Originally Posted by
ethan
Yes, but don't forget the backpackers (no idea what percentage they contribute though)!
If the reasoning is to phase out paper tickets then there's nothing to stop the e-ticktes being initially issued with 16 sectors and then add the remaining sectors once a few have been flown, especially relevant given that airport changes within cities count as a coupon for the e-ticket 'issuance' limit (but not necessarily towards the overall 20 e-ticket limit - from comments I've read on FT, the jury seems to be out but on this one but in my experience it's fine). Plus, it would be additional income for the airlines when the e-ticket is reissued!
My understanding is that the majority of xONEx tickets sold are LONExs.
Originally Posted by
sdorling
Why are e-tickets capped at 16 segments?
I'm assuming this is some form of restriction within the software so why cant the developers revise the software to allow for an update to be downloaded allowing 20 segments?
I know it won't be as simple as that - as I would like to think it would have already been done if this was the case!
Anyone able to provide an idiots insight?
My understanding is also that the 16 segment limitation is native to Sabre-based systems (AA); and of course in Oneworld, where different members use Sabre or Amadeus, it's the weakest link that controls. The GDSs are probably the biggest case of hideously outmoded mid-20th century software still in use. The systems have grown so "comprehensive" and invasive of all elements of global travel booking that tweaking one element runs the risk of the whole edifice coming apart. Even when, e.g., Sabre tries to move to more of a GUI system for travel agents ("My Sabre" for instance) the result is clunky beyond words. It needs a whole rebuild, but for the time being the GDSs are so profitable, each with its own priesthood and vestal virgins, and so competitive, and the airlines (and hotels and cruiselines) so dependent on them, that it would require a major capital risk to come up with a new system, not to mention a long period for breaking-in. The result is no motivation. I've always thought this could be ripe fruit for some cash-flush big Redmond-based software firm to exploit, but perhaps not.
In any event I suspect this is a happy confluence of technology- and profit-driven circumstance, and we should just get over it. Remember, these are the people that decided to save a million dollars a year by removing pillows from coach. However my view is that even at 16 segments xONExs will offer reduced but still good value; it will just make route planning that much more entertaining.