Are Airlines Intentionally Overbooking Their Flights? (popularmechanics.com)

"if you sell one seat to two different people, and only one of them shows up, you get extra money," explains an article in Popular Mechanics shared by schwit1. Citing a recent TED-Ed video, they argue that the airlines' strategy for booking flights "makes perfect sense, just not for you." The most frustrating part? This math could be tuned to ensure the maximum number of tickets sold with a near zero percent chance too many people show up. Instead, the most profitable solutions often involve a decent chance a few passengers getting screwed, because the extra ticket sales outweigh having to put someone up in a hotel now and then.

Comments

YES

[Anonymous Coward]

Next question?

Re: YES

[Anonymous Coward]

No shit. This has been standard practice in any type of business that makes bookings for anything for many decades, and it isn't a secret. Are people really this dumb? A TED talk? Really? Beginning to think cavemen were more advanced than 'educated' people today. As stated: YES

Re: YES

[thinkwaitfast]

I had a friend in college who was doing this 30 years ago. He would buy the most expensive ticket from Phoenix to San Diego for Friday afternoon. Every Friday he would go to the airport and give up his ticket in exchange for a refund and a free ticket to anywhere in the country. Since they were all but guaranteed to be at least five people wanting to get on the flight, it was a no brain scam. I remember at one time over Christmas vacation he showed me a stack of 35 tickets that he had gotten. He used a few, but mostly resold them. Life was a lot easier then. It paid for his college.

Re: YES

[Anonymous Coward]

That's strange. That doesn't make any sense. Why were they repeatedly overbooking flights by such a huge amount when someone at an information disadvantage was able to notice a pattern and exploit it for such a huge profit? Seems like someone wasn't doing their job.

Re: YES

[K. S. Kyosuke]

This is business optimization 101, somewhat analogical to seasonal inventory optimization in presence of probabilistically distributed demand, where depending on the revenue for sold units and losses for unsold units, the inventory order for optimal profit may not coincide with most likely demand. Freshmen are taught this.

Re:Yes

[Dutch Gun]

Are you not aware that US airlines pay a mandatory cash penalty to passengers for forcibly bumping them? Read this FAQ from Southwest.

The highlights are:

* They try to find volunteers, and give cash bonuses and vouchers to entice this (one-way ticket cost voucher + $100). If longer than 2 hours, $300 in cash plus the voucher.
* If passengers are forced to wait, they get a check for $675 or a voucher for double one-way fare, their choice, if under two hours delay. For longer, a max of $1,350 or voucher for four times one-way fare.

There are always a percentage of people that don't make their flight, and this helps to maximize the passenger load on the flights, at some occasional inconvenience to passengers. Given the financial penalties, airlines certainly don't want to consistently overbook either.

"Getting screwed?" It certainly wouldn't be pleasant to get forcibly bumped, but I think I could deal with the trauma of an hour delay for $675 in compensation.

Re: YES

[ShanghaiBill]

That doesn't make any sense. Why were they repeatedly overbooking flights by such a huge amount when someone at an information disadvantage was able to notice a pattern and exploit it for such a huge profit?

Not only that, but if a flight was over 100% booked 35 times in a row, the airline would either raise the ticket prices on that flight, or add extra flights to the route. The story makes no sense, and I don't believe it.

Re:Yes

[_merlin]

I think it varies with the regulatory environment. Every time I've been at a US airport they've had overbooked flights and asked people to come forward if they can take a later flight, but you don't notice this happening in other parts of the world. Perhaps overbooking is more common in places where there's more "free market" worship allowing the freedom to screw customers harder.

Re: YES

[jdgoulden]

My thesis adviser and his wife did much the same thing; book all of their travel at peak times, then take the bump and the free ticket / bonus miles / whatever and the free hotel room and fly out the next day. They flew mostly for free for the entire time I knew him.

Re: YES

[thinkwaitfast]

Yup. $19/ticket was Southwest's big promotion.

Re: YES

[thinkwaitfast]

It's a linear programming problem.

Re:Yes

[Oligonicella]

I used to do it all the time when I was commuting for contract. Every time I heard them announce the request I made sure I hustled on up there. Later plane and cash in pocket or free next trip.

Re:Yes

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe because in the US the over-over-book. Maybe other parts of the world they try to get everyone on board, with just enough over-booking.

Re: YES

[angel'o'sphere]

I second that.
A friend of mine did the same.
They were actually a small traveling group of about 3 and used to get the original tickets replaced, either for a later flight or in cash, about $50 for the invonvenience and often a hotel voucher or vouchers for some shows (and often they earned the miles for the flights not taken)
That was around the mid 1990s.
He did not 'finance his studies' in the US that way, but his holidays. What do you exactly care where you exactly fly to next days when you can fly for free, get money on top etc. if you are a 25 year old tourist?

Re: YES

[angel'o'sphere]

It was obviously not the 'single' same flight, but basically every flight of most american airlines.
You are old enough to know people who did that, too. Even I know people who did that in the USA, and I live in Europe. Overbookiing is here forbidden ... for a reason.

Re: YES

[angel'o'sphere]

I forgot:
the airline would either raise the ticket prices on that flight: it can't. Then it would no longer be competitive with those that don't rise the peices.
or add extra flights to the route. For that it would need:
a) buy a slot for that flit from the air traffic authorities
b) have a plane (last time I checked they cost a 'couple' of millions
c) have a crew, and depending on distance a second or third crew to keep the plane flying when the other crews have their mandatory rest

The story makes no sense, and I don't believe it. Because you never digged into the topic.
You can not simply take a plane and let it fly from X to Y ... not even in a third world country.

Re: YES

[jamesbatistre]

Yeah I agree with you bro..

Re: YES

[lgw]

Airlines weren't so optimized 30 years ago - many flights you could get standby seats reliably (I remember flying "student standby", which is lower than standby, for $30 or so). Other flights were always overbooked. Oddly enough, there were a lot of airline bankruptcies back then.

Re: YES

[Anonymous Coward]

"..I live in Europe. Overbookiing is here forbidden ... for a reason."

Perhaps, and while Europe may be better for loads of reasons, don't think this is some bastion of common sense and perfect travel.

The budget airlines (Ryan Air, Easy Jet, etc...) are bloody awful and cancel entire flights regularly.

Re: YES

[AmiMoJo]

The video linked in the summary explains it well.

Basically maximum profit is achieved by consistently overbooking. Normally some people don't turn up, and if there are people who need bumping and compensating that is offset by the extra profit from all the other times overbooking paid off.

It's not entirely true that passengers don't benefit from this. Ticket prices would be higher if they didn't do it. So you trade a very small chance of being bumped for consistently lower fares.

Re:YES

[rastos1]

YES
Next question?

What about Betteridge's law?

Re: YES

[Antique Geekmeister]

I did not do this deliberately, but decades ago with People's Express airlines I flew the day before Christmas. I had the first flight oin the morrning, and volunteered to be bumped 3 times before the ticket agent insisted I get on the next plane. It did pay for my personal air travel for the next year.

It was understandable economically. Keeping that extra small percentage of seats full keeps money coming in to the airline's coffers for that month, and helps expand reports of their numbers of riders and overall income, even if it is not profitable.

Re: YES

[Zorpheus]

Maybe intentional overbooking is forbidden. But several airlines sell tickets that allow you to fly anytime without prior notice.
So, how does that work, if several people with such tickets decide to take a fully booked flight? Someone else will be told that the flight is overbooked, and the people with their expensive flexible tickets get what they want.

Re: YES

[Hognoxious]

rise the peices.

You are Officer Crabtree from Allo Allo AICMFP.

Re:Yes

[Registered Coward v2]

Yes, of course they do. I thought this was common knowledge. From what I've seen, airlines typically deal with over-booking by offering passengers free first-class upgrades on a later flight, or other perks to induce people to voluntarily give up their seats.

I wouldn't be surprised if they *don't* overbook flights at the busiest time of the year, since that's almost a guaranteed money-loser for them, but I have no evidence either way. Has anyone ever experienced overbooked flights at busy holidays, etc? I suppose it's also airline-specific.

I fly a lot, and the most popular times tend to be overbooked, but not that often. Even when they ask for volunteers it is still a 50/50 chance they need them, based on my experience volunteering. I've even booked popular times just to take the bump and the voucher offering that I can use later. In my experience, weather or a mechanical problem is more likely to result in the airline needing volunteers than overbooking. My record is 4 bumps in a row on a single day when fog canceled all the AM flights. Despite all the /. angst about the unfairness of it all, airlines have a lot of data to base booking decisions on so it's not so simple as overbook every flight by X. Airlines are selling a perishable commodity soothed need to fill as many seats as they can; realizing there will usually be volunteers to allow them to accommodate those who don't want to get off. Delta even lets you bid on bumps for overbooked flights so they already know the cost of overbooking.

Re:Yes

[khallow]

The problem is they don't bear the true cost of not honoring their contract with the flight. If the airlines had to pay the cost in lost wages, or deals gone bad, or job loss or whatever, they'd stop pulling this nonsense.

What "true cost"? If they had to bear such a "true cost", then you would have to pay such a "true cost". You and your employer could always just put some slack into your schedule so that a late flight isn't job ending or whatever.

Re: YES

[Xest]

Um, what? The story makes no sense? I saw this article and thought why is this even a story, this isn't a magical revelation, this has been simple fact for many years. I don't even know why this would be news to anyone, let alone people denying it.

The airline industry has long been doing this, they can't simply raise prices or add extra flights because that means they become less competitive against others flying the route, and they can't just add extra flights because it can sometimes be impossible to get hold of extra capacity on a route. Try getting a slot from Heathrow because you want to increase capacity, have fun waiting years until it's your turn in the queue as an airline requesting an extra slot on the airfield and flight plan.

It doesn't matter if they have to pay a few people compensation, paying double the flight cost charged every flight for one or two people isn't exactly a big deal when they've doubled up say 10 seats.

Consider they have 200 seats, they sell 210 tickets, 8 people don't show because they missed their connecting flight, or someone fell ill, or it was just a cancelled business trip and the tickets are non-refundable then sure they have to pay 2 people double the cost of the ticket as compensation, but that means they're still 206 tickets profit up on a flight that only holds 200 people.

It's really just an insurance type setup for the airlines, as long as they optimise their calculations based on data so as they maximise the number of tickets sold vs. the number of tickets actually used then they're going to increase their profits. This is exactly what they do and exactly what they have done since at least the 90s at busy airports. Yes there are people who know how to play the system, but that already gets factored into the calculations airlines make in terms of how many tickets to sell - it's a complex statistical operation and has to factor in things like local events; i.e. if there's been a damaging hurricane at the destination a lot more people might choose not to fly, so they oversubscribe seats by a higher number knowing they'll get more no-shows.

The news for me here is that people weren't aware of this, I always figured it was pretty common knowledge. I'd have thought pretty much anyone whose flown from a major airport would've known about this having seen it first hand and having asked any of the staff the question. This is even more the case as I figured people were more aware than ever nowadays of the sorts of profit maximisation analytics that occur at companies of which this is just another example.

The fact is flying a plane costs a lot of money, so they want to maximise the number of people on that flight. There's a heavy baseline cost of lifting that massive flying tube into the air, and the more tickets sold against that baseline the more profit for the airline. Simplistic mindset type free market economics of "they should just raise the prices!" don't work when you have constraints like airport capacity. Some countries/airports even enforce penalty costs on flights that aren't carrying sufficient numbers of passengers when the airport capacity is near maximum - they can't justify having a carrier taking up a slot that isn't carrying many people so issues like that too incentivise airlines to do everything they can to fill up their planes regardless of the impact on customers. It's a pretty shitty cutthroat industry in general in this regard.

