Originally Posted by
TWA Fan 1
Perhaps it would be easier to understand like this:
Again, a simple example, just for argument's sake, to explain the principle.
1 award seat available.
1 passenger using a one-way award at 12,500 miles
1 passenger using a roundtrip award at 25,000 miles
Total miles in this universe: 37,500.
If the roundtrip redeemer gets the seat, CAL has given up 25,000 of the 37,500 miles available.
But if the one-way redeemer gets there first, CAL only gives up 12,500 miles and the roundtrip redeemer cannot redeen his 25,000, meaning that an asymmetry has been established and CAL has only given up 12,500 miles.
No, because you cannot reasonably assume that the return segment is also not used for reward travel. In the universe there are two flights in question, each worth - in you most recent "example" - 12,500 miles. Either one person buys both of them at 25K total or two people buy them for 12,500 each. Same total miles used.
By providing one-way rewards - something that YOU have claimed offer more flexibility and value for the customer - the value of the round trip would necessarily go to zero. There is no requirement for it so we cannot assume that everyone is booking them. In fact we'd have to assume that everyone is booking one-way rewards though some people will book one and some will book two. The total number of seats doesn't change and the total number of bookings doesn't change. Just who uses them does. From a macro perspective the who is irrelevant.
But I appreciate you using small words and treating me like an idiot.
Originally Posted by
controller1
?????
Sure. It was answered in post two, long before the tirade against CO management and their efforts to abuse and manipulate their customers came out of the shadows.
