Does anyone else see "FC" in a thread title and get excited for a First Class fare only to be let down b/c the OP is making it stand for Fare Compare?

Does anyone else see "FC" in a thread title and get excited for a First Class fare only to be let down b/c the OP is making it stand for Fare Compare?

I almost actually never do because I use F for F class not FC. But I can see that many get confused.

I've definately done that. To be honest while i'm quite in tune with the lingo myself i'd be all for a reduction in it in the forums, e.g. naming the airport/airline (Newark in addition to or instead of EWR, Jetblue in addition to or instead of B6 etc.).

Not all of use are familiar with fare compare and it's understandable to expect it to mean First Class.

Yes! Even though I know what it means, my heart jumps at the faint hope that the poster means F :(

I've definately done that. To be honest while i'm quite in tune with the lingo myself i'd be all for a reduction in it in the forums, e.g. naming the airport/airline (Newark in addition to or instead of EWR, Jetblue in addition to or instead of B6 etc.).

Not all of use are familiar with fare compare and it's understandable to expect it to mean First Class.

http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/

I have been rallying against this for ages...I thought posters would finally use something else....like FCompare or Farecomp

Maybe we can make it a forum rule?

I have been rallying against this for ages...I thought posters would finally use something else....like FCompare or Farecomp

Maybe we can make it a forum rule?

Whereas it really frustrates the hell out of me too, I don't think we could really make it a rule. It's not really enforceable from a moderation standpoint.

But yeah, it annoys me too...

bhatnasx
Mileage Run Moderator

Does anyone else see "FC" in a thread title and get excited for a First Class fare only to be let down b/c the OP is making it stand for Fare Compare?

Absolutely. Although at this point I've become so accustomed to translating "FC" as "Fare Compare" that I probably will overlook a true "first class" deal at some point in the not too distant future. :(

Why the source of a particular fare needs to be included in the thread title escapes me, especially when it is capable of two wildly different meaning. You don't see "Travelocity," "Expedia," "aa.com," etc. in many thread titles.

I have no problem citing or crediting the source of the fare in the text of the thread-starting post itself. Indeed, that source should be identified to facilitate easy and quick further exploration of the fare. And, to give credit where credit is due.

But the practice of tossing "FC" into Mileage Run thread titles should end immediately.

Whereas it really frustrates the hell out of me too, I don't think we could really make it a rule. It's not really enforceable from a moderation standpoint.

Perhaps a sticky could be added at the top of the forum to encourage people not to use "FC" in the subject of their threads. And/or the moderators could, at their discretion, edit thread titles to delete the offending "FCs".

Why the source of a particular fare needs to be included in the thread title escapes me, especially when it is capable of two wildly different meaning. You don't see "Travelocity," "Expedia," "aa.com," etc. in many thread titles.

I think including a reference to FC in a prominent location is a great idea; it significantly cuts down on "I can't find this fare" posts, as people realize that it hasn't been loaded yet. I would favor writing it out, and this issue probably makes it into my top 300 concerns with FT, but on the scale of everyday annoyances I'm faced with, this doesn't rate too highly.

Perhaps a sticky could be added at the top of the forum to encourage people not to use "FC" in the subject of their threads. And/or the moderators could, at their discretion, edit thread titles to delete the offending "FCs".


Good idea - I'll pass this on to my fellow mods. I am in the (slow) process of redoing the MR Tools Sticky & we've been discussing proposed changes to the Welcome To the MR thread as well.

bhatnasx
Mileage Run Moderator

A few times I thought it was FC, oh, First Class, only to find out it was FC, I mean Fare Compare. Sometimes there are too many abbreviations. LOL - Lots Of Luck. You can see what century I am from.

Actually, I'm confused as to why one would think "FC" means "First Class" (though understandable... I guess) as I never see "BC" or "EC", and that common FT vernacular dictates first class to be "F".

And yes, I sometimes put FC in the title, to indicate that fares may not be loaded, lest someone have a hissy-fit.

It drove me batty at the beginning. Now I assume it means fare compare, which is dangerous because some member might post a really great premium class fare and label it "FC" and I might overlook it :eek:

But, indeed, better practice might be "F" for first class.

And .. the FareCompare designator... what are we trying to accomplish with it? "I've seen the fare but haven't yet checked if it's bookable, or have checked but it isn't yet bookable?" Perhaps a more appropriate designator would be something to indicate the fare is possible rather than the actual source of the fare (that could go in the body of the post).

On the other hand, if the fare is bookable, there's no reason to put Fare Compare in the title, right? Certainly give credit where credit is due in the body of the post, but no reason to add text which potentially confuses.

Just MHO.

I think if they put it at the end of the subject is is easier to distinguish

UA: 100+ XXX-YYY on FC

to me is easy to understand that the OP means it was found on farecompare.

FC: UA 100+ XXX-YYY

looks like a first class fare from XXX-YYY on UA

I've definately done that. To be honest while i'm quite in tune with the lingo myself i'd be all for a reduction in it in the forums, e.g. naming the airport/airline (Newark in addition to or instead of EWR, Jetblue in addition to or instead of B6 etc.).

Not all of use are familiar with fare compare and it's understandable to expect it to mean First Class.

yes, yes, yes

Sometimes there are too many abbreviations.

yes. except it's more than sometimes.

