VS11
Topic Author
Posts: 1519
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2001 6:34 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Thu Sep 20, 2018 11:04 pm

vhtje wrote:

But timing is what kills your argument. What difference does it make to an airline if I move from the 11:30 flight to the 14:30 flight, three months out from departure? It can be hard for me to know at booking six months out from travelling exactly what I will be doing on that day, but airlines expect me to lock myself in. (The kicker is, of course, airlines can change their schedule at no penalty for inconveniencing me, but that is a different argument for another time).



It is your responsibility to finalize your plans. Why should the airlines care that you don't know what time of the day you will be traveling? Don't buy the ticket if you are not sure! This is not the airlines' problem!!!!
 
Brickell305
Posts: 782
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:13 am

rta wrote:
What about hotel, car rental, bus, and train reservations?

You can change all of those without paying a fee.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:29 am

Brickell305 wrote:
rta wrote:
What about hotel, car rental, bus, and train reservations?

You can change all of those without paying a fee.

So take those transportation options instead if you're finding the restrictions on cheap airfare so onerous. You're free to choose and vote with your wallet.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:46 am

Yossarian22 wrote:
Bald1983 wrote:
jumbojet wrote:

United's very own Scott Kirby first mentioned that flying was a lot like attending a concert. The closer you get to the stage, the more the ticket costs so the closer you get to the front of the plane, the more it should cost. That was his way of trying to justify charging customers more for economy plus seats. Now, it seems that AA is using the same phraseology.

Hey Scott and Doug; WAKE UP AND SMELL THE ANGER IN PEOPLE. .People attend a concert or a sporting event because they enjoy it and they want to, thus they will pay more to sit closer to the front. People generally fly because they have to, NOT because they enjoy it. The airlines have already taken the FUN out of flying. So Scott and Doug, please STOP comparing seats in an airplane to that of attending a sporting event or concert. If I was your boss (which in a way I am) I would fire you for saying something so ridiculous.

I can only hope that Ed Bastian doesn't use the same analogy.


WAKE UP AND SMELL REALITY. Airlines are not charities. They are a business out to make a profit. You have no right to fly for cheap. The non-refundable fare allows for airlines to offer the sat at the lower price. It can be truly non-refundable or airlines can put on change fees. Take away the change fees, airlines can either eliminate the fees and truly just say, if you need to change, "Tough luck" or eliminate the non-refundable ticket altogether which will cause everyone's ticket prices to rise. Either way, many, I suspect you among them, will scream bloody murder. What will not happen is that airlines will just allow cheap non-refundable tickets to be treated as more expensive refundable tickets. Once again, you have no right to a cheap fare. Most people who buy the non-refundable cheap fares, do not, contrary to what you wrote, "HAVE" to travel. They choose to do so to go somewhere they want to go. So, comparing it to a concert is not out of line.


This is such a problematic business philosophy. It is fundamentally saying the quality of the product doesn’t matter, the customer doesn’t matter, the employee doesn’t matter, rather simply only the profits matter.


Bull. First you sell the customer what they want to buy. People buying more premium transportation are willing to pay for the extras, so airlines are offering it. That is why premium cabins have expanded with more seats and more space per seat. People in economy want the cheapest fare possible. So far so good. Therefore, providing the customer what they want is what airlines do. The problem is, when airlines offer a product of a cheap fare, people buy that fare and then whine, gripe, and scream bloody murder when they get what that fare provides. Buy basic economy on United, gripe when you find out you cannot sit together with family. If you had family, you should have picked regular economy and selected your seats at the time of purchase. If you purchase economy on a domestic flight, gripe that you do not get a meal without purchasing it. This is such a problematic airline consumer philosophy. It is fundamentally saying that an airline making a profit doesn't matter, the companies' employees doesn't matter, rather simply only "I am entitled!!!!!!!!!!!" matters. There are few other businesses where customers feel entitled to products that they have not paid for, as in the airline business.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:13 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
DFWAviator76 wrote:
I see many arguments here about what a 'reasonable' change fee is, whether they are justified with 21st century technology, whether they are justified because Southwest profits without them, and under what circumstances they 'should' or 'should not' apply.

My question: Does the answer to all of these issues lie in having the government give a blanket edict on these fees? Do we really trust politicians and government bureaucrats, rather than airlines and consumers, to make these policy decisions? If so, why?


"Politicians and government bureaucrats" (nice appeal to the gallery, BTW) have some degree of accountability to the general public. Airline management has no accountability to customers or other stakeholders, but effectively only to shareholders.


The opposite is true. It is really simple. Make your product stink enough, fewer people will buy it and revenues go down. Therefore by not accommodating customers, you hurt the bottom line, over time and then the shareholders will want explanation. Good example; how is Smizek doing? Government officials are accountable to no one, except in the rarest circumstances and usually, if scandal happens, the lower echelons get scapegoated and sacrificed. Bureaucrats are not accountable. Just ask veterans with the VA hospitals.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:21 am

MaksFly wrote:
DFWAviator76 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
At this point airlines have demonstrated that they like fees and are turning more and more to them for revenue and profit. And they use change fees as both a revenue source and as others have stated, a tool to impact customer behavior, not to cover costs. By not changing, and with the majority of the industry following the same path and having similar fee structures, it shows there is no competitive environment that will resolve the situation. This causes a situation where the only way to address them is by consumer driven governmental intervention to create a level playing field for all airlines to follow.


If the airlines are using these fees as a revenue/profit source, and a tool to impact customer behavior rather than "cover costs," what's the problem? The purpose of revenue in any business is not to cover costs, but to maximize profit. The cost of providing a good or service means nothing if someone will not pay a corresponding price that allows a decent return.

As for the competitive question, there is plenty of competition. People can fly airlines like Southwest that don't charge the fees. They can drive. They can meet/talk via phone or videoconference. They can take Greyhound or Amtrak.

Bottom line is that if you don't like the fees, you have options. Personally, I'd rather pay a change fee now and again than pay for a full-fare, flexible ticket. If you don't want to, fly Southwest or make another choice. But don't force me to forego that choice.


I would agree with you for regular business, YES... But... living in the United States, if you need to go across the country, isn't airfare and air travel a necessity? As such, should it not be an essential service?

