Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Design the new process to solve IVDB (a constructive, positive thread)

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Design the new process to solve IVDB (a constructive, positive thread)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 14, 2017, 8:10 pm
  #151  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,884
Originally Posted by uastarflyer
Dumb move DL. Now nobody will take $400.
This. Who is gonna VDB for an X-hundered amount when they know they are willing to go to $9000+.

Or maybe supervisors don't show up to authorize. And now DLs IDB rate goes up instead.
emcampbe is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2017, 8:36 pm
  #152  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
Originally Posted by emcampbe
This. Who is gonna VDB for an X-hundered amount when they know they are willing to go to $9000+.

Or maybe supervisors don't show up to authorize. And now DLs IDB rate goes up instead.
Many people will take $200 to $2000. DL asks when you check in how much you would take.

UA should have made a similar announcement before DL beat them to the punch. Again, it will be UA following DL's lead.

This could have been major damage control for UA when they need it. Instead, UA management in "the windy city" blew a great PR opportunity.

DL had the lowest IDB rates of any other major carrier, because they pay more. I posted this up-thread.

An Associated Press analysis of government data shows that in 2015 and 2016, Delta paid an average of $1,118 in compensation for every passenger that it denied a seat. Southwest Airlines paid $758, United $565, and American Airlines $554.
kettle1 is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2017, 8:57 pm
  #153  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, AA, DL
Posts: 7,418
Originally Posted by kettle1
An Associated Press analysis of government data shows that in 2015 and 2016, Delta paid an average of $1,118 in compensation for every passenger that it denied a seat. Southwest Airlines paid $758, United $565, and American Airlines $554.
Interpretation 1: United is cheap
Interpretation 2: Delta overbooks to a greater degree, and has to pay more as a result.
drewguy is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2017, 8:59 pm
  #154  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
Originally Posted by kettle1
Many people will take $200 to $2000. DL asks when you check in how much you would take.

UA should have made a similar announcement before DL beat them to the punch. Again, it will be UA following DL's lead.

This could have been major damage control for UA when they need it. Instead, UA management in "the windy city" blew a great PR opportunity.

DL had the lowest IDB rates of any other major carrier, because they pay more. I posted this up-thread.
the accountant in me would prefer less cash outflows overall. WN has a high IDB ratio yet they do better.

of course you need to set a sweet spot for VDB to avoid getting Dao'd. But simply having more IDB isn't a bad thing.
uastarflyer is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2017, 9:04 pm
  #155  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
"Compensation" does not mean it was cash. Most of the time it is vouchers good for one year. Many of these vouchers are never used. A voucher cost the airline very little. Cash would be another story.
kettle1 is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2017, 9:14 pm
  #156  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA MileagePlus (Premier Gold); Hilton HHonors (Gold); Chase Ultimate Rewards; Amex Plat
Posts: 6,676
Originally Posted by emcampbe
This. Who is gonna VDB for an X-hundered amount when they know they are willing to go to $9000+.

Or maybe supervisors don't show up to authorize. And now DLs IDB rate goes up instead.
If you're waiting for it to go to $9000, I'm volunteering for $500. Capitalism is about greed and being greedy, I will take it for $500 because I'm afraid of someone else taking it at $600 before I can volunteer, in which case I get $0.
STS-134 is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2017, 10:20 pm
  #157  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: PDX
Programs: AS DL
Posts: 9,038
Originally Posted by Kevin AA
Except for those who will not ever fly UA again, people value free tickets at a higher rate than what it costs UA. If UA funny money isn't enough, then they should offer free unrestricted coach tickets anywhere UA flies. In theory it might cost UA $3,000 in the Y bucket but since those are rarely filled, in practice it costs them little. But if free tickets isn't enough, then offer cash. Or free tickets and cash. I refuse to buy into the myth that all 70 people will refuse two free F tickets anywhere in the world and $2,500 cash, and the idea of the passengers colluding to drive up the price of VDB is just laughable.
^

And also making it expire in 2 years, not one year. I rarely fly UA. I wouldn't want a voucher good for a year. I will have to be dragged off and also get a broken nose and get some teeth knocked out. I would look like this before and this afterwards (no teeth).

Originally Posted by GrayAnderson
While the app is an interesting idea, .
I rarely add apps. I don't trust them. Back in the Palm Pilot days, I had a bunch of apps, like the Continental flight schedule but no more.