This story is absolutely spot on, it's also at least 30 years too late to be called news too though unfortunately.

Re: YES

[Carewolf]

Yeah they don't intentionally overbook, but "just" have highly priced tickets that can get you on any flight any time. The end result is almost the same except a lot less common.

Re: YES

[jddj]

Believe it. At least, that the scam worked (though I don't know the guy being discussed here).

I saw the same method, published in a counter-culture magazine (Mother Earth News? I forget...) in the late '70s. The details are familiar to me, and I've known all my adult life that airlines double-book as a result.

The same mag also got my late-teens self off the couch to collect high-tread used tires from gas stations (back when gas stations had mechanics, kids...), load 'em in Mom's station wagon and sell 'em to the tire store in the run down part of town, where they got sold on to folks with not much money.

Useful publication, gave me pocket money all the time.

Re: YES

[K. S. Kyosuke]

I'm not sure; it's possible you might formulate it like that. But clearly the first and most obvious way of viewing it is finding a single-valued function extremum when one parameter is probabilistic.

Re: YES

[cahuenga]

The news for me here is that people weren't aware of this.

Airlines control ticketing on their flights, does anyone think overbooking is an accident? I can't count the number of times I've heard a gate agent announce "This fight is overbooked and we are looking for volunteers to...".

Re: YES

[Slashdot Junky]

There is more to cost than what shows in the ticket's price. While not necessarily easy to measure, hassle and being left irritated are a part of the total cost. I'd like to see airlines and businesses in general explore pricing that truly supports improving customer experience while still remaining practical for most. Perhaps the increase in price wouldn't be all that much and worth the benefits if marketed correctly.

Re:YES

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Related - I suspect you're very close to the truth.

Re:Yes

[LynnwoodRooster]

It is regulatory, but maybe not like most people think. Take a look at the amount of your ticket that is taxes and landing fees. I fly LAX - SFO weekly, and LAX - HKG monthly. The fees for LAX to SFO are much higher than LAX - HKG. Multiply the $30 extra landing fees by 200 people per flight, and that's $6000 extra expenses per flight that need to be made up. Almost ALL overseas (International) landing fees and taxes are lower than in the US, meaning there is less cost associated with running the flight in the first place - and thus less need to overbook to cover costs.

Re: YES

[fullymodo]

I have a friend who did the same thing in the 90s. The missing piece of the picture was that he had a contact at the airline who would let him know which flights were oversold. He would then book that flight and volunteer to be bumped in exchange for a free ticket.

Re: YES

[lowflying]

It is how America West went bankrupt.

In '98, I took contract in San Francisco, continued to live in Austin. I bought a couple of round trip tickets for the first weekends I was coming home, and they were the last ones I paid for. I got nearly 18 months of free travel (except for my time in airports), because I was willing to be bumped at least once on pretty much any leg of any flight. The gate people thought I was great to work with. They could never pay for a hotel, but I had a laptop and they would let me run a power strip so that I could keep working. My family and boss knew that I was going to eventually get home or back at the office.

Re: YES

[peragrin]

Except it takes time get more planes as they are expensive. Raising prices is a short term solution

Re: YES

[Uberbah]

Um, what? The story makes no sense?

Nope. Not even close. All prices are set to maximize revenue - if a company can sell out every single widget in stock (tickets in this case) of course it is a sign they can raise the price and will take it as such. Econ 101.

The airline industry has long been doing this, they can't simply raise prices or add extra flights because that means they become less competitive against others flying the route, and they can't just add extra flights because it can sometimes be impossible to get hold of extra capacity on a route.

Riiiight. Just like the first airline to implement baggage fees was immediately driven out of business because the other airlines swooped in and grabbed their customers.

Re: YES

[Uberbah]

Lose the arrogance and learn before you continue making a fool of yourself. Others in this thread know better than you. Deal.

Were you typing this when you were looking in the mirror?

Yes, but this (airline economics) is taught in a later class. One which you have apparently not taken or you simply failed it. Not every economic system is simple. This is one of those which are not.

That's a lot of handwaiving, snobbery and pedantry wrapped up into three sentences. But that's all it is.

Yes, deciding to raise prices when your inventory sells out every time is that simple. You can make deciding how much to raise prices a complicated subject - psychology, data mining, ad campaigns, predictive models, opposition research - but that does nothing whatsoever to change the Econ 101 subject of raising prices to increase revenue.

How do you manage the cognitive dissonance of nodding sagely at the practice of overbooking while at the same time dismissing the fact that you can raise prices if you're selling out all of your inventory, all of the time? But then, I didn't get my degree from I Want To Get Fired for Incompetence U.

Re: YES

[Roger W Moore]

...I live in Europe. Overbookiing is here forbidden...

No it is not and it does happen. The difference is that the compensation payout is much, much larger than what you get in North America thanks to the EU air passenger rights. I was on an Air Canada flight from London to Edmonton a few years ago which was over booked. They paid me just over $900 plus food and accommodation to take the flight the following day. A year before going in the opposite direction (Canada to Europe) they only offered $300 to take a flight which was 3 days later!

Re: YES

[Locke2005]

Raising the ticket price doesn't effect the strategy -- he already said he was buying the most expensive ticket available. Yes, I would expect their algorithm to correct for over-overbooking if it were really that reliable.

Re: YES

[Locke2005]

On bright side, Ryan Air cancelled their plan to charge people for using the bathrooms on the plane. I'm amazed nobody thought of what the downside could be for refusing to let people use the toilet without cash in hand...

Re:Yes

[im_thatoneguy]

Last time I was able to be flexible I got $500, left early on a different route first class and arrived home 2 hours ahead of schedule. I'm surprised as well at all if this "screwing customers" talk. I've only ever seen unhappy flyers once for getting bumped and that was forced bumping due to a smaller plane being necessary after mechanical failure and a whole high school team getting bumped. I'm sure they were taken care of generously but students don't care about cheaper flights when the school/parents are paying. Forced bumps are almost nonexistent.

Re: YES

[Hognoxious]

I dunno. These days it would show up straight away with realtime analytics and shit like that. But he said 30 years ago. Did they have computers then, or did they do everything with slide rules and an abacus?

Re: YES

[JoeMerchant]

They've been doing this since I started flying in the 1980s - if you're flying on popular routes, you can regularly score free perks by giving up a few hours of your time to take a later flight. I've only taken maybe 5 or 6 of these "bumpings" over the decades (if nobody volunteers to get off, then the schlub in the jetway gets to take the later flight), and I've never been delayed to my final destination by more than 3 hours.

In the old days, it was a free round trip ticket to anywhere - but like most things that fly out of airports, it's been getting worse as time goes on. The last one I volunteered for was a $100 travel discount... that's hitting my threshold for "no thanks."

Re: YES

[JoeMerchant]

The thing about overbooking is that a certain percentage of paying passengers don't show up. When you talk about groups of 100 people or more, this behavior is virtually guaranteed to be observed on every single flight, it's a well studied and predictable phenomenon. As the article says, the most profitable overbooking rates involve regular over-over bookings where a few non standby passengers get bumped.

The thing that bothers me about post-deregulation flying isn't the overbooking, it's the damned full planes with seats made for people who are 5'8" tall with 38" shoulders. When you are 6'1" with 42" shoulders, this is damn inconsiderate of basic animal needs for space.

Re: YES

[JoeMerchant]

There's almost always willing volunteers to take the perks of being bumped, so it's very rare that overbooking burns someone.

Now, late flights, cancelled flights, etc. - that burns large numbers of people all the time. My least favorite "trick of the hub" is when you are booked on an earlier homebound connecting flight that isn't full, so it gets cancelled while you are sitting at the gate (usually some entirely transparent BS about a maintenance problem with the plane, please don't lie to us, just come out and admit that you're doing it for higher profits) - but "you're in luck" there's a later flight with enough room for everyone, so we're consolidating your flight into theirs. No meal vouchers, no compensation whatsoever, you get home 3 or 4 hours late and either eat food from the concourse or go hungry.

Re: YES

[JoeMerchant]

Many people just don't show because they're flakes, they don't have to fall ill, they can change their minds about travel at the last minute (thank you non-transferrable tickets), or miss their cab to the airport, or stranger twists of fate that just mean they miss the plane.

Re: YES

[JoeMerchant]

Full seats don't make money, sold tickets make money. If they could sell 200% of the seats and get away with it, they would. As it is, I think the actual percentage of no-shows runs 5-10% (depends on route, season, etc.), they study this carefully and oversell by 7-12% matching the predicted rate of no-shows and exceeding by a calculated amount. The "bumped" are accommodated on available space in other airlines, or wherever/however they most cheaply can be enticed off the plane.

Re: YES

[quetwo]

Having been one of the people that got bumped from a flight because they overbooked and they couldn't get enough volunteers, it does happen. First time I've flown United in about a decade (I usually fly Delta because they have the most coverage in the Midwest), so I didn't have any status. I was stuck in SF for three days. They put me up in a roach motel, and I ended up having to pay for my taxi to and from the airport each day to wait to catch the next flight that had an available seat. The compensation? $800, which half was used up in transportation, food, etc. It didn't even come close to covering the two days I missed at work.

They need to re-reimburse you up to about two times the cost of the leg of the flight they bump you, plus the average cost of the other legs you couldn't make. They sometimes will offer more to make you go away quietly. The amount they have to pay out is the same if you don't make it to the final destination 2 hours late as it is a week late. They have no incentive to get you there if they missed their mark. If you end up flying with multiple carriers on the same itinerary, then you can expect to be even more screwed since those other legs may not be covered.

Back in the 90's and early 00's, it was pretty rare to be completely screwed if they bumped you. Often times they would work with other airlines to get you to your destination as soon as possible. They also didn't overbook every flight going to common places, they would usually keep one flight a day at 95% with the others at 110%, so that if there was a failure somewhere along the way, they had seats to move people to. Now they pretty much every flight at 110%+ with little regard of what happens to the passengers.

Re: YES

[kenh]

OMG!

Wait, so what? Human nature being what it is, there is always an amount of money they can offer someone to take a later flight - it works because people accept their offers when a flight is over-booked and everyone shows up.

Re: YES

[ChrisMaple]

I've been on several flights where after everyone was boarded, an announcement came over the P.A., "We need to board a few more passengers. Is there anyone who will take $100 in exchange for taking a later flight?" Sometimes the offer gets repeated at a higher price.

Re: YES

[bitingduck]

I did this on a much smaller scale for a short time. I flew at christmas for three consecutive years on a single purchased America West ticket. Each of the first two years I was on an overbooked flight at some point in my itinerary and took the voucher. In one case I was coming down with the flu and simply showed up at check-in and asked if they were overbooked. They were and happily handed me a voucher and rebooked me for a few days out and I went back to my mom's house and took a couple days getting over it before I flew home.

Re: YES

[bitingduck]

When traveling for work it's pretty routine for me to change either my outbound or return flight or both *after I've already checked in*.

Schedules change- "The test is running ahead of schedule - we need you there tomorrow morning instead of three days from now" or "something broke, you're not needed til next week" as I'm about to head to the airport. The same thing happens on returns - I might slip my return day-for-day as some part of a test gets delayed or runs long. It's perfectly reasonable to me that they're overbooking to compensate for such behavior (I'm hardly close to the only one). Such behavior also gets compensated by me and similar people finishing work early and not waiting the extra day or whatever to fly home, but changing to get on the next flight that's easy to make and will leave/arrive at reasonable times.