We are not talking about a country like Belgium which you can easily drive across in a reasonable amount of time. Furthermore, can't exactly drive over or take the ferry to Hawaii or Alaska, or some major US Territories.

No one NEEDs an iPhone or a designer pair of shoes, people DO need to travel however. So after having the US residents bail out the airlines... how entitled are the airlines to record profits? This is primarily focused on the US 3. I have ZERO issues with say Spirit or JetBlue as they did not receive taxpayer help... BUT the Big 3, and anyone who received taxpayer money should sure as hell be limited to making exuberant profits off of tax payers, on what I believe is an essential service, at the very least, until they pay back ALL of the money received and debts written off in bankruptcy.


It is not a necessity to fly, as proven by Clark Griswold. The profits airlines are now making are high, when compared to airlines; however they are not so high when compared to all industries. The reason they appear so high now, is that for most years, very few airlines made money. I am not sure what tax payer help the big three receive that Spirit or Jetblu does not receive but the real issue is that people such as yourself, have declared air travel a necessity and therefore demand that the government make sure you receive this necessity for next to nothing.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:25 am

Bald1983 wrote:
MaksFly wrote:
DFWAviator76 wrote:

If the airlines are using these fees as a revenue/profit source, and a tool to impact customer behavior rather than "cover costs," what's the problem? The purpose of revenue in any business is not to cover costs, but to maximize profit. The cost of providing a good or service means nothing if someone will not pay a corresponding price that allows a decent return.

As for the competitive question, there is plenty of competition. People can fly airlines like Southwest that don't charge the fees. They can drive. They can meet/talk via phone or videoconference. They can take Greyhound or Amtrak.

Bottom line is that if you don't like the fees, you have options. Personally, I'd rather pay a change fee now and again than pay for a full-fare, flexible ticket. If you don't want to, fly Southwest or make another choice. But don't force me to forego that choice.


I would agree with you for regular business, YES... But... living in the United States, if you need to go across the country, isn't airfare and air travel a necessity? As such, should it not be an essential service?

We are not talking about a country like Belgium which you can easily drive across in a reasonable amount of time. Furthermore, can't exactly drive over or take the ferry to Hawaii or Alaska, or some major US Territories.

No one NEEDs an iPhone or a designer pair of shoes, people DO need to travel however. So after having the US residents bail out the airlines... how entitled are the airlines to record profits? This is primarily focused on the US 3. I have ZERO issues with say Spirit or JetBlue as they did not receive taxpayer help... BUT the Big 3, and anyone who received taxpayer money should sure as hell be limited to making exuberant profits off of tax payers, on what I believe is an essential service, at the very least, until they pay back ALL of the money received and debts written off in bankruptcy.


It is not a necessity to fly, as proven by Clark Griswold. You can take a government subsidized train, drive, take a bus, or do not go. I grant you flying is the superior way to go but you have no right to fly or have your transportation given to you.

The profits airlines are now making are high, when compared to airlines; however they are not so high when compared to all industries. The reason they appear so high now, is that for most years, very few airlines made money. I am not sure what tax payer help the big three receive that Spirit or Jetblu does not receive but the real issue is that people such as yourself, have declared air travel a necessity and therefore demand that the government make sure you receive this necessity for next to nothing.
 
travaz
Posts: 883
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 1:03 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 2:46 am

Lets talk about reality. The average US Airline load factor according to a few sources this summer was 86% We can argue the percentage endlessly. The point is if the entire population of America decides they have had it with change fees and shift to WN. WN can not handle it. They charge the fee because the market will bear it. And the other competitive options cannot handle the amount of PAX that you all seem would shift their business tomorrow because Airline ABC doesn't charge a fee. The other question I have is what percentage of PAX actually pay a fee? Sometimes it seems that the people on this forum are living in a dream world. I have no sympathy for people that whine over change fees. Learn and read the terms and conditions before you push the purchase option.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:48 am

usdcaguy wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
usdcaguy wrote:

True, and yet somehow AA/UA/DL make lots of money allowing customers to standby the same day of travel for a nominal fee.


Well and I believe all three allow elites to same-day-standby (with varying restrictions) for free. So it's probably a miniscule number of people who are actually paying to standby.


Good point. But $75 is $75. For NOTHING.


Meh that's debatable. If I was in Duigie's shoes i might be just as greedy, who knows. Having said that I do remember the good old days when even non-elites could standby for free, and even connect through a different hub! (I think UA still allows that, LCC sure as hell doesn't)
 
ckfred
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:28 am

When the airlines introduced non-refundable tickets, the business model was based on the Saturday stay-over. The people who bought non-refundable tickets were vacationers whose travel dates were pretty much set. Absent a last-minute reason to cancel a vacation (illness, death, sudden problem with work), the vast majority of people who bought tickets flew on the scheduled times and dates.

It was the business traveler who only flew between Monday and Friday who bought refundable tickets, because a business traveler was more likely to change plans.

In the wake of 9/11, airlines pretty much dropped the Saturday stay-over.

Now, most business travelers fly on some sort of restricted ticket. The number of travelers who fly on a refundable ticket is quite low. And even J and F tickets non have non-refundable options.

For instance, my wife is flying to Europe next week to attend the conference. The entity hosting the conference is paying for her ticket. Guess what? It's non-refundable.

It seems to me that going back to some sort of model in which tickets aimed at leisure travelers are non-refundable, while those aimed at business travelers, even if discounted, should be refundable.

The family going to Florida for spring break, or the couple going anywhere for a wedding aren't inclined to change tickets. School schedules and wedding dates and times are dictating travel dates and times.

But, for someone who needs to visit a customer office and plans a few weeks in advance, an issue may force him or her to delay travel by a day or two. That is the traveler who wants flexibility while not wanting to pay the walk-up fare.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21657
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:57 am

Boof02671 wrote:
Government needs to stay out of it.


Maybe they should stay out of safety and ATC, too? I mean, who needs to get there alive, right? Just let the free market decide.

The fact is that when you are purchasing a product, laws protect you from such things as theft (the airline just takes your money and then doesn't get you there...or the car dealership takes your money and then won't give you your car). At times, the definition of what those rules are is touchy and governments exist to make those rules.

