Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16479569)

This thread is beyond silly.

The used of the word "fraud" is highly inflammatory as attested by the endless responses and postulations of fraud by mostly one member that is clearly not going to change his mind. That's ok, his right, free country, free speech.

Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16479569)

The fact is we do not set the rules or prices, the airline does and they have full control.

If the buyer takes advantage of the rules set by the airline then it is construed by a few as "fraud". When the same airline takes advantage of the buyer then it is called "supply and demand".

Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16479569)

"You need to go see your dying Father in Omaha today? Too bad, that will be $800, but hey, if you had only bothered to ask your dad to tell you 14 days in advance that he had planned to get gravely ill and die it would have cost you $229.10 for the round trip."

Oh shucks! Supply and Demand, poor airline, being screwed by a few consumers hell bent on committing fraud, bilking millions from the airline that plays it fair with rules and prices.

Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16479569)

All consumers expect to pay a fair and reasonable price for a product, from movie tickets to homes; however, when it comes to airline tickets the consumer is left bewildered by the difference in prices based on many variables that just don't make a lot of sense.

If consumers are taking advantage of the airline ticketing rules and prices then the airlines have only one to blame: themselves.

Originally Posted by ExAAerOnDL (Post 16479718)

The dictionary definition of fraud: "Deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage." What else would you like to call it?

Originally Posted by ExAAerOnDL (Post 16479718)

Now none of these mechanisms is perfect, but it's the best the airlines can do. And given the technological limitations in the system, some opportunity to game the system is created. So airlines created rules to prohibit the gaming. Hub-and-spoke itineraries created the opportunity for hidden-city ticketing. Thus it is prohibited. Saturday night stays created the opportunity for back-to-back ticketing. Thus it is prohibited. That the system creates the opportunity to cheat does not justify cheating.

Again, if you don't like an airline's fares and fare rules, don't fly them. It is not your right to break their rules. And if you break those rules with intent, you have - in my opinion - engaged in fraud. Not because you'll be prosecuted, and not because you'll be sued. Because you've knowingly broken a rule and misled an airline to acquire a service at a lower price than the provider of that service was offering. Whether you can get away with it, or go to jail for it is irrelevant. It is a question of ethics.

Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16480428)

I agree with you.

The airline's practice of pricing their product and creating fare rules does give them an "unfair and dishonest advantage".

Originally Posted by javabytes (Post 16480562)

What is unfair and dishonest about it? They tell you how much it will cost. You don't have to buy it from them. You can always fly another carrier or get in your car and drive. Not liking the cost doesn't make their practices unfair or dishonest.

Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16479569)

This thread is beyond silly....

Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16480663)

Sarcasm mate. Just sarcasm.

Say your neighbor agreed with the local garage to replace the transmission in his car for $2000 and the job was done just fine.

Next thing you know your car’s transmission bites the dust and needs to be replaced.

Knowing your neighbor just had his car fixed for $2000 you tow the car to the same garage to do the same job. You reckon the cars are identical, same year and even color. a cinch.

The garage owner tells you the job is not $2,000 but $5,000!.

He explains the rules are the $2,000 price is only for customers that make an appointment at least 7 days in advance, and can’t be on a Thursday or near the weekend neither. People that need the work outside of them rules pay $5,000. The garage owner adds that “Rules is rules” and if you don’t like it then have your car towed to the next garage 233.2 miles away, but tells you they have the same business consultant and have similar rules too.

So, you agree on the $5,000 price and drive away the next day thinking the garage’s practice is “fair and honest” because it is a “demand thing”, stuff that us common folk don’t really get, “too complicated” the garage owner sayz. You reckon you just happened to show up at the garage on the wrong side of the “demand curve” thing.

Sad ain’t it? If you had only planned to have your transmission repair 7 days before it broke you could have saved $3000!

If anyone can;t read between the lines then I am sorry. I can't help you there.

Originally Posted by bpe (Post 16480454)

Then again, if airlines were 'ethical' with fares by not taking advantage of a monopoly in their hub, we wouldn't have the problem for hidden-city ticketing at all.

Also, an airline ticket is a contract, and morals do not have to be involved at all. If you engage in whatever ticketing practice that is against their rules, you have broken the contract. This allows airlines to do whatever is in their terms of service (so pretty much anything) since you have broken the contract. Simple as that. It's an agreement between two consenting parties.

Originally Posted by MikeMpls (Post 16480871)

But it has high entertainment value.

Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 16480663)

Sarcasm mate. Just sarcasm.

Say your neighbor agreed with the local garage to replace the transmission in his car for $2000 and the job was done just fine.

Next thing you know your car’s transmission bites the dust and needs to be replaced.

Knowing your neighbor just had his car fixed for $2000 you tow the car to the same garage to do the same job. You reckon the cars are identical, same year and even color. a cinch.

The garage owner tells you the job is not $2,000 but $5,000!.

He explains the rules are the $2,000 price is only for customers that make an appointment at least 7 days in advance, and can’t be on a Thursday or near the weekend neither. People that need the work outside of them rules pay $5,000. The garage owner adds that “Rules is rules” and if you don’t like it then have your car towed to the next garage 233.2 miles away, but tells you they have the same business consultant and have similar rules too.

So, you agree on the $5,000 price and drive away the next day thinking the garage’s practice is “fair and honest” because it is a “demand thing”, stuff that us common folk don’t really get, “too complicated” the garage owner sayz. You reckon you just happened to show up at the garage on the wrong side of the “demand curve” thing.

Sad ain’t it? If you had only planned to have your transmission repair 7 days before it broke you could have saved $3000!

