Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Animats 4159 days ago
Footnote on ad: "Promotion rate flights are for first time flyers only and limted to a single use. Other terms and conditions may apply."

HeliNY, for which they are a reseller, charges $925 for that trip as a charter. Aircraft capacity is 5 (maybe 6). So the regular price, assuming they make you wait for a full helicopter, is probably about $200.

3 comments

Seems like blatant false advertising to have "$99" in big text and nothing but an asterisk to indicate that this is a rate you're allowed to have exactly once ever.
> Seems like blatant false advertising to have "$99" in big text and nothing but an asterisk to indicate that this is a rate you're allowed to have exactly once ever.

All kinds of services advertise one-time introductory rates that way.

Not where I live they don't. Is this a US thing?
I'm in Europe, and every single ISP in my area advertises like this. Every single price on their website is the new-customer 3-month promo rate.
I hate when people do this, also I think it doesn't work on anyone from my generation. That was part of my reason for choosing Sonic.net.

Which country do you live in ? I know nobody does ISP introductory prices in France.

http://offres.numericable.fr/tripleplay

The prices in bold are only for the first 12 months

For mobile phones there's a bit of regulatory backlash. iirc as of this year you can't market a phone as free anymore for example, and then combine it with a 2-year contract and advertise a 50% off 3-month rate.

So an $800 phone costing $60 a month for 2 years ($93 per month) gets advertised as 'free iPhone at just $30!'

Not sure if it works on our generation. On the one hand, obviously it does to some extent, else they wouldn't do it. I know I always made spreadsheets of monthly-average-costs (taking into account resell value of the phone) everytime I got into a 2-year contract. I know a few friends operate like that, too... In any case I think the fake advertised rate may not convince anyone in and of itself, but it does grab the attention, and that's such a key facet of marketing. For example here I'm sure plenty of people would be interested in paying $200 for the helicopter trip, but they probably wouldn't have immediately paid attention to it or had friends tell them about it or have it stuck in their minds if it wasn't priced $99.

EasyJet exists in Europe you know...

You really have to read the fine print of their promotions.

Ryanair, too. They will fly you to $MAJOR_CITY* for just €0.50†!

* Where we actually mean "a smaller airport 150km away from that city and you're on your own for getting to it"

† Plus €20 ticketing fee, €20 payment-processing fee, €20 boarding-pass issuance fee, €20 checked baggage fee, €20 carry-on baggage fee, €20 fee for no baggage, €20 plane-boarding fee, €20 airport use fee, €20 fee-handling fee and other additional fees as indicated in the terms and conditions

The far away airport is indeed buried in the fine print, but under current law (at least where I live) the advertised price has to be the final price; Ryanair skirt this by having one obscure credit card that they'll accept without a fee and a big fee for any other kind, but unavoidable fees on top of the advertised price are illegal.
You forgot €20 choose a seat - it's €0 if you want a randomly assigned seat but somehow the website mislead me in to clicking it, it took me 20 minutes to get this far in the booking, I'm scared to press the browser back button and I'm so frustrated now I'm blind to the clear and easy method of modifying the my previous selection, if there even is one, because the page changed as soon as I clicked. Maybe the site has a bug, but who wouldn't know it's not like I'm going to call the airline for support on their website. But it's only €20 and this flight is now costing me €400 anyway so it's not even worth my time to sit here for another half hour trying to purchase a ticket- fee.
A combination of legal changes and consumer pressure has changed that a lot. I flew them recently (for the first and last time - but that wasn't related to obfuscated pricing) and there wasn't much in the way of hidden charges. Checked baggage was extra and there was a tiny card processing fee, other than that I paid the advertised price.
And don't forget, if you close the page and come back a little later, the price will have gone up. And magically if you remove your cache and cookies and refresh, the price has dropped! Man I love airlines.
With EasyJet I've always paid the advertised price, give or take a couple of £. As far as I'm aware they don't have any "first-time flyer" discount rates.
Got an example? I've seen plenty where the introductory rate is bigger, but the fact that it's an introductory rate is still made adequately clear, as is the true price. I could be misremembering or oblivious, though. I'd happily call others blatant false advertising as well if so.
It's really hard to find the non-introductory rate for a cable company in the US (any I've seen, at least).
I checked out the site for Cox, my local cable company. For TV, they advertise $49.99, and above that in smaller letters it says "prices per month for 3 months, starting at." If I click "Find Out More" below the price, which it seems is required to get any details or sign up, it then gives me several plans whose prices are "for 12 months with 2-year service agreement." If I keep poking around I can finally view the terms of the offer which says "Bundle rate increases $15/month for months 13-24."

