The price isn’t right!

“From” is undoubtedly travel’s most powerful word. Essentially, it’s a safety blanket; and also the easiest way to say something complicated: a week’s B&B on the Moon has various costs, dependent on dates and the board basis of your spaceship, with the lowest being £1.94. Therefore, you’ll correctly tell me that a week on the Moon “costs from £1.94.”

The problem comes when a week on the Moon doesn’t actually cost from £1.94, but rather, let’s say, hmm, from £890,244. Perhaps it did cost from £1.94 once but, you know, “prices fluctuate”. Perhaps it never did and your client told you a porky.

A big part of the issue here is us journalists lacking the time, integrity, respect for readers or wherewithal to check. Often our lazy assumption is that diligent sub-editors will detect any inaccuracies like this. But sub-editors are also time-poor and fallible, so this is a risky bet to make.

When I submit late deals to Metro or The Times, however, I must provide either a direct weblink to the “from” price I’m alleging — because then, if it turns out to be unavailable, we can say the travel company fibbed in the first place; not us — or a screenshot demonstrating its existence online. This excellent practice has led several times to my ascertaining that prices in some of your submitted late deals or press releases aren’t available.

It’s far too easy to airily bung in a “from” price and, trusting your client, not authenticate it. Instead, what I’d urge — what would be so hugely helpful to me (this being, mwahaha, my column’s ultimate goal) — is if you simultaneously specify an/the exact date/s on which said starting price is available. Armed with that info, I’d then be able to speedily verify the price’s existence (or not). Which, in turn, would make me much likelier to use it.