4 ms·

>You are simply enabling airlines to continue this unethical practice Don't project your morals onto the rest of us. As a frequent flyer who likes to travel I

>You are simply enabling airlines to continue this unethical practice Don't project your morals onto the rest of us. As a frequent flyer who likes to travel I love this practice. It means lower prices overall and it gives me the opportunity to fly for free somewhere else later if I volunteer out. With the switch to real cash compensation on some airlines, I can even make money if I don't feel like using it to fly. I have flown over 2 million miles in my lifetime and I have never seen someone forced to give up their seat. The airlines always enticed people to volunteer out with (sometimes significant) compensation. United behaving like assholes with their forced removal is indicative of their behavior, not the practice of overbooking. I'm fine with increasing required payouts for forced removals to deal with piss poor airlines that don't conduct an auction until volunteers are found, but banning the practice outright is throwing the baby out with the bathwater due to ignorance of the practice.

bogomipz 9y ago
>"Don't project your morals onto the rest of us" I'm not projecting "my" morals onto anybody. Intentionally overbooking and knowing full well that you are going to bring inconvenience and stress to people is just plain fucked up. That's not really a grey area. If you bought a ticket to a movie and then were asked to leave the theater before the movie started in order to make room for someone else who bought a ticket you would be livid. The same is true for any other "ticketed" event. >"I have flown over 2 million miles in my lifetime and I have never seen someone forced to give up their seat." Here you can read all about it: https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/travel/passenger-removed-united-flight-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/travel/passenger-removed-unit... And that is not the first time either. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
- ryanwaggoner 9y ago
  If a significant fraction of people won’t show up AND a significant fraction of those who do show up will have flexible plans and be happy to take a later flight, “overbooking” seems a lot more reasonable.
  - bogomipz 9y ago
    >"If a significant fraction of people won’t show up ." I think its safe to say that there isn't a "significant fraction" of people who don't show up for their flights.
    - wpietri 9y ago
      The fraction is obviously significant to the people trying to make sure airplanes are fully utilized, so this seems like a word game to me. People miss flights all the time. A brief look for stats doesn't turn up hard data, but TechCrunch has it at ~5%: https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/overbooking/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/overbooking/ Someone who worked in ticketing for two airlines says it's 2% for flights to hubs, and 5-8% for flights from hubs, because of missed connections: https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-people-who-check-in-for-a-flight-end-up-missing-it/answer/Ben-Deneweth https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-people-who-check-in... According to IATA, a good year for airline industry profits is circa 5%: http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-12-08-01.aspx http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-12-08-01.aspx So even if we take the lowest fraction, 2%, filling those seats represents 40% of the profit margin. That sounds pretty significant to me.
    - hueving 9y ago
      I think it's safe to say you don't understand why the refundable fare class exists then.
- sokoloff 9y ago
  There's a price for which I'd be delighted to be kicked out of a movie or off a flight. For a movie, it might be only $50. For a flight, it could range from $1000 on up, but it's a pretty rare flight that I wouldn't give up my seat for $15,000 and rebooking. I suspect it's even more rare that no one on a flight would take $15K plus rebook.
- URSpider94 9y ago
  Airlines would be willing to do this if all tickets were 100% non-refundable, non-exchangeable, no excuses. But, that would be a terrible experience for customers. Imagine if you missed your flight, and were informed that you had no choice but to pay for another ticket. Movie theatres can do this because the $12 loss of missing a movie is annoying, but not life-changing, and the social contract is that event tickets are not changeable. I would wager that the fallout of tens of thousands of people per day being told they have to re-buy a ticket if they miss their flight would have much greater negative fall-out than the much smaller number who get involuntarily bumped.
  - bogomipz 9y ago
