ASA Adjudication on Ryanair Ltd

Ad

An ad for Ryanair was headed "CHEAPEST WAY TO THE SUN" and listed the destinations "ALICANTE", "FARO", "FUERTEVENTURA", "GIRONA", "LANZAROTE" and "MALAGA". Text stated "FLIGHTS FROM LONDON (STANSTED)". Small print at the bottom of the ad stated "Book now for summer 2010. Many routes available. See Ryanair.com for details".

Issue

easyJet challenged whether:

1. the claim "Cheapest way to the sun" could be substantiated;

2. the ad was misleading, because it did not make clear what the claim was based on.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. & 2. Ryanair Ltd (Ryanair) attached the average published fares of various airlines operating from the UK, including EasyJet, Aer Lingus, Alitalia, Iberia, Air France, Lufthansa and British Airways. They said the average fare for Ryanair was 32 Euros, the average fare for their nearest competitor was 66 Euros. They said the average fare data was worked out by dividing the total scheduled revenue for each airline by the number of passengers carried in the most recent year.

Ryanair attached screen grabs from their website and their nearest competitor's website displaying the lowest fares available from London (Stansted) to the destinations listed in the ad (excluding Lanzarote because their nearest competitor did not fly there). On the dates selected (excluding optional charges such as administration and checked baggage) Ryanair was cheaper.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA considered the evidence sent. We noted that Ryanair claimed to offer the cheapest average fare per passenger when the total scheduled revenue was divided by the number of passengers for the previous year. However, because the ad stated "Book now for Summer 2010" and "CHEAPEST WAY TO THE SUN", we considered it should be substantiated by evidence that showed Ryanair offered the cheapest way to the destinations listed during summer 2010. Although we noted the screenshots showed they sometimes offered cheaper flights than their nearest competitor, because they did not hold data that showed they were cheaper for the whole period of summer 2010, we concluded the claim had not been substantiated and was misleading.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 11) clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Other comparisons).

2. Upheld

We noted the ad did not make clear what the claim was based on. Without that information, we considered readers were unlikely to know whether the claim was a price promise relating to future fares to the destinations listed, an average claim relating to past fares to any destination, or simply a statement of opinion on the part of Ryanair. Because the ad did not give readers enough information to understand the claim, we concluded it was misleading.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 11) clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Other comparisons).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)