Certainly not great. But at least it's reasonably clear that the number they give you isn't the full story, even if finding the real one takes a bit of legwork. Not trying to defend them, but this helicopter thingy is a bit worse.

... and how much does the price increase in month 25?
Apps don't even exist. Right now they're just collecting email addresses, gaining buzz, and I highly doubt they have any capacity to actually fulfill any of it.
Somebody should validate their privacy policy. A list of active email addresses of people who desire this product could be extremely lucrative for other purposes.
Not surprised. The site looks cheap, thrown together, especially for one in the luxury market.
given that they're a reseller there probably is no aircraft with their livery as pictured either
Considering I've driven past buses covered in bumper to bumper ads for McDonalds, the local hospital system, and a pawnshop this morning, I think it's safe to say getting your name and logo on a vehicle isn't an insurmountable task. I would consider starting a helicopter-as-a-service to be the greater challenge.
They almost certainly don't own the helicopters, that would be an extremely large cost for them (up front) including maintenance, staffing, storage and so on. Virtually no businesses actually own their own birds. Their USP is that instead of going to the owners and chartering the chopper yourself, they'll match you up with other commuters and you pay your 5th or 6th of the cost.
"Aircraft capacity is 5 (maybe 6)."

Another issue is if they are flying to JFK the idea is you are taking a flight obviously out of JFK. So given that helis are small and weight sensitive I wonder if the app collects that info and/or what the baggage restrictions are.

The pictured helicopter looks like a 407, useful load ~2200 lbs. http://bellhelicopter.com/en_US/Commercial/Bell407GX/1296721...
You are correct. First paragraph of the website:

> A beautiful new Bell 407 helicopter is just minutes away!

D'oh!
Lame.

Now it really is for the 1%. At $99 I can imagine a family wanting to take one to reduce stress and complexities.

How long until drones can take us? :)

I feel like complaining that you can't take your kids on a helicopter ride to "reduce stress and complexities" kind of puts you exactly in that 1%...
? Not a complaint, I don't even have kids. But if it was $99 for the ride (regardless of people) then it's more price efficient for a family flying compared to the hundreds it costs after their promotional pricing.
Drones that can carry people are likely to be more expensive than existing aircraft that can carry people.

Why? Because they have to meet the same safety requirements as existing aircraft, but carry enough electronics to fly the aircraft as autonomously and as safely as a human pilot, which I think is actually a substantial hurdle to overcome.

I think regulations and efficacy will be the hardest hurdles, as they are proving to be for non-passenger drones. Second to sensory and risk perception challenges which will just various cameras and extra code.

If you assume you're taking out the pilot and replacing him with electronics, and assuming your average pilot is ~80-90kg, that's a fairly substantial amount of weight available for computing systems.

The theory between small and large craft autonomous flight should be the same, we've already got plenty of aircraft sized drones flying about that are packed with ordnance and axillary sensors for imaging and surveillance.

You have more things to worry about regarding subsystems on larger craft, but even those will likely just be additional code rather than extra heavy hardware on board.

I think the most likely pathway for a passenger drone will be retrofitting existing aircraft, and that could amount to a bunch of sensory equipment, a main control unit and a bunch of servos. Nothing too heavy, and it would just eat into a helicopters existing weight limits which are often fairly substantial.

I'd take my family on it in a heartbeat if it was $99 for the whole helicopter, like a taxi. But it's certainly $99/person, so taking a family would get pricey. And much worse after the first ride!
Why all the down votes when the company is doing a bait and switch with their pricing?