dchen2

This brings back memories of when flight changes were a mere $50 several short years ago.

aacharya

Untrue - at that point, one can get the VDB and ask for a refund of the original flight - and not have to fly.

aacharya

Imagine that. But I think that would be just crazy. And the incentive for the OP who is on the flight to "fudge some facts" too high in many cases.

emilio911

Even if you have no status, changes within 24 hours are $75 max. You can chose one of the crazy priced flight (e.g. $1728).

STS-134

If UA is hell bent on screwing the OP with a $200 change fee on a ticket that costs less than $200, then the least the OP could do is screw UA by attempting to deprive them of the ability to resell that seat.

What I'd do is call UA, and tell them that I will be willing to cancel the ticket, if they reduce or waive the change fee. If not, then screw them. Just as UA would tell any of us that our decisions (not being able to make a flight) have consequences ($200 change fees), so too do UA's decisions (implementing $200 change fees -> getting screwed when customers don't cancel their seats).

rankourabu

lol... and I care about United because?

I have a $140 ticket for January, I had a 30 minute schedule change, that created a 50 minute connection in EWR. UA would not cancel it, I didnt even want a refund, I wanted to reroute the ticket.

I say screw them, I will keep the ticket active, who knows, maybe there will be a snow waiver or something.

Kacee

What a lovely attitude. Thanks for sharing.

As mentioned above, I just walked away from a sub-$200 ticket. I don't feel cheated at all. I knew the rules going in. I could have bought a Y/B fare (or a ticket on WN) for substantially more money if I'd wanted to be sure it was refundable.

Often1

1. OP isn't getting sc**wed by UA. He purchased a dirt cheap ticket which was restricted. We don't have his flight details, but I am certain that there are higher priced tickets which do have flexibility. OP made a choice made by many and on this occasion his gamble didn't pay off. It's not as though refundability conditions are somehow hidden.

2. OTOH, the notion that OP, by not cancelling, is somehow getting back at UA shows a lack of understanding of revenue & inventory management. UA overbooks flights based on sophisticated software which does a good job of predicting no shows. Not on one particular flight, but on a global basis. Bluntly, if OP doesn't show, the seat has either already been filled or will be filled with a SB. And, chances are, it's a pax paying a whole lot more than OP did, so UA may actually be quite pleased for OP to have paid $100 and never showed up. Pure profit. Juvenile to get wound up the other way.

STS-134

Well, what happens if the OP cancels, and UA releases an extra seat? Maybe someone books that seat, and one SB has to wait until the flight he actually booked (and UA gets not only the OP's revenue, but someone else's revenue on the same seat). But if the OP doesn't cancel, maybe the person who would have booked the seat instead takes a competitor airline because he sees that no seats are available on UA and needs to be somewhere at a particular time. Would UA ever be able to figure this out? Probably not. Maybe UA isn't hurt by the OP not cancelling, but maybe they are. But by cancelling the ticket, that can only help UA, or be revenue neutral. It can't hurt. And in this case, the OP should just call and ask for a change fee waiver, and if he/she doesn't get it, then at least try to screw UA out of revenue if at all possible.

A better idea? Have the other person actually show up for the flight, with no intention of taking it, and volunteer his/her seat if there's a call for volunteers to give up seats. You know, because UA overbooks. This would at least deprive UA of $300 of future revenue.

Often1

No, it wouldn't. UA won't VDB to acommodate a SB (unless it's some kind of a huge, huge mess & a real HVC). And, there's no guarantee that it's OP's VDB which they accept if he does schlep to an airport and hang around a gate.

Maybe the easier and cleaner version are the new DL E fares and those used by many European carriers, where the tickets are truly non-changeable. You fly exactly as booked or they have $0 value. No fees or penalties, but no credits or refunds.

elCheapoDeluxe

I have left these tickets alone when booking new tickets because about 25% of the time a flight that I thought I wasn't going to be able to take because a job was running quickly and I wanted to get home earlier than the 24hr change rule would apply - I did in fact end up taking!

iahphx

Well, in this case my family member DID get his money back because the first flight was so late that we would have missed the connection. I re-routed (bad for me!), and he asked for a refund (which was received).

Of course, he benefited from the fact that I was still taking the flight and could call and say "hey, call UA for a refund, there's a misconnect." In most cases, the pax travelling by themselves with have to be paying attention to the flight status.

Still, I think it's worth doing if you're not going to get any money back. The odds are at least 5% that it will work, at least on a connecting flight. I wonder if the airlines would be wise to give a $50 credit per ticket for cancelling in advance. It seems like it could be a win-win for pax and airline because, right now, it's better not to cancel if there's no residual value.

STS-134

Yes, but if UA actually confirmed too many people, then the OP would get a VDB voucher. That's the definition of "overbooking" isn't it?

cblaisd

Indeed.

I continue to maintain that treating others like you wish to be treated is simply the right and classy thing to do.

Well, I care about United because, for better and occasionally worse, it is the airline I've chosen to fly almost all of my flights on. I want them to do well. Even more importantly, on a number of occasions a UA staffer has gone out of his or her way to be helpful, to go above and beyond what was required, to help out my family when we have been in binds. That sort of treatment ought to deserve reciprocation from me.

And this situation is nothing like the op's, and your hoping for a waiver is playing by UA's rules. If there comes a point where you KNOW you won't use the ticket, I hope you'll cancel it. It's the courteous thing to do.

STS-134

Well, I would want my change fees waived and 100% of the funds held for future use, if UA can resell the ticket. I would also want the change fee to closely match the actual cost to UA of having to change the flights. They can even mark it up 100% from that actual cost and it still probably wouldn't even come close to $100, much less $200. If UA didn't fulfill what I want them to do, why should I do what UA wants?

Classy? How about reducing the change fees to something REASONABLE, and not sticking it to your customers just because you can. And if you do do this, don't be surprised when your customers stick it to you.

If you want UA to do well, and you believe no shows on < $200 tickets are hurting UA, may I suggest calling and/or writing to them, and encouraging them to adopt more reasonable change fees for tickets cheaper than $200? Something like 50% of the value of the ticket, up to a max of $200, would provide actual motivation for people to actually cancel unused tickets. UA's current behavior shows a misunderstanding about how game theory works.

And actually, it would be far more sensible to possibly have change fees range from say, $5, 6 months before departure, to $200 the day before (with a max of 50% of the ticket's value). Why? Because this provides motivation for people who know they're not going to be able to use a ticket to cancel it EARLY, instead of hoping for IRROPS or WX.