....................

Hmm...
 

Sent by me a couple of weeks ago to Oneworld -

Subject : General enquiry

Enquiry : How are changes to Oneworld products decided upon? As a user of the Oneworld Explorer RTW product I am very unhappy about the rule change slated for 1 July 2007 in which surface segments are counted against the 20 segment total. This is a serious erosion of the product's value to many business users, and I would urge OW to reconsider the change.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

-------

Response received today -

Dear (Gardyloo),

Thank you for your feedback you are not the only customer who has remarked on this change. I will be reviewing it with the airlines.

regards


(His name)
Manager, Fare Products and Frequent Flyer Programmes
oneworld Alliance

Wasn't OW advertising a vacancy for this role not long ago? I wonder if it is the new person.

As suspected :( It is easier to change the rules than to improve the software :td:

I sent a comment the same day. No response yet. I believe that I used the RTW products as a subject. Perhaps the idea of sending more e-mails from those who have not done so may have an impact. Such a tatic has been successful in the past 1 or 2 times with US airlines.

What email address are you sending to?

I've used the on line comment form. They don't exactly seem to be encouraging direct communication . :rolleyes:

No, but then neither do some airlines. For example the other day, AA wanted me to read out a draft DONE4 itinerary over the phone :rolleyes: I don't suppose anyone has an email address for AA's RTW desk?

Anyway, I've sent some feedback on the surface segments issue.

They work at [antique] terminals, not PC-like machines. Email would require a PC somewhere, with someone trained to use it, thus the practical answer is usually "FAX".

No offense, but people distant from software development keep saying that as if it's the most stupid thing they've ever heard. It is unfortunately true that even the simplest change to a major body of software will be quoted at a few hundred thousand USD, ranging to the low millions.

Note that my involvement has not included airline systems, so I'm partly over-speaking here, but generally to change "16" to "20" the developer might have to spend a month or longer researching the impact of that change on a dozen airlines' hardware/software implementations, hold meetings to review proposed changes with his colleages, publish documents for final review, then make the necessary changes and carry out a plan to test the new software to be sure it does exactly what was intended and no more.

I wasn't meaning to trivialise it (unfortunately I know too well how complex systems can become), but it is not exactly customer friendly to just take the easy option and devalue the product. Remember it is the airlines themselves that are pushing for 100% e-ticketing.

Response today to my email yesterday to oneworld:

"Thank you for you're feedback, you are not alone in your sentiments. The item is on are agenda with the airlines."

Similar to the one to Gardyloo above.

Just to amplify your point: it's usually not a simple matter of changing a "16" to a "20" but of searching out assumptions regarding maximum number of segments (or whatever). It's often easier to write software, especially for legacy systems, that assumes a fixed maximum number of something, rather than make it unlimited.