So, my friends and I could theoretically book four $12,000 tickets on the Concorde, check in and get boarding passes, visit the Concorde lounge for a few hours of cavorting, then not board the plane and ask for a refund? Not that I would ever do that, but is it really plausible??

Dude chill. She's going to meet her elderly mother, not attending an airport FT party.

I would agree that you should buy a r/t ticket. Just buy a r/t ticket to SAN, PHX or LAS - something cheap.

What makes you think that BooBooKitty is a she?

And some people think snake in an "it"!

and I don't necessarily agree....

done. Cold, actually.

For what it's worth, I think it's cool that we all try to benefit from loopholes, etc. in mileage programs and the like. But, in this day, I feel it's just better if people don't try to circumvent the rules that have been put in place to make things safer and as efficient as possible. Not that they are safe nor efficient, just hopefully more so.

Remember, we're talking about a woman that is


[This message has been edited by clublounger (edited 11-08-2001).]

Clublounger;
OK, I give up. How is boobookitty's picking up his/her mother having ANY effect on anyone's safety? Puh-leeze

I just see this as wasting people's time and money. In order to do this, you will need to:

1. Call and make a reservation, costing the airline phone time and the reservationist's time or wait in line at the airport/CTO, again wasting an agent's time. Meanwhile, people who are actual customers will have to wait longer to speak to someone on the phone or get to the front of the line in person.

2. The airline will ticket you and charge your credit card money. The transaction is relatively insignificant on the credit card processing system. But, the airline is going to mail you a ticket and/or receipt if you buy it over the phone, or give you a ticket and receipt in person. This is a waste of paper. Again, maybe not a significant one, but a waste, nonetheless.

3. You'll have to go through security. Since you won't have any luggage, you might look suspicious and get a more detailed screening. This will delay the screening of real passengers, some of whom may have a plane to catch in a hurry. This delay may be a few seconds or a few minutes, depending on how many people you occupy and for how long.

4. After picking someone up/dropping someone off, you're then going to either call the airline or show up in person. Again, you'll be wasting more people's time and paper.

Phone calls to companies can cost anywhere from a few dollars per call to $20-25 per call. Mailing stuff costs around $0.50-$1. Agent's time in person is difficult to quantify and, like paper, is a relatively insiginficant cost.

Though adding up all of these costs still comes up with a relatively low total cost, you're still wasting time and money.

Perhaps if you can manage to purchase a cheap ticket, let's say $20, and not request a refund, then I'll be satisfied.

d

What is the big deal? First of all, it should be obvious that the rule requiring an airline ticket is not there to improve safety, it's there to ration security.

If airlines were truly interested in people not buying refundable tickets just to meet someone at the gate, then they would pay more money to increase the supply of screening so that security doesn't have to be rationed. That would benefit everyone, ticketed or not. Alas, that costs more than spending a few bucks refunding a ticket to someone who never had an intention of flying.

Regarding how much it costs the airline to refund a ticket -- so what? Do you decline the beverage or meal if there is one, to help them save money? Do you refuse to fly any plane other than a 757 to help them save fuel? They're a business, not a charity.

To sbrowner: how did you get out of the Bradley terminal without going through U.S. Customs, it doesn't look there is any other way out.

I tend to agree with Doppy and Clublounger on this one. Exploiting this loophole has a lot of less-than-desirable side effects. My first reaction when I read the initial post was that this simply adds unnecessary volume at the security checkpoint, on the phone, and in the checkin lines. Yes, I know one case is trivial, but it might not be to the person behind you in line, waiting for you to do something unnecessary and against the current desires of our country (misguided as the FAA can sometimes be...).

As for cost to the airline, I know we all hoard miles here, look for bonus opportunities, and are pretty good at finding cheap airfares when we need to. But that doesn't mean we don't want our airlines to be profitable. Doing something idiotic like this DOES cost them money. I don't buy the argument that because they jammed you once before for a change fee that you should jam them right back with fraudulent ticketing.

Finally, I'd react differently if this were a case of a disabled person or an elderly person unable to travel without assistance. In those cases, you can get a pass to go to the gate, plain and simple. But this isn't that case at all.

I'm not terribly concerned about the costs to the airlines, I was just noting them, as well as the delays that other real travelers may face. I am concerned about the general feeling among all people (not just FTers) that they need to get something for free from airlines every time they fly (or don't fly). I think AAFA put it well in an AA thread a couple months ago when she said something to the effect of "I don't go to a shoestore and buy a cheesy pair of shoes, then ask them to upgrade me to Gucci's for free."

Meanwhile, while it is great for some people to go with their friends/family to the gate, it's also a burden on people who are actually traveling. Like the two dozen people who need to see Grandma off before she takes a weekend trip to Florida, or the two dozen people who need to welcome Grandma home when she gets back from a weekend trip to Florida.

Obviously this many people would cause more of a slowdown in the security line than one person, but that's not the point. People in every other country and at some airports in the US have lived for years and years having to say goodbye at security. If you only have travelers go through security you speed up the operation and allow the screeners to pay more attention to a fewer number of people.

But, to ask airlines to pay for more security screeners so that non-travelers can enter the sterile area? That sounds ridiculous to me. If non-travelers really need to get through security, maybe they should lobby for a system to be imposed where a $5 or $10 fee to pay for the costs associated with the security screening can be collected for those who want to enter the sterile area, but don't have a legitimate reason to do so. But don't pass that cost along to me, an actual traveler.

d

Hmm... non-ticketed fee? OK, but $5 is way too much. Assuming five minutes of labor and $12 an hour, that's only $1. In reality, it costs much less than that. But, I would be happy to pay $1 to go through security to meet my mother at the gate. Heck, I'd pay $1 just to plane-spot! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I don't believe delaying the person behind you at security or the phone queue to get a refund is relevant. I could call every airline to get a fare quote instead of going to Expedia.com -- is that such a bad thing?

Even worse, I change planes instead of flying non-stop to get another segment and more miles. That means people behind me boarding on my connecting flight who are taking the first of a two flight trip are delayed, quite possibly causing them to mis-connect. I'm also using up a seat on not one, but two flights that may result in them being overbooked, causing someone who was trying to book a flight at the last minute to miss a funeral or a dying relative's last words.

See where this is going? It's one thing to be considerate, such as holding a door open or helping a blind person cross the street. But to abstain from going through the security checkpoint? That's insignificant IMHO.

This, generally speaking, is not true for domestic US flights on most airlines. The clubs are primarily membership clubs, not premium cabin clubs. Most airlines do offer this perk for trans-oceanic premium cabin passengers, and possibly for certain trans-continental flagship routes.

As I was reading this thread, I was thinking like a Devil's Advocate.

I would expect with the security at Airports today, that if you bought a ticket, checked in, and then cancelled the ticket, the airline would have to A) recheck to make sure that you were not on Board, B) Check to make absolutely sure that you did not check in any luggage. This could also entail the plane and Gate area being evacuated and the luggage being off-loaded. The end result could be a several hour delay for the other passengers on the flight.

I would suggest calling the airline to find out about getting a pass to the gate to meet Grandmother.

Hey, agree with everyone that buying a ticket and taking all this time and causing other delays is wrong.

BUT, if you need or want to be in the terminal, that is what you have to do. We have made some silly decisions that airport terminals are a national threat and put these rules into place. Until we realize we have over reacted and get back to sanity, this is the way it is.

And the waste by a small number of people of buying tickets is nothing compared to those that have to arrive 2-4 hours early for flights, miss flights, etc, etc. All with minimal increase in security. I think I saw that some 50-60 million people flew in October. Tell me the delays and hassles they went through, and for what?