Re: YES

[bitingduck]

In the old days, it was a free round trip ticket to anywhere - but like most things that fly out of airports, it's been getting worse as time goes on. The last one I volunteered for was a $100 travel discount... that's hitting my threshold for "no thanks."

UA was offering $800 vouchers on a flight that I was on earlier this week because they'd downgauged to a smaller aircraft and needed to get rid of 14 or so people. As far as I can tell, they did. Whenever I've been on flights with people getting IDB'd they call them to the podium at boarding time. Once they announced $800 they seemed to have no shortage of volunteers (they probably threw in hotel, too). They couldn't offer a seat til the next day, and I wasn't interested in waiting around that long or renting a car one-way, so I declined and took the flight as planned. There are plenty of other times I might have taken that much (and have in the past). Back in the 80s and 90s when I took VDB I ran about 50% on getting first class on the new flight.

Re: YES

[Kjella]

Long distance it might occasionally happen, on popular routes I haven't seen it in ages. Mostly they've structured it so that business travelers have flexible tickets, a certain percentage will always arrive early to the airport and wish to re-book to an earlier flight. If it's full tough luck wait for your scheduled departure, if there are no-shows they'll fill it up. That way they keep the planes full without any risk of overbooking any other than the last plane - which probably won't sell out anyway.

Re: YES

[unami]

i just asked someone who works at a reputable european airline (e.g. not the easy jet/ryan air league). overbooking not forbidden. it's even required by their management that they overbook flights. we've got these "european air passenger rights" so you usually get booked to a later flight and if that flight arrives more than 3 hours later than the original one, you get â250-600, depending on the travel distance. or â150 and a voucher for getting downgraded from business-class.

Re:YES

[joemck]

Next on TED-Ed: Is water wet?

Every flight I've been on recently has been overbooked. A half hour before boarding they start asking for volunteers to be bumped to the next flight in exchange for a voucher.

And ever since they started with the checked-bag fees, the overhead bins have been overfull and the flight is late taking off because they have to tag and gate-check excess bags for free.

Re: YES

[JoeMerchant]

By downgrading to a smaller plane, they probably saved well over 800x14 = $11,200 in operating costs. At least they were decent enough to share somewhat generously. Did they also make up some lame excuse about the larger plane having "mechanical problems," or have they moved past this polite white lie?

Re: YES

[bitingduck]

I don't think they even looked for an excuse - they were having trouble getting any plane at all. The first plane (already the smaller one) was MX'd out at the beginning of the day to the extent that they couldn't even tow it from the gate. They after a bunch of gate drama they managed to get a plane and a gate at the same time and it left about 25 minutes late.

Re: YES

[Xest]

"Nope. Not even close. All prices are set to maximize revenue - if a company can sell out every single widget in stock (tickets in this case) of course it is a sign they can raise the price and will take it as such. Econ 101."

Which you obviously failed because you're assuming infinite airport space and zero competition.

You're a fascinating example of someone who spends his life demonstrating to the world that he's not as smart as he thinks he is. You've been at this at least a decade, don't you get tired of making yourself look stupid?

Re: YES

[geoscodin]

20 years ago I would occasionally be able to give up a flight for a later flight and a $500 flight voucher. At that time I could squeeze 2-3 additional flights out of it. More recently the offer has been reduced to one round-trip ticket in the continental US, or a $200 voucher which is now basically just a coupon toward another flight. I, personally, seldom run into those overbooked flights anymore. When I do, even though a free flight is still not bad, my time is usually more important to me than sitting around in an airport for an extra few hours.

It has always been this way

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and they have been doing it for at least the last 30 years from my memory. From what my airline industry parents tell me, this practice was prevalent 50 years ago as well. Get with the times PopSci

Re:It has always been this way

[hey!]

Hotels do this too. And as much as it sucks to get bumped from a plane, it *really* sucks to show up at a hotel and not have a room, especially when there's a big event on in town.

Re:It has always been this way

[ShanghaiBill]

This is why I get most of my hotel rooms with American Express concierge service.

I use AirBNB. I have never been bumped. When I rent a sofa bed in spare bedroom for $18, it is all mine.

Re:It has always been this way

[mrbester]

There was that one time about 2000 years ago. Fortunately there was a stable available so others didn't have to deal with a mewling, puking newborn in the foyer while they were trying to sleep on the chairs.

Re: It has always been this way

[Anonymous Coward]

But it was Christmas, everywhere's busy at Christmas.

Re:It has always been this way

[Antique Geekmeister]

There are other risks with AirBNB and similar services. Adam Conover did a fairly good "Adam Ruins Everything" presentation at http://www.thewrap.com/adam-ru...

Adam Conover has been doing fine, satirical work discrediting a lot of commonly held beliefs such as the effectiveness of private prisons the usefulness of summer vacation, hygiene, weddings, and many others. It's the sort of information Slashdot readers may have picked up in pieces, but presented in clear individual sketches that even children can understand.

Re: It has always been this way

[Hognoxious]

Not in Israel, unless it coincides with Hanukkah.

Re:It has always been this way

[hey!]

It's not common, but it happens. It happened to me. Let me tell you about hotel managers: they cheerfully tackle any problem they can solve. Need another pillow? Right on it. Need another bottle of shampoo? On it's way sir. But you gave the room I booked to someone else and you're full? They'll treat you like a panhandler.

Re: It has always been this way

[Uberbah]

I travel for business and I don't think I've ever heard of this happening. Is it a low quality hotel thing ?

It's a corporate greed thing. I still remember the glazed look on the clerks face as we asked WTF they gave our room to someone else, when we had paid in advance and called twice to confirm the reservation. We were given the same bullshit that airlines do - 'just because you paid for a room (seat) doesn't mean you'll get one'. Except we paid in advance, assholes - should have been our room if we showed up or not.

Re: It has always been this way

[nwscfox]

We had it happen at a Marriott Residence Inn. They said they would honor our reservation but if we wanted to go to another hotel in the area (they listed a few), they would pay for the stay. It works better with airlines where you can hold out for more compensation. :-)

No shit Sherlock?

[aaarrrgggh]

Duh... the airlines will sell a ticket to every passenger willing to pay a sufficiently high price at the time of sale... and deal with the consequences later. They value your time at zero, so it is only accommodation expenses that they have to foot the bill for.

You need to understand how to protect yourself, especially on high risk tickets. Not rocket science.

Re: No shit Sherlock?

[thundercattt]

Train and bus service has been doing the same thing too. Nothing new. I've even been to a concert where me and another person had the same ticket seat.

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[mattwarden]

This is a really immature view of the practice, bordering on conspiracy theory. The airlines are optimizing to overbook as close as possible to the rate of no-shows/changes, but when they get it wrong they lose money. You pay $300-500 for a RT fare and if they have to VDB you on a single leg, they will spend $400-650 on vouchers, meals, and possibly hotel. And if they have to IDB when nobody volunteers, things get a lot worse for them.

You want them to do this. It increases efficiency and keeps ticket prices down.

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[ShanghaiBill]

Suppose an airline knows they have 100 seats on a flight and there is a demand for 1000 seats

Then they way underpriced the tickets.

Re: No shit Sherlock?

[samjam]

I watched such a drama unfold before me. It turned out that those seated were in the wrong theatre.

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[angel'o'sphere]

Oh, gosh did you really write that nonsense?

The demand would not change at all if you change the price. It is only that more and more people can not afford the price anymore, so probably the inquiries and google searches for such a flight go down leading to your false assumption the demand would have vanished.

If bread prices are to high, the demand is only fitting the supply when the beggars have starved off ... not when you change the price for the bread :-/

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[aaarrrgggh]

The airlines overbook to the extent that it makes economic sense. I have had to pay 5x the "normal" fare for a ticket before to get on a flight I needed for work. My premium made it attractive to bump, re-route, or re-book other passengers on to flights with lower load factors.

You generally can't buy a ticket for more than 5-6x the "normal" fare; not sure how regulation actually works for that, but my guess is that they have to sell a published rate. It sometimes takes status with an airline to be able to purchase these oversold tickets, but if you really must be on the flight and have at least 24 hours notice, there is usually a way.

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[colinrichardday]

You're conflating the demand curve with demand.

demand curve with quantity demanded (at that price).

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[khallow]

Price and demand can vary. Asserting that demand (not the demand curve!) won't decline when price is increased is completely missing the point of the supply and demand model.

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[colinrichardday]

Asserting that demand (not the demand curve!)

Why are you saying "demand" instead of quantity demanded?

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

The demand curve is often graphed as a straight line of the form Q = a bP where a and b are parameters. The constant "a" embodies the effects of all factors other than price that affect demand. If income were to change, for example, the effect of the change would be represented by a change in the value of "a" and be reflected graphically as a shift of the demand curve. The constant "b" is the slope of the demand curve and shows how the price of the good affects the quantity demanded.[4]

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[bitingduck]

If there were demand for 1000, the airline would add more flights. It's the case where there's demand for a fractional extra flight that things get tricky.

Adding flights in a busy airport can be non-trivial. They are often constrained in takeoff, landing, and gate slots and can't simply add flights without several years of politics and infrastructure improvements.

Re: No shit Sherlock?

[Kjella]

I watched such a drama unfold before me. It turned out that those seated were in the wrong theatre.

I actually had this happen on an airplane. We board plane, staff starts counting then counting again but we're four passengers too many. Is anybody not going to the destination? Silence. It's free seating so there's no double booking of seats. So they start going through the passenger list with name calling - very fun with 100+ seats. So mid-way someone comes from the gate asking for four passengers by name, they're present. And they're on the wrong plane, they leave so finally we can take off.

I got the rest of the story by a woman on the airport bus venting over the phone. They had boarded the plane, but it was grounded by mechanical problems. Then when finally the new flight was ready to depart, four passengers were missing. Since they were already boarded they didn't scan the boarding card the second time so they don't know who is missing. They can't take off with luggage without the passengers, so they finished the whole 100+ seat name call. So they were about to unload all the cargo to find those passengers' luggage which would take even more time, when finally the four showed up. The other passengers were not amused.

I assume that somewhere in the middle there a manager heard that two planes had to delay departure because of headcount issues and figured out they must be related. Apparently the ticket validation wasn't locked to a particular flight, so they managed to get on our plane even though they didn't belong. It was all domestic and of course everybody's been through security, so it wasn't really a risk. It probably hadn't been a problem before, except when these two planes were going to the same place with only a few minutes time difference and those four goofballs mixed it up. And they caught it, so no big deal. But those four people managed to delay two full flights quite a bit.

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[khallow]

Why are you saying "demand" instead of quantity demanded?

Because I'm lazy. And since when did that level of pedantry matter? Why am I "saying" when clearly, I'm "typing".

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[colinrichardday]

Yes, you are typing instead of saying. And yes, I can be pedantic about such things, Again, from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

(Note: This distinguishes "demand" from "quantity demanded", where demand is a listing or graphing of quantity demanded at each possible price. In contrast to demand, quantity demanded is the exact quantity demanded at a certain price. Changing the actual price will change the quantity demanded, but it will not change the demand, because demand is a listing of quantities that would be bought at various prices, not just the actual price.)

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[khallow]

Except if one looks in the second paragraph,

Demand is a buyer's willingness and ability to pay a price for a specific quantity of a good or service. Demand refers to how much (quantity) of a product or service is desired by buyers at various prices.

And we're specifying prices. Not the first time I've seen a Wikipedia article issue multiple definitions for the subject of the article.

Re:No shit Sherlock?

