drewguy

Actually it does both, unless what's right is never, ever bumping a passenger.

The current system is inefficient because it doesn't do a good job of sorting out those who are most flexible with their schedule from those who most need to travel, regardless of ticket price.

This program would seem to reduce those inefficiencies by doing a better job of sorting and potentially increasing the number of people who have flexibility.

Of course, United will be able to make more money from it. But passengers will also get some amount of the benefit (e.g., the person who would take the voucher if they could get 6 extra hours of vacation instead of sitting in an airport).

Yes, I expect United will get the vast majority of the benefit, but this is gains from trade and that usually benefits both sides of the trade.

Darlox

I generally agree, and am all-in on this, assuming they use this to _supplement_ their RM activities, and don't start baking it in as a component OF their RM activities.

What I mean by that is, if they know they're going into an over-sell situation, and they want to buy-off flexible advance-purchasers to better fit pax to available inventory across a day's flight schedule, then I think this is a big win for all involved.

On the other hand, one pathological endpoint of this could allow them to cut capacity, restrict more capacity to higher fare buckets, and start _assuming_ that they can buy-off flexible occasional flyers in order to force higher fares on business travelers who are more time/route constrained. In other words, it becomes a shadow fare-hike on anyone without who can't book on vacation-planning timelines. It becomes an incentive to start opening up low fare buckets WAY in advance, on the assumption that you can always buy-off some proportion of those people when the flight day eventually approaches, for less than you can gain in revenue from people who now want to fly on that date closer-in.

It's a subtle, but possibly insidious difference from the existing RM practice of that 6-8 week "sweet spot" in low-fare availability. Right now, they can hit vacationers planning on long timelines, and then hit businesspeople planning on short timelines. The discounts go to the Kayakers who can vacuum up inventory a month or two out. This could upset that math by removing the some of the revenue "penalty" for early discount sales, and result in higher overall fares for anyone EXCEPT long-timeline vacationers...

Of course there are market forces at work, and competition from OALs to contend with short-term. Until they ALL adopt something similar, and then the game changes again.

sbm12

The article also says it is going to avoid the Dr. Dao situation which is clearly untrue. The article is not 100% accurate.

These systems are designed to offer both earlier and later flights compared to the one booked.

eng3

I didn't see anything wrong with the old system. I got some pretty big ETC's for relatively low inconvenience. I've never gotten one of those calls 24/48hrs ahead to make a change, but being able to talk to someone and negotiate is a big plus. After the "dao-incident" I fear the days of making a quick buck are coming to an end.

I'm pretty skeptical about this approach and the accuracy of the article. Devil's in the details. While it would be nice to possibly be able to make a change before going to the airport (so I spend my time at home versus at the airport), this automated system takes away perks that you might get at the airport (F upgrade, higher ETC, change dates, airport, meal vouchers, knowing exactly what you're getting).

sbm12

Then you have nothing to worry about. This also probably won't affect you.

I'm sure you'll be shocked to learn that the company would rather reduce the size of those payouts where possible.

Good news: You can still just travel on the flight you booked. In theory that was your original goal, right?

RooseveltL

The current system pre-calls by agent received prior to departure (I've rec'd two) is typically due to weather issues at EWR causing cancellations so overload on my scheduled departure. Offered to reschedule from EWR to BOS for next day as was returning from SAN and the other was EWR to DCA. Both calls were the night before my scheduled departure but extreme cancellations causing overflow into the next day.

I believe the system contacted me because I wasn't yet in EWR (Transiting to it) and they already knew from my check-in PNR I can jump on a bus or train in no time since I didn't check luggage.

I think this system helps holiday travel overload (especially if other flights available) and will help bad weather if you can contact people early and force them on earlier flights ahead of the weather so if/when you cancel later flights you have seats for evening rush or delayed aircrafts.

I would anticipate the formula will simply gather which elite members travel with luggage/checked bags vs. carry-on. If carry-on you are flexible to head to airport anytime and can make it more attractive as an elite member because you will use the voucher.

cfischer

they should go with the new LH model. Book a flight from A to B at a discount and we'll tell you 72 hrs before which route you'll fly. That would give them a lot of flexibility at pre-discounted rates.

nerdbirdsjc

IMHO, LH can pull this off for a number of reasons that don't apply to United.

