Avis supports e-toll, sees positive impact

zizebra said:
Thats because they pass the chrg to their clients.
For mentioning they support etoll. They just lost a client
Click to expand...

They're caving in, in the sense that they're getting tagged. But they're only doing so because they really have no choice, and can pass the buck on to their clients.

BUT, at no point in that article did they come even remotely close to saying that they see the positive impact. The headline is bullschit. They said that it will be a different experience. How the hell this journalist translates that to "positive impact" I really and truly don't know. I can only assume that this journalist is being paid to promote Sanral, or is a complete fscking moron...
 
DJ... said:
For the love of god, where the hell in that article did they claim to see the "positive impact"?!

They didn't. So where the fsck does this Sapa journalist (yes, mybb, quote your sources) get off with that headline?!
Click to expand...
Doesn't the fact that 'positive impact' in the first paragraph is in quotation marks indicate that it is a direct quote from Avis?
 
joelus said:
Doesn't the fact that 'positive impact' in the first paragraph is in quotation marks indicate that it is a direct quote from Avis?
Click to expand...

It implies a direct quote, and journalists are duty-bound to provide said quote. Otherwise you land up with articles like this, where a bait-and-switch headline is used.

This is the second time in a week that Sapa have done this, and it is not on. It is either intentionally unethical or the result of incomparable incompetence.

As we have already seen, Sanral have lied today about SACCI's position on e-tolling and attempted to use this to their advantage in the media. This is another case of it happening imo. Sanral propaganda based on lies and bulldust...
 
Last edited:
“The standard tariff, which is higher than the tariff paid by registered e-tag users, is being charged to enable Avis to recover the costs of implementing systems and resources to manage e-toll compliance.”
Click to expand...

I have only used Avis overseas (never locally), it's not like Avis is losing a customer, but I certainly would never use a car hire company like Avis that wants to penalise customers for the impact of etrolling on the car hire company's systems.
 
Arthur said:
Charging more than the toll is not wrong or unfair.

By starting tolling, the State has imposed a number of additional costs on many businesses. Car rental companies have to modify existing computer and accounting systems, employ additional staff (with offices, desks, equipment, &c) to administer the toll-collection system.

These imposed costs are over and above the nominal toll charge.

They are entitled to recover those costs from their customers. And they will.

Some car rental companies might get sharper in their advertising and claim ttem, o "only charge the actual toll". But you can be certain the extra costs are recovered elsewhere, in the 15 other little cost elements that make up the total car rental package paid by the renter.

Personally, I commend Avis for being open and upfront about it. It'll be interesting to see who hides it elsewhere.
Click to expand...

You forgot about the typewriters and stationary. Also the staff required to stand at each gantry to note down when an Avis car passes. They will be requiring transportation, umbrellas, water and food. The cellphones and SMS Charges to send the details to the head office.

Wtf! This is not the 1960's, the information will be provided to corporates, with some way of integrating it into the billing. It will be a once off price to integrate it into the billing system and the information will be already tallied by the time you return the car.

Fleecing their customers is just them taking advantage of a highly contentious issue, they are a car hire company ffs, not an still management company
 
House said:
The Gauteng toll road system has been established with the poor in mind. They will not be affected. As you may be aware that poor people do not have cars or even the money to maintain one - they make use of public transport such as taxis. Taxis do not pay toll fees in order to ensure they do not raise fees.

The toll road system is aimed at the working middle-class who still have some money available and government will not stop until they have bled dry every single cent from these people.
Click to expand...

And how do think the bread, milk and maize meal that the poor eat get to the shops? They get there via trucks that pay etolls. So food pricing will go up.
 
If I were AVIS I'd do the same thing, etolls can go suck it, but with 1000s of cars in a fleet you'd need to somehow put a cap on the max amount of eraping you'll be receiving, even if that amount goes up yearly. What I don't like that they have a Zuma's finger in the pie.

then again - there's no reason the fuel levy couldn't cover this as well.
 
Arthur said:
Personally, I commend Avis for being open and upfront about it. It'll be interesting to see who hides it elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I cannot find anything in that article that suggests that they publicly support e-tolling. I read that they have introduced systems to manage e-tolls and have tagged their vehicles, but this does not constitute tacit support. They simply have no choice as a business but to get tagged.

Nowhere in that article does a quote exist that suggests that they see the positive side of e-tolling. And as we have found out today, Sanral are on a propaganda campaign, willing to lie to get the message they want to, out! As per the SAACI issue where SAACI have stated outright that Sanral clearly misrepresented their position on e-tolls...
 