[colinrichardday]

Yes, at various prices, as opposed to quantity demanded, which looks at the amount desired at one price.

Yes

[Dutch Gun]

Yes, of course they do. I thought this was common knowledge. From what I've seen, airlines typically deal with over-booking by offering passengers free first-class upgrades on a later flight, or other perks to induce people to voluntarily give up their seats.

I wouldn't be surprised if they *don't* overbook flights at the busiest time of the year, since that's almost a guaranteed money-loser for them, but I have no evidence either way. Has anyone ever experienced overbooked flights at busy holidays, etc? I suppose it's also airline-specific.

No

[JustOK]

They've been under-building their airplanes.

Uh... Yeah?

[chaboud]

This has been standard practice for years. In fact, if you have status on some airlines, you can *always* bump someone else off of any flight with the right ticket type.

I flew a few times on a United IAD->SFO route, and of four trips, I got involuntarily deferred twice. The second time, I noted to the gate agent that there's always an equipment change that screws up the flight, and she said, I shit you not, "they do it every night so we can give vouchers instead of cutting checks, even though the change is for fewer seats than the flight was overbooked. It sucks every night."

So, yeah, I gave those vouchers away, because fuck if I'm going to fly United again, even for free.

Re:Uh... Yeah?

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

Been boned on the IAD-->SFO route a couple of times with United as well. Now I pay a little more and use another airline. They probably do the same thing, but I don't notice the same free-for-all atmosphere as people are bumped at the last instant like I experienced on United.

Re:Uh... Yeah?

[FrankHaynes]

Please elaborate on how this works, particularly how the equipment change figures into it? I assume if they claim equipment problem/change they only have to hand out vouchers instead of monetary compensation? I'm not familiar with the fine print and not a frequent flier.

Re: Uh... Yeah?

[Anonymous Coward]

United is truly a hideous airline....in fact most US airlines are. Surly and unhelpful terminal staff, old planes, long waits at airports......awful experience. Having said that, Virgin America isnt too bad except for the awful musical safety demonstration video. At least their planes dont look like the inside of a 40 year old Greyhound bus and the boarding process isnt out of Hunger Games.

Re: Uh... Yeah?

[chaboud]

That's right.

If they purely overbook a flight and too many people show up, people getting bumped is known as an involuntary deferment. They used to have to cut you a check for the price of your ticket, up to $400. (And still get you there). Now that's been bumped up by the FAA ($800 or something).

If they have an equipment change that reduces seat count, they don't have to pay out cash. They can instead "compensate" you with credit on their airline that A) may not be spent at all and B) may require that you put more cash in later for an actual purchase. All the while, they get to hang onto the cash that you paid in the first place.

So the scam is that they schedule your flight (last of the day, for instance) on a plane that they *know* needs mechanical work. They don't do the work, and they "swap" planes at the last minute (to the plane that was *always* going to make that flight). Boom. Instant loophole.

I actually had these particulars explained to me by a United employee at the gate. She must have been having a shit day.

Re: Uh... Yeah?

[craighansen]

That is truly evil, and the FAA ought to crack down on them.

Re: Uh... Yeah?

[FrankHaynes]

I'm sure a little green to grease the palms at the FAA keeps things greener for the airlines so I don't expect this loophole to disappear.

It's business

[Anonymous Coward]

Large corporate accounts have guaranteed seats, if they decide they need to fly.
Which can and does bump little guys which is to say "attention, we've overbooked the flight".

No show?

[Doub]

Who the fuck buys a plane ticket and doesn't show up?

And even on my cheap EasyJet flights I can know my seat number a month in advance. So to overbook they'd have to know exactly who will not show.

Re: No show?

[Anonymous Coward]

Corporate travel agencies overbook and noshow all the time because they can reuse the fare on future flights (because they pay for refundable fares). One time I had 3 tickets on 3 airlines out of Chicago to NY in the winter to guard against cancelled flights because my boss wanted to make sure I would get to a customer meeting.

Re:No show?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who the fuck buys a plane ticket and doesn't show up?

You're trying to tell me you've never met a loose slag in an airport bar, and taken her up to the crew hotel for a quickie, only to wake up 18 hours later with no wallet and no pants? Because the police explained to me this is a very common occurrence indeed, and I had nothing to be embarrassed about.

Re:No show?

[NormalVisual]

Who the fuck buys a plane ticket and doesn't show up?

Me, several times. I'd fly out to a customer site to do some work, and usually the return flight was booked the day I expected to be finished, with the expectation I'd drive from the customer site directly to the airport. If the work ran long, and I wasn't where I could call my employer to have them rebook, the seat went unclaimed. My employer would much rather eat the cost of a ticket than have an unhappy customer that's just paid half a million dollars for a new machine + installation.

Re:No show?

[mattwarden]

Happens all the time. Meetings get canceled or rescheduled. Incoming leg gets delayed and they misconnect. Also, changes to tickets have the same effect if done in the last week or two when it will be difficult to resell the seat.

Re:No show?

[ishmaelflood]

Me, for one. I was supposed to be bringing a yacht back from far away and saw the flight I needed for peanuts so i booked it. Yacht owner changed his mind so i didn't need the flight.

Re:No show?

[ShanghaiBill]

Who the fuck buys a plane ticket and doesn't show up?

Nearly every flight has no shows. Sometimes they had a change in plans. Sometimes they are just stuck in traffic.

And even on my cheap EasyJet flights I can know my seat number a month in advance. So to overbook they'd have to know exactly who will not show.

If you book months in advance, you get assigned a seat. If you book two hours before a flight, you generally don't. You get assigned a seat at the gate. Your seat is someone that didn't show up.

Re:No show?

[Hognoxious]

Never had a dose of Ghandi's revenge?

Re:No show?

[timholman]

Me, several times. I'd fly out to a customer site to do some work, and usually the return flight was booked the day I expected to be finished, with the expectation I'd drive from the customer site directly to the airport. If the work ran long, and I wasn't where I could call my employer to have them rebook, the seat went unclaimed. My employer would much rather eat the cost of a ticket than have an unhappy customer that's just paid half a million dollars for a new machine + installation.

It happens a lot in legal work, too. Depositions get cancelled or rescheduled at the last minute, client meetings get moved, etc. Lawyers will routinely book refundable tickets, then call the airline to cancel hours before the flight leaves. Without overbooking, the seat would be empty.

For that matter, Southwest Airlines allows anyone to cancel and then "bank" the refunded ticket price on the day of the flight.

Re:No show?

[Wrath0fb0b]

Who the fuck buys a plane ticket and doesn't show up?

It makes a lot of sense if there are a few plausible options but you can't commit to one but want to be sure to have a seat. For instance, you're flying to Chicago on Wednesday to meet with a customer, the meeting may be done that day or it may drag on. You can buy a single changeable/refundable ticket for MDW-SJC on Southwest for $500, say for Friday. But if the meeting finishes early, there may not be any seats on the earlier flights and you're stuck even though you paid for a super-expensive ticket.

Conversely, you can buy 3 non-refundable tickets, one for Wed, one for Thursday and one for the last one out Friday for $164 each, or $492. And then you have a confirmed seat for whichever day you want to go, for $8 less than the refundable ticket.

I'm sure there's some way in which this price structure is what Southwest wants, or else they wouldn't intentionally price their refundable tickets so high :-/

Re:No show?

[bitingduck]

Happens all the time. Meetings get canceled or rescheduled. Incoming leg gets delayed and they misconnect. Also, changes to tickets have the same effect if done in the last week or two when it will be difficult to resell the seat.

Last week or two? I think about 90% of my tickets for work travel in the past 10 years were booked less than a week out, and I regularly change flights within 24 hours before the flight, often after check-in, for reasons that many others have listed.

Re:No show?

[wvmarle]

My parents, quite recently. Medical emergency prevented them from flying. Yet another reason for why this may happen.

So that were total four flights with two empty seats (well, possibly resold to someone else). Airline got to keep their money; parents will have to claim with their travel insurance.

Re:No show?

[mattwarden]

Same here but we are business travelers. The Hawaiian shirt brigade does not buy these fares. If you are not on a route with a high % of business travelers, it will be hard to sell a seat in the last couple weeks when the cheaper advanced purchase fares are not available.

Get real compensation

[Anonymous Coward]

You can demand compensation (As in, hard cash, not a voucher) if you're booted off a flight. Usually at a minimum of 2x the cost of the ticket. They don't like to advertise it for obvious reasons, but I highly recommend it over the vouchers.

My world is shattered!

[Gravis Zero]

What earth-shattering fact are you going to drop on me next, that customer service is insincere when they tell me to have a good day?

Customer loyalty has a value as well

[wizrd_nml]

The forecast model is inaccurate if it assumes customers will continue to have the same behavior towards an airline that regularly overbooks flights. I had two incidents with an airline 10 years ago where I got bumped because of overbooking and I just stopped flying with them. I've also told all my friends. The airline I use now is about 15% more expensive and the seats are slightly less comfortable (although that's improving), but I still don't want to risk being bumped off the flight.

Re:Customer loyalty has a value as well

[mattwarden]

This always makes me laugh. Almost every airline operates exactly the same way. Every irregular ops flight I'm on, some rare flyer is stomping around saying they will never fly this airline again, as if the other airlines don't have mechanical delays or staff union rules or overbook their flights or get screwed by air traffic control every once in a while. Even when it's weather!

Why aren't airline execs going to jail?

[knorthern knight]

I don't like tele-evengelists like Jim Bakker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... But if he went to prison for fraud for overbooking his theme park time-share hotel, why aren't airline execs getting the same treatment?

Re:Why aren't airline execs going to jail?

[meerling]

Yes. I'm pretty sure it's illegal to sell the same thing to multiple people, or to otherwise knowingly sell more of a product than you have.

Re:Why aren't airline execs going to jail?

[BlueStrat]

Yes. I'm pretty sure it's illegal to sell the same thing to multiple people, or to otherwise knowingly sell more of a product than you have.

Broadband ISPs do it as a standard practice. I believe it's a corollary of "too big to fail"..."contributes/lobbies too much to prosecute" in both the ISP and airline cases. At least that's the way it is in the US where we have the finest government and legal system money can buy.

Strat

Re:Why aren't airline execs going to jail?

[david_thornley]

I'd bet that most residential ISP contracts say that you get up to a certain bandwidth, and the ISP tries (to some extent) to give you that bandwidth most of the time. In other words, they're putting the effects of overselling in the contract, so it's legal. If you want guaranteed bandwidth, you can often get it at a considerably higher price (often these are considered business accounts).

Know what you're buying before you file complaints.

Re:Why aren't airline execs going to jail?

[SuiteSisterMary]

"Supplies are limited, act now!"

Or are you saying that anybody selling anything needs to have literally infinite stock?

Hotels do it too.

[waspleg]

Source: I worked 8 different hotels in 6 years a long time ago. If they know especially that it's some kind of special event they ALL do it and will also triple the rack (regular) rate sometimes impose a minimum stay too - fuck locals they'll come back another night goes the thinking.

I've never been able to wrap my head around this

[93 Escort Wagon]

Oh, I understand why airlines overbook. But I just can't grasp why a significant number of people who've paid good money for airline tickets simply don't show up. If I spend several hundred dollars on something, I'm going to make sure I get what I paid for...

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[Hadlock]

Here are some fun stories to grasp:
 
I missed my flight from Miami to Dallas in ~2005 because I missed the 45 minute checkin time by 2 minutes due to misreading the ticket.
 
On an international flight home from Colombia to the United States I missed my flight by ~7 hours because my ~6 hour bus ride from Medellin to Bogota was delayed by 15 hours due to a mudslide that blocked the highway.
 
