Are we obliged to comply with irrational pricing

[ggreg]

A question for the more scrupulous among you.  There have been debates before about whether music piracy is theft, but here is a more tricky question.

Are we obliged to pay the prices and meet the contractual terms of conditions of provider of goods and services if their pricing makes no logical sense when compared to the services that are being provided?

Does the requirement vary on whether we have a choice of another supplier?

Example.  Crossing the channel with a car from Dover to France or vice-versa one may buy three types of tickets.  

First on the Channel Tunnel.

A day return = £49 (go out and come back same day)
A single = £99
A return separated by more than one day = £199

On the car ferry

A day return = £20
A single = £70
A return separated by more than one day = £150

So, because the pricing does not reflect the service of physically transporting you and your car across 20 miles of water, it is actually cheaper to buy a day return on each service and throw the return section of each ticket in the bin.

Alternatively it is cheaper to buy a return that a single.

However, the T&Cs of the contract (for all carriers) state that you MUST return for that price to be valid.  Now clearly you are not stealing anything by NOT returning, since to use the return portion you would use up more of their resources than not returning.  In fact you are saving them money by not returning.

Is one obliged therefore to comply with such wacky terms and conditions when all carriers across the English Channel have the same rules?  Or can such terms and conditions be described as unjust since they make no rational sense.

[Ger]

Well that's a good one.  Have they explained their reasons for such daft pricing?

Maybe if we understood their reason, it might be easier to judge this one.

From a pragmatic viewpoint, surely they know most people will simply buy the return ticket?

[Sonoman]

Wow! The politicians HAVE found a way to tax honesty! Just when I thought they couldn't even recognize it, they've found a way to tax it! Figures.

[Vandaler]

The price structure seem reasonable to me.

It's reasonable to believe that someone taking a same day commute is likely to be a rather regular user since his voyage can be made by car, back and forth within a day. He would then be a traveler running a short distance. Having a lower price for such commute is offset by the likely volume of usage from that same person over and over.  The other not coming back the same day is more likely to be an occasional user or tourist and he gets to pay full price.

Furthermore, I'm sure they keep license plate information to forbid you from using the loophole you describe.

[maso]

How many faithful Catholics who are working in such companies  (sometimes in high ranked jobs) and are okaying to sell their products,  counsels or services at cheating prices. How many among them   allow themselves unjustifiable wages together with scandalous  stock-options, golden parachutes, company home& car, etc... while  skimping small wages rises to their employees.
  To be merely honest is out of fashion, not to speak about religion.
 
 

[ggreg]

Furthermore, I'm sure they keep license plate information to forbid you from using the loophole you describe.

How would that work then?

You're wrong by the way, they don't.

[ggreg]

Well that's a good one.  Have they explained their reasons for such daft pricing?

Maybe if we understood their reason, it might be easier to judge this one.

From a pragmatic viewpoint, surely they know most people will simply buy the return ticket?

Most people don't buy the return ticket.  Only a tiny number do.  The threat is.  We have your credit card details and if you don't come back we will bill you the extra amount.  Most people simply comply with the pricing.

Morally speaking is it fair to charge people more for half a service than the whole service.  Are monopolies and duopolies able to make up any prices they like?

[ggreg]

It's reasonable to believe that someone taking a same day commute is likely to be a rather regular user since his voyage can be made by car, back and forth within a day

Nobody is commuting.  They are shopping.  The day trip ticket is priced low because they want to attract shoppers who will buy a large amount of booze and cigarettes on the journey thereby earning them a profit in that way.

But the question stands.  Is it legitimate for a single journey to be more expensive than a return?  Is it legitimate to charge someone for NOT using the return?

[Vandaler]

How would that work then?
You're wrong by the way, they don't.

I did not put much thought into it, it would seem simple to implement the idea that when you come back, if you are on record (license plate record) for not purchasing the right ticket, that you be charged what you owe.  Is there an obstacle to this simple idea ?

They seem to implement safeguard with credit cards instead by your own account.  You mean there is no enforcement for those paying cash ?

[Vandaler]

Nobody is commuting.  They are shopping.  The day trip ticket is priced low because they want to attract shoppers who will buy a large amount of booze and cigarettes on the journey thereby earning them a profit in that way.

Regardless of their motives, it comes back to my idea... the local market is maximized by charging them a lower amount, encouraging volume, while the occasional transient pay more.

I don't see this as a matter of half price or full price, but rather revenue maximization.  Locals and transients are two different markets and both are being taped in with what I can only assume to be their optimum price between offer and demand.

But I differ to you, your a local and you must understand the issue better then me who sees this more as a mental exercise then a moral issue.