So you don't use a travel agent, thus travel agents are irrelevant? The overwhelming majority of premium tickets (First/Business, full-fare Economy) are purchased through travel agencies. And agencies do still sell a great number of tickets - airline website penetration is only about 20% or so (if that), and significantly less for business travel. OTAs, like Expedia and Orbitz have grown. But brick-and-mortar agencies still account for a fairly high percentage of tickets sold.

All of the examples I cited took place within the past five years. I saw it with my own eyes. You can choose to believe me or not, that's up to you.

I think if you read what I've written, I've said exactly that. Yet ticketing fraud still exists - even if new fare structures make it less prevalent. Now if you think travel agencies like BCD, Carlson, AmEx and so on aren't powerful, that's your right. But you're dead wrong. As for the small mom-and-pop shops, yes they're less powerful. And yes, airlines can debit memo them or pull plates. Doesn't change the fact that ticketing fraud is fraud. So your sarcasm about "Earth to ExAAeronDL" notwithstanding, I'm fairly confident that my knowledge about the industry is pretty solid. If you'd like to put that to the test against yours, have at it.

Finally, someone with some sense. That's exactly right. I'm adding my point of view so that the ticket fraudsters' point of view has a counterbalance.

Hardly a typo! :D

Is a location in a studio apartment, 10 feet away from my bed, in my home? Are you asserting it isn't? Or are you attempting to claim that telling the truth is fraud?

So I travel to NYC on Wednesday, returning the following Wednesday. Are you claiming that I'm violating a contract if I visit my parents (outside NYC) on Saturday?

In this reality, Delta doesn't say anything like that. Picking a random ticket (MSP-LGA a month out for a 1 week stay), the rules say I don't see anything there about nailing my feet to the ground at the far end.

If Delta's own web site sells me a ticket, or set of tickets (with me not misrepresenting anything; I'm logged in to my account at all times, and I specify that all tickets are for me to fly with my butt in their seat), how can I be committing fraud against them? Am I required to understand their rules differently from (and, according to you, better than) they do?

Huh? So I put AAA and BBB backwards in haste. How is that more than a typo? You knew what I was referring to. I'll assume you're being completely tongue-in-cheek. The alternative would be less flattering :)

It all depends on how the utility defines "residential" and "commercial" use. The point is that if you had a standalone business on a standalone property and a phone line used for primarily business use, and you claimed the "residential" rate, it would be fraud, yes.

Sadly Seth, you've bought into the absurd strawman arguments that the fraudsters have made. Nobody is trying to "nail your feet to the ground at the far end." This is what Delta says about back-to-back ticketing:

Back-to-back ticketing—combining multiple overlapping round-trip tickets to circumvent Saturday or other overnight stay requirements.

Nothing in there restricts what you do while at your destination. It doesn't restrict you from going home, or taking a side trip. What it does say is that if your ticketed itinerary is made with the intent to circumvent the fare rules for your true itinerary, you have engaged in ticketing fraud. Thus if you flew MSP-LGA, then took the bus up to Albany to visit family, then took the bus back to NY and flew home LGA-MSP, there's no issue. Nor is there an issue if you fly MSP-LGA, take the train down to DC, and fly home DCA-MSP. So in your example, you weren't trying to circumvent fare rules. You took a side trip in the middle of your itinerary.

The issue is when you intend to take two mid-week trips from MSP to LGA, but instead book two Saturday-night stay tickets, one from MSP to LGA, and the other from LGA to MSP. And unlike a nested itinerary, you don't fly the second itinerary in full before returning on the first itinerary. Rather, you split them and fly half of each ticket on each trip. The entire purpose of a back-to-back ticket is to evade the fare rule and get a lower fare than Delta would sell you if you told them your true itinerary and flew the coupons in a logical order. You never had true travel plans originating at LGA. As their website states:

Our fares apply only to the specific itineraries for which they are quoted and the restrictions that apply to our discounted fares are an essential part of our contract with you. These restrictions make it possible for us to offer these discounted fares.

Failure to comply with applicable fare restrictions, circumventing those restrictions, or misrepresenting your intended itinerary are all violations of our Contract of Carriage.

I really don't see how it is that difficult to understand the difference. Other than the fact that people bend over backward to justify schemes that dilute an airline's right to charge what it wants for its product.

And yet most people would get away with it no problem. If Delta really cared, they should be able to detect this when you are making the second 'immoral' booking. Or they could just not give discounts for Saturday night stays.

Also, you can just buy the two different tickets on two different airlines - Delta has even less to gain from this. Or just don't use your FF number on one of the flights. Whatever. People do get away with this, as long as you don't go tell Delta about it.

Re-read what he's saying. He is not saying that airlines frequently go after people for this or that people don't get away with it all the time. What he is saying is that just because you can get away with something doesn't mean it isn't wrong/a breach of contract/fraud/whatever.

Not here. Lousy analogy. My wife and I have even had business listings (white & yellow pages) on a residential line. What matters is the primary purpose & zoning of the structure.

This constant name-calling ("fraudster") and silly allegations of criminal fraud are only reflecting on you.

deleted

^^^

Moreover, the fact that you can more easily get away with back-to-back ticketing by using two different carriers doesn't mean that an airline should thank you for your loyalty when you make both fraudulent bookings on their metal. :)

Once again, why don't you read what I said instead of starting out with your argument and ignoring the facts? Here's what I said:

"It all depends on how the utility defines "residential" and "commercial" use. The point is that if you had a standalone business on a standalone property and a phone line used for primarily for business use, and you claimed the "residential" rate, it would be fraud, yes."

Did I not say that it depends on how the utility is defining residential/commercial use? So that if they define the use based upon the purpose and zoning of the structure, then so long as you're honest about that fact you're not engaged in fraud? But if you tell the phone company it's a house, when in reality it's a commercial office building, then you've misled the vendor and engaged in fraudulent behavior. The point is not the factual details of a specific phone vendor - it's the concept of having a split rate structure based on what you're using the product for that I am illustrating.

As for the "constant name-calling," should I go back and pull all the names I've been called on this thread, and all the personal invective that's been thrown my way? Notice that if you don't accuse me of ulterior motives, or call my positions absurd, I respond in kind. I mean, you tell me to stop the constant name-calling, then call me and my opinion "silly" in the next breath. Grow up.

Fair enough.
It does seem like he is taking it more seriously than Delta would. :eek:

I just don't like people who think it's okay to game the system just because they can get away with it. It's the same reason that I'm annoyed by people who think they can bring a giant suitcase on the airplane, or three bags, because bag fees are "wrong." Or people who think that they can ignore the electronic devices rule because they think it is "silly." Or people who crowd around the jetbridge door when they're in Group 4, and they haven't even called Group 1 (or try to board before their group is called).