More recently my flight got pushed back one day and screwed up my onward travel from London to Budapest, so I had to eat that ticket (rebook fee was higher than buying a new one),
 
Then my new ticket, I booked for the wrong time because Iceland is in a different time zone than England (apparently! don't try booking this shit jetlagged at 4am in the morning) and missed my flight because 90 minutes to get from London Gatwick to London Luton is just not enough and we forgot to checkin online.
 
So shit happens. Or your car gets a flat taking your friend on the way to the airport. Or your friend's wife goes in to labor a week early so you need to pet sit for the next 48 hours because they have no immediate family in town. Or your grandfather has a health problem and has to go to the hospital during thanksgiving, so you eat your $79 ticket home and just take the bus the next day for $50 instead.
 
There are a million, billion reasons not to catch your flight.
 
Oh, one time I missed my flight from Manila, Phillipines to the island of Palawan ($69) because I was just too hung over that morning, so I booked a second flight that afternoon instead (also $69). Whatever.

Is this April Fools?

[mattwarden]

This is not an open question and the answer is not news. Of course they overbook their flights, and you should be happy they do. Unused seats are inefficient and result in higher ticket prices. If x% don't show up to a given route, then the airline should oversell up to x% depending on the VDB cost (e.g. "500 Delta dollars") and the cost of the fare.

Most passengers have their tickets heavily subsidized by price insensitive passengers (e.g. Business travelers). If you're reading an article claiming that your average passenger is "getting screwed", you can be sure the author has no idea what he or she is talking about.

Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[burtosis]

Have seen people access flight loads from employee databases on several major airlines. They always overbook a few seats, it shows right up in the system for all employees and pass riders to see on each system. And yes, it is actually uncommon for everyone to make the flight when it's booked as there are always a few random problems in any large group.

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[WindBourne]

not quite forever. Just since the 80s, when AA developed this.
And there was a vastly different reason for it back then. Basically, the airlines had ppl pranking them by booking 20-30 more seats so that they could be guaranteed getting on with standby.

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[edtice1559]

What you are talking about are double-reservations which only worked if people had refundable tickets. This got cracked down on but it's unrelated to over-booking. Over-booking exists because it allows the airlines to accommodate passengers with extenuating circumstances as well as business travelers who need some schedule flexibility. It is very rare that people get bumped from a flight. Many people love to volunteer to take a later flight in exchange for compensation. On Southwest, I'll do it just about every chance I get assuming that I'm not flying to a business meeting. On other airlines less so but only because the vouchers are too hard to redeem.

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[swb]

Many people love to volunteer to take a later flight in exchange for compensation.

I get why airlines overbook from an operational standpoint, but this volunteering to take a later flight part is what mystifies me. Vacations are only so long, hotel rooms are paid for, activities with inflexible schedules are planned, someone's changed their plans to provide destination end transport, and so on.

While I'm pretty sure this is mostly my biases, I can't even begin to imagine sitting at the airport thinking "No problem, I'd love to get to my destination 8-24 hours later, because I'm not looking down a stack of nested contingencies that require me to get someplace as scheduled for them to work. And of course I want that voucher which is totally flexible, provided I want to fly from TUL to FAR on a Tuesday in January."

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[lgw]

It used t be that you could plan on certain plights being overbooks, so some people did just that. These days, the airlines are counting on WalMart shoppers on vacation - be a few hours late for $200 in cash, sure thing! (Any time the flight is seriously overbooked, the airline does a reverse auction for a cash payout - they only need to find the cheapest people on the flight.)

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[swb]

For me, psychologically at least, there's not really any realistic amount of money that would offset the delay.

It would literally require them telling me they were transferring me to the private aviation terminal to be flown on a private jet to go along with it, or whatever the cash equivalent of that is.

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[Hognoxious]

Well that's why it doesn't work and the whole process is clearly a myth. Because everyone, from senior business people to backpacking vacationers, has exactly the same money/time tradeoff profile as you.

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[WindBourne]

things did not work in the same way back in the 80s. We could book without ANY MONEY on the line. You did not actually buy a ticket. You just made a reservation. BUT, ppl would call in with fake names and do say a family of 4. Then another family of 3. then another family of 6.
Back when crandall changed the market place, it was not uncommon to have 40 missed seats out of 120 on the heavily traveled routes. That way somebody could fly standby. Yes, back in the 80s, ANYBODY could fly standby. Now, it is just those of use and our families that work for the airlines, and some airlines still allow military standby (only a few).

Everything that you talk about is TODAY, and it was nothing like this 30-40 years ago.

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[bitingduck]

I've done this many times. Usually at the end of a vacation where I have some slack and I'm in no hurry to get back to work. I've never had work even close to rigid enough that I couldn't just send an email "Got bumped, will be back a couple days late, call/email if there's anything urgent". In some cases it's when I'm going to spend the night at home no matter which end of the trip I'm on (either parents home at holidays or partners home when I was bicoastal.) It's not that different than weather delays, which happen all the time at the holidays. As soon as they're having weather and my flights look questionable (you can track your aircraft several legs prior to your flight with FlightAware), I'll get on the phone and ask them for alternatives that are convenient for me. It's generally easy to get them to make a free change that relieves them of having to deal with an extra body screaming for a flight while sitting on the couch eating cookies and watching netflix (and arranging for a few extra days of that).

There are other times when there's no way I'm going to take a voucher (coming home on the third transcon RT in three weeks, all of which were on less than 24 hours notice and were 12-14 hour days at the working end. On those flights I'm going to buy the upgrade to first when they offer it at check-in!)

Re:Yes, all airlines have been doing this forever

[edtice1559]

How about Southwest gave me $900 to take an earlier, non-stop flight instead of the connection on which I was originally scheduled. Would you take that deal? Many times you're only talking about an hour. If I'm coming home from a business trip on a Friday night and my family is going to be asleep anyway when I get home, what's an hour for a half a grand or so? Who wouldn't take it. Sure if you're on the *outbound* segment you probably don't want to do this. Heck one time, though, I had a Monday morning flight to see a customer. They cancelled on me but I had a Tuesday afternoon meeting in the same city. It was cheaper to just go on my original itinerary than change so I showed up at the airport. Flight was overbooked and I got paid to leave on a Tuesday morning instead. There are many reasons to accept this and usually the airlines only need one or two people to take the deal so there's always somebody who is happy for the change.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[tchuladdiass]

Because out of 100 people, one person will have a family emergency they have to attend to. 2 people will have mis-set their alarm clocks, 5 are first-time travelers and underestimated traffic and security delays. Then there are the business travelers who have a last minute change of agenda, and take a flight at a later time.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[Hadlock]

Another flight home from Cartagena, I was too hung over in the morning and nearly missed my flight home, but thank god, they held the flight for me by ~15 minutes as I didn't have any checked luggage and Spirit Airlines patiently waited for me to be expedited through security/customs.
 
Thursday, I nearly missed my flight from SFO to Dallas because I thought my flight was at 5:45 but really it was 5:25 and also I didn't count on SF traffic to the airport. Thanks to the miracle of online checkin I was able to make that flight.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[Hadlock]

I once bought a bus ticket from Iguazu, Brazil to Rio De Janiro for about $250, went to go see the falls that morning (they're amazing by the way, twice as wide and twice as high and twice as much water as Niagra falls), and the bus driver that takes us back in to town slept through lunch and I got back an hour later than I expected. Worse, I thought the bus started from the Argentinian side, so I had to get an international taxi for $80 to the bus terminal. Got my passport stamped sitting in the back of a ratty hundai taxi. Had they waited an extra 5 minutes to scrutinize my brazilian visa, I'd have been screwed and missed New Years in Rio.

Airlines overbook?

[ATMAvatar]

Next you're going to try and convince me that ISPs oversell bandwidth, hardware stores don't actually give me boards that measure 2"x4" in the cross section, that hard-drive manufacturers don't label drives as their formatted capacity, and printer cartridges don't let you utilize 100% of the ink inside.

Re:Airlines overbook?

[KiloByte]

hard-drive manufacturers don't label drives as their formatted capacity

Heck, hard-drive manufactures are so evil they even paid a committee to introduce a conflicting unit of measure with the same name as something we used for decades.

yeah? So? Been doing this since the 80s.

[WindBourne]

Bob Crandall of American Airlines started this because so many ppl would actually call in with false reservations so that they could fly standby. That kills the load factor. So, was AA's CIO that really created the hub/spoke system, along with dynamic pricing and slightly overbooked seats. Note that when overbooked, somebody gets nice things.

Sadly, the western based airlines are now a disaster due to de-regulations combined with MBAs that do not have an original thought. Worse, because the CEOs now have stock in the airlines, it is in their best interest to look at short-term stock value and not at long-term profits. Crandall REFUSED to have publicly traded stock to any executive when there. AA became the best. Once he left, the execs that took over ran AA into the ground.

Re:yeah? So? Been doing this since the 80s.

[Registered Coward v2]

Sadly, the western based airlines are now a disaster due to de-regulations combined with MBAs that do not have an original thought.

Deregulation was the major cause as it changed how airlines competed for passengers. When the CAB set fares and awarded routes, airlines were assured of a profit and competed on service, not price because everyone's price was the same. Deregulation change that model to one where price became the major determinants of demand, so airlines started to cut costs to stay competitive and service went out the door. Suddenly, routes that were only profitable because the CAB set fares became unprofitable and cities lost jet service, and new entrants could cherry pick profitable ones and provide cheaper service, driving down profits on those as well. Seats became a commodity to sell at the lowest possible price. International routes are still profitable and airlines try to stop any discount carrier from going a foothold because the consequences are severe. It will be interesting to see what happens on trans-Atlantic with Norwegian Air. I suspect we will see a number of EU country flag carriers fold since they are often already barely profitable or rely on subsidies to survive. They may merge and keep their names, such as Air France - KLM but in reality be one transnational carrier.

Crandall had it right when he said "We are at the mercy of our stupidest competitor..."

Re:yeah? So? Been doing this since the 80s.

[Uberbah]

Bob Crandall of American Airlines started this because so many ppl would actually call in with false reservations so that they could fly standby.

My corporatist-BS sense is tingling....

Re:yeah? So? Been doing this since the 80s.

[WindBourne]

nope. It was not uncommon for AA to have routes in which up to 1/3 of the seats were missed. Back then, we did not put reservations on cards. Simply a call in. Nothing more. You could actually pay at the gates. Keep in mind that calling in CCs back then was useless. It was all paper WRT CC.

Re:yeah? So? Been doing this since the 80s.

[WindBourne]

well, when deregs went in, Crandall came on strong and AA blew the doors off weak competitors such as United (they had it easy due to many on CAB being ex-boeing).
And yeah, Crandall did have it correct on that. In fact, he had SOOO much right such as the no executives owning publicly-traded stock (though he was a fan of ESOPs). I have to laugh. My dad is a retrd AA capt and now lives down the street from Crandall. They have had some interesting discussions. Apparently, he is still mad that his proteges got SOOO greedy and destroyed AA. OTOH, he is pretty pleased with Parker.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[mattwarden]

Meetings run long. They get canceled or rescheduled. People oversleep and need to take a later flight. Or they get in a fight with their girlfriend and take an earlier flight. They misconnect because their first leg was delayed.

Heck, one time I was was at my gate really early (early enough that there was another flight at the gate before mine), working on my laptop until my flight. And I missed my flight at the very gate I'm sitting in because my laptop clock was in a different time zone and I was so focused on work that I didn't hear announcements that my flight was boarding.

