|
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 26999822)
OK, I will get the discussion going.
It is great news that the ‘legacy’ wording is being removed – see post# 347 upthread where this was first raised (in this thread that is) So from now on, the AA Pricing Department (or whatever its correct name is) should have no reason to disallow inter-zone segments in Europe/Middle East __________________________________________________ ___ But the cynic in me says AA will just find some other (mis)interpretation of the rules to make life difficult for us. I predict the misinterpretation will be over the words “travel to/from Europe in both directions” in order to disallow itineraries that include South Africa and/or Mauritius. I had already given my view on clause 4(e)3 - see post#336 upthread. What clause 4(e) says is:I’m interested in what others think the words “to/from Europe in both directions” mean in practice. Here’s what I think they mean.
What do others think? Great news about the re-wording and huge thanks to Pandaperth for his persistence - and I have also pressed the point with the AA RTW desk when I've called about the segments between ME and Eurpope AA have ticketed me flying MPM-DOH - stopover - then ASIA-SWP--USA- and transiting LHR to JNB - ie ticket including travel in SA ... So I think this means they do accept Pandaperth's intepretation of the rules regarding what constitues in and out of Europe ? But presumably the question is - woudl AA allow it if I were to go DOH_LHR at the start of the trip ..... they wouldn't before because of their use of the no segments may be flown between ME and Europe if travel includes Africa .... IF they do now allow this - ie MPM-DOH-LHR-RTW-xLHR-JNB - would I be able to get my ticket reissued to this or would they still apply the rules that were current at time of issue ? |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 26999822)
OK, I will get the discussion going.
It is great news that the ‘legacy’ wording is being removed – see post# 347 upthread where this was first raised (in this thread that is) So from now on, the AA Pricing Department (or whatever its correct name is) should have no reason to disallow inter-zone segments in Europe/Middle East __________________________________________________ ___ But the cynic in me says AA will just find some other (mis)interpretation of the rules to make life difficult for us. I predict the misinterpretation will be over the words “travel to/from Europe in both directions” in order to disallow itineraries that include South Africa and/or Mauritius. I had already given my view on clause 4(e)3 - see post#336 upthread. What clause 4(e) says is:I’m interested in what others think the words “to/from Europe in both directions” mean in practice. Here’s what I think they mean.
What do others think? I believe that I agree with your interpretation. The purpose of the clause “to/from Europe in both directions” can only serve to qualify the permitted routes on the left-hand-side of the table. It is to take pressure off the highly popular routes from Europe to South Africa and Mauritius; routing via DOH is probably what is intended. LHR-JNB is one of BA's most profitable routes, even given the long downtime at JNB (which actually BA often use for cheap maintenance). LHR-CPT is also very lucrative for BA. Thus, I suspect that the true purpose of the clause is to reduce the capacity BA must make available to xONEx tickets, for which it would receive a sharply reduced revenue compared to ordinary return tickets bought on that city pair. |
Originally Posted by pianoperson
(Post 26999931)
IF they do now allow this - ie MPM-DOH-LHR-RTW-xLHR-JNB - would I be able to get my ticket reissued to this or would they still apply the rules that were current at time of issue ?
BUT the issue here is really "will AA continue its (mis)interpretation of the rules that were in effect when you bought the ticket". I want LHR-TLV-MAD on my ex-MPM DONE6. In due course I will be testing AA on this. |
AA RTW has been known to not use the rules in effect at the time of ticketing. Think back to when MH and QR were added and people were able to add flights to exiting in progress tickets, which would not have been allowed if they followed the old rules.
|
Originally Posted by JAXBA
(Post 26998186)
I found an update effective today.
Breaking: The nonsense in Para 4(h) about "the backtracking provisions in Para 4(e) 3.1.3.or 3.2.3." is being removed! The QF filed fare rule is already updated. 4(h) line about *segments between Europe and Middle East are not permitted if... - no longer exists! {snip} Each member airline files their *ONEx fares - copies of each other of course - but it takes time for all of them to go in. QF is usually first and their rules are already filed. oneworld.com not updated yet. Haven't looked for any other changes. Discuss! Just been checking on the progress of the implementation of the new rules referred to by JAXBA
|
Originally Posted by Calchas
(Post 27000021)
I think that the wording remains needlessly opaque.
