Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DOT: Websites Have 60 Days To Show Code Share Info  
User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6796 times:

(CNN) -- When booking a flight online, you may think you're getting a seat on a major airline, but it's possible to unknowingly end up on a regional carrier instead.

Now, the government is stepping in to make sure that doesn't happen.

The U.S. Department of Transportation this week gave airlines and ticket agents 60 days to make sure their websites show any code-sharing arrangements on each segment of your journey. The information must show up on the same screen and next to your itinerary when you buy a ticket.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/01/11...share.disclosure/index.html?hpt=C2

As explained in the article..
The DOT already requires airlines to let you know which carrier actually operates a flight, but some websites only show that information through a hyperlink or when you "mouse over" a link.


This will be easier for people who really don't know how to look for the information to see who they really are flying on.

Alex


Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7563 posts, RR: 28
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6710 times:

What websites aren't showing the info?

Don't all of the airline's websites prominently display this information already?


User currently offlinelhr380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6674 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Thread starter):
This will be easier for people who really don't know how to look for the information to see who they really are flying on.

Even when it is clear people don't read it. You make a booking on ba.com for LHR SYD for example. You book BA7372 going out which is actually a Qantas plane, it says all over the booking Qantas Airways under the flight number. It says it when looking for flights, then the next page it gives you the overview, it tells you service may differ from ba, check the airlines website for baggage etc, could not be clearer, but people will still make the mistake of coming to BA to check in, or to QF for a BA flight and complain they were not told. Even when they give you a itinerary where on it it says QF they have not read it and "assume" as its a BA flight number, ignore anything else.


User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6613 times:

On a quick spot check, United, America and Delta all already do this.

User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2358 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6575 times:

I would also like to see the govt...

-ban adverts of "one-way" fares that require a round trip purchase
-require all fees and surcharges included in the base fare when searching .
-require all taxes, fees, and surcharges completely itemized.
-require flights that stop between departure and destination cannont use the word direct.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11557 posts, RR: 61
Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6575 times:

I, too, am a bit confused by this. I have never seen any major travel website - airline, online travel agency, aggregator, etc. - that doesn't identify operating carriers for codeshare flights. Perhaps that's just it - this is aimed more at smaller websites - but I was not aware this was really that large of a problem.

User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10393 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6499 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Thread starter):
As explained in the article..
The DOT already requires airlines to let you know which carrier actually operates a flight, but some websites only show that information through a hyperlink or when you "mouse over" a link.
Quoting tharanga (Reply 3):
On a quick spot check, United, America and Delta all already do this.

   Exactly what I was going to say........I did the same check the other day and that's what I came up with.


I think the biggest problem might not be with the airlines' websites, but the different travel websites, i.e. Expedia, Orbitz, etc., which the airlines have no control over.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineBAKJet From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 744 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6467 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 4):

I would also like to see the govt...

-ban adverts of "one-way" fares that require a round trip purchase
-require all fees and surcharges included in the base fare when searching .
-require all taxes, fees, and surcharges completely itemized.
-require flights that stop between departure and destination cannont use the word direct

That would be great. I agree!


User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10393 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6433 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 4):
-require flights that stop between departure and destination cannont use the word direct.

Then what would you call it, if it's not non-stop? Using nomenclature that has been used by the airlines for years and years, a flight going JAX-ATL-TUL-SLC would certainly be a "direct flight from JAX to TUL or SLC and a non-stop to ATL. Is that really that hard to figure out? Not every flight in the country can be a non-stop, after all.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6336 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 6):
I think the biggest problem might not be with the airlines' websites, but the different travel websites, i.e. Expedia, Orbitz, etc., which the airlines have no control over.

Just looked - on Kayak, the initial results page does NOT show the actual operator. The results page is fairly minimalistic. You have to hit 'details' to see that information. But Kayak isn't a ticket agent.

Quoting mayor (Reply 8):
Is that really that hard to figure out?

It isn't hard at all. But it's industry jargon, and the average person doesn't know industry jargon. People tend not to know the difference between 'nonstop' and 'direct'. And really, when 'direct' includes a change-of-gauge or even sometimes a change of terminal, and it's possible to miss the connection to your own continuing flight, it stops having any real meaning for the customer. It's just a construct for the airline.

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 4):
-require all fees and surcharges included in the base fare when searching .

Taking that to its conclusion, that's the end of a la carte pricing. I don't think that's the solution.