Also changes made in the last 1-2 weeks are hard to resell. Most "subsidized" leisure fare buckets have advance booking rules, and leisure travelers won't pay full fare coach. So late changes are very similar to "no shows".

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[rgmoore]

One reason people miss their flights is because they have busy, unpredictable schedules. They may be doing something like business negotiations that don't run on a nice schedule; they're finished when everybody agrees on terms. For someone like that, it's more convenient either to book multiple flights and then take whichever one works out or to pay the full, non-refundable fare that lets them keep changing their flight so they can push it back one day at a time. FWIW, this kind of thing is why there are still travel agencies specializing in business travel even in the day of online booking.

How !!

[invictusvoyd]

is it legal to sell one thing to two different people?

Re:How !!

[ShanghaiBill]

is it legal to sell one thing to two different people?

It depends. If you read the fine print on the back of your airline ticket (or on the website if you buy online) it specifically says that you may get bumped, and it also says that a refund or replacement ticket is your only legal recourse. You agreed to those terms when you bought the ticket. So in this case, yes it is legal.

Re:How !!

[invictusvoyd]

They can sell 110 tickets on a 100-seat flight. But if all 110 people turn up, they have to buy 10 spare tickets from another airline - or buy *back* 10 of the tickets from the passengers, at whatever price the passengers feel like setting.

Not sure about that !

Re:How !!

[Solandri]

Careful what you wish for. If it were illegal to sell one seat to two different people, yes your flight would never be overbooked. But if you missed your flight, you wouldn't be able to get a refund or rebook. The airline would say tough - by law that was your seat and only your seat. Once you bought it, by law they weren't allowed to sell it to anyone else. So once you bought it it was yours period. If you missed the plane, that's not their problem. If you want to get to your destination, you'll have to buy another ticket.

I like the current system. The airlines usually have enough people overbooked or on standby that they don't lose money when you miss your flight, and they extend the favor to you by rebooking you on a later flight at no extra charge. No need to buy a new ticket. And usually there are enough volunteers willing to be bumped that a forced bump is very rare.

The quote in TFS has it backwards - you arrive at the conclusion that overbooking is bad if you only consider what makes perfect sense for the customer, and completely ignore what makes sense for the airline. If you forcibly implement a system that costs the airlines more money, well they have to make that money up somewhere. In this case it would be from the wallets of passengers who miss their flight. The current system represents a good compromise where the desires of both the airlines (to have full flights) and passengers (to be allowed to rebook without penalty or with minimal penalty if they miss a flight) are taken into account.

Re:How !!

[lgw]

They pretty much have to find volunteers. But remember, once they start offering cash to take a later flight, it's a reverse auction, and they only need to find the cheapest passenger on the flight. It's a pretty safe bet by the airline that even if all 110 show up, at least 10 shop at WalMart.

Re:How !!

[Calydor]

They aren't selling you a seat.

They are selling you a LICENSE to sit in a specific spot on THEIR airplane at a specific time.

Just like the weasel words "on a computer" and "on the internet", "license" is the new get-out-of-jail-free card.

Re:How !!

[thegarbz]

Yes it's a service. The law protects the consumer to ensure they will eventually get what they paid for which is transport within a window listed in the terms of sale.

Re:How !!

[K. S. Kyosuke]

I'm not sure you're selling the same thing to different people. That might require two people to be actually put on the plane to fight for the seat. Clearly that's not what's happening.

Re:How !!

[jareth-0205]

is it legal to sell one thing to two different people?

It depends. If you read the fine print on the back of your airline ticket (or on the website if you buy online) it specifically says that you may get bumped, and it also says that a refund or replacement ticket is your only legal recourse. You agreed to those terms when you bought the ticket. So in this case, yes it is legal.

And it depends on the law at your location. EU rules about delays and cancellations are quite strict,it's about a mandatory €300 compensation if you're bumped. (Depends on his far and how late)

Re:How !!

[swillden]

is it legal to sell one thing to two different people?

It depends. If you read the fine print on the back of your airline ticket (or on the website if you buy online) it specifically says that you may get bumped, and it also says that a refund or replacement ticket is your only legal recourse. You agreed to those terms when you bought the ticket. So in this case, yes it is legal.

That makes it sound worse than it is. If you have a confirmed reservation on a given flight and you get bumped the airline is required by federal law to get you on the next available flight on any airline as well as give you a cash payment. In many years of travel, I've only been "involuntarily refused boarding" (the FAA's terminology) once. The airline gave me a check for $500 and a first class seat on a different airline 30 minutes later. And I think it's also a black mark on some FAA record for the airline and there may be additional fines or consequences if it happens too often.

What actually happens is that except in very, very rare circumstances airlines don't refuse anyone. Instead they make a series of offers to buy passengers off of the plane. This starts with relatively low-value vouchers, but can escalate to free tickets or even cash. It basically always works. My involuntary refusal was due to a last-minute mixup after the plane was boarded, when there was no time to buy someone off.

Re:How !!

[Uberbah]

But if you missed your flight, you wouldn't be able to get a refund or rebook. The airline would say tough - by law that was your seat and only your seat.

Which is....exactly what happens unless you pay yet another fee for flexibility. Your bus breaks down on the way to the airport - airline DGAF.

Re:How !!

[quetwo]

The FAA has changed their rules in the last three years. They no longer have to work with another airline to get you to your final destination. There is now a timer that starts that if they don't get you there by any means within a comparable passage class within 2 hours of your scheduled destination, they owe you cash, based on some formula that is basically a refund of your ticket, plus possibly a penalty. If they know that they can't get you there within two hours, you fall prey to the machine and hope you find somebody who will work with you to make it right. The FAA no longer tracks airlines that bump passengers, and if you do get involuntary refused booking, you have to go to arbitration, and possibly court to get the full refund allowed by the FAA.

Re:How !!

[oshkrozz]

That is incorrect ... Most airlines will rebook you without a fee if you had some issue on the way to the airport (you still need to arrive to the airport), if you don't show up at all and call them they might be less forgiving, even then.
Non-refundable means very different things in different countries. In the USA it most of the time it means you will not get cash, but it can be used as credit on another flight (minus a change fee).

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[swillden]

But I just can't grasp why a significant number of people who've paid good money for airline tickets simply don't show up. If I spend several hundred dollars on something, I'm going to make sure I get what I paid for...

I see you don't fly much.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[edtice1559]

Business travelers change their flights all of the time. If it wasn't for overbooking this would be prohibitively expensive. Meeting runs late, you call the airline, pay your change fee, and carry on. Also many business travelers don't know when they are going to be done their last meeting so they leave plenty of time and book the last flight of the night. Then when business is done, they show up at the airport and ask to get put on the next flight. For vacation-grade tickets, if you're going to miss your flight, just call the airline and let them know and you can pay the change fee up to like 10 minutes before the flight departs. For many higher-fare tickets you can actually call up to 2 hours after the flight leaves.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[Macdude]

The Iguazu falls are only 50% wider, average somewhere around 50% taller and have only 73% of the water flow of Niagara Falls.

Re:Fraud

[edtice1559]

Except that airlines are explicitly exempted from some of these rules in exchange for their being willing to accommodate passengers who have extenuating circumstances. There's nothing to be upset about here. The article is flamebait and you took it.

Nobody gets bumped from their flight

[Sun]

That is pure misinformation. What does happen is that 50,000 passengers a year get an offer to fly at a later flight for compensation, and they accept that offer!

The number of people who don't fly on a flight for which they have a confirmed ticket without their consent is near zero.

Shachar

Re:Nobody gets bumped from their flight

[Anonymous Coward]

My daughter just got bumped from her flight against her will just a couple of days ago. So this is NOT misinformation.
They did compensate her with a large voucher and dinner $
But since she ended up being put on a flight to a different airport, but her luggage went to the original airport (which
we had to go pick up, and hour drive each way!) we would much preferred she just get to fly on the flight
she booked months in advance and planned on.

And NO she was not asked to volunteer, it was done in checkin order (not ticket purchase order).

Re:Nobody gets bumped from their flight

[Uberbah]

That is pure misinformation.

Pure dumbfuckery. No amount of compensation is going to make up for missing the game/concert/meeting/operation if that was the purpose of your flight.

Re:Nobody gets bumped from their flight

[Sun]

Has that ever happened to you? To someone you met? I once flew with someone to whom it happened on the flight right before (i.e. - that was the flight they took in lieu of the flight they were supposed to take). Once. And that was 15 years ago. You are much, much more likely to miss your game due to delays, technical problems or strikes than because of overbooking. Shachar

Re:Nobody gets bumped from their flight

[Uberbah]

Has that ever happened to you? To someone you met? I once flew with someone to whom it happened on the flight right before (i.e. - that was the flight they took in lieu of the flight they were supposed to take). Once. And that was 15 years ago.

What difference would it make if it were 0 times or 50? All we'd be doing is trading anecdotes, and anecdotes are worthless. If neither you nor anyone you know has been the victim of violent crime, does that mean that violent crimes don't happen in this country?

Point isn't that it's necessarily a common occurrence, point is you cannot dismiss it out of hand. Once it's you or a friend/family member missing a flight to a championship game/wedding/meeting, it will seem like a BFD when the gate attendant says there is no way you're getting on that flight because there isn't a seat for you.

Re:Nobody gets bumped from their flight

[Sun]

No, that's not correct.

Obviously, being the one that this happens to sucks big time. There is a huge difference, however, between "50,000 people a year cannot fly on reserved tickets" and "500 people a year cannot fly on reserved tickets".

The point I'm making is that this isn't a one sided move by the airliners. This has direct impact on you. If they cannot overbook by 10%, then your tickets will be 10% more expensive.

The anecdotal evidence here is that this happens at a higher frequency than I was aware (then again, all such evidence came for ACs). Let's assume that this is right, and I'm wrong. It's easy enough to solve. Just sue the #@%!)@# out of the bastards. The formula they use takes the expected cost of being wrong into account. If the cost of being wrong goes up, the airlines will organically overbook by less, and you got your wish.

I'll re-iterate: It sucks to not be able to make the game because of overbooking, but it also sucks to not be able to make the game because of bad weather, strikes, mechanical failures or bad traffic to the airport. If each of those, individually, are more likely than missing a game because of overbooking, then the "sucks" part is somewhat irrelevant.

I get it that this is a particularly infuriating reason to miss the game, as it was done on purpose. Still, the alternative cost is to pay more for tickets.

Shachar

Re:Nobody gets bumped from their flight

[tempo36]

Do I have figures...no. Do I have anecdotes? Sure. Yes I've been bumped. Yes I know people who have been bumped. More people would be bumped except that there is one thing you're correct on...and that is that airlines often essentially bribe themselves out of a corner. "Who is willing to give up their seat for $250? No? How about $350, a free dinner, and a hotel? No? $400, dinner, hotel, and an upgrade to business class on the next flight? SOLD!"

See? Look! No one got bumped, they just "accepted an offer!" Any guesses on if the airline was just looking to pay someone money and really had enough seats for everyone if no one took the offer?

We had to run this stats problem years ago. It's a basic binomial distribution. There is a certain probability that someone will no show. You run that probability against the number of seats you oversell, expand it out over however many thousand flights you have daily/yearly/etc and look at the cost of all the "failures" vs the profit from the oversell, and you find the sweet spot.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[jdgoulden]

Happens all the time in the executive world; The Boss doesn't know WHEN he'll make it to the airport so his assistant books him on every flight.

Why is that even a question?