    >"Airlines would be willing to do this if all tickets were 100% non-refundable, non-exchangeable, no excuses. But, that would be a terrible experience for customers. Imagine if you missed your flight, and were informed that you had no choice but to pay for another ticket" In the US all three big carriers - American, United and Delta all charge $200 to change non-refundable tickets.[1]. Any you pay the fare difference if any on top of that. So there's already a hedge in place. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandratalty/2015/07/20/dont-cancel-your-ticket-on-these-airlines/#556b505e24e1 https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandratalty/2015/07/20/dont-...
    - URSpider94 9y ago
      Yes, but they don’t usually charge you this fee if, e.g. you miss a flight. Additionally, that $200 fee comes nowhere near covering the lost revenue if you change flights a day in advance of departure and that seat isn’t re-sold. I hope you can see that a last-minute change (even with a nominal fee) means the plane takes off without a paying butt in that seat.
      - bogomipz 9y ago
        If you miss your flight due to a delay by the airline such as missed connection then you will not pay this penalty. If you miss the flight because you overslept or got stuck in traffic then yes absolutely will pay this penalty. You will have to pay this fee at the counter in order to be rebook. I also wouldn't call $200 plus any change in fare for the rebooked flight "nominal."
- wpietri 9y ago
  No, those are your morals. And you're projecting them on to everybody. "Just plain fucked up" is another way of expressing your personal values, not a rational argument. I get that you value the "but we had a deal" criterion for fairness above the other things people value in this situation. Which is fine! You do you. And I agree that forcible removal is a bad idea that we should ban. But booking so that the airplane will probably be full and paying people to wait a bit when statistics make it overfull is something that the great majority of the public is fine with. Flexible people like it quite a bit.
  - bogomipz 9y ago
    >"No, those are your morals." No its common decency and etiquette. These aren't "mine" they are social norms. >"I get that you value the "but we had a deal" criterion for fairness above the other things people value in this situation" Sure everybody is "fine" with this as long as its just chatter on HN. It's all optimization problems and capturing true market value etc. But I'm willing to bet that when you yourself are on the receiving end of an involuntary bump by an Airline your first thought is most certainly not "I'm fine with this."
- hueving 9y ago
  > Intentionally overbooking and knowing full well that you are going to bring inconvenience and stress to people is just plain fucked up. That's not really a grey area. First, passengers who buy refundable seats frequently cancel last minute to take a later flight. The airline can somewhat estimate how many cancellations any given flight will have and overbook by some amount less than that. This happens all of the time (nearly every close to full flight you are on will have had this happen) and you don't even know about it. You just benefit from it in the reduced fare due to the increased margin this provides. Second, even if more people show up than projected, this doesn't bring "inconvenience or stress" to anyone in the vast majority of cases because they begin an auction to give up seats. The people who volunteer out come out ahead winning an auction they willfully participated in by selecting their own price. Delta will bid up to $10,000[1] to get people to release their seats. That's more than a month's salary for most people in the US just to take a later flight. Nobody feels like they got screwed in the volunteer situation, because they volunteered in exchange for the money/flight voucher. >Here you can read all about it: Cool, you sent an article echoing what I already said about bad actors like United's regional carrier who don't define the norm. That case is not what happens in the vast majority of overbooking situations. You ignored what I said to make what point? You are intentionally confusing forced removal with the standard case for overbooking where people volunteer out and come ahead. >I'm not projecting "my" morals onto anybody. These are your moral issues which seem to be driven by ignorance of how overbooking works in 99%+ of the cases. I suspect you have flown very little or have never paid attention at the gate. Please don't armchair referee an industry practice you don't understand that benefits both consumers and the airlines in all but pathological cases. 1. http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/news/companies/delta-10000-overbooked-flight/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/news/companies/delta-10000-o...