Originally Posted by pinniped
Aw, just an extra 25 bucks to guarantee you won't get roughed up by some rentacops at the GA's direction?? That's a great value!! @:-)
No, that is a sneaky ticket price increase. How about if you are IDB, you can have them go down the line and add your own money to the pot.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 14, 2017 at 11:19 pm Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member
Toshbaf is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2017, 10:56 pm
  #158  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: Amtrak Guest Rewards (SE), Virgin America Elevate, Hyatt Gold Passport (Platinum), VIA Preference
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by drewguy
Interpretation 1: United is cheap
Interpretation 2: Delta overbooks to a greater degree, and has to pay more as a result.
At least anecdotally, this is also because Delta starts the bidding higher. One thing to think about is the ratio of VDBs to IDBs:
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/12/these...assengers.html

DL's ratio is 32:1, competing with VX for the highest ratio. United's is 9:1. Frontier is the worst (at about 3:1).

I'm wondering...perhaps rather than going after individual cases there should be some sort of fine if an airline's VDB:IDB ratio (or even just if their IDB rate) is too high? The idea that, for example, Expressjet and Skywest oversell by that much (nearly one in every 500 pax who show up being denied their seat) is boggling to the mind.
GrayAnderson is offline  
Old Apr 15, 2017, 12:11 am
  #159  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,203
Originally Posted by uastarflyer
Dumb move DL. Now nobody will take $400. If someone even makes a small movement to the desk when the offer is $400 he will get Dao'd by the others holding out for more.

if you advertise free pots of gold people will want it.
"If Delta paid $9,950 to every person it bumped involuntarily last year, that would total $12 million. Delta earned nearly $4.4 billion."

This announcement alone is worth more than 12 million in PR to tragetted audience than general vague commercial airlines run on expensive TV ad slots.
desi is offline  
Old Apr 15, 2017, 12:53 am
  #160  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 6,546
add a option on united.com at final payment to reduce the fare by $5 if you consent in advance to be chosen for a required IVDB. passenger still gets the standard IVDB payout of course.

make the amount low enough so that only 5% or so of passengers would be interested in the savings. once enough volunteers secured for a flight, no longer offer the option for that light on new United.com bookings.
Colin is offline  
Old Apr 15, 2017, 4:19 am
  #161  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Platinum, AF, Chase, Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 1,089
Originally Posted by pinniped
We may be saying the same thing here: I suggest that zero-IDB can be a goal, and an airline can get incredibly close by using technology better. I realize they cannot fully get to zero.

I don't believe IDB will be banned outright as some suggest. I continue to remain in favor of overselling, whether to paying passengers or with confirmed crew movements as part of the passenger load. Even the best technology and intentions of an airline can't prevent a broken seat, a weight issue, or some other reason that an IDB *could* happen.

The only regulatory fix is a simple one: make the IDB cash compensation meaningful, require each airline to fully publish their entire IDB algorithm, and provide some simple consumer protections on the instruments offered as VDB. Don't need to overhaul the system or change airline revenue management models. Just a measured action to provide some basic consumer protections that don't exist today.
...though I would argue that as revenue management continues to improve, especially at UA with Orion, forecasts will get better at predicting overbookings, and therefore VDBs and IDBs will become far less common. Even looking at DOT data, all denied bookings industry-wide are at some of their lowest levels in a quarter of a century, even with the higher load factors taken into consideration.

The furor over this IDB situation is a highly emotional one to say the least, and this IDB story, like every other complaint anyone has about any airline they don't like, is mostly based on anecdotal experience. UA is not significantly worse at handling VDBs and IDBs than much of its competitors, and B6's commitment to never overbooking doesn't mean that they don't have some pretty crappy IDB rates as of late.

The issue here really has nothing to do with overbooking. The issue has to do with calling in LEOs who used excessive force on a passenger, and then UA's piss poor initial response to the entire thing. Had UA simply said "this video is horrifying and we're going to do an investigation to figure out what happened," even if nobody at UA actually believed that, the story probably would have died the next day.
char777 is offline  
Old Apr 15, 2017, 4:47 am
  #162  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: Amtrak Guest Rewards (SE), Virgin America Elevate, Hyatt Gold Passport (Platinum), VIA Preference
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by notquiteaff
Yeah, look at the IDB numbers of B6 last year. Not impressed.

http://crankyflier.com/2016/12/26/fo...-of-travelers/

has the stats for 2016.
I had wondered about that. B6's issues are related to downgauging flights by around 50 seats. As the article notes, an overbook of 3-5 seats might easily be handled. You might well be able to fish out ten seats with some aggressive offers. Trying to fish out more than 10-15% of a flight (probably 20-25% in the case of B6), however, is likely to be tricky even in the best of cases even with absurd voucher offers.

