From the top of my head I know three cities which have peculiarities when it comes to public transportation to the Airport. In two cases, it's obvious they do this to push the private train to foreigners, at 5x the ticket rate.

▲

ghaff 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This sort of used to be the case with Heathrow Express in London. There was a lot of signage that suggested to the unwary that Heathrow Express was the "right" way to get into London. Now, especially with the Elizabeth Line, while you can save a few minutes with Heathrow Express, that's really not a cost-effective alternative for a lot of people. (And Piccadilly may be a better option depending on your luggage and where you are staying.)

▲

throw-the-towel 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Can you share which cities these two are?

▲

groestl 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Stockholm (SL Bus/Train via Märsta 47kr vs. Arlanda Express 340 SEK)

Vienna (S-Bahn S7 4.40 EUR vs. City Airport Train 24.90 EUR)

While with the Stockholm one, the public transport option is cheap but a little bit more complicated (there are convenient medium priced options too), the Vienna one is really just branding and a non-obvious exit to the train station.

	▲	throw-the-towel 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ah, Stockholm. Been there as a student, went to Uppsala the day I was flying from Arlanda, and the only trains to the airport were the insanely expensive Arlanda Expresses. Had to take the normal train to Märsta, then walk the five kilometers to the airport. Fun times.

▲

alexfoo 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

London for sure. All three of the Stanstead, Gatwick and Heathrow Express services are an absolute rip off compared with the alternatives that don’t take much longer.

Many people use them out of ignorance, expense accounts or they have the disposable income not to care.