ADT have a contract with Avis to supply all the cars and vans their staff and response officers drive around South Africa. After 1 year the car is returned to Avis. ADT's contract is worth many millions of Rands, seeing that they run over 35000 vehicles. A big majority of these are in Gauteng. ADT are guaranteed to put up their prices on a regular basis, despite a terrific monthly income from customers amounting to several billion Rand and an ever-increasing customer base
 
Chevron said:
And how do think the bread, milk and maize meal that the poor eat get to the shops? They get there via trucks that pay etolls. So food pricing will go up.
Click to expand...

+1

And when they start rolling this out nationally, this will further impact pricing in coastal regions also.

Also, the 'free for taxis' tariff was introduced only afterwards, when they knew they would lose that particular battle.
 
Arthur said:
Charging more than the toll is not wrong or unfair.
Click to expand...

Agreed...

Arthur said:
By starting tolling, the State has imposed a number of additional costs on many businesses. Car rental companies have to modify existing computer and accounting systems, employ additional staff (with offices, desks, equipment, &c) to administer the toll-collection system.

These imposed costs are over and above the nominal toll charge.

They are entitled to recover those costs from their customers. And they will.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but your argument that their method is above board doesn't sit well with me. They have a fairly fixed cost associated with their management of e-tolling. Their largest costs attributed to systems and salaries. The variable costs are by all accounts, relatively small. What they are doing makes no sense in my eyes. They could have attached a marginal rate above tolls to recover costs and this would allow them to accurately forecast this aspect of the business better. They'd also very easily be able to calculate the optimum price point in this respect. Instead they are charging a variable rate. One has to ask why they have adopted this approach, as it doesn't make business sense if their argument is simply to recover costs.

If they are in support of e-tolls, I can only conclude that they are anticipating a profit to be derived from their model, and looking at the model they're adopting, it certainly seems to be the case...
 
Greedy Avis - charging the "Standard Tariff" and not the "Registered E-tag user's Tariff" - 1.93x higher.

I'm not sure how they are going to deal with the R450 monthly cap, I suspect in their favor.
They rent out a car for a few days and it reaches the R450 cap for the month - they charge the customer 1.93xR450=R868
They then rent out the same car for another few days, and it again reaches the R450 cap - they charge the 2nd customer another R868.
The two customers have no way of knowing what the balance of the e-tag is.
Avis pays SANRAL R450 for the whole month as this is the limit and collect R1,737 from 2 customers.
Nice trick Avis - no wonder they are in favor of e-tolls - money for jam.

I suspect most transport companies will pass on the costs to consumers - but instead of R450pm, they will charge R868 or more due to the extra admin required.
 
Last edited:
If I see one more ****ing article from SAPA on etolling where they take a statement and extract what suits etolling and then attribute support without context I will have to put a press ombud complaint on the top of my to do list. For ****s sake republish the entire press statement or at least set a proper article forth.
 
Paul Hjul said:
If I see one more ****ing article from SAPA on etolling where they take a statement and extract what suits etolling and then attribute support without context I will have to put a press ombud complaint on the top of my to do list. For ****s sake republish the entire press statement or at least set a proper article forth.
Click to expand...

Hear, fscking hear! It has been pissing me off too, as is evidenced already in the thread. This has now happened twice this week and it is either the result of greased palms, or complete ineptitude. While I'd love to attribute this to malice, I have seen the same thing done in non-toll related articles. It really does appear to be complete ineptitude...
 
joelus said:
Doesn't the fact that 'positive impact' in the first paragraph is in quotation marks indicate that it is a direct quote from Avis?
Click to expand...

it's more likely that they stated the gauteng free way project was a positive impact hence why just positive impact is quoted instead of a full quote fully referencing etolls.
 
milomak said:
it's more likely that they stated the gauteng free way project was a positive impact hence why just positive impact is quoted instead of a full quote fully referencing etolls.
Click to expand...

Well it appears that they're going to be making a tidy profit on tolls, so perhaps they were a little more specific after all? We'll certainly not know based on the schit journalism on the article...
 
I drove Europcar rental this weekend in Ramsgate. Picked it up at King Shaka and it had a CY numberplate.
Pride of place on the windscreen was a sticker - that warned you that removal or tampering of the E-Tag would result in a R1000 penalty fee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X