I think this thread really illustrates the impact FareCompare has on our great community. I think including "FC" in the thread title has come to serve as a caveat for other members that the fare might be elusive, it might end up to be $$$ more in taxes/fees/YQ charges, and it might not be available at all. Therefore, I think it has value in the title. I can sort of see how a title like "FC AA LAX-DUB $292 (serious doubts)" might get folks excited, but most of the titles I've seen with "FC" in them say "on FC" (as opposed to "in FC") which pretty much clarifies it for me. Also, I'm not all that worried about missing a first class deal, as a deal good enough to post is going to attract a lot of posts/activity.

Why the source of a particular fare needs to be included in the thread title escapes me, especially when it is capable of two wildly different meaning. You don't see "Travelocity," "Expedia," "aa.com," etc. in many thread titles.

To me, it's different than listing the source in the title, because it's not the source. The airline is the source, and FC is just the messenger (and sometimes the message isn't all that accurate). For this reason, I for one have yet to book a flight on FC, but I've sure found some good fares that I've booked elsewhere, and I've had fun with the challenge of trying to track down others.

As dlnewbie suggested, maybe the solution is to end the thread title with "…on FC" if one feels the need, but I sure don't think a rule is necessary.

I can sort of see how a title like "FC AA LAX-DUB $292 (serious doubts)" might get folks excited, but most of the titles I've seen with "FC" in them say "on FC" (as opposed to "in FC") which pretty much clarifies it for me. Also, I'm not all that worried about missing a first class deal, as a deal good enough to post is going to attract a lot of posts/activity.


I agree with the linguistic explanation, that's how I detect it and how everyone should.

a lot more likely is that when people realize what a waste of time fare compare is, they will quit using it all together.

Mentioning Farecompare is important, because it signifies a deviation from former FT standard procedures; in the past, it was customary to post fares only after having made sure that they would be bookable.

More importantly, Farecompare has given us a unique gift, knowledge, and I am not sure that many FTers have figured out how powerful this knowledge can be. Knowing, for instance, that CO has just loaded a new fare*, is worth a lot, but I don't care about this information once it's more than a few hours old.

Finally, I don't worry much about having too many threads, and having threads that are poorly labeled. So what? Maybe this is a unique skill, but I can discern within seconds whether I might be interested in a fare that's posted. I'm sorry if some of you suffer a minor heart attack every time they read "FC" in a thread title, but I'm not sure that there's anything that can be done, short of hiring Sheryl from BFT.

--
* and -before the flames begin- I am talking about normal fare changes here, simple signaling stuff that'll get pulled with the next load, PDX-PHL for $158, not mistakes.

a lot more likely is that when people realize what a waste of time fare compare is, they will quit using it all together.

As least those who don't know how to use it.

Frees up the bandwidth for the rest of us.

As least those who don't know how to use it.

Frees up the bandwidth for the rest of us.

^ ^ ^ Plus the chances of airlines bothering to make corrections to their fares since there will be fewer takers. I am likin' this.:D

I'm sorry if some of you suffer a minor heart attack every time they read "FC" in a thread title, but I'm not sure that there's anything that can be done, short of hiring Sheryl from BFT.

As someone who has been scolded and then banned by Sheryl from BFT...I am loving this reference. ^

i always see FC and as i have a RSS, its looks like a First class fare.

i think the best would be to make a rule how a thread title in mileage run has to be

i.e

AirportCode- Airportcode, Airline Code, Date, Booking Class, Price, Booking platform

so

NRT-IAD, AA, 23.3.2007, C, 299USD+, book on FC

and if somebody does not post accurate *nuke " :)

:p

^ ^ ^ Plus the chances of airlines bothering to make corrections to their fares since there will be fewer takers. I am likin' this.:D

glad i could help. i'll count this as my contribution for the day. now i can watch ncaa basketball and lounge at the pool.

I could care less about what's in the thread title, my pet peeve is when well intentioned folks simply post something they see on Fare Compare without bothering to check it against nwa.com, or ua.bomb or where ever. Some might not expect lots of due diligence to be done, but I usually take the time to investigate a deal to verify it's validity before sharing it with everyone.

Perhaps because I am newer, when I see FC, I assume it means Fare Compare, not First Class. But I agree with DLNewbie that something like "on FC" would be helpful. I'm not sure that saying "book on FC" would be accurate, since FC doesn't acutally sell airfares. On the other hand, it's easy enough to book through FC's links, so perhaps it's just a matter of semantics.

I don't think that I've ever saw anywhere on FT someone posting that their upgrade cleared to FC. YMMV

FC= fine choice

?

:p

I am jargon junkie and I too still feel misled when people post "FC" in the thread title. I check the MR forum a few times a day and I still fall for this!

Wouldn't it be cool if there was a standard template/form that was used for all posts in the Mileage Run Deals forum, where/ the original poster has to fill out the fields such as listed by derpelikan in Post #25, and then the subject line populates itself? Might also cut out on posts better suited to Mileage Run Discussion. Food for thought.

http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/

hahahahaha - love it.

I always think FC = first class since I don't really use Fare Compare and don't really care about keeping track of which fares come from that particular site in any case.

I agree with SAT Lawyer that the source isn't important enough for the thread title.

it must be a slow couple of days since everyone wants to whine about FC being fare compare or first class.. just what we need more rules so that when we want to post something and if we don't do it just right someone will run to the mods

personally I try to post as much relevant information in the subject line but sheesh.. is this really an issue :rolleyes:

I just went back to the first two pages of the MR threads and saw 6 references to FC and five of the six were clear that it was fare compare and only might one mistake for First class.. that was the AA DUB thread... most people (unless the mods edited the titles) made the Farecompare reference pretty clear.. if someone couldn't figure it out; then its their problem as you can try but won't get too far when you try to moderate stupidity