Superguy

And that's why the ticket costs a lot more than a non-refundable ticket. At least with interest and stuff, the airline has something more to hold on to for the risk of cancellation than they do if they offer it as a lower priced non-refundable ticket. Additionally, the higher refundable fare is a deterrent to people abusing the system.

People aren't typically going to buy a refundable ticket that far out anyway. The whole point of buying that far in advance is you're sure that you're going to go, so you get the price advantage of a cheaper ticket. Refundable ticket prices don't change much and offer no advantage to buying them ahead of time vs right before travel.

Add to that fact that people buy tickets in short time frames (like T-48 or less), and the airline does ok. There are always people whose travel plans aren't firm until right before it's time to go and need to buy the ticket then. I've had several trips where I wasn't sure I was going until less than T-48. I know I'm not unique.

djibouti

My only point is that calling an airline ticket "refundable" when it carries a fee is misleading. All of the tired discussions about whether a non-refundable ticket as a right to exist are off topic. "Partially refundable" wouldn't be misleading... to have to read the fine print to see that it's refundable minus a $300 fee is bogus. Like when Mileage Plan Shopping advertises 6x miles on appliances at Sears then in the fine print excludes Kenmore. And now I've introduced a whole other rant

RTW1

These charges are easily seen when booking... people simply choose to ignore it when they see the cheaper fare, but then complain when they actually need to cancel.

djibouti

"Easily" seen on the very last page after having gone through the whole "refundable" booking.

RTW1

The first booking page already mentions that changes/cancellations are possible but that fees might be applied to do so depending on fare class. But you see what you want to see I guess.

When booking airfare it's rather simple, don't assume but make sure what you are booking.

TrojanHorse

Wouldn't this inventory spoilage argument be valid if they don't have any other seats to sell? if they have other economy (I presume this was Y) seats for sale? Since seats are not allocated 4A is Full Y, 4B is B, 4C is M etc.. it shouldn't be a valid argument. Now if all seats are sold, you may have a valid argument.

for whomever said the OP should not have bought a ticket with a $300 refund fee, well he didn't, he caught it before he purchased; hence this post on the deception

pinniped

But it was. Airlines have long used overbooking algorithms, and these days those algorithms are quite good. Sadly, I think that better data analytics tools have made them *too* good: flights are always full, yet they seem to land closer to the "right" count, leading to much lower VDB offers than years ago. (If they're over by 1 or 2, a couple $250 vouchers gets the job done. When they were over by 20 pax on a 727, it took $500-750 per person to get it done.)

They expect some people to cancel refundable tickets: that's why they market them that way. The airline refunds your original capital only. They got your money for a few weeks or a few months. You got the ability to cancel the trip.

I can see where passengers would be confused by a "refund fee" as we tend to think of refundable tickets are Y/B fares that are totally refundable, no questions asked. But if there are markets where this is common and made extremely clear to passengers (beyond only in fine print that is hard to find), so be it.

s0ssos

Depends which society you prefer to live in. The 2 extremes being Europe with high levels of consumer protection (when words are taken at face value) or China (buyer beware, they never actually told you the stuff inside the bun is actually food, so they never actually lied. And you never asked about melamine so it is your fault)

RTW1

I live in Europe, and only fools take words at face value when entering a contract..even here .

That doesn't mean that the information shouldn't been there. But when you see something advertised as a flexible fare with a remark that using that flexibility might incur fees, it's a bit naive to think there will be no fees.

s0ssos

Haha, northern Europe then?
I like to think of civilized places as locations where you can walk across the street without looking. Obviously I look but I want the ability to not look and not get run over (in Asia you will get hit, in New Zealand as well, in major American cities probably also, I heard in Europe no)

satman40

In business operating cost are always passed on,

Go ahead and BS yourself, in time you will find the lunch is not free,

Guess that is why mist people fail to succeed.

scottsam66

In my estimation airlines charge $300 for the same reason dogs lick themselves...
Because they can.

pinniped

True. There are never any pedestrian injuries in major European cities. Walk wherever you like without looking.

The things the drivers yell at you are usually "Hello, have a nice day!" in their own language.

CDKing

Airlines are getting more creative in getting people to pay more for additional flexibility. Instead of all or none (refundable, non-refundable) they are offering a middle ground at a middle price point. Its more expensive than non-refundable and cheaper than fully refundable.

It pretty common in some of the foreign flag carriers which may have even more tiers. No changes, changes with penalty, refund with penalty and refund no penalty.

Similar is going on over on the AA side with their Choice and choice plus packages waiving change fee for a slightly more affordable upcharge. You will see more as IATA resolution 787 comes online

Superguy

What's that?