Bald1983 wrote:
It is not a necessity to fly, as proven by Clark Griswold.


He didn't prove anything. For some people, flying is essential.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:31 am

DocLightning wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Government needs to stay out of it.


Maybe they should stay out of safety and ATC, too? I mean, who needs to get there alive, right? Just let the free market decide.

The fact is that when you are purchasing a product, laws protect you from such things as theft (the airline just takes your money and then doesn't get you there...or the car dealership takes your money and then won't give you your car). At times, the definition of what those rules are is touchy and governments exist to make those rules.

In all fairness that's not really the argument being made. The philosophy behind airline deregulation was deregulation of product (routes, fares and, by extension, service). Change fees/refundability...it's a product decision, and so long as airlines are being transparent about it, why shouldn't customers be free to buy a cheap, nonrefundable airfare product?

DocLightning wrote:
Bald1983 wrote:
It is not a necessity to fly, as proven by Clark Griswold.


He didn't prove anything. For some people, flying is essential.

Define essential. It's essential that I drive a 2018 Maserati GranTurismo.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:37 am

flyguy89 wrote:
Define essential. It's essential that I drive a 2018 Maserati GranTurismo.

Why?

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6583
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:38 am

flyguy89 wrote:
Define essential. It's essential that I drive a 2018 Maserati GranTurismo.


If I didn't fly from time to time, I would lose my livelihood. I have to travel cross-country 4 to 6 times per year for work, and I don't have an extra week to drive or two extra weeks to take Amtrak every time. The same is true for lots and lots of people in managerial and professional jobs.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 6:01 am

DocLightning wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Government needs to stay out of it.


Maybe they should stay out of safety and ATC, too? I mean, who needs to get there alive, right? Just let the free market decide.

The fact is that when you are purchasing a product, laws protect you from such things as theft (the airline just takes your money and then doesn't get you there...or the car dealership takes your money and then won't give you your car). At times, the definition of what those rules are is touchy and governments exist to make those rules.

Bald1983 wrote:
It is not a necessity to fly, as proven by Clark Griswold.


He didn't prove anything. For some people, flying is essential.


This has nothing to do with theft. This has everything to do with people making and living with choices. This has everything to do with what reactions will be if Congress outlaws change fees. For some, flying is essential and they tend to buy the full fare tickets. The rest want to fly cheap which is fine; just accept the restrictions. As far as the ATC comment, part of the ticket price goes to that service but your remarks are nothing more than hyperbole. The issue is the fact that whiners are complaining that airlines, after deregulation, actually get to set the fares themselves. People would whine more if we went back to the CAB as ticket prices would be much higher.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 6:12 am

Bald1983 wrote:
This has everything to do with what reactions will be if Congress outlaws change fees.

No one is suggesting outlawing change fees.

The problem is excessive fees that have no basis in the cost of the transaction along with the consumer having no recourse when it occurs (most don't plan to have to change a non-changable (without a fee) ticket.

And the public addresses such situations via their powers of government, our representative government.

Tugg.
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
VC10er
Posts: 4222
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 6:30 am

adambrau wrote:
Airlines are already highly regulated but I feel change fees have increased dramatically in the last 2-3 years. You can purchase non-refundable trans Atlantic business class fares with a $500 change fee (I've even seen $900), for $8000. That is about the worst I've seen, but it is my biggest beef with United. Guessing AA and DL are not much different? The legacy airlines fare structures are so complicated - it's hard to even figure out sometimes what they mean. I understand that a seat is a perishable item, but things have gotten out of hand. I get paying $25 for a bag, I get paying for a good seat, but trans Atlantic fee changes are outrageous. I don't think the Government ought to tell airlines what they can charge, as profitable airlines are preferable those teetering or in Chapter 11. Can see this being a popular vote winner!!

Perhaps the ULCC's will begin to self-regulate the market once they have a significant presence. On the other hand, it's nice to be able to call up United 24/7 and have someone there for you. I once needed to get in touch with Easyjet in Greece to make a change and any successful attempt to do so was elusive, to say the least!


The new United change fees are indeed excessive IMHO. I am at GVA right now ready to board the non-stop to EWR. If change fees are charged to dissuade people from changing or to buy up to crazy high refundable tickets- a $500 change fee for virtually no expense on the part of the airline- it works. I paid well over $8000 for my Polaris ticket. A ticket I bought about 4 weeks ago. The least expensive route had me returning GVA>MAD>EWR. The non-stop, no refundable was $10,000. When I saw that the MAD>EWR leg was a high density 772, I paid $500 to go GVA>IAD>EWR because the GVA>EWR flight was sold out.
Then 2 days ago I checked United.com and seats had opened up on the non-stop. I called the 1k desk and got a lovely representative. But she said it would be another $500. I said “I’m sorry, that is just so wrong, I’ll stick with my flight through IAD” - she agreed that my total being well over $9000 with the last change fee was simply enough, she recognized my loyalty and waived the fee.
She went on to say “there are times when the change fee is $800 or $900” - and then said “it takes me 45 SECONDS to make the change”. Our 1ks are getting very upset.
So one can rationalize it all they want, at some point I will just fly Swiss. Yes, I’m an adult and have choices- I chose to fly United, but not for $1000 over the original ticket price for something that really didn’t provide much value. And as for corporate travel, very rarely does a Corp travel dept approve a non-refundable.
There’s a lot of other things I could have done with that $500 in Duty Free (like the Caran d’ache rocket ship pen! Very cool!)
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
adambrau
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:44 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:11 am

VC10er wrote:
adambrau wrote:
Airlines are already highly regulated but I feel change fees have increased dramatically in the last 2-3 years. You can purchase non-refundable trans Atlantic business class fares with a $500 change fee (I've even seen $900), for $8000. That is about the worst I've seen, but it is my biggest beef with United. Guessing AA and DL are not much different? The legacy airlines fare structures are so complicated - it's hard to even figure out sometimes what they mean. I understand that a seat is a perishable item, but things have gotten out of hand. I get paying $25 for a bag, I get paying for a good seat, but trans Atlantic fee changes are outrageous. I don't think the Government ought to tell airlines what they can charge, as profitable airlines are preferable those teetering or in Chapter 11. Can see this being a popular vote winner!!