If anyone can;t read between the lines then I am sorry. I can't help you there.

Originally Posted by ExAAerOnDL (Post 16480944)

Huh? What does that have to do with airline tickets.

Originally Posted by ExAAerOnDL (Post 16479718)

The dictionary definition of fraud: "Deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage." What else would you like to call it?



Your first sentence is correct, but then you go off the track. The "rules set by the airline" say you can't engage in back-to-back ticketing. So when you engage in back-to-back ticketing, you're not taking advantage of the rules. You're breaking the rules. That's the fundamental difference.

And how is the airline taking "advantage of the buyer"? Nobody is forcing you to buy their product. Nor do they exist to provide you with that product on your terms. It is their business, and they get to set the rules. Now, if you wanted every seat to be sold for $200, then guess what - there wouldn't be any seats left 14 days before departure because every flight would be sold out. So revenue management operates to make it more likely that you will have a seat available at the last minute - but since the airline takes the risk of inventory spoilage, you also pay a premium for that product.



First of all, airlines do have bereavement fares - although they still aren't cheap. But what's the alternative? Without revenue management and variable fare structures, you'd have two choices: (1) set the fare too low, and that flight would be sold out and you couldn't go see your dying Father at any price; or (2) set the fare high enough that the flight wouldn't sell out, and now all of your discount fares vanish. So which would you prefer?



So who defines what a "fair and reasonable" price is? The market. And how are airfares set? The market. Just because you don't think it's fair to pay $0.20 a mile to be flown at 500 mph to your destination (when a cab costs $2.00 per mile and goes far slower) doesn't mean that it isn't the market price.

And what variables "just don't make a lot of sense"? They are all intended to effectuate price discrimination among buyers at differing points on the demand curve. Let's look at them:

Advance purchase requirements: The further out you book, the easier it is for the airline to manage inventory. And the more likely it is that you are a leisure passenger at the lower end of the demand curve. Thus AP requirements on lower fares make sense.

Refundability/Change Fees: Business travelers are more likely to value the ability to get a refund or change an itinerary. Thus it makes sense to charge more for a refundable and/or changeable ticket.

Saturday Night Stay: Business travelers are less likely to have a Saturday night stay requirement in their itinerary. Thus charging more for not having one makes sense.

Round-trip: Same story. Business travelers are more likely to have itineraries with one-way flights. Thus the cheapest fares often have round-trip requirements.

Now none of these mechanisms is perfect, but it's the best the airlines can do. And given the technological limitations in the system, some opportunity to game the system is created. So airlines created rules to prohibit the gaming. Hub-and-spoke itineraries created the opportunity for hidden-city ticketing. Thus it is prohibited. Saturday night stays created the opportunity for back-to-back ticketing. Thus it is prohibited. That the system creates the opportunity to cheat does not justify cheating.

Again, if you don't like an airline's fares and fare rules, don't fly them. It is not your right to break their rules. And if you break those rules with intent, you have - in my opinion - engaged in fraud. Not because you'll be prosecuted, and not because you'll be sued. Because you've knowingly broken a rule and misled an airline to acquire a service at a lower price than the provider of that service was offering. Whether you can get away with it, or go to jail for it is irrelevant. It is a question of ethics.

Originally Posted by ExAAerOnDL (Post 16480944)

Huh? What does that have to do with airline tickets.

The concept that two people pay different prices for the same seat misses the entire concept of commercial air transportation. You are NOT buying the same product at different prices. When you pay a high price for a walk-up fare, what you are paying for is: (a) flexibility; and (b) the ability to get a seat on the day of departure.

Say, as you would seem to support, airlines were forced to stop price discriminating. You have a flight with 100 seats, and the cost of flying it from A to B is $50,000 (making the average total cost $500). What price do you charge?

Charge $200, and you'll sell the flight out a month before departure. Sadly, you'll only collect $20,000, and lose your shirt. Business travelers will be SOL, as no seats will be available for sale to them in the week or two before departure.

Charge $1,000, and you won't sell out. Sadly, you'll only sell 20 seats. So you've generated $20,000. Still a big loser.

Maybe get closer to ATC - and charge $500. But now, you're selling 50 seats. Better - $25,000 - but still a loser.

In reality, the only way to stay in business is to price discriminate. Sell the first 20 seats to people willing to pay $200, but live with a bunch of restrictions. Now you've got $4,000. Now sell 20 more to people willing to pay $400, and live with fewer restrictions - revenue is up to $12k 20 more to people willing to pay $600. 20 more to people willing to pay $800. 20 more to people willing to pay $1,000. Now you've got $60,000 - a profitable flight, where people on all portions of the demand curve have been served. They all bought a different product. Airlines cover their costs (a good thing), and passengers get a variety of fares to choose from (also a good thing). So where's the problem?

In all of your defense, your single-minded hatred of airlines, their business model, and their right to try and earn - in a good year - a 5% margin, is shared by many. The U.S. Department of Justice, the class action plaintiffs bar, most professors. Granted, not one of these people has ever worked one day in the airline industry, but they - like you - all think that: (a) airlines are crooked; (b) they could do a better job running airlines than the people running them; and (c) more government regulation of how they do business would make the world a better place. So if you know so much about airlines, go work for one. I'm sure you'll have the whole thing fixed in no time.

Originally Posted by ExAAerOnDL (Post 16480944)

Huh? What does that have to do with airline tickets.

The concept that two people pay different prices for the same seat misses the entire concept of commercial air transportation. You are NOT buying the same product at different prices. When you pay a high price for a walk-up fare, what you are paying for is: (a) flexibility; and (b) the ability to get a seat on the day of departure.