But what would be helpful is a search engine that asked you what level of service you wanted, and then included those fees into the results it showed.

The main distortion isn't people being unaware of who is doing the dba. It's airlines doing anything and everything to appear at the top of the list on kayak, and then charging fees afterwards to make it up a


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22911 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6288 times:

Quoting tharanga (Reply 3):
On a quick spot check, United, America and Delta all already do this.

US, with the little icons next to the flight numbers, does too (for both codeshares with *A partners and regional-operated flights).



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinejunction From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6233 times:

Quoting tharanga (Reply 9):
But Kayak isn't a ticket agent.


And this is the problem. Kayak and other non-ticketing sights are the ONLY travel sites that do not disclose this information already, yet the government is not requiring them to do so. They are only requiring all sites that already comply to do it. I love bureaucracy.


User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6171 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 10):
US, with the little icons next to the flight numbers, does too (for both codeshares with *A partners and regional-operated flights).

I see that US does require a bit more work than the others. The initial results page shows a code next to the flight, like 'ZW'. That's meaningless for most people. At the bottom of the page, there is a legend that explains what the regional codes are.

But if you click to select the flight, then the full name of the operator is written clearly. so before you book, it is very clear.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22911 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6139 times:

Quoting tharanga (Reply 12):
I see that US does require a bit more work than the others.

Yes, though while the "who" requires a bit more work, the fact that it's not Mainline US is pretty clear.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6059 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 4):
I would also like to see the govt...

-ban adverts of "one-way" fares that require a round trip purchase
-require all fees and surcharges included in the base fare when searching .
-require all taxes, fees, and surcharges completely itemized.
-require flights that stop between departure and destination cannont use the word direct.

...yes, yes and yes. The "one-way" fare is especially bad as it isn't even available as a separate fare and yet that is the price plastered all over an airline website/advert.

Quoting mayor (Reply 8):
Then what would you call it, if it's not non-stop?

Direct implies you can go direct to somewhere, i.e without going via somewhere else. I am using the standard English language definition here that 99% of the traveling public understand not some industry jargon with a twisted meaning of direct. Call it "one-stop, two-stop" etc. service, because it sure isn't direct!

Quoting lhr380 (Reply 2):
Even when it is clear people don't read it. You make a booking on ba.com for LHR SYD for example. You book BA7372 going out which is actually a Qantas plane, it says all over the booking Qantas Airways under the flight number. It says it when looking for flights, then the next page it gives you the overview, it tells you service may differ from ba, check the airlines website for baggage etc, could not be clearer, but people will still make the mistake of coming to BA to check in, or to QF for a BA flight and complain they were not told. Even when they give you a itinerary where on it it says QF they have not read it and "assume" as its a BA flight number, ignore anything else.

Which really does highlight the question of what's the point of selling a codeshare, if it's not on a BA plane, it will never be a BA flight, so why don't BA just sell a ticket on a QF flight? (this applies to all airlines that codeshare, I'm not picking on BA)...all I can see it does is clog up the arrival and departure boards with multiple listings for the same flight but with 6 different codeshare flight numbers!


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21564 posts, RR: 55
Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6025 times:

Quoting junction (Reply 11):
And this is the problem. Kayak and other non-ticketing sights are the ONLY travel sites that do not disclose this information already,

Kayak does disclose the information, and does so quite clearly.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinehomsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1175 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 5950 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 4):
I would also like to see the govt...
-require flights that stop between departure and destination cannont use the word direct.

If you can stay on the plane, I don't necessarily see it as a big deal.

I'd like to see change-of-gauge flights prohibited from being advertised as direct.



I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently onlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3057 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 5928 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
Yes, though while the "who" requires a bit more work, the fact that it's not Mainline US is pretty clear.

Before the new website, they actually had the airlines logo next to the flight number, instead of the codes,and that made it real easy.

However, a frequent traveler should know UA means United.



E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10393 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 5921 times:

Quoting BD338 (Reply 14):
I am using the standard English language definition here that 99% of the traveling public understand not some industry jargon with a twisted meaning of direct. Call it "one-stop, two-stop" etc. service, because it sure isn't direct!

So, direct and non-stop have been used, for at least the last 40 years and you never heard any complaints about it, before. Has the travelling public just become more ignorant than in the past, or what?