Perhaps the ULCC's will begin to self-regulate the market once they have a significant presence. On the other hand, it's nice to be able to call up United 24/7 and have someone there for you. I once needed to get in touch with Easyjet in Greece to make a change and any successful attempt to do so was elusive, to say the least!


The new United change fees are indeed excessive IMHO. I am at GVA right now ready to board the non-stop to EWR. If change fees are charged to dissuade people from changing or to buy up to crazy high refundable tickets- a $500 change fee for virtually no expense on the part of the airline- it works. I paid well over $8000 for my Polaris ticket. A ticket I bought about 4 weeks ago. The least expensive route had me returning GVA>MAD>EWR. The non-stop, no refundable was $10,000. When I saw that the MAD>EWR leg was a high density 772, I paid $500 to go GVA>IAD>EWR because the GVA>EWR flight was sold out.
Then 2 days ago I checked United.com and seats had opened up on the non-stop. I called the 1k desk and got a lovely representative. But she said it would be another $500. I said “I’m sorry, that is just so wrong, I’ll stick with my flight through IAD” - she agreed that my total being well over $9000 with the last change fee was simply enough, she recognized my loyalty and waived the fee.
She went on to say “there are times when the change fee is $800 or $900” - and then said “it takes me 45 SECONDS to make the change”. Our 1ks are getting very upset.
So one can rationalize it all they want, at some point I will just fly Swiss. Yes, I’m an adult and have choices- I chose to fly United, but not for $1000 over the original ticket price for something that really didn’t provide much value. And as for corporate travel, very rarely does a Corp travel dept approve a non-refundable.
There’s a lot of other things I could have done with that $500 in Duty Free (like the Caran d’ache rocket ship pen! Very cool!)


Yeah $500 doesn't go far at the Zurich airport! I now call GS when I make flight changes after I have done some research on united.com. And while I didn't in the past try to get a waiver from united.com's crappy rebooking lotto, most agents - when they saw I was flying on a non-refundable Polaris ticket approaching the amount you mentioned with a $900 change fee - I think they were so shocked they think it is a mistake and so in their mind waiving it can be explained if they were ever asked why a change fee waiver was made. I mean at least they should count the change fee spend to my yearly PQM's spend, but some financial nerd who probably coded it just laughed to himself. $900 change fees on a return flight - that is something Congress should look into lol. Safe flight!
Friendly Skies
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:36 am

seabosdca wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Define essential. It's essential that I drive a 2018 Maserati GranTurismo.


If I didn't fly from time to time, I would lose my livelihood. I have to travel cross-country 4 to 6 times per year for work, and I don't have an extra week to drive or two extra weeks to take Amtrak every time. The same is true for lots and lots of people in managerial and professional jobs.

That your job uses a particular product or service to help conduct its business does not automatically make it essential...at least not in the sense that some are implying that airlines/air travel are some kind of public utility and should have their products heavily regulated as such. That's the crux of many of the points being made here, that it's essential for me to travel thus the government should step in to regulate XYZ about an airline's product (seat size, ancillary fees, etc). The reality is that the reason so many businesses have come to rely on air travel is precisely because mass market air travel was able to develop in the first place because of deregulation. The other issue is that initiatives like this (using regulation to micromanage certain product aspects of the airlines) are really just a solution in search of problem and ultimately have unintended consequences...it's certainly not inhibiting air travel and more and more people are flying on lower fares each year.

Tugger wrote:
And the public addresses such situations via their powers of government, our representative government.

That's just mob rule though. Just because the public wants something doesn't mean it's good or right for the government to act accordingly. Countless awful policies have been implemented by governments over the years at the behest of the majority. While it's certainly true that representing the public to some degree is important, there's a reason most democratic governments in the world have a system of checks and balances for weeding out bad/destructive/unconstitutional policies even if it's something most of the public at the time might favor.
 
sabby
Posts: 397
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:11 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:22 am

I find it funny that airlines complain about regulations all the time but at the same time run back to mama (Govt) when the market drops / chapter 11 or when there are real competitions outside the cartel. If they want Govt protection, the need to accept certain regulations to prevent them being too greedy. Or if they want real free market, they should stop taking any tax breaks, debt support in the event of bad economy and not complain about competition entering US.

I like what someone said earlier in the thread, non-refundable tickets are completely acceptable when airlines promise not to sell those seats in case of cancellations alongside making them transferable. If they do want to sell them again, they need to return the fuel surcharge + taxes, they should only be allowed to keep the base fare.

I support successful airlines business all over the world but I don't want some legacies to form a cartel and screw the customers and any new entrants that may try a new/better solution.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:46 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
And the public addresses such situations via their powers of government, our representative government.

That's just mob rule though.

Oh that is just BS. You are reaching, just flailing about with that one. It is essentially the opposite of "mob rule", the airlines get to present their case, the elected legislators review both sides, and then make a decision. And there isn't even a decision yet, it is entirely possible (likely even) that no change will be made. But because they are getting ridiculous (look what even the top premium passengers are saying above) even those trying to be supportive of airlines charging them are assuming it'll be changed.

Mob rule. Please.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
LAXtoATL
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:55 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:46 pm

sabby wrote:
I find it funny that airlines complain about regulations all the time but at the same time run back to mama (Govt) when the market drops / chapter 11 or when there are real competitions outside the cartel. If they want Govt protection, the need to accept certain regulations to prevent them being too greedy. Or if they want real free market, they should stop taking any tax breaks, debt support in the event of bad economy and not complain about competition entering US.

I like what someone said earlier in the thread, non-refundable tickets are completely acceptable when airlines promise not to sell those seats in case of cancellations alongside making them transferable. If they do want to sell them again, they need to return the fuel surcharge + taxes, they should only be allowed to keep the base fare.

I support successful airlines business all over the world but I don't want some legacies to form a cartel and screw the customers and any new entrants that may try a new/better solution.


How do you define greedy?
DL, AA, UA all earn less than 10% ROI.
Try looking at what other industries generate. If the airlines are greedy, oh my I wonder what what word you would use for healthcare sector, tech, etc.

