<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by keithguy:
Furthermore, how do you know that the MIA-ORD flight gone out/would have gone out with empty seats? An AA flight could have cancelled and passengers could have been rebooked on to that UA flight.
</font>
While this could be very possible, are you suggesting that UA should be looking out for AA's passengers instead of their own? I don't quite understand this logic.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
What if the UA MIA-ORD flight got cancelled, forcing UA to reprotect on later flights (possibly on other carriers) and the PBI-ORD left with open seats? In hindsight, it wouldn't have made sense for UA to allow you to change to MIA-ORD without penalty.
</font>
There's always a risk any flight will get cancelled. At the time when we were asking for the change, it was pretty clear that PBI-ORD was going to go out full and MIA-ORD was still half-empty.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
It certainly would have been more convenient from the start if you were allowed to get a confirmed change for MIA-ORD, but not being allowed to do so does not mean UA lacks common sense in this department. UA took a risk in overbooking the PBI flight to a certain level and paid for it when the flight became oversold.</font>
I have to agree to disagree. What is the actual cost for UA to put us on basically the same route to ORD? It's still their staff, their aircraft, their fuel, their crews. Furthermore, this would have been a very nice "treat" since it would have eliminated the need to drive some 75 miles to PBI. It not only would have avoided them having to rebook us on US and giving us $200, but it would have satisfied customers.