charges"? A company spokesperson says: "Expedia never pockets any tax dollars... When this issue has been raised as a sideshow in the hotel occupancy tax litigation, every court who has looked at this baseless allegation has ruled in Expedia’s favor, finding that Expedia does not overcharge customers or pocket any tax dollars." The situation is the same with the other major online travel companies, according to spokespeople and previously issued public statements. They argue that because they are not hotels and do not "furnish" rooms to travelers, the hotel occupancy sales tax does not apply to them. There's one exception. New York City and New York State have explicitly changed their laws so that they also tax the money on the online travel company's mark-up and service fees. Expect other municipalities and states to copy that move. SEE MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL: Introducing the $450 Checked Bag Fee Can a Chain Hotel Pull Off Boutique-Style Amenities? Best Hotel Rate Guarantee Ever?