4 ms·

This is really interesting from a game theory perspective. What's really going to matter is how it's executed. If someone bids $100 to keep a seat empty and th

This is really interesting from a game theory perspective. What's really going to matter is how it's executed. If someone bids $100 to keep a seat empty and the flight is empty, do they still get charged the $100? Or is it only when there's a limited number of empty seats and more people that will pay to have an empty seat next to them. One interesting way would be that each person gets charged the lowest amount of everybody who has an empty seat next to them. This obviously limits what the airline makes, but keeps things generally fair. Another way is when people go to reserve seats, if someone is willing to pay $x to keep an adjacent seat empty, the price of selecting that seat goes up by $x. This guarantees the airline gets paid at least $x as soon as someone bids that. It also makes it more important to book seats early, but will of course, get much more complicated to execute. One of the things I do when booking flights for two, is choose an aisle seat and a window seat. Odds are if the flight is not full, a solo traveler will not book the middle seat, and we end up having all three seats for us. If someone does book the middle seat, we just trade aisle/window for the middle, so we're together, and he other person feels like he got an upgrade.

pc86 9y ago
> This obviously limits what the airline makes, but keeps things generally fair. What possible incentive would an airline have to do that, then? > If someone does book the middle seat, we just trade aisle/window for the middle, so we're together, and he other person feels like he got an upgrade. This infuriates me. My wife and I traveled cross country last month and due to a maintenance issue the previous night, our 6am flight was cancelled and we were pushed to 10am. What resulted was us trying to select seats when every row on the plane was either full or window-aisle. Had people flying together actually selected seats next to each other, it stands to reason some of those would have opened up and we may have been able to sit together. Not a big deal for a 30-minute connecting flight, but not the best 5 hours to start a trip with.
- obastani 9y ago
  In this situation, wouldn't the person sitting in the middle be willing to trade for either the aisle or the window seat?
  - porpoisemonkey 9y ago
    I think the point of the parent comment is that the strategy of capturing the two end seats of a three-person row displaces noncoupled passengers across more rows which has the potential to make finding coupled seats less likely for other fliers.
    - pc86 9y ago
      Yes I didn't do a great job explaining it but this is what I meant. You end up with a lot of couple + single filled rows and couple + empty seat rows. If you selected the seats you wanted instead of trying to game everyone else on what is probably a full or nearly-full flight anyway, there would be more rows filled with 3x single passengers.
- reverend_gonzo 9y ago
  > What possible incentive would an airline have to do that, then? For one, the airline makes more than if it had without bidding. Second, there is some value in not completely pissing off your customers. In my opinion, if the airline asks "how much are you willing to pay?" but you normally pay less, customers will hand over their money with a smile.
- dahart 9y ago
  > it stands to reason some of those would have opened up and we may have been able to sit together. I'm curious what your reasoning is? That experience sounds like it sucked, I've had similar and I can sympathize, but I might guess that your anger is misplaced. The comment you replied to is someone traveling in a pair. People traveling in pairs and shifting from a window/aisle to a middle only vacates 1 seat in a 3-seats-per-side 727 type plane, so that strategy doesn't affect you. If a plane is entirely full of pairs, no shifting for people to sit together will let you and your wife sit together. You could possibly sit across the aisle from each other if you find two pairs, which you can sometimes do with some talking to passengers and/or agents. It's far more likely that the plane was mostly full of singles and not pairs, and asking someone to move to a middle for you is a downgrade for them. I've done it successfully before by asking a few people nearby who'd be willing to move in exchange for me buying them a drink on the flight. But, most people are quite understandably reluctant to move to a middle when they're in a window or aisle with an empty middle next to them. Ultimately though, no amount of communication or behavior or game theory would be better than if the airlines would just make the seats more reasonably sized -- just a couple inches in each direction. But of course, if they do that, we pay more. :P
samsonradu 9y ago
> What's really going to matter is how it's executed. If someone bids $100 to keep a seat empty and the flight is empty, do they still get charged the $100? Or is it only when there's a limited number of empty seats and more people that will pay to have an empty seat next to them. For sure they will, and probably that's what they are after. Think of it like this, when you pay for an economy seat and get 2 adjacent seats for free because the plane is half empty you're basically winning the lottery since many travellers are randomly assigned. The airline will monetise on this from now on by opening up the bids. It's very interesting also to see to what degree prices will go up since this would create some scarcity. The airline is probably happier to accommodate as few passengers as possible due to the extra passenger overhead (check-in, bags, service) though the math is quite hard considering upsales and all. All in all, I have always been fascinated about the complex problems the airline industry is solving and this only adds more to it. Would really like to see the software implementing all this.
bluesign 9y ago
It is fair actually, you are bidding for the empty spaces. If flight is not full, empty places are assigned to people with the order of their bidding. From game theory perspective best option is bidding something like 1$ etc. (considering probably not many people will bid)
amrrs 9y ago
>Another way is when people go to reserve seats, if someone is willing to pay $x to keep an adjacent seat empty, the price of selecting that seat goes up by $x. This guarantees the airline gets paid at least $x as soon as someone bids that. It also makes it more important to book seats early, but will of course, get much more complicated to execute. But what if it is this way. Where if $x is the bid amount to keep the next seat empty (say middle seat that no one prefers booking), then the bid cost of that seat and comes $x*y% thus some passenger is encouraged to book the ticket and hence the bid value changes dynamically.

