Whether it's hotels or airlines is immaterial -- the same logic applies to both. The difference (and it's crucial) is that in the $29 example, money has changed hands. A contract has been entered into.

In the $0 rate example, nothing "tangible" has changed hands -- hence no contract has been entered into.

These whole issues would disappear if hotels would use half a brain to figure out what prices to post in the reservations system.

I recall working for a major luxury hotel chain that had $0 rates all over the place, yet our reservations provider gave me idiotic excuses about why the $0 rates existed and refused to remove them. Of course we never honored them, but nor were the powers that be at all concerned about them.

I have no idea about whether Hilton should honor the rates, but maybe they should think about automated controls that prevent confirmation numbers being generated for reservations made at $0, without a manual override.

Money does not have to change hands for a contract to be in place. If I reserve a full fare ticket, I am allowed to wait until just before flight departure before I pay for it. Using the logic that money has to change hands would mean the airline would be free to cancel my reservation whenver they want to unless I have given them money.

I agree with both TravelManKen and MatthewClement.

Further, I have seen airlines sell $29 fares to places far and wide. These were not mistakes. They were promotions. So there could be an expectation of this kind of price being real.

I've never seen any hotel or airline sell anything for zero. Buy one, get one free...yes. But just have rooms listed at zero...no.

I think it all boils down to intent and reasonable expectation. In this case, IMHO, there is no question of what's right and wrong. But that's just me.

Hilton did more than enough. In fact, I feel a bit sorry for them. I think that if they weren't overly concerned about bad press (which happened to United), they would have just said no. In that sense, I think they are the victims of a form of extortion.

But hey, it was their error and they are big boys and can handle it. So I'm not crying tears for them.

TravelManKen, I believe the legal term (at least here in the U.S.) to be "consideration." In order for most contracts to be binding, there has to be consideration. An exchange of tangible value between both parties.

Tango, what you are talking about is a "promise to pay" which is a different part of contracts. Many contracts are entered into without funds exchanging until some future date.


[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 08-31-2001).]

A few answers to questions:

- Why Post This Here? I made sure not to expose the identity of the person I referenced and this is an issue that comes up every few months on FT.

- Why Miles? This is all about exploiting programs to earn miles/points in a dishonest method.

- Is $0 the same as a low price (i.e. $20/nt)?
No it is not. It's reasonable to conclude that a hotel/casino/resort is offering some type of promo in the 20's - but not $0.

I understand what people have said about hotels running promos and airline contracts - however if they contact you to make a correction and even make you a reasonable offer, I think it's wrong to hold them hostage. Just my view.

------------------
Ken in Sacramento

This may vary from airline to airline, but the airline is reserving a seat for you in that class of service until the day of departure, but the actual fare is only guaranteed for 24 hours, or in some situations, until midnight of the same night. Full coach fares don't change all that much, so generally there isn't going to be a difference, but next time you book one, check and see if the fare is held and not just the seat.

------------------
Have a great day!!
~~Missy~~

Just a little bit more of my legal half-knowledge -

Ethically, this thread seems to side with the Hotel and, legally, believe it or not, ethics comes into play as well because, so often, as in this case, intent is an issue.

For example, I personally never would have noticed this "deal" because I have seen it so frequently when I pass over internet promos or ebay offerings that say hotels are free, and then on the next page, if one pays the airfare or v.v. They end up being no-deals if one reads on, as they are instructed to do.

There are many questions here with regards to intent. Were the rooms bought from such a promo or ad, such a place that one may usually find $0 as a price? And, if so, where was the rest of the no-deal one expects to find? Or were they had directly from a travel website or the airline's site itself, where it is certainly not common to find a rate for $0.

Also, what about the airline's intent. What if this was a marketing ploy albeit really, really backhanded, although look at PremEx's post where he states he feels sorry for them. Hey, you can't help it. I do too! Or, did the hotel know this could happen and just let it go?

On a legal level, this could go on forever. I would just like to see the lawyer that wants to go back and forth with Hilton's lawyers. But then again, they would probably settle to reduce costs and notoriety ... and, in the meantime, the lawyer could get some press ...

The real question here is how do we know it's a mistake.

I have legally stayed at hotels for $1 a night. With taxes and fees, I've paid $8.95 for the hotel for a weekend. The hotel was just fine with that.

Of course it's a little different in that I know that Priceline kicked in $20 bucks a night as a special bonus. Of course, I don't technically have to know that -- from my point of view, I paid $1 a night, or $4.50 a night including taxes/fees, for the hotel.