Originally Posted by Loose Cannon
I think that the idea of disallowing IDB altogether and no cap on VDB with the auction system has great merit. However I think that the old Rule 240 ought to be codified into law and be made legally binding on ALL airlines including Southwest and Spirit.
I think you might still retain IDB (requiring better VDB offers in line with the length of delay as well as adjusting compensation for the IDB accordingly), but I do agree with resurrecting some form of Rule 240. We're back to the "24 hour delay" problem with this and I don't think it's unreasonable to require the option of "other carrier" transportation.

I'll just throw out an example: Let's say that for some reason this was an ORD-EWR flight instead, but everything else remains the same (with an adjustment to the length of the flight, of course). At that point, "other carrier" transport on Amtrak would be faster than waiting out the delay (and you'd be more than able to make the Lake Shore Limited, too...that doesn't depart until 2130). The same general fact pattern would apply to a slew of other destinations (Cleveland, Detroit, St. Louis, Buffalo, Memphis, and New Orleans). If you're willing to just bite the bullet on Greyhound the list grows.

I think restricting restrictions on vouchers would be another thing to consider. Require that VDB vouchers be "same as cash" with the airline (I think I mentioned this elsewhere), including the ability to use more than one on a reservation and/or partially use them on a reservation. I'd also strip away the requirement that the person issued the voucher be on the reservation, though I would be willing to allow them to require that if they weren't on said reservation then they need to, at some point, be physically present and present ID to redeem for someone else or to transfer ownership (e.g. I'd need to head over to my local airport within some timeframe to confirm it). I do get the fraud concern there, but if the voucher were essentially an unrestricted negotiable instrument (aside from only being valid with the airline) then UA would probably have had takers at $800 since I think someone on here would happily have bought that unrestricted $800 voucher for $600.
GrayAnderson is offline  
Old Apr 15, 2017, 10:53 am
  #163  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Let me check my Logbook
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards; AAdvantage; Alaska Mileage Plan; Wyndham Rewards; Choice Hotels
Posts: 2,350
Perhaps I should clarify. No IDB whatsoever. once the person had his Boarding Pass scanned and is therefore considered "boarded" whether actually in his seat, on the plane or queuing in the jetway.

I do think that the current caps on IDB compensation should become floors instead with no cap. And those "floors" should be adjusted upward annually for inflation.
Loose Cannon is offline  
Old Apr 15, 2017, 11:09 am
  #164  
Original Member and FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Programs: DL PM/MM, AA ExPlat, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia, National ECE, Hertz PC
Posts: 16,579
Originally Posted by emcampbe
This. Who is gonna VDB for an X-hundered amount when they know they are willing to go to $9000+.
There are plenty of people who will bid less. Last time I was bumped I think I bid $200, in that case it was an early evening flight and I knew that if they asked I was only going to take it if they got me home the same night, so at most it was a 2 hour delay and the difference between getting home at 10 PM and midnight is pretty minimal. In fact in that situation I did get bumped and they put me on flights that were scheduled and in fact did get in a few minutes before my originally scheduled flights. If you're doing an auction you're going to get people to accept much less than $9,950 depending on how long they'll be delayed for.

Regardless, the other part of getting people to take VDB is reaccomodation and the airlines need to be more creative. In the case of Dr. Dao's incident UA should not have been offering $800 and accommodation on a flight the next day, instead they should have been offering $800 and a six hour van ride that got passengers home that night.
Beckles is offline  
Old Apr 15, 2017, 11:12 am
  #165  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA MileagePlus (Premier Gold); Hilton HHonors (Gold); Chase Ultimate Rewards; Amex Plat
Posts: 6,676
Originally Posted by Loose Cannon
Perhaps I should clarify. No IDB whatsoever. once the person had his Boarding Pass scanned and is therefore considered "boarded" whether actually in his seat, on the plane or queuing in the jetway.

I do think that the current caps on IDB compensation should become floors instead with no cap. And those "floors" should be adjusted upward annually for inflation.
There are already floors. The airline is free to offer goodwill money in excess of the required IDB amount by law (the floor). But the problem is that if the required IDB amount is less than what the airline needs to offer to get enough VDBs, then management beancounters will tell GAs to just IDB people because it's cheaper (neglecting any PR disasters that occur as a result of this, of course).
STS-134 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.