Gaucho100K

Im booking my next RTW, and am sort of confused by a fax I just got from UA's MEX reservations office.

I thought that for RTWSTAR fares, the booking of code share flights was not permitted (ie. booking LH metal but with UA flight number). Now, I just got an initial itinerary I reserved with the help of UA Mexico where my segment FRA-JFK is booked on UA3517 (operated by Lufthansa) with the correct D fare...?

I knew that as long as you included two different *A carriers in one intra-continental longhaul segment each, you where off the hook. My current itinerary has one long haul SQ and various long haul UA, so does that mean I can go ahead and book the codeshare? Any experiences?


------------------
Gaucho100K

JohnnyGlobal

I've always been told the same thing regarding codeshares for RTW: flights are always booked in the flight number of the physical carrier.

I inquired just last week about this very rule when I reviewed my RTW FRA-JNB segment. UA codeshares this route with LH and I wanted the UA codeshare flight # since it would double my mileage plus bonus miles. No dice. LH it is.

Rudi

same experiences as JohnnyGlobal (just again last week with LH ZRH). No code-share-bookings.

Disadvantage of having that LH-metal flight booked as a UA-code-share: you can't upgrade using UA vouchers or miles (you could using LH-vouchers).

bernie

I've done just the opposite twice: booking seats on the codeshare, if seats at the "right" fare are not opnen with the physical carrier. Helped in january, when no "A" seats were available on UA. Worked recently in september, when no "D" seats left on UA longhaul. It also worked UA domestic. No "A" seats on UA, so the agent booked "P" on NZ codeshare.

Of course, there are some codeshare flts, which are expicitly excluded. Have the list of those excluded flts. here:

indogulf

i too have had the opposite experience.

i regularly book *RTW fares and I have always been able to specify which flight number I wanted if it was a codeshare. Actually, I have used this to benefit me if one airline's seats are unavailable but the other's are still there. Most recently I booked an AC flight under the NH code b/c AC was sold out but NH had a few seats left.

Also, I have noted that LH typically book all posible sectors with their code regardless of the carrier. I suppose it has something to do with revenue share?

transpac

If your RTW ticket is on UAL ticket stock (016) then I can see why UA might put you on UA 3517 rather than LH 400. They wrote the ticket, and they might get more revenue and not have to incur any costs. Just a guess on my part.

Gaucho100K

Thank-you all. Here's another question:

If Im on a multi-continent (ie. Asia - Europe - North America) full fare business class ticket thats over US$ 10K, is it feasible to switch to a RTW type ticket in the middle of the itinerary?

If so, will it be feasible for my company to get a refund on the fare difference?

I have to plan my early December travel and I dont think I will be able to go RTW since I may have to backtrack continents. But if at a later stage I dont, I would like to be able to switch back (if possible).

Gaucho100K

PS: does this thread appear extra-wide on your screens... on my computer, for some reason it looks as if the text lines are 3 times as long (no right margin justification or cut-off, like other regular threads).

I wonder why is this...???

JohnnyGlobal

Hmmm....I'm going to call UA back and see if I can change that FRA-JNB LH flight # to the UA codeshare. The OAG flight guide says "UA 3814 - Int onln cnx/stpvr tfc". Not sure how this rule applies to *Alliance RTW fares...specifically ones booked through UA, that start with UA, from the United States. Would this have any impact? Does the airline that you book the RTW ticket with matter for things like this? Does the ticketing airline matter for any reason at all?)

Rudi

extra-wide screen: the list in bernie's post is the culprit.

JohnnyGlobal

YES!!! While all of you sleep, I think that I may have answered my own questions from an hour ago.

indogulf and bernie...thank you so much for the tip on codeshares for RTW tickets! I just talked to the UA 1K int'l desk and after 20 minutes or so was able to get (three) LH flight numbers switched over to the UA codeshares: FRA-WAW, WAW-FRA, FRA-JNB. In the end, this will result in 100% bonus miles for all three legs--about 6500 extra miles!

I called UA, told them that I heard I could book a flight using codeshare numbers assuming that number wasn't on the prohibited list.

The agent replied, "well, we're told to book the flight in the carrier on which the flight is going to actual take place."

To which I quickly replied, "I understand that, but seeing as these flights are not in the sequence of flight numbers listed as prohibited for this request, I believe that we can go ahead and book these flights under the UA codeshare number instead of the LH numbers."

She said she'd have to check on this and then asked to put me on hold.

NO!!! I thought to myself...once they put you on hold, then they go and confer with their buddies who live, breathe, and die by these rules. They will surely find something that denies my request.

Then she came back and said that she didn't see why we couldn't do this, but asked to put me on hold do that she could make another call.

This time I thought I was done for sure. Stick a fork in me. In cases like this, they must call Jim Goodwin himself and figure out how to deny me.

Surprisingly, she came back in about 5 minutes and told me that all three flight numbers fell outside of the prohibited ranges and that she could switch the numbers to UA codeshare numbers--no other questions asked. She never asked me why I wanted to do this, and I never volunteered. Does UA benefit from this because it's under their flight numbers, but flown on LH-metal?

Moral of the story: Use bernie's list of prohibited numbers and keep calling UA until they do it for you. After all of the calls that the UA agent made, and all of the checking, I suspect that we can safely assume that their policies don't specifically prohibit this practice--they just don't encourage it.

[This message has been edited by JohnnyGlobal (edited 10-16-2000).]

ozstamps

gaucho .. Bernie's post has this as one huge word in the eyes of the UBB:

4449/4457/4462/4502/4506/4507/4519/4524/4526/4533/4542/4548/4561/4563/4571/4585-4586/4596/4603/4608/4609/4618/4620/4623/4626/4628/4631-


Sometimes it does that with huge web addresses. Trick is to place space in there once or twice. (impossible with web addresses tho!) If Bernie is reading this he might consider editing to acheive that.

------------------
~ Glen ~