5 ms·

In the USA, nearly all airfares are changeable, even those that are sold as "non-changeable". In Europe, that's different -- the lowest fare class is often "use

In the USA, nearly all airfares are changeable, even those that are sold as "non-changeable". In Europe, that's different -- the lowest fare class is often "use it or lose it", with the ticket becoming worthless if you don't get on the flight you booked. If you want to stop airlines from overbooking, then you need to stop travelers from changing their plans and leaving seats empty on the plane. You can talk about overbooking as "profit motive" for the airline, but airlines traditionally make very low margins. Air travel is a classic oligopoly, where a large number of competitors offer goods that are practically indistinguishable (Coke vs. Pepsi, Shell vs. Exxon, United vs. Delta) -- these industries are characterized by fierce price competition. Ultimately, any decrease in revenue from one source will be reflected in higher average ticket prices. An airline industry that didn't overbook would be one where either everyone pays significantly more for their tickets, or where most tickets become truly non-changeable, as in you have to buy a totally new ticket if you change your travel date or time. Honestly, a system like this, where the airline can do yield management transparently, days or weeks before departure, when people have time to weigh their options and make alternate plans, makes tremendous sense and does a lot to allocate costs to those who are willing to pay, keeping things less expensive for those who aren't.

kevin_b_er 9y ago
And those "change fees" are $200, more than many shorter one-way economy fares.
- rbcgerard 9y ago
  to be fair those change fees only apply to the discount economy fares - you can pay more to have schedule flexibility with a flexible/refundable fair
  - jasonlaramburu 9y ago
    I've never heard a rational justification for overbooking except that it allows airlines to sell more tickets than they have seats. On most airlines non-refundable fares have a change fee which cover the fuel costs in the event of a no-show. Southwest is the only one that does it right- their refundable fares have enough margin built in to cover no-show costs without change fees.
SilasX 9y ago
What are you talking about? Every US ticket I've bought has been non-refundable. I even tried notifying one that I wouldn't be using it as a courtesy and they were like "why are you calling? You can't get a refund and we don't care that you're not coming." And of course there's a middle ground: being upfront about which seats are really reserved, and what you can expect for not-really-reserved seats on overbooking. None of this "oh you should have done research to realize what your rights and minimumn payment are and that this voucher is worthless". Eliminating overbooking is overkill and some people are in fact confused on that matter. But please don't pretend the only alternative is some apocalypse.
- URSpider94 9y ago
  I don't know which tickets you are buying, but I fly ~ 150,000 miles per year, all on non-refundable tickets. I change my plans ALL THE TIME, and those tickets are always credited to my account. I have to re-use them within 12 months, and the airline deducts a change fee from the value before making the deposit. My work travel system even has a built-in tracking and reminder system for ticket vouchers that will nudge me to fly on a particular airline if I have a credit with them. And, I will say this -- in nearly all situations, if an airline thinks they may need to involuntarily bump you, they won't assign you a seat. Once you have picked a seat on their reservation system, you have a very low chance of being bumped involuntarily. Once you have a boarding pass with a seat number on it, I'd guess that the odds are 100,000:1 that you're not going to get on board (unless you volunteer to take a voucher). All the more reason that the infamous United dragging incident was some kind of anti-unicorn (which wasn't about over-sold seats, after all -- it was about needing to accommodate a non-revenue flight crew).
  - jonknee 9y ago
    So you're saying an airline that you fly 150,000 miles a year on treats you like a valuable customer? It works a little differently for the average Joe without elite status.
    - URSpider94 9y ago
opo 9y ago
There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of overbooking as it allows for more efficient use of planes, but if the airlines screws up and has too many passengers at the time the flight is to leave, involuntary bumping should not be allowed - it is the airline's responsibility to fulfill their contract. If they think paying people to give up their seat would be too expensive, they shouldn't overbook. I agree the system in the article sounds like a good start - making more efficient use of planes is better for everyone.
Steeeve 9y ago
> In the USA, nearly all airfares are changeable, even those that are sold as "non-changeable". The vast majority of tickets sold in the USA have restrictions on changes. > An airline industry that didn't overbook would be one where either everyone pays significantly more for their tickets, or where most tickets become truly non-changeable, as in you have to buy a totally new ticket if you change your travel date or time. This is a legacy from time long past and it wasn't the best decision back then. If you put a little thought into most airline policies you can come up with something that is both more effective and provides a better customer experience while reducing costs or increasing profits. There is simply not enough competition in the industry to force change.

kevin_b_er 9y ago

And those "change fees" are $200, more than many shorter one-way economy fares.

rbcgerard 9y ago
to be fair those change fees only apply to the discount economy fares - you can pay more to have schedule flexibility with a flexible/refundable fair
- jasonlaramburu 9y ago
  I've never heard a rational justification for overbooking except that it allows airlines to sell more tickets than they have seats. On most airlines non-refundable fares have a change fee which cover the fuel costs in the event of a no-show. Southwest is the only one that does it right- their refundable fares have enough margin built in to cover no-show costs without change fees.

SilasX 9y ago

What are you talking about? Every US ticket I've bought has been non-refundable. I even tried notifying one that I wouldn't be using it as a courtesy and they were like "why are you calling? You can't get a refund and we don't care that you're not coming." And of course there's a middle ground: being upfront about which seats are really reserved, and what you can expect for not-really-reserved seats on overbooking. None of this "oh you should have done research to realize what your rights and minimumn payment are and that this voucher is worthless". Eliminating overbooking is overkill and some people are in fact confused on that matter. But please don't pretend the only alternative is some apocalypse.

URSpider94 9y ago
I don't know which tickets you are buying, but I fly ~ 150,000 miles per year, all on non-refundable tickets. I change my plans ALL THE TIME, and those tickets are always credited to my account. I have to re-use them within 12 months, and the airline deducts a change fee from the value before making the deposit. My work travel system even has a built-in tracking and reminder system for ticket vouchers that will nudge me to fly on a particular airline if I have a credit with them. And, I will say this -- in nearly all situations, if an airline thinks they may need to involuntarily bump you, they won't assign you a seat. Once you have picked a seat on their reservation system, you have a very low chance of being bumped involuntarily. Once you have a boarding pass with a seat number on it, I'd guess that the odds are 100,000:1 that you're not going to get on board (unless you volunteer to take a voucher). All the more reason that the infamous United dragging incident was some kind of anti-unicorn (which wasn't about over-sold seats, after all -- it was about needing to accommodate a non-revenue flight crew).
- jonknee 9y ago
  So you're saying an airline that you fly 150,000 miles a year on treats you like a valuable customer? It works a little differently for the average Joe without elite status.
  - URSpider94 9y ago

opo 9y ago

There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of overbooking as it allows for more efficient use of planes, but if the airlines screws up and has too many passengers at the time the flight is to leave, involuntary bumping should not be allowed - it is the airline's responsibility to fulfill their contract. If they think paying people to give up their seat would be too expensive, they shouldn't overbook. I agree the system in the article sounds like a good start - making more efficient use of planes is better for everyone.

Steeeve 9y ago

> In the USA, nearly all airfares are changeable, even those that are sold as "non-changeable". The vast majority of tickets sold in the USA have restrictions on changes. > An airline industry that didn't overbook would be one where either everyone pays significantly more for their tickets, or where most tickets become truly non-changeable, as in you have to buy a totally new ticket if you change your travel date or time. This is a legacy from time long past and it wasn't the best decision back then. If you put a little thought into most airline policies you can come up with something that is both more effective and provides a better customer experience while reducing costs or increasing profits. There is simply not enough competition in the industry to force change.