Excellent question. If we accept that LHR//LGW is a segment, and there is nothing the airlines can do about it, much to their regret, why don't the same airlines accept LON, which solves the problem?

oneworld4u, I would be happy to accept that LGW-LHR is a "segment", if the home carrier (BA) was willing to accept that they should provide a flight number so I can include it in my itinerary. Then most most OneWorld airline's FF programes would also provide some form of minimum miles/points/tier/status credits etc. Currently QF offer a minimum 1000 FF points for their top-tier FF members, and AA offer a minimum 500 Elite Qualifying Points (EQP) per segment flown. So if LGW/LHR is seem as one of the maximum 16 sectors of a OneWorld Explorer, then why not at least provide a consistent FF points/miles etc. payment for a "segment" that only seems to exist as a result of product devaluation.

I've recently switched to OW due to AA's new larger presence in JFK. Are all carriers expected to share award ticket availability equally (via an official or even unofficial rule?) Or, is it *Alliance style where carriers pick and choose which seats are available to their own customers, even though award seats have been released by the "owner" airline?
Also, what are future expnasion probabilities?

Thanks for the info!

I guess I'm wondering if robust protracted argument for change on edge cases (situations we care about but "normal" users wouldn't) is forlorn or not. Giving our feedback loud in clear is different from aiming for real debate that goes beyond stated policy which may result in real change.

I'd hate this thread to become a way to *unconstructively* take out oneworld frustrations on one individual. Even if that person is an official rep.

Dear OneWorld4U:

Recently I have booked a LONE4 from AA.Not paid yet but in reservation. I use the OneWorld Itinerary Planner to get all the flight details and called AA to book it. But my little mind is, the OneWorld Itinerary Planner is so wonderful that it can detect most of the breaching on technical rules. I believe it should be made available for us to book online with the One World Itinerrary Planner. It cost me 3 calls almost 3 hours to make the telephone reservation. But with internet I can finish the journey planner in one hour and I can choose the flight available which I prefer to be on.

It might not be suitable for online on-time reservation right now due to the complex taxes/fuel surcharge calculation. But I believe it is possible for us to make a reservation online and get the response regarding total price in 48 hours time. That can save a lot of trouble.

The *A RTW tool has an option to send your itinerary to an airline. Doesn't check availability online, but otherwise sounds like that is what you'd like IC6A?

Hi oneworld4u,

When will you issue the electronic timetable for Mac computers?

Oneworld4u,

My question is whether Oneworld has ever thought about setting up an alliance-wide ticketing desk specifically for the ticketing of oneworld products such as the Oneworld Explorer or the Global Explorer. It seems that the rules are interpreted inconsistently, depending on who is processing the ticket. It also seems to be a huge waste of resources to train and equip many people within the alliance on the various rules, when really only a handful are needed. The tickets could be "issued" by the carrier used for the first longhaul flight, and the cost could be picked up on a pro-rata basis by the ticketing carriers.

Thank you. Darren

I'd second Darren's suggestion. It is logical and seems cost effective. What would be the obstacles to implementing it?

I see one obvious issue in that the different airlines have differing fuel fines which they wish to charge. Wouldn't want a single desk that just charges the highest fines. The current system seems to work ok to me

Dave

Thanks for all your observations, suggestions and queries, FTers. All your feedback is much appreciated.

Alliance fare sales procedures: Thanks to all for their input to this debate. We are conscious that the current process for buying oneworld fares, such as Explorer, Circle and Visit passes, could be smoother. Because of the huge number of options they offer, they are complicated things to support, from the sales technology standpoint. All I can say at this stage is that we are working on developments which take account of aq number of the key issues raised in your postings, so please be patient for a while longer and, as they say in the ad industry, watch this space!

Open-dated segments: This is one of the difficult issues the industry is having to come to terms with as it flies into the all e-ticket era. While some individual airlines have found ways of allowing open-dated segments with their e-tickets, there is (as far as I am aware - always dangerous to say things like that!) no internationally-accepted industry-wide process or procedure for dealing with them. Things are moving pretty fast in this overall area, however, so keep watching this space, as they say...

headinclouds: Not only did I get your name wrong first time around, but I think I failed to respond to your question, too! So double apologies. BA, Finnair, Iberia, LAN, Malev and Qantas all currently use Amadeus, with Cathay Pacific in the process of moving to it. AA uses Sabre, JAL uses Axess and RJ SITA.

kiwiflyer: Thanks for your input re Star's RTW rules. I note you said they state that various airport co-terminals are NOT to be counted as a segment or transfer. That's the same as oneworld. So transferring from, say LHR Terminal 1 to LHR Terminal 3 is not a segment. But if you have to transfer between different airports - eg LHR to LGW, or DFW to Love Field - that is counted as a segment.

manar: Remind me, if we ever meet, that I owe you a beer!

I hate to sound ungrateful, given the prompt and considerate responses we have received from oneworld4u in a short period of time, but I still see two major issues that remain unanswered.

Issue #1: Transfers between co-terminals count as a segment.
Stated reason: Technical problem, not commercial.
FT suggestion: Use the city code (LON, NYC, etc).
Response: None so far.

Issue #2: OWE limited to 16 segments.
Stated reason: Technical limitation of eTickets.
FT suggestion: Linked PNRs.
Response: None so far.
 

Sorry for being unclear. Certain airports are designated as co-terminals as follows. Any transfer between these are NOT counted as a segment on xRWSTARx (the main *A RTW product), thus more reasonable (IMO) than xONEx.

The IATA list covers the usual ones such as LHR/LGW/etc, NRT/HND, etc.

On the subject of sales procedures, could you clarify how the recently introduced �Canada exception� works? My understanding is that the old rule of having to pay the maximum of the price of country of booking and the price of country of origin now does not apply when booking in Canada. It seems that when ONE tickets are booked through Canadian travel agents then you can pay the point of origin price even if it is lower than the country of booking (i.e., Canada). Given that most people in this forum deal directly with airline round-the-world desks, my question is whether this pricing also works when booking directly with the airline for an origin in, say, South Africa or Japan, but paying for the ticket at a ticket counter of AA, BA, or CX at a Canadian airport?

OneWorld has contracted with Innovata, Ltd. for its electronic timetables. However, the Innovata product is distinctly inferior to the electronic timetables produced by Goldenware, Inc. for both Star Alliance and SkyTeam.

The most serious problem I have seen is in synchronizing the Palm database. The oneworld data file is so large, that the Palm synchronization software frequently has trouble with it, loses synchronization, and fails, crashing the HotSync utility. By contrast, the Palm timetables for Star Alliance and SkyTeam, that are equally large, have no problems whatsoever. (I keep electronic timetables for all 3 alliances on my Palm PDA. I prefer flying OneWorld, and it is most annoying that the competitors electronic timetables are so much more reliable.)

American Airlines used to offer a OneWorld electronic timetable from Goldenware, which was much superior, technically, to the current product from Innovata.

I would like to suggest that when your contract with Innovata runs out, that you seriously consider switching to GoldenWare as a provider, as their products work much more reliably. Their user interface is also much more pleasant to use, but the reliability issue is the major problem.