We used to have a flight going thru ORD that went LIT-STL-ORD-DTW-CLE-BTV-MHT-PWM-BGR, all on a DC-9 with no change of equipment and the same flight number, all the way thru. Would you call this an 8 or 9 stop flight? The thing is, the public should only be confused once, if at all. After that, they should understand the difference between non-stop and direct.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5893 times:

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 17):


However, a frequent traveler should know UA means United.

The rules being put into place here aren't aimed at frequent travelers. Quite the opposite.

And I'll admit that I don't know all the regional codes that well. Mesaba, Pinnacle - some of them are a bit odd.

Still, as I noted, the very next screen you have to see is very clear on the matter.


User currently offlineUAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2392 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5847 times:

I think it would be more useful to make airlines put the actual flight number on at least the itinerary if not everything that shows a flight number. For example when UA9999 for a LH code share it would be nice if LH999 was right under it. This would be useful for everyone involved and would save a lot of grief at the airport.


/// UNITED AIRLINES
User currently offlinecactus742 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 237 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5790 times:

I think the DOT needs to do more to distinguish between the two very different types of codesharing: codesharing between major carriers, and regional affiliate flying.

Codesharing between major carriers was discussed above. When a person who buys a ticket through BA with a BA flight number, but then goes to the counter and finds out it is actually a QF flight, they at least know what airline they will be flying. While the end result may be different than what was originally intended, it is still very clear what carrier a passenger will be flying before he/she gets on that plane. In this case, they go to the QF ticket counter; go to a QF gate, and board an airplane that is most like in QF livery with "QANTAS" written very plainly across it.

However, regional flying is an entirely different animal. The passenger goes to the same ticket counter they would if they were flying mainline, goes to the same gate, and usually flies on a plane (albeit smaller) with a livery very similar to what they are used to. In most cases, the passengers have no idea how significant the word "Express" really is. I hope the DOT compels airlines to do more to inform passengers as to what it really means.

While both are codesharing, they operate very differently. Most regional carriers don't sell their own tickets these days. They try to operate as invisibly as possible. In comparison, codesharing among major carriers is much more transparent. More should be done to alert people to each of these practices.



Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive.
User currently offlinemacsog6 From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 530 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5737 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Atrude777 (Thread starter):
airlines and ticket agents 60 days to make sure their websites show any code-sharing arrangements on each segment of your journey. The information must show up on the same screen and next to your itinerary when you buy a ticket.

Wonder how this will impact places like Priceline where the provider of whatever you are buying is not named till you make the purchase? I'm not even sure that Priceline sells airline tickets, but if they hit airlines it is likely to migrate to other things as well.

Be interesting to see. Anyone ever bought a tix on Priceline?



Sixty Plus Years of Flying! "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Saint Ex
User currently offlineYflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1019 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5725 times:

Quoting lhr380 (Reply 2):
You book BA7372 going out which is actually a Qantas plane... but people will still make the mistake of coming to BA to check in

I almost had the opposite problem when I took my very first flight. My itinerary said something like "United Express flight 1234 operated by Air Wisconsin. Check in with operating carrier." At the time I had no idea what a regional airline was or how "express" code shares worked, so if I hadn't asked my friend beforehand I probably would have ended up wandering around the airport looking for the Air Wisconsin ticket counter. I assume "Check in with operating carrier" was standard boilerplate Orbitz put by all code share flights, but it was really confusing as a first time flier.

[Edited 2011-01-12 22:32:14]

User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5598 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5684 times:

Quoting BD338 (Reply 14):
Direct implies you can go direct to somewhere, i.e without going via somewhere else. I am using the standard English language definition here that 99% of the traveling public understand not some industry jargon with a twisted meaning of direct. Call it "one-stop, two-stop" etc. service, because it sure isn't direct!

