Less than meets the eye

Reader question:

Please explain “less than meets the eye” in this passage:

The reported rise in the June new home sales figures was less than meets the eye. New home sales for June of 2009 were in fact the worst totals for any June since 1982.

My comments:

In other words, though home sales reportedly rose, the size of the increase is not as significant as it appears to be. In fact, as the next sentence explains, total sales for June of 2009 were in fact the worst for any June since 1982.

To wit, gloom on the home sales front remains.

“Less than meets the eye” means literally less than what meets the eye. What meets the eye is what you see. Hence if something is less than meets the eye, it’s less significant or less important or, in this case, less encouraging than first thought.

In other words, those figures are unimpressive.

Anyways, “less than meets the eye” is a variation from the more commonplace idiom “more than meets the eye” and that means something is better, bigger, more important or more complicated than first perceived to be.

Or, to use another similar expression, there’s more to it than that.

Here’s a recent media example of each, first less, then more than meets the eye:

1. EARLIER this year, Bob Zoellick, the president of the World Bank, grandly declared that “2009 saw the end of what was known as the third world”—that is, the end of a distinct, separate section of humanity that is poor, aid-dependent and does not matter very much. Is he right?

Suppress, for a moment, the thought that the term itself went out of fashion long ago. This still seems a plausible time to consider the idea. While the rich world stumbles out of recession, Asia, Africa and Latin America are accelerating and contributing more than ever to world output. Two fast-growing countries, Turkey and Brazil (“powers of the future”, says Iran’s president), struck a deal in May that was intended to break the deadlock over Iran’s nuclear programme. Though less than meets the eye, the agreement was still an intriguing case of emerging-nation diplomacy. And the football World Cup gets under way this week in South Africa, arguably the poorest country to host the event.

Yet at the same time, Mr Zoellick’s bank is not in any danger of going out of business. Aid still flows. Last month Western donors were debating whether an increase of nearly $14 billion in aid to Africa over the past five years was enough. Whatever you call it, the category still matters (“third world” later became “developing countries” or “less developed countries”). It matters for trade, to non-governmental organizations and in the United Nations. Poor countries are treated differently under the UN framework convention on climate change, for instance, with fewer commitments to cut emissions. The European Union has a special trade and aid agreement with 79 poor nations. The world is still split between haves and have-nots (though the group of seven richest haves is now a group of 20 of them). Not surprisingly, many NGOs dislike Mr Zoellick’s assertion because, they fear, it will encourage Westerners to ignore poverty abroad.

In one sense Mr Zoellick is right to say the third world is finished—if 20 years late. The poor world is usually thought of as coming “third” after the first, capitalist West, and the second, communist East. Since the second one imploded in 1989, it seems past time to put to rest the nebulous and sometimes toxic third-world concept.

- Rethinking the 'third world', The Economist, June 10, 2010.

2. The battle to offer the lowest airfares in the Caribbean is heating up.

Triggered by the newest airline in the region, REDjet, offering deals as low as US$9.99, LIAT and Caribbean Airlines are trying to match some of the fares.

REDjet’s chief executive Officer Ian Burns declared: “The war on high fares has truly begun” at the announcement of the May 8 start of the airline servicing three countries – Trinidad, Guyana and Jamaica.

In addition to the US$9.99 fare which was splashed across ads in the media as well as on the airline’s Facebook page, there were the US$19.99 deals to the three destinations.

In the April 1 WEEKEND NATION, LIAT introduced its special to two destinations for US$22. Then, Caribbean Airlines offered its Fly Caribbean promotion to Trinidad for BDS$188 and Jamaica for BDS$288.

But there is more than meets the eye, and it’s all in the fine print.

For example, the cost of a trip to Trinidad on these airlines far exceeds the amount quoted in the ads, given the special conditions that apply, as well as the additional taxes and extra costs.

On REDjet, while the US$9.99 fare was quoted for a one-way trip, there are other costs:

*There is a US$5 charge for all website bookings, per passenger, per flight.

For a trip leaving Barbados for Trinidad, there are also other taxes:

*the airport security charge is US$2.50;

*passenger service charge is US$27.50;

*Barbados sales tax is US$1.75

Leaving Trinidad and heading back to Barbados, fares are also subjected to:

*airport terminal charge of US$1.50

*concourse fee US$7.50

*passenger user charge US$15.70

*Barbados sales tax US$1.75.

Passengers flying REDjet also have to pay for their luggage, as only carry-on handbags and a laptop are free.

A small bag, weighing up to 15 kilograms (kg) is US$10, a medium bag of up to 22.5 kg is US$17.50 and a large bag of up to 30 kg will incur US$25.

- Strings attached to low fares, NationNews.com, May 9, 2011.

About the author:

Zhang Xin is Trainer at chinadaily.com.cn. He has been with China Daily since 1988, when he graduated from Beijing Foreign Studies University. Write him at: zhangxin@chinadaily.com.cn, or raise a question for potential use in a future column.