I believe that I agree with your interpretation. The purpose of the clause “to/from Europe in both directions” can only serve to qualify the permitted routes on the left-hand-side of the table. It is to take pressure off the highly popular routes from Europe to South Africa and Mauritius; routing via DOH is probably what is intended. LHR-JNB is one of BA's most profitable routes, even given the long downtime at JNB (which actually BA often use for cheap maintenance). LHR-CPT is also very lucrative for BA. Thus, I suspect that the true purpose of the clause is to reduce the capacity BA must make available to xONEx tickets, for which it would receive a sharply reduced revenue compared to ordinary return tickets bought on that city pair. I made the same sort of argument when the rules were changed in April. In this post http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/26570141-post336.html, I suggested simpler wording: Suggested Wording If the intention is to disallow two flights between the UK and Southern Africa – then say so explicitly: 4(e) Only one intercontinental departure and one intercontinental arrival permitted in each continent except as follows:
This wording is concise and does away with zones completely. |
Thanks to pandaperth for your hard work to enable the change. I have yet to read the revised rule. when i was reading the rule from april. did they get rid of the hawaii restriction?
|
Originally Posted by pbd456
(Post 27008953)
Thanks to pandaperth for your hard work to enable the change. I have yet to read the revised rule. when i was reading the rule from april. did they get rid of the hawaii restriction?
The restriction on backtracking from Hawaii is a long-standing one; and it has not changed in the new version 4(b) Travel must be in a continuous forward direction between TC1 - TC2 - TC3. Backtracking within a continent is permitted except as follows: Backtracking between Hawaii and other points in North America is not permitted. |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27009047)
The restriction on backtracking from Hawaii is a long-standing one; and it has not changed in the new version |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27008868)
...
4(e) Only one intercontinental departure and one intercontinental arrival permitted in each continent except as follows:
This wording is concise and does away with zones completely. Try Two permitted in Asia when one is a transfer without stopover or when one is on a direct single plane service between the Southwest Pacific and Europe/Middle East. And even that may not be sufficient. Happy wandering Fred |
Originally Posted by wandering_fred
(Post 27012638)
The two permitted in Asia still has the ambiguity of the precedence of the "or" particularly with relation of a transit without stopover between Southwest Pacific and North America.
Try Two permitted in Asia when one is a transfer without stopover or when one is on a direct single plane service between the Southwest Pacific and Europe/Middle East. And even that may not be sufficient. Happy wandering Fred The wording is: 2.Two permitted in Asia when one is a transfer without stopover or on direct single plane service between the Southwest Pacific and Europe/Middle East. Also in the past I recall some airlines would only allow transfers without stopover if they were between SWP and Europe/Middle East, but I don't recall any issues with that for some years. The online tool allows transfers without stopovers between SWP and Africa or North America and I have twice ticketed itineraries with AA that had transfers between SWP and North America. For those who don't know the background, the issue has been how to interpret the rule; does it mean:
The first requires the transfer without stopover to be between SWP and Europe/Middle East, the second does not have that requirement. My view is that everything after word 'stopover' should be removed. My justification is:
Nor is the implication dealt with that either Asia or Africa must be included (ie sold as continents) if transiting from Europe to SWP. IMHO that is quite right. Clause 4(e) deals only with the backtracking provisions. What you are referring to Fred is covered in Clause 0 (zero!): Other Conditions Fares apply only if purchased prior to departure. The fare to be charged is determined by the highest class travelled and the number of geographic continents in the itinerary including the continent of origin and continents transited. {snip} * Travel between South West Pacific and Europe/Middle East on a single flight number/or by surface eg LON-SYD/MELvv, DXB-SYD/MELvv, DOH-ADL/MEL/PER/SYDvv, is considered travelling via Asia. Continents South West Pacific, Asia and Europe/Middle East must each be counted. How many continents you will be charged for is separate from the backtracking rules . For example fly LHR-SYD and then on the to the Americas, you will be charged for Asia even though you don't backtrack there |
TWO Rule Changes that had not been spotted previously
TWO Rule Changes that had not been spotted previously
What with one thing and another recently, I have been scrutinising the rule sheet very closely over the last few days, and I have spotted two changes that have not been reported here previously. Rule 0 Counting Continents I had to search back through my old versions of the rule sheet to find when this change was made - it was in March-2013:D Rule 8 StopoversPrior to March-2013, the rule was: The fare to be charged is determined by the highest class travelled and the number of geographic continents in the itinerary including the continent of origin. The fare to be charged is determined by the highest class travelled and the number of geographic continents in the itinerary including the continent of origin and continents transited. Prior to the changes on April 22, the rule was: Discuss.8. STOPOVERS Permitted NOTE:
8. STOPOVERS Permitted NOTE:
|
I do not believe that the change in continent counting is significant; has it not always been the case that transited continents must be counted? This seems more like a clarification than a real change, but I stand to be corrected.