[Ihlosi]

Of course they are intentionally overbooking flights, based on statistical analysis of what percentage of people who book a flight don't show up for it, and actually data of what it costs them to bump people off flights.

Wait, what??

[pablo_max]

The person I spoke with sounded very sincere when they told me to a great day.
Though, due to the very heavy Indian accent, they may have told me I was gay... either way though they sounded sincere.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[lgw]

OK, not to be all "the man", but you should seriously reduce your substance abuse if shit like that is an ongoing problem. Fat drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, or so I'm told.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[lgw]

Heh, most concise answer in this thread.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[tlhIngan]

Oh, I understand why airlines overbook. But I just can't grasp why a significant number of people who've paid good money for airline tickets simply don't show up. If I spend several hundred dollars on something, I'm going to make sure I get what I paid for...

1) Missed connections. This happens way more often than you think - either the connection is impossible, delays, or longer than normal flight can easily cause a connection to be missed.

2) Cheap seats - a lot of these are non-refundable, and non-flexible (and thus, cheap). If you need to change it for any reason, (perhaps your paperwork isn't in place, you missed the checkin time,etc) well, you're stuck. Since you can't change it or refund it, well, you book a new seat and yours go unused.

3) Cheaper - Sometimes depending on the routing, taking a few extra legs may end up making the trip cheaper (e.g., Vancouver-Seattle-San Francisco - it may be cheaper to buy Vancouver-San Francisco via Seattle than Seattle-San Francisco direct, even if it's the same plane). In which case, if you want to board at Seattle, you simply ignore the Vancouver-Seattle route and take the second half of the flight, and save a few bucks.

Unconscionable terms.

[Anonymous Coward]

So what if you write back and say that you've changed the terms. If they don't refund (and they never do: no process to do that), this is just as much an acceptance of YOUR terms as you buying the ticket accepts THEIRS.

This is part of the reason why most of the first world has consumer protection laws, and part of the reason why the USA sucks donkey balls to live in. No bullshit one-sided contracts have legal standing unless they are quid-pro-quo. See EULA (decided in Germany).

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[Sarten-X]

If you write back and they don't do anything to explicitly accept the new terms, they're generally unenforceable. You buying the ticket (or installing software, or using a service) is an action that indicates you accept their contract. Actions can accept contracts. Inaction generally cannot.

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[guruevi]

The FAA has rules around that. If you get bumped from your flight you are eligible for 4x the ticket price of the entire trip and they have to accommodate alternative travel or housing. You may have to take them to small claims to get it, they often only give vouchers up to 2x the ticket price.

Re: Unconscionable terms.

[Carewolf]

An action can not agree to a contract if the contract is presented after or during the action or if the action is something you already have the right to do. EULAs violate both rules and can be safely ignored in non-banan republican countries/states.

Re: Unconscionable terms.

[Sarten-X]

It depends on the terms of the EULA, and the implementation, and ultimately what it can convince a judge to decide.

The basis of a contract is that both parties are giving up legal rights in exchange for others. As an example, in a EULA the publisher is giving up certain exclusivity to copying, and you are giving up rights to privacy, warranty, and a chunk of money. Yes, the contract can also include escape clauses that define the actions (like failure to maintain a support contract, or failing to run updates, or clicking the "I don't accept" button) that will terminate the contract, and may entitle you to compensation (like a refund).

The legal complication comes from software that requires exercising the contract rights (copying to RAM) before seeing the EULA. In the case of installers and online services, and the infamous "by breaking this seal" stickers, that's a problem, and that's what some courts have decided against. The only real result is that now, EULAs are written to separate pre-EULA actions from the contract terms, so you can view the EULA before accepting, but still can't really use the software without accepting.

No, the courts did not invalidate contracts en masse. They just closed a loophole in a few specific cases, where the contract terms didn't mesh well with the actual system behavior.

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[Sarten-X]

Firstly, "click to accept" has been upheld many times, It's been overturned on a few rare occasions, in instances where other circumstances (like local sales laws) invalidated the EULA conditions.

1) In the particular case in this discussion, writing the airline with new terms would immediately be laughed out of court. It's not the normal method of doing business, and the AC proposing the scheme stated that he knows the airline has no process to handle the proposed contract, so the contract is obviously being made in bad faith.

2) In a service contract, if the terms change there is a window (typically 30 days, but it depends on the jurisdiction and applicable, consulmer protection law) during which you can cancel the service or otherwise reject the new terms (though that usually triggers other terms in the contract, like cancellation). However, it's important to note that a previous contract already exists. That changes the legal posture significantly. Again, in the case of sending your own terms to an airline, there's no pre-existing relationship, and your case would be thrown out of court pretty quickly.

Re: Unconscionable terms.

[Existential Wombat]

I am changing the terms of the contract. Pray that I do not change them further...

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[Uberbah]

Firstly, "click to accept" has been upheld many times

By idiots, by corporatist hacks, and idiotic corporatist hacks. There is simply no way to square the circle of trying to enforce contractual terms after money has changed hands. Can't be done. You might as well try and justify child labor and indentured servitude - two other things that were once immutable and in-evita-bull as well.

And it's a farce that's proven every time a consumer tries to use an EULA to their advantage - remember Windows Refund Day? They're no different from those "employee handbooks" that have a little notice at the end saying that the handbook is not an employment contract. Which, translated, means that the company can use any clause against you, but you cannot use any clause against them.

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[whoda]

Nobody gets bumped except in the extreme instance they don't have enough volunteers take the voucher they are offering.

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[guruevi]

It does still happen, especially on smaller commuter flights. Happened to one of my co-workers, the airway wouldn't reimburse her, gave her a $50 voucher initially (they claimed she would only need reimbursing for the leg she was bumped on), later on $300 in vouchers (half the cost of the ticket), they went to court, my co-worker won, she got $2400 and got to keep the $300 in vouchers.

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[JoeMerchant]

It's mostly about accepted practice. We the travelling public generally accept the abuse, so it continues to get ratcheted up until we start physically abusing gate attendants and stewardesses - that's when they know they've maximized profits.

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[JoeMerchant]

Another interesting phenomenon is the variable price per seat. Tickets sold for a flight at one time, or through a particular channel, can vary as much as 600% from tickets sold at other times or places.

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[Sarten-X]

There is simply no way to ... enforce contractual terms after money has changed hands.

Well, fortunately that opinion was obsolete about 5000 years ago, when debt contracts became legally enforceable. Because we can legally oblige someone to follow terms after an exchange of money, we as a society developed investment, credit, loans, and complex economics. Effectively, if all exchange was limited to what was available at the time of the transaction, we'd be trapped in a barter economy.

Your rejection of the law and assertion that it cannot possibly be exactly how it's been for millenia does not in any way change the fact that the law exists and has worked very well overall.

While we're at it, let's discuss the other points you've fumbled.

You might as well try and justify child labor...

Which, when legal, is legal and justifiable. It didn't magically become illegal just because decided it was immoral. Rather, it was legal prior to any laws outlawing it, and continued to be legal until there were new laws declaring that children were not legally employable. That had some major side effects, like disruption to family businesses, so the laws were clarified to grant limited exceptions where the child's parents consented on the child's behalf. That led to more problems in cases where the parents did not care about their children's well-being, so the laws were again adjusted to the form we have today, where it is a complex set of rules to determine a minor's eligibility for hire.

Making a blanket law like "all minors are unemployable" is a very short-sighted reaction to the problem, and leaves you with the problem of starving farmers whose kids can't help harvest the crops. Good luck justifying that.

...and indentured servitude

...which is a very interesting application of contract law. At the time, indentured servitude was a simple contract: I give you X, you work for me for Y years. The unfortunate downside to that was that during those years, you couldn't do anything else to support yourself. This led to laws that contracts must not leave either party destitute, such that they would be unable to live reasonably during or after the contract. Once those laws were enacted, indentured servitude quickly gave way to employment contracts, that usually specified the same deal as the servitude, but with livelihood provided during the term of indenture.

Notably, an employment contract is a contract. You agree to certain conditions (working), and the employer agrees to conditions (payment). If you quit the job, the contract might say you have to pay back your wages or meet other demands, and they'd be enforceable, too. The contract could prohibit you from working in the same industry for the remainder of your contract term, and it'd be enforceable.

Since a key aspect of a contract's consideration is that you are giving up certain rights of your own, the contract may supersede other laws. This is now coming into play for EULAs and service agreements, as arbitration clauses are being included in the contract, overriding local laws regarding dispute resolution. The debate in the courts is whether your right to a court-based resolution is waiverable by a contract or not. There have been decisions on both sides, so the matter is not yet settled.

They're no different from those "employee handbooks" that have a little notice at the end saying that the handbook is not an employment contract.

That's correct. They are not contracts, which means that they do not invoke contract law over any other laws that are in place. That's very important, because it means that nothing in the handbook is binding by contract law.

Without the handbook being a contract, the law falls back to whatever would be in force without the handbook's existence. Usually, that's a law saying something to the effect of "the employer wil

Re:Unconscionable terms.

[Uberbah]

There is simply no way to ... enforce contractual terms after money has changed hands.

Well, fortunately that opinion was obsolete about 5000 years ago, when debt contracts became legally enforceable. Because we can legally oblige someone to follow terms after an exchange of money, we as a society developed investment, credit, loans, and complex economics. Effectively, if all exchange was limited to what was available at the time of the transaction, we'd be trapped in a barter economy.

Unfortunately that's tripe. Debt contracts are just that, contracts, where you see terms and conditions before you sign, not after.

Which, translated, means that the company can use any clause against you, but you cannot use any clause against them.

No, it means that you need to go learn the local laws to understand the laws, and it's not your employer's responsibility to educate you.

No, it means exactly what I said: the company is free to use any policy in the handbook against you, but if you try to point out a clause to your benefit with a dispute to HR, then it's "oh, it's not a contract."

So, you're the exact sort of corporatist. idiot. hack. that I was referring to. You could make a nice living as a judge in Texas.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[HuskyDog]

Sometime airlines effectively encourage people not to turn up. Example: A few years ago when my wife moved to live with me she needed to book a single ticket (i.e. not a return). She quickly discovered that a return cost less than a single (something which I think is common, but still mystifies me). So, she bought a return ticket and simply didn't turn up for the return flight. So, she was a no-show and it was effectively all the airlines doing.

*eyeroll*

[Hognoxious]

Of course it isn't, because they don't offer you a refund or a ticket on an alternative flight and hey kick you in the nuts too. That's whey pretty much every time you go to an airport you see check-in agents being dragged away in handcuffs.

Re:WTF?

[khallow]

No, the original poster is right. Revenue still counts even if it is from customers who didn't show up and that means a cheaper airline ticket for everyone.

Re:Always a couple of cheapskates

[ShakaUVM]

>There are almost always 1 or 2 cheapskates on a flight of 150+, whom can be bought off.

Sure, count me as one of them (as a frequent flier). As long as I don't have a strict deadline, I'll usually take a voucher. One year I think I probably got back more credit worth in vouchers than I spent on flying.

Re:Look, a Trump-U graduate!

[cbraescu1]

The amount of educated people failing Economy 101 is astounding.

Been that way for 30 years?

[eggstasy]

Why is this news? I can remember this being done all the way back to the 80s...

And inverse is also true...

[dyfet]

If they have an under-booked flight, they also will simply cancel it and move people onto other flights instead. This I had seen often enough too.

Re:Look, a Trump-U graduate!

[Hognoxious]

s/amount/number/
s/Economy/Economics/

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS !

[redelm]

This story is prehistoric, overbooking has been an algorithmically optimised practice by the airlines for at least 40 years. No recent news, but in 2011 the US increased the legally-mandated compensation for "involuntary denied boarding compensation" in 14 CFR 250.5 .

The loophole is the airlines try to get their victims to agree to substantially less, mostly by never giving the written notice they're required to, or by obfuscating it. Go google/duckduckgo it.

Re: I've never been able to wrap my head around th

[LynnwoodRooster]

QUIET! If he's too stupid to know about TSA Pre by now, the LAST thing I want is him in the TSA Pre line asking "do I need to take my shoes off?" or trying to dig his iPad out of his bag... I fly weekly from LAX to SFO and back, typically catch the 8 AM Delta flight, and arrive at the airport at 7:30 AM to park my motorcycle. Never missed a flight yet, TSA Pre is always 5 minutes, I'm at the gate a solid 10 minutes before they close the door... If he was in the TSA Pre line, my margin gets a lot smaller...

It's the surface lie of woe vs. hope for trouble

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

I'm not for government involvement in the economy, but when a company claims they need to keep the money from unused tickets instead of returning it, because otherwise they have unfairly lost money on an unsold seat if they return it (which is not nice, but reasonable), but then actually do this, where they have completely ameliorated that risk, then to continue to maintain that rational for not returning the unused seat's money when it gets re-sold anyway, i.e. double-sold, is flat out fraud.

Like banks charging $35 overdraft fees, over and over in a single month, because it's "costly" to them, or credit card companies charging outrageous interest rates, bumping you up because you have borrowed too much ("you are a 'higher risk' "), the actual behind the scenes math is oriented around the surface reason as fraud for a real, massively profitable business model.

These are frauds. They literally hope you get into trouble of some kind (forget to use the ticket, forget you're low on funds, borrow too much from them without even missing a payment) so they can "protect themselves". But when they hope you trip instead of fear it, because it profits them, there's the lie. There's the fraud.

Re:I've never been able to wrap my head around thi

[Kelerei]

Another fun story to add to the list: my mother has been visiting us in Cape Town and had a flight back to Durban (2 hours flying time). She misread her ticket: what she thought was her departure time was actually the arrival time in Durban. I realized her error too late, and we made it just as the baggage drop counter closed. Online check-in didn't save her since she had bags that needed to have been put in the hold; it would have saved her if she had carry-on luggage only (though, this is my mother -- she travels with the kitchen sink!).

It was also the last flight for that day, but the airline was very understanding -- they gave her a standby ticket for the next day at virtually no charge. We took her back the next morning, and she pretty much camped by the standby counter. Thankfully, there was a no-show on the early morning flight, so she managed to get on that.

Re:WTF?

[khallow]

THEIR claim is that unused seats are inefficient and increase the price of seats.

Which is correct, let us note. Unused seats really are inefficient and do increase the ticket price.

NOT They can get more revenue by overselling seats if someone doesn't turn up. Which, by the way, is deliberate fraud.

Words have meaning. Fraud doesn't mean what you claim here since no misrepresentation of the business has happened for the past half century or more. But yes, overselling seats does reduce the cost per passenger and hence, in the usual competitive market result in a price decline of tickets.

Depends on why you travel

[phorm]

Maybe if you're just missing a night flight arrival VS early the next morning, but getting bumped often can mean missing connections, missing events, paying for a hotel booking you don't use etc etc.

I've had flights delayed 2-3 and that was enough to f*** up my travel plans in some cases. Overbooking and bumping intentionally is just greed.

Fuckin' Drive

[krray]

Overbooking flights is the least of the problems that you (or I) have with the Airlines. Frankly, flying just sucks all around now.

How many seats can we cram in? How many more rows can we stuff them into? How small can we make the bathroom. Just how bad can the food get? What else can we possibly do to charge these slimy people we call customers? How much more miserable can we make them???

It's why I don't fly that much anymore. I'm talking maybe one flight every ten years now. If I can drive it -- I will. It's the reason I bought a really really nice fucking car.

Let's see -- be at the airport 2-3 hours BEFORE the flight. I remember showing up half and hour before the flight and it was no problem. That was then. This is now. It takes another hour to get to the airport (my problem, but now theirs). Sometimes two hours if traffic is shit like it is during the holidays. Plus flight time to get where ever I'm trying to go. Plus another hour or two at the other end to get to the final destination after getting a car, etc. Add it all up...it's almost 10-12 hours to get somewhere within 5 hours of flight. I can drive that in a couple of days -- and here's the thing ... be much more RELAXED when I arrive. Did I mention the nice fuckin' car? LOTS of room. I can get out and walk around any time I want. I pick the washroom I want to use. They're huge.

Thank god I don't need to travel for business. Suckers.
I wish I could drive to Hawaii. That flight sucks...

I remember going to the movies. Then the seats started getting smaller and smaller. Cram more people in. Just like the airlines. I stopped going there too. Except one recent movie trip -- and I was blown away. HUGE electric reclining seats. Almost as good as the ones in my home built theatre. I may just go back again.

Funny -- if the airlines would charge me TWICE as much, and cut the bullshit charges along the way. Remove half the rows (or more now) and give me a nice big lav -- perhaps the entire tail section would be nice. You know, make it like it was in the 60's and 70's ... or better. I just might consider flying a whole hell of a lot more than I do now (which is never).

Oh, and fuck United. I am a Delta share holder. LOL

 

Re:Fuckin' Drive

[Nkwe]

Thank god I don't need to travel for business. Suckers.

The irony is that if you did travel for business you would travel enough to be treated well by the airlines and you wouldn't be a sucker. Traveling by air infrequently does suck, for many of the reasons you mention. If however you travel a lot, you will obtain status on one or more airlines. With status they treat you well. With status, you get nicer seats, don't have to pay to check luggage, can use TSA-Pre (the security fast lane), receive automatic re-booking for missed connections, significant priority for stand by travel, etc.

Funny -- if the airlines would charge me TWICE as much, and cut the bullshit charges along the way. Remove half the rows (or more now) and give me a nice big lav -- perhaps the entire tail section would be nice. You know, make it like it was in the 60's and 70's ... or better. I just might consider flying a whole hell of a lot more than I do now (which is never).

You mean buy a first class ticket?

Suggested changes to the business model ...

[CaptainDork]

... by amateurs reminds me of a true story:

I moved from the oil patch (layoff) to the legal field and one of my first recommendations to management was, "Hey! Let's stop doing all this copying crap that requires skill of a 13-year old and print to PDF and email attachments to clients!"

Fuck.

Those lawyers made 3 cents per page of copy.

I would learn all about "time and expense" billing.

--

So, some of the suggestions offering a better business model for the airlines in these comments show a lack of understanding similar to mine.

Re:Suggested changes to the business model ...

[Locke2005]

My divorce lawyer chared $72 per email, sent or received, because "Oh, we have to archive all those!" Right... and you don't have to file paper documents, which is actually a lot more work?!? She also asked a lot of unnecessary question, obviously intended to generate more emails... and then quit just before the hearing when I wouldn't play her game. Yeah, lawyers are assholes.

Re:WTF?

[Uberbah]

No, the original poster is right.

Nah, he's just a corporate jihadist, much like yourself. You guys having a wake for the TPP, since companies wont be able to sue for "lost" profits from consumer protection, the way these airlines don't want to "lose" revenue from not being able to overbook - even though each and every seat was paid for in advance?

Re:WTF?

[khallow]

You haven't even shown there is a problem. Buzz off.

overbooking is old new

[alw53]

The policy of rewarding people for getting bumped was instituted by Alfred Kahn under the Carter administration. After airlines were deregulated, they had no established policy for overbooking and they would either just hold the plane indefinitely until someone volunteered to get off for free, or they would just bump random people. Kahn established the policy of requiring them to first ask for volunteers and offering rewards.

Re:WTF?

[Uberbah]

You haven't even shown there is a problem. Buzz off.

Not a problem? Does the Fairy Rand Grandmother come down and sprinkle Libertarian Magic Dust to ensure that people flying to a hearing/wedding/concert/meeting/operation do not get bumped from flights?

Re:WTF?

[khallow]

Does the Fairy Rand Grandmother come down and sprinkle Libertarian Magic Dust to ensure that people flying to a hearing/wedding/concert/meeting/operation do not get bumped from flights?

Of course, yes. For example, asking for volunteers and offering something valuable in exchange is how the magic Rand fairy gets people who don't mind getting bumped. For all the talk, it rarely happens that someone with a desperate need gets bumped. And even when it does happen, airlines will often go out of their way to assist truly desperate people.

Moving on, bumping happens anyway due to cancellations of flights. The magic Rand fairy has no more figured out how to make a broken down plane flight-worthy or fix the weather than any other fairies out there.

Obviously solution

[Locke2005]

Make the penalties for selling someone a seat they don't actually have far, far outweigh the marginal profits of over-selling tickets. Remember the Ford Pinto, and how the Ford Engineers decided paying off a few lawsuits was more cost effective than installing a $2 part that would keep the gas tank from exploding in a rear end collision? The airlines have obviously made a similar cost/benefit analysis and decided that comping a flight costs them less than they make by overbooking.

Yes. statistics homework in school

[drolli]

Company optimizes for money earned - shocking! finding the optimum overcommitment of resources was a homework in statistics in our class.

It's simple:
* Probability distribution of people appearing for a given flight
* take cumulative probability distibution
* multiply earning per ticket sold with number of tickets
* multiply cost per over committed seat with remaining probability
* subtract these two values
* find minimum as function of commited seats

And let me ask a question: Would you accept a several % increase in ticket price for reducing the risk from a small chance (i was offered compensation for voluntarily giving up a booking once and never not boarded) to 0?

Other venues?

[parp]

So why isn't this done for concerts, sporting events, theater, movies, cruises, etc? Seems odd that it's only done for airlines.

Re:WTF?

[bitingduck]

IF they book EVERY SEAT, then the seat, ***even if unused*** IS STILL PAID FOR.

Not if they sell refundable or changeable tickets. Every seat is paid for until suddenly someone goes online and makes a change and it's not. If they do that close to departure time then the airline risks the seat going out empty, which is essentially product spoilage for them. So they overbook, counting on a certain fraction of travelers to change their plans at the last minute and have the plane go out exactly full.

The typical counterargument is "well, they should just make tickets non-refundable within X hours of departure", except that their reliable customers are business customers who like the flexibility and are willing to pay for expensive refundable tickets, expensive last-minute tickets, and change fees if they're buying non-refundables. The excess that those customers are willing to pay for the flexibility more than compensates for what they have to bid for one of 75 or more people to take a $200-$400 voucher to accept VDB. So they can sell tickets to business travelers right up til departure on most flights, counting on the ability to get someone to take a voucher in return for accepting a later flight.

Re:Look, a Trump-U graduate!

[angel'o'sphere]

Rubbish. Demand is defined as the quantity people are willing and able to buy at a specific price.

Demand is defined by what the word "demand" means in an english dictionary. And that has absolutely nothing to do with the price people want to pay for it.

Re:Look, a Trump-U graduate!

[Hognoxious]

In the context of economics, you should use the economics definition.

Mind your head down there, I'm dropping you a new spade - that one looks worn out.

Re:WTF?

[mattwarden]

This is an impressively unhinged reply. Even more impressive is that it makes no sense. If a seat goes unused, that is inefficient. It doesn't matter the circumstances in which that occurred or whether someone paid for that unused seat. It is better for the passengers if the airline fills every seat and maximizes the revenue potential. Airlines are a commodity industry and competition prevents excess profit, so this practice just keeps ticket prices low for the Hawaiian shirt brigade