Kevin AA

Except for those who will not ever fly UA again, people value free tickets at a higher rate than what it costs UA. If UA funny money isn't enough, then they should offer free unrestricted coach tickets anywhere UA flies. In theory it might cost UA $3,000 in the Y bucket but since those are rarely filled, in practice it costs them little. But if free tickets isn't enough, then offer cash. Or free tickets and cash. I refuse to buy into the myth that all 70 people will refuse two free F tickets anywhere in the world and $2,500 cash, and the idea of the passengers colluding to drive up the price of VDB is just laughable.

chrisl137

An app could be reasonable if they build it into the United app (or whichever airline you're on) and get people into the habit of using it before there's even a threat of VDB/IDB. It could almost turn into a game that people play while waiting to board.

I'm imagining an app that's basically like having Priceline inside the United app. While you're waiting around to board, especially if there's weather or they've announced it's full, you can stand around and build alternate itineraries within your reservation and put bids on them. It should let you build at least three, and ideally should even let you include other airlines so that the airline can do the math in the background on what offer it wants to take.

Suppose I'm in a middle on UA for a transcon and the plane is going to be overfull. I don't really want to sit in that seat all the way across the country, and I see that there's a seat in first on AA that leaves two hours later. I'd consider *paying* them to pass me over to AA and take that seat in first that they can probably get for a discount, and I'd certainly put a low rebate bid.

After writing that, I think a good mobile-enabled website would be more effective as long as it's fast. People who fly once or twice a year are probably unlikely to have the app on their phone but might be entertained by building alternate itineraries anyway. You'd be able to build itineraries up to the point they close the door and tell you to shut off your electronics.

It would also wreak havoc on upgrades. People will come back here and post "I was #1 on the upgrade list and then got bought out for TOD by an VDB from a United flight. I think united is gaming it so that they deliberate oversell and upgrade people onto OALs." There would be another forum on FT on how to best plot and bid itineraries to get upgrades or maximum cash back.

Kevin AA

At least half the people on the plane are not going to play with this app. People want to talk to a real person, the gate agent, when it comes to situations like this.

chrisl137

They don't have to- all you need is enough reasonable bids to clear the overbooking. If you don't want to give up your seat, don't play the game. It will become the new mileage run.

rapidex

Because people with a fully refundable/changeable ticket can cancel at the last minute for a full refund or change.The seat then goes out empty and unsold if there are no standby passengers.

GrayAnderson

While the app is an interesting idea, I really think that at the end of the day it's only going to be a signal for "how many people are interested". As others have noted, there are many incentives that someone might be up for on a short delay versus a long delay.

I do think the idea raised elsewhere of tying compensation to delay time beyond "just" the four-hour limit has merit. If the IDB rate were 16x/$5400 for a 24-hour delay versus 4x/$1350 for a 4-hour delay, UA would probably have considered either (1) offering to put the pax on the next flight to SDF (and potentially confront an overbooking situation at the gate there) or (2) put them on another airline. Doing this would also "put some stick about" playing games in low-frequency markets.

pinniped

This.

Start in the app, then augment with a manual process if you need to.

Most "typical" VDB situations - the flight is 3 hours later and people are getting $400-ish in funny money - will handle themselves easily enough and save time at the gate. People with complicated routings beyond the overbooked flight won't play, but on most routes that's fine.

The atypical ones - overnight stays, insufficient volunteers in the app - can be followed up with gate announcements.

eng3

There is always the possibility that no one will take the VDB offer. There will always be the possibility for unusual circumstances (this case). That is why DOT allows for IDB. Not allowing crews to get where they need to go would cause delays and cancellations affecting hundreds of people. Not capping the VDB offers would just allow people the abuse the system. Both cases driving up fares. They could just fly all the planes at 50% capacity from now on and double all the fares. That would alleviate the situation but then people will complain about fares.

The IDB system now is fine. If the system changes at all, it still will not make any difference. All this assumes people behave rationally. It wont stop a DYKWIA from decided it is more important for him to cause a scene and potentially delay hundred of people than follow a written procedure that have existed for years.

drewguy

1) Refundable tickets can sometimes be refunded if not used (it's only non-refundables and some others than you have to cancel to retain value).
2) If refundable pax don't show, filling seats increases revenue, meaning airline can reduce prices overall (i.e., they can price as if planes are full, not less than full)
3) misconnects also happen, which relates to point 2 (if they can fill every seat more easily, they can potentially lower all ticket prices).

bbmatt

The likelihood of no one taking a VDB offer is almost impossible. It's called tragedy of the commons. When you're talking about 50+ people, the chances of them all colluding together to not take an offer is pretty unrealistic. Someone will crack. Haha, it's how cops get confessions/get people to finger each other in a crime involving a group.

Loose Cannon

I think that the idea of disallowing IDB altogether and no cap on VDB with the auction system has great merit. However I think that the old Rule 240 ought to be codified into law and be made legally binding on ALL airlines including Southwest and Spirit.

Fiordland

An airline has already gone to zero over booking. WestJet. The only time you have this nonsense of more people than seats is IROP or standby passengers. In those cases the passengers know they are on a standby list.

pinniped

I think banning IDB entirely is a longshot and, as others have pointed out in cases like a broken seat, may have unintended consequences.

But the penalties for IDB (payments to passengers) should be stiff. High minimums are more important than an uncapped maximum. $1000 for a short-delay minimum and $3000/day for overnight delays should be both a reasonable offset for (most) passengers as well as a deterrent against egregious misbehavior on the part of GAs such as what we saw the other night.

VDB should be uncapped. High IDB minimums will function as a natural cap...people will realize that short-delay VDB offers aren't going above $1000 cash or, say, $2000 in funny money. (Using my example minimums above.) A planeload of pax colluding together to ask for a million dollars each could not happen.

The only regulation I'd impose on VDB is that if an airline offers vouchers/gift cards, they truly spend like regular flight credit on the airline. The restrictions/trickery on airline vouchers has gotten out of hand, and this is NEVER explained by a GA during the VDB solicitation process. GA's always make the vouchers sound like unrestricted credit towards future flights.

pinniped

So has Jetblue. IROP (well, equipment swaps) has driven up their IDB numbers in recent months, so all of these proposals would still apply to carriers that don't purposely overbook.

notquiteaff

Yeah, look at the IDB numbers of B6 last year. Not impressed.

http://crankyflier.com/2016/12/26/fo...-of-travelers/

has the stats for 2016.