5 ms·
If United's fare is more than 20% lower than the otherwise lowest fare, I'd probably risk it...but until there's a big change in management, I wouldn't feel goo
by theprop 9y ago
If United's fare is more than 20% lower than the otherwise lowest fare, I'd probably risk it...but until there's a big change in management, I wouldn't feel good about it.
- maxerickson 9y agoThe odds of being involved in an incident are essentially 0 (especially right after the big negative publicity). Someone analyzing just that risk should take United anytime it is cheaper or more convenient.
- ryandrake 9y ago...and, this is how change doesn't happen.
- frogpelt 9y agoIn one way you're right. In another way, the mounds of negative publicity the last few weeks have already caused change I'm guessing.
- maxerickson 9y agoRead both sentences. Focus on the phrase "analyzing just that risk" in the second one. Think about what I might have meant. Think about whether what I meant really should have prompted your snide remark.
- ryandrake 9y agoI think we are in agreement--people who are only picking who to buy from using that mentality (It won't happen to me) are why companies can get away with shenanigans on a once-in-a-million cadence.
- dboreham 9y agoWell, I fly United about once a month and I've been involved in an incident exactly once in the past 20 years. I wasn't thrown off the plane, just the guy seated in front of me. I still fly United because I expect they are on best behavior now.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- mcphage 9y ago> The odds of being involved in an incident are essentially 0 Involved in what kind of incident? United getting the police to throw me off the plane? Yeah, that's probably around 0 right now. But an incident involving poor customer service? That's definitely a lot higher than 0.