|
Originally Posted by Calchas
(Post 27013624)
I do not believe that the change in continent counting is significant; has it not always been the case that transited continents must be counted? This seems more like a clarification than a real change, but I stand to be corrected.
But I have a vague memory that in the dim and distant past, i.e. before the 2013 rule change, some people got away with not having North America counted when they flew NRT-GRU or vv (those JL flights were via JFK) |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27013668)
Yes I agree this is a clarification
But I have a vague memory that in the dim and distant past, i.e. before the 2013 rule change, some people got away with not having North America counted when they flew NRT-GRU or vv (those JL flights were via JFK) |
Originally Posted by skunker
(Post 27014660)
The old AA ORD-DEL counted as including Europe even though the plane never landed there and you couldn't go back.
But Europe was NOT charged for, see http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/14223220-post1.html |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27014704)
It is a moot point now as the ORD-DEL flight is but a distant memory
But Europe was NOT charged for, see http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/14223220-post1.html |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27014704)
It is a moot point now as the ORD-DEL flight is but a distant memory
But Europe was NOT charged for, see http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/14223220-post1.html |
2016-Aug-04 New Version of the Rule Sheet
The new rule sheet has now been published on the Oneworld web site
The only change I can se is that posted by JAXBA on August 1st - namely that Clause 4(h) has had these words removed *segments between Europe and Middle East are not permitted if travel includes Africa and the itinerary utilises the backtracking provisions in Para 4(e) 3.1.3.or 3.2.3. |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27019176)
The new rule sheet has now been published on the Oneworld web site
The only change I can se is that posted by JAXBA on August 1st - namely that Clause 4(h) has had these words removed Yay! |
WHAT THE *#@%!!! - AA does it its way!
So the new fare rules have been published on the Oneworld web site
But AA has obviously decided it is right and Oneworld is wrong This is what AA's new fare rule looks like in ExpertFlyer (apologies for the crappy formatting and for SHOUTING) 4E. ONLY ONE INTERCONTINENTAL DEPARTURE AND ONE INTERCONTINENTAL ARRIVAL PERMITTED IN EACH CONTINENT EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS - 1. TWO PERMITTED IN NORTH AMERICA WHEN ONE IS A TRANSFER WITHOUT STOPOVER. 2. TWO PERMITTED IN ASIA WHEN ONE IS A TRANSFER WITHOUT STOPOVER OR ON DIRECT SINGLE PLANE SERVICE BETWEEN SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AND EUROPE / MIDDLE EAST. 3. TWO PERMITTED IN EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST A. FOR TRAVEL ORIGINATING IN AFRICA //AFRICA-EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST-RTW-EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST-AFRICA// - ONE OF THE VISITS TO EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST MUST BE A TRANSFER WITHOUT STOPOVER BETWEEN AFRICA AND THE PREVIOUS/NEXT CONTINENT. B. FOR TRAVEL ORIGINATING OTHER THAN AFRICA //EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST-AFRICA-EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST// - IF TRAVEL TO/FROM EUROPE IN BOTH DIRECTIONS THE ITINERARY MAY NOT INCLUDE MAURITIUS/SOUTH AFRICA. --- --- H.A MINIMUM OF 3 AND MAXIMUM OF 16 SEGMENTS INCLUDING SURFACE SEGMENTS BETWEEN ANY 2 AIRPORTS ARE PERMITTED FOR THE ENTIRE JOURNEY. FREE