what to do when airline warned me about numerous throw-away ticketing? ($95 vs $497)
Oct 28, 2014, 10:02 pm
#1006
Join Date: Jan 2008
Programs: QFF WP
Posts: 379
No, you never had the ten million. If you have the winning lottery ticket, and you're an accrual-basis taxpayer (or, perhaps, if they know you won and use "constructive receipt"), but then don't collect before the ticket expires, you might be able to deduct the loss against your winnings. But you have to report the winnings.
Oct 29, 2014, 1:01 am
#1007
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
If you're saying that GAAP and IAS don't always follow conventional logic, most accountants would agree. But those are the rules.
Oct 29, 2014, 9:31 am
#1008
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, MM, NR; HH Diamond, Bonvoy LT Gold, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Diamond, others
Posts: 12,159
Fair Market Value of a lottery ticket, pre-draw, is somewhere between expected value and price. The maximum amount that might possibly be won isn't it (except to the extent it affects the expected amount received).
Nov 25, 2014, 5:12 pm
#1009
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: in the vicinity of SFO
Programs: AA 2MM (LT-PLT, PPro for this year)
Posts: 19,781
But yeah, unless it results in breaking a criminal law of some sort on top of the contract violation, it's not theft (and even then, fraud and some kinds of IP violations are both criminal, but not theft.)
Nov 26, 2014, 9:06 am
#1010
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
Just because you don't go to jail for it doesn't mean it's not theft.
Jan 2, 2015, 9:00 am
#1011
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of Enchantment!
Programs: Southwest RR, Alaska Mileage Plan™
Posts: 341
I see a similarity of this issue to the hotly debated (at least on the Southwest forum) issue of whether a customer should be able to standby for an earlier flight for free. On Southwest, and increasingly on other airlines, you have to pay a hefty up-charge to take an earlier flight if you are on a discounted fare.
Advocates of free standby correctly point out that the airline incurs virtually no cost for letting you standby on the earlier flight. Furthermore if successful you free a later seat for possible sale to another customer. All true.
However look at the problem using game theory and it changes. Once customers learn that they can standby for free, some of them will buy tickets on the cheap late evening flight rather than the expensive peak hour flight. That behavior change will definitely save those customers money and cost the airline money. Advocates of free standby know this and in fact it's why they advocate it, not realizing that the airlines would not be able to maintain their current pricing under a more liberal policy.
In summary, the right answer for a one-time, never to be repeated event is different than the right answer for a permanent policy decision.
Advocates of free standby correctly point out that the airline incurs virtually no cost for letting you standby on the earlier flight. Furthermore if successful you free a later seat for possible sale to another customer. All true.
However look at the problem using game theory and it changes. Once customers learn that they can standby for free, some of them will buy tickets on the cheap late evening flight rather than the expensive peak hour flight. That behavior change will definitely save those customers money and cost the airline money. Advocates of free standby know this and in fact it's why they advocate it, not realizing that the airlines would not be able to maintain their current pricing under a more liberal policy.
In summary, the right answer for a one-time, never to be repeated event is different than the right answer for a permanent policy decision.
ANyway, props to NSX for being the first to bring it into the discussion.
Jul 22, 2015, 10:03 pm
#1012
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: DL Gold, AA Platinum, SM, OP, HHonors Gold, SPG Ambassador
Posts: 172
Theft of service, obviously. If you pay $95 for a service priced at $495, you stole $400 from the airline.
Similarly, if there are a bunch of $5 firewood bundles stacked up outside Safeway and you pay the cashier for one but load a dozen into your car, you may pride yourself on craftily outwitting Safeway, but from an ethical and legal standpoint you're a thief who owes Safeway $55. This is really no different.
If you think the wood is overpriced and ought to be $2, not $5, you can take it up with the store manager and try to make a deal -- but you can't steal extra bundles to compensate.
The airline is this case can sue for all lost revenue associated with all the OP's trips, plus attorneys' fees, which obviously could run into many thousands of dollars. And don't think they wouldn't do it.
Similarly, if there are a bunch of $5 firewood bundles stacked up outside Safeway and you pay the cashier for one but load a dozen into your car, you may pride yourself on craftily outwitting Safeway, but from an ethical and legal standpoint you're a thief who owes Safeway $55. This is really no different.
If you think the wood is overpriced and ought to be $2, not $5, you can take it up with the store manager and try to make a deal -- but you can't steal extra bundles to compensate.
The airline is this case can sue for all lost revenue associated with all the OP's trips, plus attorneys' fees, which obviously could run into many thousands of dollars. And don't think they wouldn't do it.
