FlyerTalk Forums
Page 3 of 3
1
2
3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Cathay Pacific | Cathay (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cathay-pacific-cathay-487/)
-   -   baggage allowance (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cathay-pacific-cathay/1291691-baggage-allowance.html)

garykung Feb 1, 2012 1:06 pm
Originally Posted by hadsst (Post 17931350)
Wow, I can't believe you're just making up the rules.

On the second case, the answer is right but the reasons are wrong (let's forget for the moment whether the MSC rules were in force at that time). Here CX is the MSC because it is the operator for the flight across 2 IATA 'sub-areas' (SE Asia - Japan/Korea) within the same 'Tariff Area' (Area 3) - it has nothing to do with distance!

http://www.cathaypacific.com/cpa/en_...X_COUNTRY=INTL

And for the first case, 'common sense' is not even a proper answer when people ask about the rule, when the rule is clearly stated on CX website.
Oh...sorry about that.

ernestnywang Feb 2, 2012 10:56 pm
Originally Posted by garykung (Post 17905235)
In common sense - will KA piss off a CX F customer?
In fact, it used to be the case that if you have a F (or J) segment, you can enjoy the higher limit all the way (whether it needs to be in one TKT I'm not sure). CX changed this a while ago so that now you can enjoy the higher limit only if you bought the higher fare but need to sit in the lower cabin for some reason. Whether KA will charge the extra baggage fee I do not know, but certainly CX / KA should not change the rule if they really had no intention to piss off F PAX in the first place.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:53 am.
Page 3 of 3
1
2
3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.