Change fees are just part of the overall pricing model. It was allows the base fares to remain so low. In fact, anybody surprised by Parker’s comment really is just not to smart. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if a business is selling a cheaper version of its product (non-refundable ticket) and allows you an exception via a fee and that fee is outlawed, the end result is that the business will either stop allowing exceptions altogether (and the change fee in practice is the cost of the ticket) or they simply stop selling the reduced rate product and everybody buys a refundable ticket. Either way, the airlines will still generate the same income it will just be distributed more evenly across their customer base and those least capapable of absorbing the added cost will be subsidizing those who can.
There is a reason most businesses do not allow their employees to purchase the cheaper Basic Economy tickets and that is because they do not allow any changes even with a fee. The flexibility is worth the extra costs to them. Legislation that restricts change fees would more than anything subsidize the cost of travel for large businesses at the expense of individuals (most of whom never pay change fees because they don’t change their tickets).
 
DFWAviator76
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 7:10 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 2:28 pm

LAXtoATL wrote:
How do you define greedy?
DL, AA, UA all earn less than 10% ROI.
Try looking at what other industries generate. If the airlines are greedy, oh my I wonder what what word you would use for healthcare sector, tech, etc.

Change fees are just part of the overall pricing model. It was allows the base fares to remain so low. In fact, anybody surprised by Parker’s comment really is just not to smart. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if a business is selling a cheaper version of its product (non-refundable ticket) and allows you an exception via a fee and that fee is outlawed, the end result is that the business will either stop allowing exceptions altogether (and the change fee in practice is the cost of the ticket) or they simply stop selling the reduced rate product and everybody buys a refundable ticket. Either way, the airlines will still generate the same income it will just be distributed more evenly across their customer base and those least capapable of absorbing the added cost will be subsidizing those who can.
There is a reason most businesses do not allow their employees to purchase the cheaper Basic Economy tickets and that is because they do not allow any changes even with a fee. The flexibility is worth the extra costs to them. Legislation that restricts change fees would more than anything subsidize the cost of travel for large businesses at the expense of individuals (most of whom never pay change fees because they don’t change their tickets).


This, this, and this. Welcome to my friend list, LAXtoATL.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 2:53 pm

sabby wrote:
I find it funny that airlines complain about regulations all the time but at the same time run back to mama (Govt) when the market drops / chapter 11 or when there are real competitions outside the cartel. If they want Govt protection, the need to accept certain regulations to prevent them being too greedy. Or if they want real free market, they should stop taking any tax breaks, debt support in the event of bad economy and not complain about competition entering US.

I like what someone said earlier in the thread, non-refundable tickets are completely acceptable when airlines promise not to sell those seats in case of cancellations alongside making them transferable. If they do want to sell them again, they need to return the fuel surcharge + taxes, they should only be allowed to keep the base fare.

I support successful airlines business all over the world but I don't want some legacies to form a cartel and screw the customers and any new entrants that may try a new/better solution.




This ^^^. Couldn’t have been said any better. This should be the mic drop to this thread and it should be locked.
717, 727-100, 727-200, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 742, 748, 752, 753, 762, 763, 772, 77W, 787-10, DC9, MD80/88/90, DC10, 319, 220-300, 320, 321, 321n, 332, 333, CS100, CRJ200, Q400, E175, E190, ERJ145, EMB120
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:11 pm

Tugger wrote:
Bald1983 wrote:
This has everything to do with what reactions will be if Congress outlaws change fees.

No one is suggesting outlawing change fees.

The problem is excessive fees that have no basis in the cost of the transaction along with the consumer having no recourse when it occurs (most don't plan to have to change a non-changable (without a fee) ticket.

And the public addresses such situations via their powers of government, our representative government.

Tugg.


"Excessive fees." Subjective term. Generally, excessive means anything more than you are wanting to pay. The consumer has recourse; do not buy a non-refundable ticket. If you are traveling in a group on United Airlines, and others, do not buy a Basic Economy ticket. Here is what happens when the government steps in: The Government decides what is fair and what is excessive. There was a time, the Government did exactly that; set fares, routes and everything else. They set the fares so that a sixty percent load factor was break even, form what I read. The result, Government artificially inflated the fares. IN the very early sixties, maybe even the late fifties, Continental Airlines wanted to introduce economy class fares. The idea there would be no amenities as far as meals etc. They had to get the Government's permission, via the CAB to offer that service. Other airlines resisted and finally the CAB allowed it. For a long time, the only routes that had that option were routes that Continental operated on. Fares were much, much higher in real dollar amounts then they are now. Generally, when government steps in, the consumer loses and the service provider loses.

As far as change fees, the solution, as I said is real simple; if you buy non-refundable, live with it. Do not want to, buy refundable. The issue with your group is simply that you have decided that you have a right to fly at a cheap price and you want government to make sure you have that option. When you buy the cheapest tickets, and something happens to force you to not be able to use it or want to change it, you want government to step in and alter your contract with the airline and magically turn you ticket unto a refundable ticket.
 
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:13 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Government needs to stay out of it.


Maybe they should stay out of safety and ATC, too? I mean, who needs to get there alive, right? Just let the free market decide.

The fact is that when you are purchasing a product, laws protect you from such things as theft (the airline just takes your money and then doesn't get you there...or the car dealership takes your money and then won't give you your car). At times, the definition of what those rules are is touchy and governments exist to make those rules.

In all fairness that's not really the argument being made. The philosophy behind airline deregulation was deregulation of product (routes, fares and, by extension, service). Change fees/refundability...it's a product decision, and so long as airlines are being transparent about it, why shouldn't customers be free to buy a cheap, nonrefundable airfare product?

DocLightning wrote:
Bald1983 wrote:
It is not a necessity to fly, as proven by Clark Griswold.


He didn't prove anything. For some people, flying is essential.

Define essential. It's essential that I drive a 2018 Maserati GranTurismo.


Personally, I want the government to mandate that Hank's used car lot, must sell me a Rolls Royce at Chevy Spark prices.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:15 pm

seabosdca wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Define essential. It's essential that I drive a 2018 Maserati GranTurismo.


