![]() |
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 25667731)
They removed the biggest stakeholders from the debate, frequent business travelers, via ExtortionCheck, which also kept the airlines happy. Mission accomplished.
|
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 25668166)
What will those biggest stakeholders have to say if, and it's a huge if, TSA gets those "millions more" ExtortionCheck enrollees? Having 85%+ of travelers going through Pre is going to slow those lines down and you can be certain that a good number of those people will be selected for extra screening. What will the the POSH complain about next?
Now someone wake me up, I must be having a dream. |
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 25667731)
They removed the biggest stakeholders from the debate, frequent business travelers, via ExtortionCheck, which also kept the airlines happy. Mission accomplished.
If, for example, you are a FF with Pre who regularly flies from PHX, you may not be getting much value for your money right now. IIRC, CLEAR is limited but locations and availability are clearly defined at signup - unlike Pre. If there aren't enough signups for Pre, will TSA continue the program? If they start introducing too much additional randomness, that won't deter business fliers from re-enrolling but it also won't spur ordinary leisure travelers to run out and sign up for a 'maybe' faster or less invasive experience. |
Originally Posted by chollie
(Post 25668210)
Some of them - the ones lucky enough to fly through an airport where Pre is available during the hours they are flying and at checkpoints granting access to the airline they are flying.
If, for example, you are a FF with Pre who regularly flies from PHX, you may not be getting much value for your money right now. IIRC, CLEAR is limited but locations and availability are clearly defined at signup - unlike Pre. If there aren't enough signups for Pre, will TSA continue the program? If they start introducing too much additional randomness, that won't deter business fliers from re-enrolling but it also won't spur ordinary leisure travelers to run out and sign up for a 'maybe' faster or less invasive experience. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 25666737)
Revenue generation should not even be in TSA's vocabulary. Effective and efficient security screening should be the focus of TSA. That does not mean throwing megabucks at the issue.
I'm afraid if the suspected cause of the Russian airliner downing is confirmed that TSA will invent some new draconion procedure to further abuse travelers. If from the passenger side, TSA could say "that could never happen here because of all our layers, blah, blah, blah"or, and most likely, passengers here will pay dearly. |
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 25668920)
Will be interesting to learn if it came from the passenger side or employee side of the airport, if it was a bomb.
If from the passenger side, TSA could say "that could never happen here because of all our layers, blah, blah, blah"or, and most likely, passengers here will pay dearly. Except that at airports across the country "Security Layers are Simply Missing at TSA Checkpoints"! |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:46 am. |
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.