bogomipz 9y ago

>"Don't project your morals onto the rest of us" I'm not projecting "my" morals onto anybody. Intentionally overbooking and knowing full well that you are going to bring inconvenience and stress to people is just plain fucked up. That's not really a grey area. If you bought a ticket to a movie and then were asked to leave the theater before the movie started in order to make room for someone else who bought a ticket you would be livid. The same is true for any other "ticketed" event. >"I have flown over 2 million miles in my lifetime and I have never seen someone forced to give up their seat." Here you can read all about it: https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/travel/passenger-removed-united-flight-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/travel/passenger-removed-unit... And that is not the first time either. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

ryanwaggoner 9y ago
If a significant fraction of people won’t show up AND a significant fraction of those who do show up will have flexible plans and be happy to take a later flight, “overbooking” seems a lot more reasonable.
- bogomipz 9y ago
  >"If a significant fraction of people won’t show up ." I think its safe to say that there isn't a "significant fraction" of people who don't show up for their flights.
  - wpietri 9y ago
    The fraction is obviously significant to the people trying to make sure airplanes are fully utilized, so this seems like a word game to me. People miss flights all the time. A brief look for stats doesn't turn up hard data, but TechCrunch has it at ~5%: https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/overbooking/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/overbooking/ Someone who worked in ticketing for two airlines says it's 2% for flights to hubs, and 5-8% for flights from hubs, because of missed connections: https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-people-who-check-in-for-a-flight-end-up-missing-it/answer/Ben-Deneweth https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-people-who-check-in... According to IATA, a good year for airline industry profits is circa 5%: http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-12-08-01.aspx http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-12-08-01.aspx So even if we take the lowest fraction, 2%, filling those seats represents 40% of the profit margin. That sounds pretty significant to me.
  - hueving 9y ago
    I think it's safe to say you don't understand why the refundable fare class exists then.
sokoloff 9y ago
There's a price for which I'd be delighted to be kicked out of a movie or off a flight. For a movie, it might be only $50. For a flight, it could range from $1000 on up, but it's a pretty rare flight that I wouldn't give up my seat for $15,000 and rebooking. I suspect it's even more rare that no one on a flight would take $15K plus rebook.
URSpider94 9y ago
Airlines would be willing to do this if all tickets were 100% non-refundable, non-exchangeable, no excuses. But, that would be a terrible experience for customers. Imagine if you missed your flight, and were informed that you had no choice but to pay for another ticket. Movie theatres can do this because the $12 loss of missing a movie is annoying, but not life-changing, and the social contract is that event tickets are not changeable. I would wager that the fallout of tens of thousands of people per day being told they have to re-buy a ticket if they miss their flight would have much greater negative fall-out than the much smaller number who get involuntarily bumped.
- bogomipz 9y ago
  >"Airlines would be willing to do this if all tickets were 100% non-refundable, non-exchangeable, no excuses. But, that would be a terrible experience for customers. Imagine if you missed your flight, and were informed that you had no choice but to pay for another ticket" In the US all three big carriers - American, United and Delta all charge $200 to change non-refundable tickets.[1]. Any you pay the fare difference if any on top of that. So there's already a hedge in place. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandratalty/2015/07/20/dont-cancel-your-ticket-on-these-airlines/#556b505e24e1 https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandratalty/2015/07/20/dont-...
  - URSpider94 9y ago
    Yes, but they don’t usually charge you this fee if, e.g. you miss a flight. Additionally, that $200 fee comes nowhere near covering the lost revenue if you change flights a day in advance of departure and that seat isn’t re-sold. I hope you can see that a last-minute change (even with a nominal fee) means the plane takes off without a paying butt in that seat.
    - bogomipz 9y ago
      If you miss your flight due to a delay by the airline such as missed connection then you will not pay this penalty. If you miss the flight because you overslept or got stuck in traffic then yes absolutely will pay this penalty. You will have to pay this fee at the counter in order to be rebook. I also wouldn't call $200 plus any change in fare for the rebooked flight "nominal."
wpietri 9y ago
No, those are your morals. And you're projecting them on to everybody. "Just plain fucked up" is another way of expressing your personal values, not a rational argument. I get that you value the "but we had a deal" criterion for fairness above the other things people value in this situation. Which is fine! You do you. And I agree that forcible removal is a bad idea that we should ban. But booking so that the airplane will probably be full and paying people to wait a bit when statistics make it overfull is something that the great majority of the public is fine with. Flexible people like it quite a bit.
- bogomipz 9y ago
  >"No, those are your morals." No its common decency and etiquette. These aren't "mine" they are social norms. >"I get that you value the "but we had a deal" criterion for fairness above the other things people value in this situation" Sure everybody is "fine" with this as long as its just chatter on HN. It's all optimization problems and capturing true market value etc. But I'm willing to bet that when you yourself are on the receiving end of an involuntary bump by an Airline your first thought is most certainly not "I'm fine with this."
hueving 9y ago
> Intentionally overbooking and knowing full well that you are going to bring inconvenience and stress to people is just plain fucked up. That's not really a grey area. First, passengers who buy refundable seats frequently cancel last minute to take a later flight. The airline can somewhat estimate how many cancellations any given flight will have and overbook by some amount less than that. This happens all of the time (nearly every close to full flight you are on will have had this happen) and you don't even know about it. You just benefit from it in the reduced fare due to the increased margin this provides. Second, even if more people show up than projected, this doesn't bring "inconvenience or stress" to anyone in the vast majority of cases because they begin an auction to give up seats. The people who volunteer out come out ahead winning an auction they willfully participated in by selecting their own price. Delta will bid up to $10,000[1] to get people to release their seats. That's more than a month's salary for most people in the US just to take a later flight. Nobody feels like they got screwed in the volunteer situation, because they volunteered in exchange for the money/flight voucher. >Here you can read all about it: Cool, you sent an article echoing what I already said about bad actors like United's regional carrier who don't define the norm. That case is not what happens in the vast majority of overbooking situations. You ignored what I said to make what point? You are intentionally confusing forced removal with the standard case for overbooking where people volunteer out and come ahead. >I'm not projecting "my" morals onto anybody. These are your moral issues which seem to be driven by ignorance of how overbooking works in 99%+ of the cases. I suspect you have flown very little or have never paid attention at the gate. Please don't armchair referee an industry practice you don't understand that benefits both consumers and the airlines in all but pathological cases. 1. http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/news/companies/delta-10000-overbooked-flight/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/news/companies/delta-10000-o...