Jetstar clickbaiting - $169 Syd to Honolulu

[greenfish]

For the past few weeks I've regularly had ads appearing in my browser from Jetstar for Syd Hnl flights for $169. I've searched every date through to June 30 and the cheapest is $339.

I imagine this is just Jetstar being sloppy, but isn't offering something that isn't actually available for that price illegal?

 

[mannej]

Can you provide any further information as to whether a range of dates are provided, or if it's just as is?

I seem to remember a third party site doing the same with a fancy hotel in SYD not too long ago for some reason

 

[yohy?!]

have seen the same JQ banners showing CNS-NRT for $85 - clicking the link just takes you to the offers page which has nothing near that price, are the ACCC the right ones to submit instances of these?

 

[greenfish]

No date range specified - so I checked every date, using the lowest fare option.

I've posted this on the Jetstar FB page. They want screenshots of the whole page - difficult as it is an animated ad, and doesn't come up all the time.

Don't know if it is ACCC or not. Bloody irritating though.

 

[Happy Dude]

Can you call them up and ask for the dates that the advertised special is available? Or will they just say that those fares have been snapped up?

 

[harvyk]

Can you call them up and ask for the dates that the advertised special is available? Or will they just say that those fares have been snapped up?

If the fares have been snapped up then JQ are still in the wrong.

When making an offer of cheap flights they need to ensure that there is sufficient quantity of seats at that price that a person has a reasonable chance of been able to obtain said deal, plus as soon as all fares are sold out JQ would be required to withdraw the advertisement as soon as possible.

Where fares are limited by a specific date range, the airline is required to publish date limitations as part of their advertisement and make it crystal clear where you can go to review the full terms and conditions without it being a significant time investment on your part.

I can sort of understand why JQ may want a full page screen shot, it helps the identify where problems may be, for example if the image complies with ACCC advertising rules, but for some reason the website which was displaying the ad was cutting off important details then JQ are actually in the clear (provided that JQ do things to rectify the problem). It's only if JQ refuse to do anything could you actually make a complaint to the ACCC or other advertising standards boards.

If you do make a complaint to the ACCC, don't expect a fast turn around, and don't expect anything to come of it (they work based on volume of complaints, not just based on the strength of a single complaint).

 

[greenfish]

It really isn't the end of the world, just annoying as I clicked on it a couple of times before reaching the conclusion that it was all porkies.... since I posted it on the FB page, I haven't had a single Jetstar inbrowser ad...

 

[snabbu]

From memory in the last 3 or so years the cheapest I've seen JQ on the SYD-HNL route has been about $220, with the HNL-SYD return slightly cheaper.

 

[Milefest]

If it's true that it's bait advertising, it's illegal. Also if the fine print contradicts the overall message of the ad, it's also illegal.

 

[BillytheFIsh]

If you refresh a few times, it will come up with different prices for the same destination that probably corresponds to something you recently searched on the JQ site (at least what it is for me). I've seen $59, $89, $179 and $359 all for the same destination.

It seems the destination is targeted, but the price is not matching up.

 

[yohy?!]

probably worth pinging "The Checkout" ABC TV series FB page to see if they want to run a story on it...

 

[eastwest101]

I did a tipoff to The Checkout last year, I understand they may have acted on it but didn't feel the need to contact me with further questions, so may be worth a look, unfortunately their "Tipoff page" doesn't allow you to attach images or files - which is a major drawback - but the email link will bring up an email message where you can make attachments.

Tip-offs - The Checkout - ABC TV

Or the Facebook page as someone else above has suggested.....

 

[medhead]

If it's true that it's bait advertising, it's illegal. Also if the fine print contradicts the overall message of the ad, it's also illegal.

Apparently bait advertising, in itself, isn't illegal, provided certain conditions are met. This in today
s SMH in relation to the new harry potter book.

Big W $15 sale of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child book leaves customers angry

According to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, bait advertising can be a legitimate form of advertising, "however, it is illegal to engage in this conduct where goods or services are advertised for sale at a discounted price, and they are not available in reasonable quantities and for a reasonable period at that price".