If I didn't fly from time to time, I would lose my livelihood. I have to travel cross-country 4 to 6 times per year for work, and I don't have an extra week to drive or two extra weeks to take Amtrak every time. The same is true for lots and lots of people in managerial and professional jobs.


The your solution is to buy the refundable fare ticket; problem solved. It is not essential that you get a refundable ticket at non-refundable prices nor do you have a right to such a service.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:22 pm

Tugger wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
And the public addresses such situations via their powers of government, our representative government.

That's just mob rule though.

Oh that is just BS. You are reaching, just flailing about with that one. It is essentially the opposite of "mob rule", the airlines get to present their case, the elected legislators review both sides, and then make a decision. And there isn't even a decision yet, it is entirely possible (likely even) that no change will be made. But because they are getting ridiculous (look what even the top premium passengers are saying above) even those trying to be supportive of airlines charging them are assuming it'll be changed.

Mob rule. Please.

Tugg


It is mob rule. It is the government taking ownership of a private business because you decide you need the service and do not want to pay much for it. I have news for you; When the government does regulate, almost always, it regulates in favor of the business, while adding costs to the business, thus making it more expensive for the consumer. This is not speculation; this is exactly how it was when airlines were regulated by the government. It is mob rule. The affect will be higher fares and less service.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:39 pm

Bald1983 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
That's just mob rule though.

Oh that is just BS. You are reaching, just flailing about with that one. It is essentially the opposite of "mob rule", the airlines get to present their case, the elected legislators review both sides, and then make a decision. And there isn't even a decision yet, it is entirely possible (likely even) that no change will be made. But because they are getting ridiculous (look what even the top premium passengers are saying above) even those trying to be supportive of airlines charging them are assuming it'll be changed.

Mob rule. Please.

Tugg


It is mob rule. It is the government taking ownership of a private business because you decide you need the service and do not want to pay much for it. I have news for you; When the government does regulate, almost always, it regulates in favor of the business, while adding costs to the business, thus making it more expensive for the consumer. This is not speculation; this is exactly how it was when airlines were regulated by the government. It is mob rule. The affect will be higher fares and less service.

No it is not. It is government and legislation. The market then manages after that. But it provides a floor for the market to operate on instead of the problems that companies have with having to compete against others that aren't acting in the best interest of the customer.

No one saying the companies can't charge fees, or that fees covering actual costs aren't appropriate. It is the opportunistic nature of applying fees when someone has no choice at the time (again, people do not intend to change tickets at the time they book them). And additionally airlines encourage and work to get people to purchase non-refundable fares because they need to fix that future income into their financial picture. That is what the airlines fear, is that they will not have the ability to increase fares and will be stuck with only charging "reasonable costs" for change fees.

Again, airlines encourage,and want people to buy non-refundable fares, it is part of their core strategy.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
RobertS975
Posts: 961
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:17 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:44 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
Government needs to stay out of it.

They did pass the DEREGULATION Act of 1978.


Trouble is, we didn't get deregulation...we got self-regulation. The airlines have more rules and regs than ever, and passengers worrying about "breaking the law" as if "back to back" or hidden city ticketing rules were written on the tablets that Moses brought down the mountain!
 
Boof02671
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:07 pm

If you don’t like it don’t fly it.

I think $95 an hour labor for a car mechanic is too much, Congress needs to pass a law to $20 an hour.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:17 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
If you don’t like it don’t fly it.

I think $95 an hour labor for a car mechanic is too much, Congress needs to pass a law to $20 an hour.

Why?

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9745
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:17 pm

So the economist and accountants at the airlines have determined that clients will simply switch to purchasing non-refundable tickets and continue to fly in the same record numbers?
Ok....
 
Boof02671
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:18 pm

Tugger wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
If you don’t like it don’t fly it.

I think $95 an hour labor for a car mechanic is too much, Congress needs to pass a law to $20 an hour.

Why?

Tugg

You clearly didn’t grasp my post.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:27 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
If you don’t like it don’t fly it.

I think $95 an hour labor for a car mechanic is too much, Congress needs to pass a law to $20 an hour.

Why?

Tugg

You clearly didn’t grasp my post.

I did.

You clearly didn't grasp that you made a ridiculous argument or don't understand the issue.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:47 pm

Tugger wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
And the public addresses such situations via their powers of government, our representative government.

That's just mob rule though.

Oh that is just BS. You are reaching, just flailing about with that one. It is essentially the opposite of "mob rule", the airlines get to present their case, the elected legislators review both sides, and then make a decision. And there isn't even a decision yet, it is entirely possible (likely even) that no change will be made. But because they are getting ridiculous (look what even the top premium passengers are saying above) even those trying to be supportive of airlines charging them are assuming it'll be changed.

Mob rule. Please.

Tugg

Please, the entire narrative of your argument over the course of this thread is that the airlines can try and do what they want, but that the people ultimately have the government to bring the hammer down on things they don't like. That in and of itself is not a valid argument for regulating fare product.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1636
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:15 pm

Interestingly, Frontier changed their change fee:
https://www.flyfrontier.com/travel/trav ... aign=3Tier
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:15 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
That's just mob rule though.

Oh that is just BS. You are reaching, just flailing about with that one. It is essentially the opposite of "mob rule", the airlines get to present their case, the elected legislators review both sides, and then make a decision. And there isn't even a decision yet, it is entirely possible (likely even) that no change will be made. But because they are getting ridiculous (look what even the top premium passengers are saying above) even those trying to be supportive of airlines charging them are assuming it'll be changed.

Mob rule. Please.

Tugg

Please, the entire narrative of your argument over the course of this thread is that the airlines can try and do what they want, but that the people ultimately have the government to bring the hammer down on things they don't like. That in and of itself is not a valid argument for regulating fare product.

Please... of course the public via the government has the ability "to bring a hammer" when needed.
Where do you get that it is not a valid argument? It is an absolutely valid argument for regulating something. If the industry and market do not address something and it becomes onerous to the public, they public can and will work through the available options to address it. The government, all free republic governments, are open to petition by consumer/the public to address issues they find need to be.

This is done cost/price issue all the time (in addition to for safety issues, zoning issues, legal liability issues etc.). Why on earth do you think this is not an appropriate course to follow?