FLIGHT SEGMENTS WITHIN EACH CONTINENT ARE LIMITED AS FOLLOWS - AFRICA 4 ASIA 4 EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST 4 - NOT MORE THAN 2 OF WHICH MAY BE BETWEEN THE UK AND ALBANIA/ALGERIA/ BULGARIA/CROATIA/CYPRUS/GREECE/LIBYA/ISRAEL/ MIDDLE EAST/MOROCCO/ROMANIA/RUSSIA WEST OF THE URALS/TUNISIA/TURKEY/UKRAINE. SEGMENTS BETWEEN MIDDLE EAST AND EUROPE ARE NOT PERMITTED IF TRAVEL INCLUDES AFRICA AND THE ITINERARY UTILISES THE BACKTRACKING PROVISIONS IN PARAGRAPH FL.E.3.A AND E.3.B NORTH AMERICA 6 SOUTH AMERICA 4 SOUTHWEST PACIFIC 4 Note this is new wording - previously paragraph 4(h) referred to "3.1.3 and 3.2.3" not "FL.E.3.A and E.3.B" So it looks like AA will still refuse Europe-Middle East flights on backtracking itineraries The Qantas fare rules do not have the red text in paragraph 4(h) |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27008826)
I obviously have too much time on my hands, now that the feeding frenzy that was the ex-MPM fares is over:)
Just been checking on the progress of the implementation of the new rules referred to by JAXBA
AB, QR, RJ and UL are now moved to the HAVE updated list So we are still waiting on BA, AY, MH and LA to change their fare rulesAA is also moved, BUT its fare rules are different* from the rest * I have checked the fare rules of all the airlines that have updated - except for AA, they are all the same, in other words they have removed all reference to restrictions on Europe-Middle East flights due to backtracking |
AA not filing the same rules could mean that unless it was ticketed by AA, the RTW desk will not touch it. Or if they do, they will use AA's rules and not the issuing carrier's rules. Is that possible? Another example of the 'seamless' oneworld travel experience.
|
Originally Posted by headinclouds
(Post 27019617)
AA not filing the same rules could mean that unless it was ticketed by AA, the RTW desk will not touch it. Or if they do, they will use AA's rules and not the issuing carrier's rules. Is that possible? Another example of the 'seamless' oneworld travel experience.
|
Originally Posted by pbd456
(Post 27019627)
other carriers are not supposed to take over a ticket unless there is a strong reason to, like irregular operation or maybe upgrade via mileage/swu. i believe aa complimentary upgrade does not require it to be reissued.
|
Originally Posted by pbd456
(Post 27019627)
other carriers are not supposed to take over a ticket unless there is a strong reason to, like irregular operation or maybe upgrade via mileage/swu. i believe aa complimentary upgrade does not require it to be reissued.
Who knows what rules they would apply |
Originally Posted by pandaperth
(Post 27019324)
So the new fare rules have been published on the Oneworld web site
But AA has obviously decided it is right and Oneworld is wrong This is what AA's new fare rule looks like in ExpertFlyer (apologies for the crappy formatting and for SHOUTING) My emphasis Note this is new wording - previously paragraph 4(h) referred to "3.1.3 and 3.2.3" not "FL.E.3.A and E.3.B" So it looks like AA will still refuse Europe-Middle East flights on backtracking itineraries The Qantas fare rules do not have the red text in paragraph 4(h) I checked Amadeus to see how QF and AA had it filed and of course QF doesn't have the para 4(h) line, as we knew. I also compared paras 3(a)(b) for differences and, well, spot the difference: QF filed: Code:
3. TWO PERMITTED IN EUROPE/MIDDLE EASTAA filed: Code:
|
Originally Posted by pbd456
(Post 27019627)
other carriers are not supposed to take over a ticket unless there is a strong reason to, like irregular operation or maybe upgrade via mileage/swu. i believe aa complimentary upgrade does not require it to be reissued.
