Originally Posted by
bmwe92fan
Why do so many here insist on debating things as if UA had no choice - UA took the original 65 people they screwed and decided to screw 65 more instead of putting them on other airlines to get home - all so they could keep the revenue....
Golly, unusually find your posts balanced and fair, a good mix of critical and positive. But your view on this thread is puzzling. There's so much we don't know here, it's hard to take so hard and firm a stance.
I think that if UA had left the 65 stranded in SAN, the hard-liners would be complaining that UA "wasn't as creative as" [name another Atlanta-based airline] at "recovering from IRROPS by just making a stop in CLE on way to IAD."
I'd not be thrilled that UA made me stop in CLE, but I'd feel like it was a nice thing that 65 of my fellow Buckeyes got home and all I had to do was put my seat up for landing one more time.
First world problems, really.