Perhaps I have been influenced by the conspiracy theorists, but...

- US introduces all of these idiotic rules

- Much protest ensues

- Other airlines match the use-or-lose, the $100 standby fees, etc., but not preferred miles restriction

- Other travelers say, "at least it's not as bad as US. We dodged a bullet"

- US announces others haven't match the preferred restrictions, so they are recinding them

- US FF's proclaim victory and relief at continuing to earn preferred miles on all fares.

Net - Airlines have implemented use-or-lose, $100 standby fees, etc, but FF's feel lucky/vindicated/victorious.

Perhaps they aren't as dumb as they appear. Maybe even planned...

Remember, New Coke was only pulled after long, sustained opposition. Giving in after the slightest concession will result in long-term loss.

[This message has been edited by CPRich (edited 08-31-2002).]

You're absolutely right.

They're trying to sneak the largest fare increase and service take back in history under our noses during a holiday weekend.

In a perverted sort of way it's brilliant.

Who is going to be able to explain this to the average Joe on the street? Why the local frequent flier of course. Oh, but wait, he (or she) is busy falling for the head fake on Q miles -- and probably sounds more than just a bit whiny complaining about all of these Rockefeller-like "perks" being taken away (look at U's press release again -- isn't it sort of odd that they're making such a big deal out of coddling robber barons?)

Meanwhile every little mistake and every desire for a little flexibility means you buy a brand new full fare walk up ticket or you don't fly. Sorry, you knew that when you bought a "discount" fare. Really, there's nothing I can do -- we're in dire straits and there are no exceptions allowed. Not even for death. I'm really terribly sorry, perhaps you should have purchased a refundable ticket?

It's been tried before. See www.errorplan.com , scroll to the bottom, and look at the newsletters.

[This message has been edited by goingnow (edited 08-31-2002).]

perhaps I am missing something? All of the arilines are having problems but they dont run the business like a business. Re qard your best customers with the lowest fares, most flexibility and best recognition and things get better. try to squeeze everyone, charge a non customer hardly anythignn while making a top customer pay a premium and treat all customers like they dont matter. Wonder why they are in trouble?

"How is the general "occasionally" traveling public expected to know the difference between published and non published fares when going to the website and buying what the airline itself offers? Doesn't that make it a published fare if they publish it on their website? Where is this clearly and simply explained?"

I think you mean "restricted" and "unrestricted" fares. Unpublished fares are a different matter and it is generally accepted that these will not earn FF credit. These are occasionally available on airline web sites, but are not the same as the vast majority of fares offered on these sites. Unpublished fares are also provided to the travel industry, and through consolidators [with varying accrual rules]. Or Priceline type fares.

The changes being announced by most carriers related to discounted tickets which are the usual type sold on airline websites and by TAs and internet services like expedia and travelocity. Because they require Saturday overnight and/or have other restrcitions, these are known as non-refundable, or restricted fares. Refundable or unrestricted fares, a basically full Y, C/J or F/P/R which have minor restrictions but otherwise are fully flexible, often accepted [endorseable] by other competing carriers.

As for the conspiracy, I don't really believe in them. I just see this as a logical step towards clearly defining what each fare class now provides, and what additional charges will be to add levels of flexibility to the base ticket price. This is differentiating the product beyond the notion that an airline seat is just an airline seat. Full service carriers want us to now realize that beyond the reserved seat on a given flight, we will have to pay for each additional item: standby, change, upgrade, etc.

Shareholder, most of what you say is pretty accurate -- I don't really believe in an out and out consiracy either. At least not the secret meetings in smoke filled rooms kind...

But you said "...and what additional charges will be to add levels of flexibility to the base ticket price."

US Airways isn't doing that. The base ticket price is the full fare. They are taking away existing flexibility and replacing it with a single option -- buy a full fare.

Try an experiment -- call reservations and book a flight. When they get to the part about telling you that it's non-refundable ask them what happens if you miss your return flight. They'll give you all the "oh, just call ahead" stuff. Listen patiently. Then ask them "exactly how much will it cost to get home?" (Since it's a walk-up fare and prices may very well change between now and then they can only answer this question speculatively -- but let them use today's walk-ups for illustration purposes.)

What about baggage charges???
http://www.msnbc.com/news/800209.asp?cp1=1#BODY Airlines slap big fees
on large luggage


http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum21/HTML/007072.html

Let's face it....weve been had and they didn't even give us the vaseline to make it easier

You are absolutely correct! Does anyone else remember when changing non-refundables cost $25.00? Then $50.00, $75.00, $100...and now this? And ask any travel agent what's happened to their commissions. All of this while they have pushed everyone to e-tickets "because it's much more cost effective and we will be able to pass those savings on to our customers." Instead, a change fee on an e-ticket is in some instances more than the ticket itself! Try as I might, I see no way that the can justify raping the consumers this way and yet, eventually, we all come to accept it.

I agree with many in that I would rather let the market handle these arrogant SOBs. But can we afford to do that when many don't really have a choice but to accept what's handed to them? This is the kind of thing that invites legislation, odious as that may be.



[This message has been edited by Skyman (edited 08-31-2002).]

Check the US forum and see how triumphant everyone is feeling over the backinging off on the tier miles.

Someone used the (rather offensive) analogy that you have to AAAA them before you BBBB them. I think US's strategy was to BBBB us, and then AAAA us to make us feel better.

I guess it worked.

My loyalty has not returned. Management has shown their true colors. Customers are merely revenue sources to yank around as we please. I always have had, and will continue to have, repsect for the line employees. I have built relationships with several at my regular clubs, gates, etc. (We shared vacation stories and plans last week). However, that feeling no longer extends to the company as a whole.

I don't know about the premeditation part, but it DOES reflect badly on the managements that, rather than rededicating themselves to serving the customer better or finding inexpensive ways to add value, they decide the way to profitability is by inventing or introducing new junk fees, sometimes at gouge level. It's the "low road" and an approach that deserves to fail.

I'll be optimistic, though, and predict that the pendulum will swing again when things get better and airlines try to grab more market share. What's important in the interim is that Southwest and airlines like it stay healthy and keep up the competitive pressure. The other big winner from all this is the automobile, which is unfortunate because more people will die (due to much higher fatality rates) as a direct result.