There was an interesting observation made over at TB on AA's ability to do so. http://travelingbetter.vbulletin.net...8195#post78195

In case you can't navigate to that site, here's what the poster said:
What I don't know is if RTW fares are published with ATPCO. I can't log in, but I found this note from 2013 on their website -

So if they're proposing to automate these fares, I'm guessing that means they have them on file, no?

The other two alliances have already had their RTW and circle fares automated in Sabre.

I'm thinking AA just made some internal policy about the CC location and they don't care what anyone thinks. I bet they would fail to mention this policy if you tried to book a ticket that is more expensive than in the US.

Gardyloo, I'm pretty sure RTW fares are published with ATPCO. We can see them in GDS's, including in ExpertFlyer (for those with access). Doesn't that mean the fares must be published?

The question of whether fares can autoprice is different from whether fares are published.

If anyone here has been harmed by AA's policy -- wanted to buy at one price, but AA imposed a rule not present in tariff or fare rules, requiring a particular type of credit card and hence a higher price -- that is grounds for a formal DOT complaint. It would be on-the-record and public, and AA's attorneys would be obliged to respond. I have a template and submission instructions and would be happy to help anyone interested in this. Send me an email or FT PM and I'll send details of what I know about the complaint process.

I would assume so, but this is frankly rather arcane stuff to me, as are terms like SITI/SOTO etc.

I can only speak for myself, but I get a little nervous at the prospect of raising this issue too loudly in the AA apparatus, or any of the alliance's airlines for that matter. Given that the prices for the tickets can vary so substantially from one country to another, I don't know how hard it would be for AA in cahoots with BA (who between them most likely call the shots with Oneworld) just to say, "enough," and just raise prices everywhere, badda bing. Who's to stop them? So my inclination is to find work-arounds rather than pull the lion's whiskers, as it were. Maybe that's chickens**t but it's what I'm thinking.

I wish there were a sticky with recommended TAs who were knowledgeable and experienced in issuing Explorer tickets.

Is there a way to compile a list of FT members (working as TAs) who are either working in places like Japan and South Africa, or who have colleagues in those locations who are able/willing to issue such tickets?:confused:

My thoughts too.

As many FTs mentioned before,
for ex-JPN explorer tickets, call or mail to CX Tokyo ticketing office.
They accept foreign issued credit cards.

I don't think it's a surprise, to AA or BA or any international airline, that fares vary based on point of origin. Fares are set carefully, with an eye to market conditions and competition and customer willingness to pay.

Personally I have not been harmed by this practice. When I have needed to buy RTW tickets, originating outside the US, I have been able to do so. (But of course that was some years ago, and by all indications the current problem is a new development.) If AA tried the tactic on me that is discussed in this thread, I would file the complaint contemplated here. That doesn't mean anyone else has to or wants to.

The risk is what that response says.

Exactly my thoughts.

RTW tickets are a strange thing. The airlines seem to want them to be used, but not too much. Whenever people here have gone "too far" (in the airlines' eyes), the cost has gone dramatically up. When I first started booking RTWs, ex-US fares were 1/3 what they are now. They became very popular, and fares started climbing. Ex-KRT was very popular for a year, and suddenly started being priced in USD. Right now, ex-S.A. is the best deal. I'd really hate to see that option destroyed. There are several ways to work around the issue for now.

But your taking such action is bound to result in some result:

1. The DOT ignores you
2. AA ignores the DOT
3. AA responds by allowing you to use your CC as a one-off
4. AA responds by apologizing and allowing anyone to use any CC
5. Ex-S.A. fares start being priced in USD (at ex-N.A. rates)
6. AA (with BA) responds by adding a rule about CC address or residency

You have vast experience in this area. Which option(s) do you think are most likely? (1) and (2) are probably out, (4) feels unlikely to me, but what do I know? (5) and (6) would be very bad for all of us.

2 is certainly out. Procedural rules oblige AA to answer.

To 1: Whether DOT takes action, and when, is uncertain. Some of the complaints I filed have been pending for well over a year, I believe some as long as two full years. Now, DOT is busy. And since DOT prefers to settle these cases, not litigate them, there can be an odd negotiation -- DOT wants a tough settlement; airline says "what are you going to do about it?"; and they're a bit stuck. This may look like "DOT ignores" the complaint although I don't think that's the best assessment in general.

3 is perfectly common -- airlines often try to buy off complainants with individual benefits on condition of complainant withdrawing a complaint. That's not my game -- I want to get problems fixed for everyone's benefit, not just get one benefit for one person (even myself).

5 is possible. Always an airline's right. No reason why the complainant has to complain about the very best / very lowest fare in the system. A complainant wanting to start in some country that is 5% less than USA would suffice as a matter of law and would still amply demonstrate the problem.

6: I don't know that such a rule is permitted. I'd need to do some legal research, including as to credit card rules, the duties of common carriers, and other sources of authority. My hunch is that it's not permitted or else more airlines would be doing it already and would have done it for years.

Well, aren't we already dealing with de facto fare collusion? The multi-continent fares published by Oneworld, Skyteam, and Star Alliance (as well as the Escapade and other non-alliance products) have to be agreed upon by all the alliance members; unless I'm mistaken this sort of behavior wouldn't be allowed in US domestic markets.

Exactly. We saw it in KRT.


That's true, of course; but airlines have lots of smart people working for them. I'm not going to take any action assuming that they won't figure out what's going on and extrapolate. We already know (based on MRU and KRT) that they are aware of the effects of currency fluctuation on global products. And with the ZAR having been in free fall for five years, I have no interest in sticking it in AA's face.


I've seen non-U.S. credit cards be declined more than once at supermarkets for the reason that they are issued in another country.

The only places that I have ever seen a card not issued locally be declined simply because it wasn't issued locally is where a card reader/ATM is not connected to the global credit network. ie, most ATMs in Japan.

Yes, that makes sense. May have been what I was observing.

Another (more convoluted) example is what AA has been doing with fares/ticketing in Venezuela (VE), where the local currency is highly devalued, foreign currency exchange is state-controlled, and where there is a rather transparent black market for foreign currencies. About 3-4 years ago, AA started by implementing new rules for all fares ex-VE (including xONEx) that required local currency/local billing address CCs to purchase tickets. Plus, tickets could only be payed for in person at a local AA office. This initial rule was put in place to prevent people from making "technical" stop-overs in VE to take advantage of the very convenient (black market) exchange rate. That lasted about 1-2 years, until AA dropped it altogether due to, in part, conflicts with VE government over the massive debt owed to AA (ongoing). At this time, AA does not accept local currency/local billing address CCs for ex-VE tickets anymore — they only accept foreign currency CCs, that is, the exact opposite of the initial rule. In fact, you can only purchase ex-VE tickets by calling AA reservations in US or doing it online on the US site. Local AA offices in VE don't make reservations anymore, the only payments they process in the local currency are mileage ticket taxes/fees for ex-VE reservations strictly made online (and this could very well change too leaving the AA local agents with nothing to do!). Albeit at times vague, AA did include these "evolving" changes in fare rules. There is a lot more to say about the VE example, and it is certainly different and more extreme than the other cases discussed in this thread. My point is that AA aggressively pursued and implemented those fare rule changes even if some were/are illegal. Having experienced the resulting complexity (and at times impossibility) of ticketing ex-VE AA flights, I would agree that perhaps is best, whenever possible, "to find work-arounds rather than pull the lion's whiskers”...