Tugg
Last edited by Tugger on Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4278
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:16 pm

phlswaflyer wrote:
Parker cares about Parker. Kirby cares about Kirby. They both come from the same school of " how much can we screw our customers and make ourselves rich..?" There is not and never has been a rationale for a ticket change fee and one as high as $200. Never. Ever. They will sell every seat because they are reducing flights and frequency so they do NOT lose a stinking cent. Southwest makes plenty of money, runs a MUCH better shop and people like to fly them.

I remember when ALL tickets were refndable and there WAS no change fee. When you could send a ticket and they could cash it in . De-regulation started all of this and now it's a DOG eat Dog scenario. I know many would like to go back to when a 68% Load factor on a flight made money for the airline. Well? that's no longer the case !! Now?? 80% is Break even. Discount fares were an anomaly, So now they're the Norm. The American public got what they wanted, Now it's up to the Airlines to take the ball and run with it. And so?? No Need to complain when they find a scheme to get more Profits.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:21 pm

cledaybuck wrote:
Interestingly, Frontier changed their change fee:
https://www.flyfrontier.com/travel/trav ... aign=3Tier

And this is where "the hammer" or the threat of it being used, is shown to be an important power for consumers to have. Industry can make the changes themselves, we gave them the power for self-regulation (as someone above pointed out). They just have to do it. But it is hard sometimes to forego profit when "everyone else" is doing it. Shareholders and others don't like that.

Hopefully the threat of legislative action will cause the industry to reassess their current practices.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
caverunner17
Posts: 265
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:50 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:51 pm

cledaybuck wrote:
Interestingly, Frontier changed their change fee:
https://www.flyfrontier.com/travel/trav ... aign=3Tier

Hey, that was my idea yesterday!
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:51 pm

Tugger wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Oh that is just BS. You are reaching, just flailing about with that one. It is essentially the opposite of "mob rule", the airlines get to present their case, the elected legislators review both sides, and then make a decision. And there isn't even a decision yet, it is entirely possible (likely even) that no change will be made. But because they are getting ridiculous (look what even the top premium passengers are saying above) even those trying to be supportive of airlines charging them are assuming it'll be changed.

Mob rule. Please.

Tugg

Please, the entire narrative of your argument over the course of this thread is that the airlines can try and do what they want, but that the people ultimately have the government to bring the hammer down on things they don't like. That in and of itself is not a valid argument for regulating fare product.

Please... of course the public via the government has the ability "to bring a hammer" when needed.
Where do you get that it is not a valid argument? It is an absolutely valid argument for regulating something. If the industry and market do not address something and it becomes onerous to the public, they public can and will work through the available options to address it. The government, all free republic governments, are open to petition by consumer/the public to address issues they find need to be.

This is done cost/price issue all the time (in addition to for safety issues, zoning issues, legal liability issues etc.). Why on earth do you think this is not an appropriate course to follow?

Tugg

Because just because they can, doesn't mean it would right or good policy for the government to respond. The fact that a mob can pressure the government to do something speaks nothing of the merits of capping/banning/regulating things like change fees.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9697
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 6:06 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Please, the entire narrative of your argument over the course of this thread is that the airlines can try and do what they want, but that the people ultimately have the government to bring the hammer down on things they don't like. That in and of itself is not a valid argument for regulating fare product.

Please... of course the public via the government has the ability "to bring a hammer" when needed.
Where do you get that it is not a valid argument? It is an absolutely valid argument for regulating something. If the industry and market do not address something and it becomes onerous to the public, they public can and will work through the available options to address it. The government, all free republic governments, are open to petition by consumer/the public to address issues they find need to be.

This is done cost/price issue all the time (in addition to for safety issues, zoning issues, legal liability issues etc.). Why on earth do you think this is not an appropriate course to follow?

Tugg

Because just because they can, doesn't mean it would right or good policy for the government to respond. The fact that a mob can pressure the government to do something speaks nothing of the merits of capping/banning/regulating things like change fees.

In this case you cannot say the government is making any sort of rush to judgement. The complaints have been growing for a few years at least, the industry is being consulted, they are being given a chance to explain the situation and why things are as they are. And as I said earlier, legislation on this isn't passed yet or a sure thing.

The industry just needs to address the problem, and if Frontier 's action is a start perhaps they are.

But if companies, industries don't respond to consumer input and pressure then they face possible "other solutions" being applied. Look at net neutrality. The public does have input on that too.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
evank516
Posts: 2014
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 6:39 pm

cledaybuck wrote:
Interestingly, Frontier changed their change fee:
https://www.flyfrontier.com/travel/trav ... aign=3Tier


I don't really have many positive things to say about Frontier, but I guess there's a first time for everything. Great move!
 
sabby
Posts: 397
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:11 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:33 pm

LAXtoATL wrote:
sabby wrote:
I find it funny that airlines complain about regulations all the time but at the same time run back to mama (Govt) when the market drops / chapter 11 or when there are real competitions outside the cartel. If they want Govt protection, the need to accept certain regulations to prevent them being too greedy. Or if they want real free market, they should stop taking any tax breaks, debt support in the event of bad economy and not complain about competition entering US.

I like what someone said earlier in the thread, non-refundable tickets are completely acceptable when airlines promise not to sell those seats in case of cancellations alongside making them transferable. If they do want to sell them again, they need to return the fuel surcharge + taxes, they should only be allowed to keep the base fare.

I support successful airlines business all over the world but I don't want some legacies to form a cartel and screw the customers and any new entrants that may try a new/better solution.


How do you define greedy?
DL, AA, UA all earn less than 10% ROI.
Try looking at what other industries generate. If the airlines are greedy, oh my I wonder what what word you would use for healthcare sector, tech, etc.

Change fees are just part of the overall pricing model. It was allows the base fares to remain so low. In fact, anybody surprised by Parker’s comment really is just not to smart. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if a business is selling a cheaper version of its product (non-refundable ticket) and allows you an exception via a fee and that fee is outlawed, the end result is that the business will either stop allowing exceptions altogether (and the change fee in practice is the cost of the ticket) or they simply stop selling the reduced rate product and everybody buys a refundable ticket. Either way, the airlines will still generate the same income it will just be distributed more evenly across their customer base and those least capapable of absorbing the added cost will be subsidizing those who can.
There is a reason most businesses do not allow their employees to purchase the cheaper Basic Economy tickets and that is because they do not allow any changes even with a fee. The flexibility is worth the extra costs to them. Legislation that restricts change fees would more than anything subsidize the cost of travel for large businesses at the expense of individuals (most of whom never pay change fees because they don’t change their tickets).

