4 ms·

Money. You just said that you're happy with limitations if you can save some money. The article is about them imposing limitations so that you cannot get a ch

Money. You just said that you're happy with limitations if you can save some money. The article is about them imposing limitations so that you cannot get a cheaper flight. They will set the price and the route, and you do it. Sure you can argue for convenience for you, but why would you take away freedom from others?

gruez 3y ago
>You just said that you're happy with limitations if you can save some money. >The article is about them imposing limitations so that you cannot get a cheaper flight. They will set the price and the route, and you do it. How is this any different than the airlines selling tickets with two prices: the high one that allows you to get off at any point, and a discounted one that's conditional on you promising flying all the way to the final destination?
- drekipus 3y ago
  Right. We're talking about the same thing. Some people want to save money going to the intermediate stops. If you want to go to X, the flight A->X is $1000, or A->X->B is $700. People are saying you should be able to go on the second flight and ditch. They are saving $300.
  - gruez 3y ago
    Right, and what if you were buying a ticket from A -> B, you were offered two options: 1. $1000 "regular" ticket, you could skip any time you want 2. $700 "discounted" ticket, but the airline makes you promise that you won't get off at X In this case you can't really complain about how airlines are "imposing limitations" or whatever, because you willingly agreed to it as a condition for receiving the discounted ticket. If you secretly wanted to go to X, it'll be even better if you could receive the discount and get off at X, but that violates the agreement you had with the airline, and the airline was only willing to offer the cheaper ticket to you because they thought you were going all the way to B.

4 ms·

Money. You just said that you're happy with limitations if you can save some money. The article is about them imposing limitations so that you cannot get a ch

by drekipus 3y ago

gruez 3y ago
>You just said that you're happy with limitations if you can save some money. >The article is about them imposing limitations so that you cannot get a cheaper flight. They will set the price and the route, and you do it. How is this any different than the airlines selling tickets with two prices: the high one that allows you to get off at any point, and a discounted one that's conditional on you promising flying all the way to the final destination?
- drekipus 3y ago
  Right. We're talking about the same thing. Some people want to save money going to the intermediate stops. If you want to go to X, the flight A->X is $1000, or A->X->B is $700. People are saying you should be able to go on the second flight and ditch. They are saving $300.
  - gruez 3y ago
    Right, and what if you were buying a ticket from A -> B, you were offered two options: 1. $1000 "regular" ticket, you could skip any time you want 2. $700 "discounted" ticket, but the airline makes you promise that you won't get off at X In this case you can't really complain about how airlines are "imposing limitations" or whatever, because you willingly agreed to it as a condition for receiving the discounted ticket. If you secretly wanted to go to X, it'll be even better if you could receive the discount and get off at X, but that violates the agreement you had with the airline, and the airline was only willing to offer the cheaper ticket to you because they thought you were going all the way to B.