Perhaps, but it also potentially offers far more alternative flight options than at the airport within 60 minutes of departure given current industry load factors.

Once the system is fully implemented and refined, I could easily see an expansion to (for example) TATL itineraries, where UA could maximize revenue by offering vouchers to shuffle people around on the various UA (and LH) options during heavy business travel periods.

sxr71

So this is for FF members who book on United.com. That would exclude granny and all BE flyers for the most part i would think. So i wonder how many FFs would take $250? Especially to be comfirmed within 24hrs. When i heard about this i thought "nice i might get paid a nominal sum for an SDC that might be a more optimal flight than i originally booked.

Also, as a FF member i really would want the voucher and PQD also. Otherwise i doubt i would ever bite. I love the SDC option in theory but in hindsight I've very rarely actually used it. Usually i already bought my optimal flight. This 24 hour confirmation is just not going to get many takers from the FF contingent. Who would waste a day at their destination over $250? Much more likely with non FF flyers.

jsloan

I don't understand your first point -- you get full PQDs on any ticket purchased using a voucher, if that's what you mean.

Most of my travel is personal; I frequently have plenty of flexibility, and I will almost always volunteer if I can find a reasonable replacement. $250 is reasonable for a 1-2 hour change in plans, and probably more if I know about it in advance. However -- they'd have to provide the replacement flight information at the time I agreed to accept the cert. I don't mind the 24-hour delay in confirmation while they try to sell the seat; there's no way I'd just say "sure, fly me whenever you want for $250," because I don't want to end up in an E- middle on a red-eye or something. I'd need to be protected on an actual alternate itinerary in the meantime.

This has the potential to make VDBs much less lucrative -- which is obviously the point -- but it certainly won't eliminate them, and it may actually lead to a few more vouchers paid out in some circumstances. After all, when you give the voucher in advance, you risk paying someone for a seat you don't end up needing. However, I think it will have minimal impact until / unless it's rolled into the app and made more aggressive. Heck, plenty of people on this board don't seem to receive any UA marketing emails at all, despite being opted in -- what makes us think that these Flex-Schedule emails will actually make it to the inbox?

Gig103

I can definitely relate to the attitude that if I'm at the airport, my 'buyout' price is going to be very high. I've never VDB'ed before, and never even considered it until DL and UA started offering $1k at the gate. With notice, and a flexible schedule, I'd be more inclined.

Often1

Of course UA is doing this to maximize net revenue. It is a for-profit business with a duty to its shareholders to do so. But, everything that maximizes net is not bad for consumers as well. This is one which is good for both.

The fact that there are people here who won't use it or think it's bad for them doesn't mean that it is bad for others.

I also suspect that, in time, this will expand to a broader population of bookings and non-FF's. Tickets booked on .com and for FF's have a lot more stability in their information and it is easier to isolate the bugs in the system.

Outside the FT cocoon, people think of being bumped as a bad thing, even with a voucher. Sure, this program will do a lot to eliminate higher VDB's at the gate, but that is generally a good thing other than for the minute percentage of travelers who book hoping for $1,000 vouchers.

You can't compare $250 offered well in advance, allowing you to head for the airport to make a newly-scheduled flight with a larger voucher offered at the gate which may mean hanging around for hours with little to do.

This will also open inventory for last minute fliers as UA can create full Y inventory and effectively buy out the cheap discounted ticket + $250 or thereabouts and still make money. Again, a win-win. UA makes money and the walk-up passenger is happy because he has his ticket.

sbm12

BE fares are primarily booked through direct channels. Not excluded at all.

The new ticket paid for with the TCV will earn PQDs. Just like it has for years.

Why would you think it is a waste of an entire day? The goal is generally to move passengers to a different flight a couple hours earlier or later, not to a different travel date.

guaCOmole

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/trav...-seats-n782171

fuzz

My brother is the CEO of Volantio, whose technology is used. So happy for his company, as I have seen how hard they've been working on this!