Way to pick up a single word out of a whole paragraph and purposefully avoiding the point I tried to make in my post. Like I said, airlines are free to make fare rules as they see fit, but only if they don't come running back to Govt to complain about competitions or when the going gets tough to ask for tax cuts or any other help from the Govt. You can't expect to have "Heads I win, Tails you lose" situation.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:44 pm

sabby wrote:
LAXtoATL wrote:
sabby wrote:
I find it funny that airlines complain about regulations all the time but at the same time run back to mama (Govt) when the market drops / chapter 11 or when there are real competitions outside the cartel. If they want Govt protection, the need to accept certain regulations to prevent them being too greedy. Or if they want real free market, they should stop taking any tax breaks, debt support in the event of bad economy and not complain about competition entering US.

I like what someone said earlier in the thread, non-refundable tickets are completely acceptable when airlines promise not to sell those seats in case of cancellations alongside making them transferable. If they do want to sell them again, they need to return the fuel surcharge + taxes, they should only be allowed to keep the base fare.

I support successful airlines business all over the world but I don't want some legacies to form a cartel and screw the customers and any new entrants that may try a new/better solution.


How do you define greedy?
DL, AA, UA all earn less than 10% ROI.
Try looking at what other industries generate. If the airlines are greedy, oh my I wonder what what word you would use for healthcare sector, tech, etc.

Change fees are just part of the overall pricing model. It was allows the base fares to remain so low. In fact, anybody surprised by Parker’s comment really is just not to smart. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if a business is selling a cheaper version of its product (non-refundable ticket) and allows you an exception via a fee and that fee is outlawed, the end result is that the business will either stop allowing exceptions altogether (and the change fee in practice is the cost of the ticket) or they simply stop selling the reduced rate product and everybody buys a refundable ticket. Either way, the airlines will still generate the same income it will just be distributed more evenly across their customer base and those least capapable of absorbing the added cost will be subsidizing those who can.
There is a reason most businesses do not allow their employees to purchase the cheaper Basic Economy tickets and that is because they do not allow any changes even with a fee. The flexibility is worth the extra costs to them. Legislation that restricts change fees would more than anything subsidize the cost of travel for large businesses at the expense of individuals (most of whom never pay change fees because they don’t change their tickets).

Way to pick up a single word out of a whole paragraph and purposefully avoiding the point I tried to make in my post. Like I said, airlines are free to make fare rules as they see fit, but only if they don't come running back to Govt to complain about competitions or when the going gets tough to ask for tax cuts or any other help from the Govt. You can't expect to have "Heads I win, Tails you lose" situation.



I agree. The US3 got their panties in a bunch and had to go running to the govt for help and to be coddled because they felt threatened by “unfair” practices of the ME3. Because the ME3 offers a FAR SUPERIOR hard product and experience and customer service and so on and so on it’s practically endless. Then they gripe that the ME3 are subsidized and pay bottom wages to the crews. Well then maybe reevaluate how much you pay your employees. They obviously get paid much better than ME3 crews and have much shittier attitudes. You have high pay you have union backing yet it’s hard for you to act like you at least like your job and smile to your customer and treat them as a guest not as a nuisanced cattle with a wallet. Even flying on international budget carriers you get smiles and treated like you matter. I never fly a US airline outside of this country and always opt for the international option.

Well US3 how about trying to compete with them and their business model instead of competing with the business models of F9, G4 and NK??

Let’s not forget how they ran into the arms of Washington to be saved and needed to be bailed out post 9/11 by the government. So they can run to the government when they need protection, but passenger rights are exempt? Sounds very hypocritical but what more can you expect from a large corporation that has to answer to the traders on Wall St and the overall bottom line.
717, 727-100, 727-200, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 742, 748, 752, 753, 762, 763, 772, 77W, 787-10, DC9, MD80/88/90, DC10, 319, 220-300, 320, 321, 321n, 332, 333, CS100, CRJ200, Q400, E175, E190, ERJ145, EMB120
 
PHXEZE
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:17 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:48 pm

aaflyer777 wrote:
And yet somehow Southwest makes money without charging change fees...


Actually, Southwest relies very heavily on change fees and bag fees to make money. Granted, they do not charge these fees themselves but they gain a ton of passengers by not charging these fees...passengers they would not have if other airlines did not charge fees. Southwest bean counters have determined they make more money from these additional ticket sales than they would from the fees they could charge.

It only works if they are the only airline not charging fees. If one or two of the legacy carriers decided to copy them, they would lose their advantage.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Sat Sep 22, 2018 1:41 am

Tugger wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Please... of course the public via the government has the ability "to bring a hammer" when needed.
Where do you get that it is not a valid argument? It is an absolutely valid argument for regulating something. If the industry and market do not address something and it becomes onerous to the public, they public can and will work through the available options to address it. The government, all free republic governments, are open to petition by consumer/the public to address issues they find need to be.

This is done cost/price issue all the time (in addition to for safety issues, zoning issues, legal liability issues etc.). Why on earth do you think this is not an appropriate course to follow?

Tugg

Because just because they can, doesn't mean it would right or good policy for the government to respond. The fact that a mob can pressure the government to do something speaks nothing of the merits of capping/banning/regulating things like change fees.

In this case you cannot say the government is making any sort of rush to judgement. The complaints have been growing for a few years at least, the industry is being consulted, they are being given a chance to explain the situation and why things are as they are. And as I said earlier, legislation on this isn't passed yet or a sure thing.

All may be true. I'm just saying the process does not inherently make the desired outcome good or rational.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21657
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: AA May End Ticket Changes If Congress Limits Fees - Bloomberg

Sat Sep 22, 2018 2:05 am

flyguy89 wrote:
Define essential.


It may be necessary to receive medical care and it may be a condition of employment.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos