Newsstand - US law extends ticket protection for air travelers

Here is the article (http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCompanyNewsArticle.jhtml?duid=mtfh8360 8_2004-12-08_23-27-05_n08582047_newsml)


Jay

Good news for travelers. It makes me comfortable buying US tickets on UA metal to Europe for February and March. I was pretty sure that UA would transport me even if US went under since it would be on their metal, but this is additional insurance.

... and this helps with intelligence reform how? :( [This was part of the "intelligence" bill meant to "save" us.]

As a consumer, I am happy to hear this. As someone who cares about sustainable economics, I am not so pleased, for this is just another backdoor tax on firms already in the industry and postpones the natural market adjustment.

... and this helps with intelligence reform how? :( [This was part of the "intelligence" bill meant to "save" us.]

As a consumer, I am happy to hear this. As someone who cares about sustainable economics, I am not so pleased, for this is just another backdoor tax on firms already in the industry and postpones the natural market adjustment.

An unrelated rider attached to a bill in the US Congress? I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you. ;) I bet there was also funding for building a bridge in some Senator's home town and a tax break for which exactly 6 people in the country quialify for, embedded somewhere in the bill.

I fail to see how this postpones market adjustment as it is post-liquidation. And while it may forego incrementatl revenue (forcing stranded pax to buy full fare tickets), I hardly see it as a tax (I'm relatively certain the marginal cost of an additional passenger flying standby in what would have been an empty seat is not over $25)

An unrelated rider attached to a bill in the US Congress? I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you. ;) I bet there was also funding for building a bridge in some Senator's home town and a tax break for which exactly 6 people in the country quialify for, embedded somewhere in the bill.

I am not shocked. This is business as usual -- unfortunately.

I fail to see how this postpones market adjustment as it is post-liquidation. And while it may forego incrementatl revenue (forcing stranded pax to buy full fare tickets), I hardly see it as a tax (I'm relatively certain the marginal cost of an additional passenger flying standby in what would have been an empty seat is not over $25)

It postpones market adjustment because such "insurance" is a clear indicator to business and leisure travellers that doing business with vendors of questionable financial credibility/sustainability is ok; after all a failure won't cost the customer as much and so they can continue to make their business decisions without serious concern of the vendor's reliability in delivering service. In other words, bad firms (measured financially) continue to get customers that would otherwise go to better firms (measured financially) and help sustain the more sustainable businesses.

The marginal cost of handling a passenger on an international flight is certainly not $25 or less.

This has nothing to do with protecting the consumer and everything with saving certain credit card companies serious money. Most airlines would honor tickets from a dead airline but on a standby basis only--no different than what the law provides for. The credit card companies come out as the big winner's becuase it would have cost them serious money in having to refund all of the unused tickets--and since the majority of people charge their tickets we are talking about a major chunk of change.

US Airways and Airtran have both been honoring Southeast Airline's stranded passenger tickets since they closed the doors last month. Of course, both of the airlines are charging a per-ticket fee to cover the stranded passengers.

I believe passengers may be getting reimbursed the Airtran fee by Southeast, after the fact.

Nevertheless its good to see that these people aren't being left high and dry.

-JC

US Airways and Airtran have both been honoring Southeast Airline's stranded passenger tickets since they closed the doors last month. Of course, both of the airlines are charging a per-ticket fee to cover the stranded passengers.

I believe passengers may be getting reimbursed the Airtran fee by Southeast, after the fact.

Nevertheless its good to see that these people aren't being left high and dry.

-JC

As most people in the US buy their tickets with credit cards, they would not be left hanging dry.

What we have here is an indirect transfer of wealth from the US taxpayers to the credit card companies.

[QUOTE=GUWonder]I am not shocked. This is business as usual -- unfortunately. QUOTE]

The "shocked" statement is sarcastic, in the vein of the inspector in Casablanca.

:mad:

Why should the rest of us have to bail out those who are stupid enough to buy a ticket on a failing airline just because it's cheapest?