So what's not to say that if I see a $1 rate availably conventionally at another hotel, that it's not valid? Maybe the booking agency is kicking in some bucks as a promotion, just like Priceline did. Or I just don't care -- it says a $1, so it's a $1.

I'm not sure what side I am on in these sort of issues; I just don't think no mistake necessarily needs to be 'obvious'. I've paid a much as 95% off regular rates using various techniques -- when I tell people my rate, they don't believe me -- and the front desk does a double take (though they take it!) .. so I've had my share of 'unbelievably REAL' good deals.

In my book, it's not a form of extortion-- it's outright extortion. Referring to the 300-room guy here, only.

I certainly understand that different folks might see it from different points of view, but in my business when someone says "give me what I want or I'll expose you to bad publicity and/or tie you up in court with nuisance lawsuits"-- I never give in to people who try that with me.

I'd rather spend 100x the amount on a lawyer to defend against that kind of extortion than give even a modest settlement to the threat-maker.

But I suppose a publicly-held company can't take such a position, as it may not be in the best interests of the shareholders.



[This message has been edited by JonNYC (edited 08-31-2001).]

Tango,
For a contract to be valid, nothing has to change hands immediately, it can state a future date for the exchange. For example, I could offer you $10 to wash my car on December 1, and if you agree, then we are both stuck to that contract even though I won't pay you until after the work is done. In the case of a full fare airline ticket, that contract allows you to back out of it any time before the flight. That's why it costs so much more. However, a contract can't be legally valid if it is one sided. An exchange must be made. If I offer to give you $10 on December 1 with nothing required from you in return, and you accept, this is not a binding contract. I do not have to give you the money. That is why a $29 airfare must be honored, and a $0 hotel room doesn't. If it were $.05 instead of $0, then it would be valid because both sides would get something and exchange something. Both parties must get something out of the deal.

Well, everyone is going on about the fact that no money exchanged hands, but these rooms were guaranteed to a credit card, and after that, WRITTEN confirmation was given to the asinee (the customer), so in a way, through electronic commerce a valid contract has been entered into. As for the guy with 300 rooms, I think that would be viewed as excessive. I mean there r question you have to look at. How long was this rate available? Was this found on Hilton's website or a 3rd party.

I've already thrown in my 2 cents on previous threads about this issue, so I won't repeat it here. However, many of you are talking wish fulfillment re the hotel's obligations and not reality, legal or otherwise, concerning same.

However, I would like to know just who among us has reserved the 300 rooms? I dont' think that they should have any "reservation" in doing so, inasmuch as they feel it appropriate to Hilton "pay" them in points for the release of the rooms. Should they fail to identify themselves, I think that will tell you alot about them and how they really feel about what they are doing.

If any of you know about this "e-mail" I would be happy for you to post it, or for you to send it to me (as some of you know my home e-mail address)

Thanx and have a good holiday!

That's not the intent of this post and I would ask that this request not be honored. This is a post about the ethics of taking advantage of obvious errors for the purpose of gaining points/miles in a dishonest way. This is not a "ratting out someone type post" - that's wrong.

This discussion does not center around any one person, hotel property or airline - they were simply used as an expample of extreme exploitation (without names or whrere they live).

Let's stay away from this type of "investigative posting" - thanks.

I pretty much come down on Hilton's side here, too. Like Premex, I remember $19.85 flights DCA-LGA and $29 flights EWR-SFO. That is not unreasonable. A $0 flight is just silly.

And as for calling 300 nights excessive, well, IMHO, it is either right or it is wrong.

I, too, am interested as to the content of the email. Was it telling you about the $0 deal and telling you to book one, or was it from someone complaining that they were told hilton would not honor their $0 rate? In other words, what does the email you got have to do with this issue? Was it from 'the list' that was so widely jumped upon a few months ago???

My curiosity is piqued!!!

It's not exactly a form of extortion, at least not in the traditional sense.

If we go to a business and tell them that if we don't get satisfaction, we will tell the world about the poor service we got, that's extortion? I don't think so. Extortion really means that you're spreading damaging information that serves no purpose other than to smear the image of the extortee.

This is different. Everyone has a right to tell other potential customers of their own experiences with a business. This is how businesses establish reputations, good or bad. Giving the business a chance to make things right before their reputation is damaged is hardly extortion.