> I don't see how it's defensible... I'm trying to answer for the sake of debating - not necessarily my point of view. First, regardless of how much the airli

> I don't see how it's defensible... I'm trying to answer for the sake of debating - not necessarily my point of view. First, regardless of how much the airline charges, there will be a fixed number of people that will get a seat. Now, suppose the price is kept low, like $99. Maybe some people that don't want the seat that much will get it. They may have other options and wouldn't pay $200 for the seat, but think $99 is ok. Conversely, some people who value the seat much more (to the point they would pay $4000 for it) may not be able to get it. So you can argue that the seats will be attributed randomly, which is worse than basing the allocation on who wants the seats the most (well, then there's the issue that $5000 is peanuts for some people, and a lot for others, not sure how to answer to that). Also, with the seats getting so expensive, the airlines may try to sell extra seats (re-routing planes for instance). Finally, this happens all the time in different contexts. People go to all sorts of trouble because they don't have access to the best lawyers, doctors or can't afford their medication. It's not really an argument but if we are consistent, we shouldn't be shocked by one and not the other.