Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

oag.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 396 posts

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#111

Post by yamtaddle »

lockhouse wrote: post #57
rootusrootus wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, the same reason we can't have the convenience of pre-filled tax returns from the IRS? People need to be able to feel the pain of the taxes they pay, because it might help bring them closer to the ideological conservative viewpoint.

Why would ensuring people know how much they are paying in taxes be a bad thing?

1) There are other ways to do that that don't annoy people so much.

2) Surveys about understanding of how taxes work, of personal or typical tax burden, and even about whether a given individual believes they were affected by some new high-profile tax law or other (versus whether they actually were...) demonstrate pretty damn conclusively that this approach has entirely failed, anyway.

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#112

Post by gruez »

dangwhy wrote: post #86
grahar64 wrote: post #27

As a foreigner who lived in the USA for a few years, I always thought the US runs in hidden fees. From tipping, to taxes not in the sale price, to insurances not being able to give a price for a procedure, to hotel fees… I could never actually guess how much anything would cost. Either the wording of the law will have a ton of exclusions per industry.

> tipping This has gotten ridiculous past 2-3 year. Buy a $3.00 coffee , $1 tip is expected. I hate those ipad type payment consoles.

>Buy a $3.00 coffee , $1 tip is expected.

Is this a fancy coffee shop thing? I admittedly don't go to cafes often, but my impression was that it's a "tipping optional" type of place (as opposed to something like full service restaurants which are tipping defacto mandatory).

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#113

Post by binoct »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #82

I think a lot of comments here are missing the reason as to why these hidden fees have become so much more prevalent in the past 20 or so years. The short of it is that comparison pricing is now much easier to do because of the Internet, and many, if not a majority, of shoppers will just sort by price ascending and pick the first result (or, only pick from the first couple results). Thus, there is a huge incentive fo…

> This is also a case where consumers say they want one thing, but their behavior is a different matter. For example, pretty much everyone says they prefer the full price to be shown up front in search result pages. But, as someone who is privy to a ton of A/B testing in this area, the opposite nearly always results in higher conversion, where there is a lower up-front price and fees are only tacked on during checkout.

Consumers are very consistent here. You are comparing what consumers want: clear, upfront pricing so they can pick the lowest cost option, with what companies want: more sales. The fact that putting your pricing upfront causes you to lose customers because your competition is hiding costs is as you point out a dysfunctional market problem. But the consumers involved are not being hypocritical.

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#114

Post by 93po »

pydry wrote: post #96
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #82

I think a lot of comments here are missing the reason as to why these hidden fees have become so much more prevalent in the past 20 or so years. The short of it is that comparison pricing is now much easier to do because of the Internet, and many, if not a majority, of shoppers will just sort by price ascending and pick the first result (or, only pick from the first couple results). Thus, there is a huge incentive fo…

>But, as someone who is privy to a ton of A/B testing in this area, the opposite nearly always results in higher conversion, where there is a lower up-front price and fees are only tacked on during checkout. That is evidence that bait and switch works, not that people want it.

I think OP recognizes that, but is simply stating that product decisions are based on user behavior, which rewards bait and switch

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#115

Post by Animats »

junofan wrote: post #74
themitigating wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this is sarcastic and if you didn't post it first I would have. The inconsistencies some people have when complaining about regulation, California, and Democrats is just irritating

What does a consumer protection bill have to do with regulation?

It interferes with the sacred Right of Contract.

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#117

Post by mattficke »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #82

I think a lot of comments here are missing the reason as to why these hidden fees have become so much more prevalent in the past 20 or so years. The short of it is that comparison pricing is now much easier to do because of the Internet, and many, if not a majority, of shoppers will just sort by price ascending and pick the first result (or, only pick from the first couple results). Thus, there is a huge incentive fo…

Airlines are an interesting an example because the FAA required them to advertise all-inclusive pricing a decade ago. The extras they charge for now (checked bags, bigger seats, nonstop flights) really are optional —- I routinely pack light and pass on any upgrades. People who need to check a bag can include that in their price comparison. For hotels, it’s fine to charge extra for access to the pool or whatever as long as it’s possible to decline.

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#118

Post by scarface74 »

themitigating wrote: post #42
grahar64 wrote: post #27

As a foreigner who lived in the USA for a few years, I always thought the US runs in hidden fees. From tipping, to taxes not in the sale price, to insurances not being able to give a price for a procedure, to hotel fees… I could never actually guess how much anything would cost. Either the wording of the law will have a ton of exclusions per industry.

"Either the wording of the law will have a ton of exclusions per industry." Even if it does it's better than no law.

A complicated law only helps big business that has the resources to follow it.

Look no further than the shit show of the 11 chapter 99 section GDPR.

Re: California AG and state senators introduce bill to ban hidden fees

#120

Post by AussieWog93 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #82

I think a lot of comments here are missing the reason as to why these hidden fees have become so much more prevalent in the past 20 or so years. The short of it is that comparison pricing is now much easier to do because of the Internet, and many, if not a majority, of shoppers will just sort by price ascending and pick the first result (or, only pick from the first couple results). Thus, there is a huge incentive fo…

>But, as someone who is privy to a ton of A/B testing in this area, the opposite nearly always results in higher conversion

I suspect this might be the case initially, but eventually consumers will get fed up with being tricked again and again and refuse to deal with that particular industry (and A/B testing won't predict that).

I know this is the case for myself and local services (e.g. cleaning, lawn mowing, appliance repair). I literally will not search for any of those things because I don't want to have to sort through bullshit.

Same thing for restaurants that expect a tip. I might uncomfortably pay it, but would never go back there. (note: tipping culture is very different in Australia compared to the US, as are minimum wage laws. Your local barrista is probably getting $35+ an hour on a weekend.)

Post reply on HN