 

[eastwest101]

Apparently bait advertising, in itself, isn't illegal, provided certain conditions are met. This in today
s SMH in relation to the new harry potter book.

Big W $15 sale of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child book leaves customers angry

Thanks for the link medhead - looks like this is the crucial part of the SMH article:

A Big W spokesperson said the one-day special launch offer was clearly identified as "while stocks last" via print and online catalogues, but added that "social media channels did not carry this message and we are reviewing our internal processes to ensure terms are consistent across all platforms".

So - in other words the the social media channels didn't have the important "while stocks last" disclaimer. I assume a social media post or offer made by a company is still counted at advertising material, and therefore subject to the same laws as other forms of advertising? Social media team not talking to the mainstream marketing team. Familiar story huh?

 

[yohy?!]

just popped now for me on AFF - CNS-NRT $165, JQ Deals page best fare is $265

oddly the banner changes to CNS-NRT $479 after refreshing

 

[UP4014]

Thanks for the link medhead - looks like this is the crucial part of the SMH article:

A Big W spokesperson said the one-day special launch offer was clearly identified as "while stocks last" via print and online catalogues, but added that "social media channels did not carry this message and we are reviewing our internal processes to ensure terms are consistent across all platforms".

So - in other words the the social media channels didn't have the important "while stocks last" disclaimer. I assume a social media post or offer made by a company is still counted at advertising material, and therefore subject to the same laws as other forms of advertising? Social media team not talking to the mainstream marketing team. Familiar story huh?

What's annoying is the way companies seek forgiveness after the event.

 

[medhead]

Thanks for the link medhead - looks like this is the crucial part of the SMH article:

A Big W spokesperson said the one-day special launch offer was clearly identified as "while stocks last" via print and online catalogues, but added that "social media channels did not carry this message and we are reviewing our internal processes to ensure terms are consistent across all platforms".

So - in other words the the social media channels didn't have the important "while stocks last" disclaimer. I assume a social media post or offer made by a company is still counted at advertising material, and therefore subject to the same laws as other forms of advertising? Social media team not talking to the mainstream marketing team. Familiar story huh?

I saw that as well. But I don't think the warning save BigW or perhaps Jetstar based on the quote from ACCC, which also mentioned the need for adequate stocks. In the BigW case 50 books available in store on sale day, and no doubt stock held back in warehouse. In JQ case, having perhaps 1 or 2 fares at the advertised level. Same as Qantas telling me that there are $349 ADL-SIN on a range of dates, except there I can't find stock.

BTW I'm not commenting whether JQ didn't include the disclaimer or not.

 

[greenfish]

They're still doing it. Screen pop on Kayak today.

Mouse over does get a disclaimer - of course this fare isn't available on any day!

 

[harvyk]

View attachment 76191

They're still doing it. Screen pop on Kayak today.

Mouse over does get a disclaimer - of course this fare isn't available on any day!

View attachment 76192

Not saying when the fares are valid for and not having a quick way of finding those fares is probably their undoing.
Have you sent the above screen shots to JQ? At the same time ask them to provide exact details of when these fares are available. If they are unable to do so you'd have a pretty strong case to take to ACCC.

Of course, if you do continue with a complaint, the investigating body would expect that you are actually planning on taking advantage of the offer.

 

[eastwest101]

Of course, if you do continue with a complaint, the investigating body would expect that you are actually planning on taking advantage of the offer.

Yes indeed - some would think that spending 8-9 hours on a JQ 787 in Y class is probably a very good disincentive for any potentially succesful complainants!

Bit of a phyrric victory after what would be a very very lengthy and time consuming complaints process through the ACCC. I do hope that someone does make the effort though, and I wouldn't think that the ACCC could ever enforce the idea of anyone thinking of taking the offer would actually have to take the offer, I would think that the ACCC would only want to know if the person making the complaint was "thinking" of possibly taking advantage of the offer. For $139 - maybe I would, but not if it was the other amounts quoted by some of the other posters.