Dave Noble

Fares will be impacted by availability, but the lowest fares on each of US, AA and BA have exactly the same total price, the only difference is how it breaks down between fare and surcharge

dazza189

I agree that the policy has always existed, but I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the rest at this point. If you ever get around to telling me what you think metal neutrality actually is or should be IYO i'd be interested to hear it.

dazza189

This is true today as they rationalize fares across carrier, but surely was not always true in the past?

Dave Noble

I expect that total fares between the carriers will have been similar as they compete

The key thing is that for a normal booking, it doesn't matter if there is a large surcharge if the base fare is reduced by the same amount, the end result is the same

I think that surcharges should be abolshed and merged into the base fare since the rationale for having fuel surcharges is , imo, long gone, however the airlines are permitted to get away with it

Austinrunner

dazza189, you are the person going around saying that such and such policy is not "metal neutral", not me. I have just been trying to figure out what your understanding of that term is and where you are coming up with that definition.

Austinrunner

What does that mean?

ijgordon

Metal neutrality seems quite self-explanatory to me.
But here, LMTGFY.

It really doesn't take a leap of logic to understand that what's going on here is probably not metal neutral.

Dave Noble

If arguing that so called "metal-neutrality" provides a requirement for AA to rebook the passenger on the BA service and not charge the fees, I would be looking for something more authoritative than a google search results or just believing that AA should do it

I haven't seen anything presented to show that AA should do what the OP wants FOC

ijgordon

The argument was most certainly described earlier in the thread. If you're looking for a statute that explicitly addresses this situation, I'm afraid you're not going to find it. If everything was spelled out in black and white in contracts or laws, we wouldn't need courts or regulatory bodies, now, would we?

Let's put it this way - do you think AA and BA coordinating their schedules, so that AA drops its morning JFK-LHR service is anti-competitive (absent the ATI of course?). Should the AA and the joint venture be allowed to directly benefit from this anti-competitive behavior? Because that's what they just did.

Dave Noble

I haven't seen anything that shows tha there should be some form of entitlement to get rebooked onto the BA service

flyertalker54234

I do not follow your logic. Between LON and NYC there are 3 US carriers, AA,UA(CO as was to EWR) and DL. there are also 2 UK carriers. There are also a number of airlines flying via Europe. There are no anti competitive restrictions to prevent these carriers implementing a new morning service NYC to LON.
AA and BA have aa Joint Business Venture with exemptions from the US and UK licensing authorities to integrate fares and schedules.
Cutting out a service and handing to BA is not anti competitive, it restricts consumer choice but the choice remains to use other carriers. Businesses are entitled to cut flights if they are unprofitable or too use their planes in the most profitable routes and schedules.
Further trying to prove loss when dealing with Award tickets is problematic given the nature and commercial value do such tickets.
So whilst I can see no legal footing, I can see a good reason for consumers to switch to other airlines or alliances. BA work on the principle that most British people will fly with them no matter how badly they treat them
And they can play the Downton Abbey / Masterpiece Theater card in US.
The less people fly BA the more likely they will reform. They voyage relented on some European flights due to consumer pressure.
I would hope AA bring 142 back when they have removed F from the 772 as I do not find BA AA metal neutral and I think AA will find pushing people to BA will not be revenue neutral, particularly as their new J and F products on the 773 is so far ahead of BA on 773, 744 or 388.

skunker

AA and US newly posted fares do just that. There is a surcharge outlined in the fare and not broken down as an individual YQ/YR.

SAN-TYO filed yesterday

Dave Noble

That is just detailing how much the surcharge is. To get the complete fare , need to take the base fare plus add the $290 each way. If you were just to look at the base fare, then the fare would appear to be $580 cheaper than it is

That AA is listing the actual surcharge as part of the fare rules just highlights to me that there is no justification for having one

Random Flyer

This thread has many of the usual suspects leaping to defend AA and to attack the OPS for his temerity in not just complaining about AA consumer-hostile behaviour but daring actually to file a DOT complaint.

Well I'm a consumer like the OP, and I applaud the OP for his actions. I have no idea what his chances are but, for the sake of all consumers such as myself, I hope he ultimately wins his case. AA's position just doesn't pass my smell test.

But what bothers me here is this - Why are so many board members apparently on the other side, nit picking at the OP's case and failing to acknowledge the bigger picture? What are their interests exactly? Why was it necessary for example to make a sneering sarcastic response to the news that the OP had gone to the DOT? This I do not understand.

dazza189

There is nothing so called about it - AA and BA have used that term and described the benefits they believe consumers would receive as a result. If you do some homework on their anti-trust filings you can see for yourself. I think someone even posted a link earlier in the thread for you.

You and AustinRunner appear to be the only two people in the thread who can't seem to grasp that some people might have a different interpretation of what "metal neutral" might actually mean. (AustinRunner refuses to even state his understanding for some reason, instead preferring to endlessly nitpick grammar and phraseology.)

Regardless I have done exactly what you are asking for Dave. I have reached out to an authoritative source (the DOT) to seek their opinion on the matter. In that complaint I have referenced both AA's and BA's previous positions and officially recorded statements and explained why I don't think they are living up to how they previously defined them. Hopefully whatever they say you will take to be "more authoritative than a google search results or just believing that AA should do it"

By the way AA/BA also used the term "full reciprocity" but I didn't want to throw that into the mix lest AustinRunner asks me to define that for him too!