canadiancow

Right now, the issue is that IDB can have such dire consequences on a very small number of people.

Yes, airfares might go up a couple dollars, "hurting" everyone. But is that any different than something like health insurance? Everyone pays a bit more tax, and as a result, no one gets stuck with a $250k medical bill.

@philelite posted an IDB example the other day in another thread. He was in J for SFO-YVR, and it was over by 1. They wanted a volunteer to take an AC flight 6 hours later for $650. He asked if he could get the UA flight 2 hours later (which only had Y left). They said sure, but offered much less than $650, since the delay would be less. So he boarded, and they IDBd someone for $650.

Outlaw IDB, and in situations like that, AC doesn't even lose money. They just end up with a really happy Super Elite who walks away with a heavy pocket, and a grateful VBIT who gets the seat they wanted/needed.

yyznomad

Your response sounds so perfect, I wonder why it was never implemented awhile ago.

RCyyz

I still see this as problematic. No one buys a ticket to get from here to there "eventually". It is completely unreasonable to show up to the airport 3h in advance of scheduled departure but only expect to depart "sometime". Yet with overselling and IDB, this is essentially what's happening.

As the cow pointed out, you can't write a contract to sell a good at a specified time then end up selling a somewhat similar good at some relatively random future date.

P.S. To emphasize, we're talking overselling & IDB here. wx, mx etc are different matters.

tracon

Just like the DL VDB question of a few years ago.
Your flight may be oversold, which of the three amounts would you be willing to accept if we need volunteers.
$100, $200, $400.


A current thread about a Marriott Platinum being walked.

Rates for a Lindbald Galapagos Cruise.

seadog83

How much would it really cost? Take the worst case for bumping which is United at 10/100k.

https://qz.com/956005/united-ual-pas...or-us-airline/

Assume there's somehow mass collusion, and they use Delta's max $10k compensation. This literally works out to $1 per pax, and likely a lot less as you'll have lower rates of bumping, and payouts.

If anyone's read Nassim Taleb's great book "Anti fragile" it talks a lot about asymmetric risk and black swans. This is a perfect case of that. If their overbooking/bumping system works perfectly, they'll literally save pennies per seat. Meanwhile, there's the looming threat of a black swan over your head, which although unlikely, can easily cause 6 or 7 figures worth of brand damage. The "autistic beancounters" love to focus on the pennies from the former since it's easily quantified, and forget about the latter since the likelihoods are so remote that it can't be given a number and accounted for in their model.

RCyyz

Wow - that's really interesting for multiple reasons. Firstly because UA IDBs almost 11 pax per 100,000 that fly (vs 4.7 with DL) and secondly because even at $10K per bump it doesn't cost UA much at all.

Jagboi

Or far more. On that massive thread on the UA forum on small travel agent said he has had clients direct well into 6 figures of travel away from UA that they would have otherwise had since the dragging incident. I doubt there is a way for UA to account for business they never saw, but could have had.

yyznomad

Thanks for that link.

Many here are hypothetically talking about IDB compensation costing little per passenger overall, but I am curious to know the overall impact when factoring all the flights that go empty, when and if IDB is abolished (implying that Overbooking will not exist, if it gets that far - but that's the main crux of my question)

canadiancow

They can keep overbooking without having IDB. They just need to do what DL is doing and allow agents to offer more than $800.

yyznomad

Right. So I guess thisnnow assumes that 100% of the time on all flights that are overbooked and require VDB, that there will always be enough takers. Always, without fail.

eigenvector

The level of overbooking will naturally be adjusted to compensate for the cost of VDB. If they are spending more on VDB than they make from overbooking, they will just reduce the amount of overbooking.

With IDB, it is "heads we win, tails you lose". The airline can overbook as much as it wants with no corresponding escalation in compensation. It only pays the minimum mandated by the CTA.

yyznomad

Is this not status quo?

Stranger

Which is why schedule is not part of the contract.

eigenvector

No, because the airline always holds the trump card of IDB @ $800. It has no incentive to offer more than that for VDB if they have the right to kick someone off without bidding an amount that is mutually agreeable.
Which is why I can show up a bit late to the airport and hop on the next flight without penalty if I want. Wait...

yyznomad

I'm running through all the rationale in my head and it leads to the same result.

Agreed that the difference right now is the low max limit of regulated IDB comp. however, this assumes everyone will take VDB comp at a higher rate, and that overbooking will correct itself... however, it doesn't guarantee no IDB. The overbooking algorithm will never be perfect for every flight all the time, until the end of time.