pc86 9y ago

> This obviously limits what the airline makes, but keeps things generally fair. What possible incentive would an airline have to do that, then? > If someone does book the middle seat, we just trade aisle/window for the middle, so we're together, and he other person feels like he got an upgrade. This infuriates me. My wife and I traveled cross country last month and due to a maintenance issue the previous night, our 6am flight was cancelled and we were pushed to 10am. What resulted was us trying to select seats when every row on the plane was either full or window-aisle. Had people flying together actually selected seats next to each other, it stands to reason some of those would have opened up and we may have been able to sit together. Not a big deal for a 30-minute connecting flight, but not the best 5 hours to start a trip with.

obastani 9y ago
In this situation, wouldn't the person sitting in the middle be willing to trade for either the aisle or the window seat?
- porpoisemonkey 9y ago
  I think the point of the parent comment is that the strategy of capturing the two end seats of a three-person row displaces noncoupled passengers across more rows which has the potential to make finding coupled seats less likely for other fliers.
  - pc86 9y ago
    Yes I didn't do a great job explaining it but this is what I meant. You end up with a lot of couple + single filled rows and couple + empty seat rows. If you selected the seats you wanted instead of trying to game everyone else on what is probably a full or nearly-full flight anyway, there would be more rows filled with 3x single passengers.
reverend_gonzo 9y ago
> What possible incentive would an airline have to do that, then? For one, the airline makes more than if it had without bidding. Second, there is some value in not completely pissing off your customers. In my opinion, if the airline asks "how much are you willing to pay?" but you normally pay less, customers will hand over their money with a smile.
dahart 9y ago
> it stands to reason some of those would have opened up and we may have been able to sit together. I'm curious what your reasoning is? That experience sounds like it sucked, I've had similar and I can sympathize, but I might guess that your anger is misplaced. The comment you replied to is someone traveling in a pair. People traveling in pairs and shifting from a window/aisle to a middle only vacates 1 seat in a 3-seats-per-side 727 type plane, so that strategy doesn't affect you. If a plane is entirely full of pairs, no shifting for people to sit together will let you and your wife sit together. You could possibly sit across the aisle from each other if you find two pairs, which you can sometimes do with some talking to passengers and/or agents. It's far more likely that the plane was mostly full of singles and not pairs, and asking someone to move to a middle for you is a downgrade for them. I've done it successfully before by asking a few people nearby who'd be willing to move in exchange for me buying them a drink on the flight. But, most people are quite understandably reluctant to move to a middle when they're in a window or aisle with an empty middle next to them. Ultimately though, no amount of communication or behavior or game theory would be better than if the airlines would just make the seats more reasonably sized -- just a couple inches in each direction. But of course, if they do that, we pay more. :P

samsonradu 9y ago

> What's really going to matter is how it's executed. If someone bids $100 to keep a seat empty and the flight is empty, do they still get charged the $100? Or is it only when there's a limited number of empty seats and more people that will pay to have an empty seat next to them. For sure they will, and probably that's what they are after. Think of it like this, when you pay for an economy seat and get 2 adjacent seats for free because the plane is half empty you're basically winning the lottery since many travellers are randomly assigned. The airline will monetise on this from now on by opening up the bids. It's very interesting also to see to what degree prices will go up since this would create some scarcity. The airline is probably happier to accommodate as few passengers as possible due to the extra passenger overhead (check-in, bags, service) though the math is quite hard considering upsales and all. All in all, I have always been fascinated about the complex problems the airline industry is solving and this only adds more to it. Would really like to see the software implementing all this.

bluesign 9y ago

It is fair actually, you are bidding for the empty spaces. If flight is not full, empty places are assigned to people with the order of their bidding. From game theory perspective best option is bidding something like 1$ etc. (considering probably not many people will bid)

amrrs 9y ago

>Another way is when people go to reserve seats, if someone is willing to pay $x to keep an adjacent seat empty, the price of selecting that seat goes up by $x. This guarantees the airline gets paid at least $x as soon as someone bids that. It also makes it more important to book seats early, but will of course, get much more complicated to execute. But what if it is this way. Where if $x is the bid amount to keep the next seat empty (say middle seat that no one prefers booking), then the bid cost of that seat and comes $x*y% thus some passenger is encouraged to book the ticket and hence the bid value changes dynamically.