Jul 23, 2015, 7:03 am
#1013
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,371
I have only read thru post 278 or so, but I must give kudos to NSX for bringing game theory into the discussion. It is by far the better [if not best] modeling technique for understanding airline pricing. Folks, this is important to understand! And it is hard to understand, I certainly do not grasp it very well. ...
of course, virtually everyone who asks one or more of the "is this legal?" or "will the airline come after me?" or "how can I do this?" questions believes they're in the "one-time, never to be repeated event" camp (or, perhaps more realistically, the "occasionally, but not making a habit of it with my preferred airline" camp); of course, the airlines have to operate in the "permanent policy" camp ... this of course means there will always be a conflict between these camps
I've cited what I call "Newton's Law of the Online Forum" in about a dozen other FT threads, but this is certainly an appropriate location to do so again:
"For every so-called expert opinion, there is at least one equal and opposite so-called expert opinion"
Jul 23, 2015, 9:47 am
#1014
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,622
I missed that post in skimming the first 25 pages of this 4-1/2-year-old thread; thanks for quoting it
of course, virtually everyone who asks one or more of the "is this legal?" or "will the airline come after me?" or "how can I do this?" questions believes they're in the "one-time, never to be repeated event" camp
of course, virtually everyone who asks one or more of the "is this legal?" or "will the airline come after me?" or "how can I do this?" questions believes they're in the "one-time, never to be repeated event" camp
Other than unwarranted arrogance, the error in this belief in people's ignorance is that everyone has a network of friends. If even one of your friends knows the trick, you are likely to learn it. The Internet has greatly expanded everyone's network of experts, to the point where, for example, you can find a video on practically any repair job you attempt.
I enjoy the unintentional irony when someone asks for information on FlyerTalk about how to abuse the system, while arguing that airlines should ignore the possibility that people would intentionally abuse the system.
Jul 23, 2015, 10:31 am
#1015
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, MM, NR; HH Diamond, Bonvoy LT Gold, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Diamond, others
Posts: 12,159
Almost. They believe that hardly anyone else is clever enough to figure it out how to game the system. If that were true, the airlines should treat the situation as a one-off occurrence rather than establish any policies to prevent abuse.
Other than unwarranted arrogance, the error in this belief in people's ignorance is that everyone has a network of friends. If even one of your friends knows the trick, you are likely to learn it. The Internet has greatly expanded everyone's network of experts, to the point where, for example, you can find a video on practically any repair job you attempt.
I enjoy the unintentional irony when someone asks for information on FlyerTalk about how to abuse the system, while arguing that airlines should ignore the possibility that people would intentionally abuse the system.
Other than unwarranted arrogance, the error in this belief in people's ignorance is that everyone has a network of friends. If even one of your friends knows the trick, you are likely to learn it. The Internet has greatly expanded everyone's network of experts, to the point where, for example, you can find a video on practically any repair job you attempt.
I enjoy the unintentional irony when someone asks for information on FlyerTalk about how to abuse the system, while arguing that airlines should ignore the possibility that people would intentionally abuse the system.
Jul 24, 2015, 8:52 am
#1017
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,394
Good luck. Theft of services would require the airline to prove that someone else would have actually paid $495 for that actual seat before they changed the price again. It's almost impossible to make that argument. Same goes for Safeway... Who says that the value is $55? Safeway? Easy for them to say. They bought those for fifty cents.
What? That is the worst interpretation of what theft of services is ever.
The airline published a price and if you intentionally violate the contract of carriage that's theft.
Safeway listed a price and you chose to not pay that price but still take the goods. That's the definition of theft.
They don't have to prove that someone else was going to pay their published asking price. By that logic I could go to a restaurant right before closing time and walk out with all the food they were going to have to toss and say no one else was going to buy it so it's mine now.
I can't go steal $1,000 worth of stuff from Target and then when I'm arrested tell the judge that this should only be a misdemeanor because Target only paid $200 for the goods I stole.
Your interpretation says that it's basically impossible for anyone to make money ever. You can steal something and say it didn't cost that much to produce so I'm not in trouble. Good luck with that.
Jul 24, 2015, 9:36 am
#1018
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, MM, NR; HH Diamond, Bonvoy LT Gold, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Diamond, others
Posts: 12,159
No, it's a contract violation. If you show up drunk, but don't appear that way and the airline lets you fly, you're violating the contract but there's no theft.
Jul 24, 2015, 10:07 am
#1019
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,394
Jul 24, 2015, 1:28 pm
#1020
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: VS Gold, HHonors Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 73
A moral or legal definition of "theft", especially those claiming that you've "stolen" $400 from the airline, relies on the completely incorrect assumption that you would've paid $495 for the A-B flight if you hadn't been able to get the A-B(-C) flight for $95, and that's obviously not true.
It's precisely the same as these ridiculous statements from the movie industry that try to put a monetary value on how much is "lost" to movie piracy each year - these figures rely on the (again) incorrect assumption that you would've paid full price for the movie if you hadn't been able to watch it for free, and in most cases it's just not true.