Especially RTWs and alliance fare products. They can, they're allowed, they don't need extra permission, it's an internal alliance rule in the oneworld Ticketing Agreement. Now which rules they apply when they do so is another matter... |
Originally Posted by JAXBA
(Post 27020141)
Any oneworld member is allowed to reissue any ticket with a published fare issued by any other oneworld member.
Especially RTWs and alliance fare products. They can, they're allowed, they don't need extra permission, it's an internal alliance rule in the oneworld Ticketing Agreement. Now which rules they apply when they do so is another matter... |
Originally Posted by pbd456
(Post 27020254)
yes. but cx told me they wont unless there is.a good reason to. we asked cx to reissue the qf ticket but cx agent that i talked to refuse. as a rule, it is allowed, whether it is being done is another matter. i am thinking to apply mileage upgrade on a cx segment and hope cx to reissue and then un apply the upgrade.
|
Originally Posted by jerry a. laska
(Post 27020509)
Once travel has started CX has reissued several xonex's originally issued by other airlines for me over the years.
|
Originally Posted by pbd456
(Post 27020585)
how do u get cx to reissued?
|
Originally Posted by jerry a. laska
(Post 27020643)
I have had them reissue in HKG while I am traveling on the ticket. I provide them the new routing and my credit card, I sit in the lounge for awhile, they come back with the reissue completed. I have also called and given them my new routing and they have reissued.
|
Originally Posted by pbd456
(Post 27020718)
they didnt ask u to contact the original ticketing airline?
|
Originally Posted by JAXBA
(Post 27020116)
Ugh! I checked Amadeus to see how QF and AA had it filed and of course QF doesn't have the para 4(h) line, as we knew. I also compared paras 3(a)(b) for differences and, well, spot the difference: QF filed: Code:
3. TWO PERMITTED IN EUROPE/MIDDLE EASTAA filed: Code:
So, my understanding of AA's version is: If I choose to take advantage of the backtrack provisions of Paragraph 4E3, in other words backtracking through Europe/Middle East in conjunction with travel to/from Africa, then if American Airlines tickets the itinerary: So with AA these itineraries would be valid (but invalid with QF):
JNB-oCPT-LHR-DME-LHR-LAX-HKG-MLE-xLGW-oMRU-JNB - through Europe twice yet including SA/Mauritius :rolleyes: We need someone to try booking one of these with AA ATW desk:DLAX-HKG-MLE-oDOH-oAMM-oDOH-JNB-CPT-oLHR-oDME-oLHR-LAX - stopovers in Middle East prior to Africa and stopovers in Europe after Africa |
I've been spending a bit of time in EF looking at what all the airlines have in their fare rules for this clause.
What I have found is:
IMHO this wording is in turn a poor translation of the actual requirement, which I think is: 3. Two permitted in Europe/Middle East when one is a transfer without stopover. Note only one flight segment permitted between the United Kingdom and South Africa/Mauritius or maybe (if this was truly the intention) 3. Two permitted in Europe/Middle East when one is a transfer without stopover. Note only one flight segment permitted between Europe and South Africa/Mauritius
Originally Posted by JAXBA
(Post 27020116)
Ugh! I checked Amadeus to see how QF and AA had it filed and of course QF doesn't have the para 4(h) line, as we knew. I also compared paras 3(a)(b) for differences and, well, spot the difference: QF filed: Code:
3. TWO PERMITTED IN EUROPE/MIDDLE EASTAA filed: Code:
|
So is it fare (!) to say that we now officially have a fragmented oneworld Explorer product, rather than was open to interpretation but at least had the same, ridiculously complicated rules?
|
Originally Posted by danger
(Post 27027149)
So is it fare (!) to say that we now officially have a fragmented oneworld Explorer product, rather than was open to interpretation but at least had the same, ridiculously complicated rules?
|
The "more than oneworld"
|
I can't imagine the fragmented product is going to last in this way. Surely there will have to be some consistency brought to bear by oneworld HQ?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:20 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.