That terminology has been in use for over 130 years. So to call it "industry jargon" and to say it's not "standard English" is just plain wrong.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
25 lhr380 : In LHR at least, it lists the flight only once, changing between the code-share flight numbers. (passengers of course need to read these properly fir
26 BD338 : The word direct has many meanings and uses, it can be a verb, and adjective or an adverb. Websters, the standard dictionary in use in the USA defines
27 atpcliff : Hi! I wrote a long letter to a number of public officials: I told them that every airplane should be the livery and name of THAT airline, not somethin
28 Cubsrule : How, exactly, are passengers - who almost assuredly get lower fares with little or no compromise on service or safety - "ripped off" or "exploited" b
29 PSU.DTW.SCE : What I am confused about is that this isn't really a new requirement. This regulation has been in places for several years, not sure why or who they
30 mayor : Except, the regional flying is not, strictly, codesharing. The majors are doing more than buying seats on those flights, they are contracting with th
31 PPVRA : A planned-ahead stop is not a "deviation".
32 mayor : If you were driving from PIT to MIA, you could say you drove direct to MIA without explaining that you actually made a couple of stops. However, if y
33 Mir : There can be a fair amount of compromise on service, depending on the level of service of the mainline carrier. UA has IFE on its entire mainline fle
34 Cubsrule : Correct, but that's an aircraft size issue, not a regional versus mainline issue. A UA-operated CRJ would still lack IFE and still be uncomfortable.
35 Mir : You mentioned two of the better regionals. The argument would work if mainline carriers only had one regional partner. But if you buy a ticket with a
36 Cubsrule : Absolutely - but that's hardly an argument for regulation of the entire group.
37 flyingalex : Not really. Just because it's been done for quite some time does not mean it should ever have been considered acceptable. If it's a flight where ther
38 par13del : One would think that another beneft of booking your flight on BA's web site one could simply go to BA to check in, with state of the art computers to
39 apodino : In the old days, all the Delta Connection flying was done this way. The planes carried either ASA, Comair, Skywest, or Business Express paint, not de
40 tharanga : oh, dear. Here is a solution in search of a problem. What would that fix? The name of the regional is clearly visible on the webpage when you buy the
41 tharanga : Correct. I disagree. I think it is, strictly, codesharing. It's also much more than that, but that doesn't take away the fact that it's codesharing.
42 Viscount724 : Because the GDS systems give higher display priority to connecting flights bearing the same carrier codes. A BA/BA connection will probably appear on
43 mayor : So, what is it for you.....ok or not ok? Little vague there. I respectively think you're wrong. With codesharing, airline A is operating the flight a
44 Viscount724 : It's still codesharing and considered as such by the DOT. There are several types of codesharing. The capacity purchase agreements are just one of th
45 flyingalex : To clarify what I wrote earlier: LHR-SIN-MEL (stopover in Singapore, but same aircraft all the way through): it's OK to call that a "direct" flight L
46 764 : Exactly. For some reason many airlines, particularly US based airlines, use the same flight number for different flights. United's transatlantic flig
47 Post contains images flyingalex : I can think of plenty of direct flights where disembarking is mandatory. Any direct flight to the US, for example, as they are subject to additional
48 mayor : Basically, I think this is done for marketing reasons. A flight with the same flight number, even though it is a change in equipment, will show up, w
49 Mir : As long as it's scheduled to be the same aircraft, it should count as a direct flight, even if you have to get off to clear customs or additional sec
50 Viscount724 : AC has several flights like that including SYD-YVR-YYZ, GVA-YUL-YYZ and BRU-YUL-YYZ, passengers clear customs/immigration at the first stop and reboa
51 Post contains images FlyASAGuy2005 : Very true. And really, the service offered is up to the mainline carrier. They decide on what's catered, what's in the seat-back, and how the F/As sh
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Delta And GOL To Begin Code-share posted Tue Apr 13 2010 19:01:27 by FFlyerWorld
Alitalia-Etihad To Start Code-share Next April posted Fri Dec 18 2009 15:51:36 by LIPZ
MAS And Alitalia To Sign Code-Share Agreement posted Wed Apr 4 2007 19:15:24 by OdiE
Virgin & BMI To Expand Code Share posted Sun Nov 7 2004 14:22:28 by Aerofan
CX To Enter Code Share Agreement With MU posted Sat Sep 11 2004 08:59:51 by Calvin99
Grupo Taca To Start Code-share With Avianca! posted Sat Jul 17 2004 19:41:42 by SOUTHAMERICA
ANA/MAS To Begin Code-share March 28 posted Thu Feb 12 2004 21:47:32 by Odie
Alaska To Start Code Share With Delta? posted Fri Oct 31 2003 17:57:07 by Atcboy73
What Have You Done To Show Gratitude To Airlines? posted Mon Sep 23 2002 06:45:07 by Zrs70
Frontier To Expand Code-share To 35 Cities. posted Sat Nov 10 2001 01:20:47 by BA