Prev: Jews Strive To Restore Christmas Trees At Seattle Airport
Next: United Mileage Plus mystery terms
From: hummingbird on 1 Mar 2007 07:25
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:52:29 GMT 'Jim Ley'
posted this onto rec.travel.air:

>On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:32:21 +0000, hummingbird
><RHBIYDTNPPAX(a)spammotel.com> wrote:
>
>>The Expedia website 'offers' a set of classes when booking flights.
>>FYI it appears in a drop down window.
>>The only options 'offered' to me were economy, business and first.
>>
>>Got it yet?
>
>EXPEDIA is not a travel agent, USE a travel agent or a better website,
>and then you might be able to find stuff...
>
>Jim.

You keep saying that Expedia is not a travel agent but you have yet
to state what you think they are.
From: hummingbird on 1 Mar 2007 07:31
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 19:48:06 GMT 'redmonds(a)sprynet.com'
posted this onto rec.travel.air:

>On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:32:21 +0000, hummingbird
><RHBIYDTNPPAX(a)spammotel.com> wrote:
>
>snip
>>
>>The Expedia website 'offers' a set of classes when booking flights.
>>FYI it appears in a drop down window.
>>The only options 'offered' to me were economy, business and first.
>>
>>Got it yet?
>
>It is true that some of the discount web sites do not bring up
>"premier economy" as a choice.

So it seems.


>snip
>>
>>>>Why you think a travel agent would do better than me is a mystery.
>>>
>>>Because you were too incompetent to find the seats available on a
>>>flight, and are under the mistaken belief that there were only one
>>>provider with economy plus serving asia.
>>
>Booking on the BA web site does bring up the option of "premier
>economy" which presents flights with World Traveller Plus. Curiously
>when I tried it for some hypothetical dates bookings from BKK to LHR
>show only Qantas outbound wiht no WT+ and BA back with WT+. Looking
>at LHR-BKK-LHR has BA0009/BA0010 with WT+ both ways.
>
>It is indeed a lesson on learning the services available and not
>taking what one particular online broker "offers."
>
>Also note according to SeatGuru the BA 744 WT+ seat has 7" more pitch
>and 1" (for what it is worth) more width than WT.

1" of extra width would hardly be worth the premium cost.
IMHO economy seats need to be at least three inches wider and a space
inserted between seats to enable each seat to have its own armrests.


>Is it possible that you were actually boarded on a Quantas 747 with
>only one economy service?

No, it was definitely a BA 747-400 that I flew home on.
There was a Qantas 747 which left Bangkok for London soon after mine.

It's worth mentioning that I flew out to Hong Kong and only returned
from Bangkok, so that made the booking slightly more difficult.
From: hummingbird on 1 Mar 2007 07:38
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:13:30 -0900 'nada'
posted this onto rec.travel.air:

>On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:16:00 +0000 in rec.travel.air, hummingbird
><RHBIYDTNPPAX(a)spammotel.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, obese people are a fact of life but it is the responsibility of
>> the airlines to deal with that issue.

>No it's the responsibility of the fat pigs to lose weight. I
>agree there should be standards that don't allow obese people to
>fly, because they are a danger to all the other pax. Some of
>these 3-seat porkers couldn't make it out the exit door, and they
>shouldn't allow them on the plane in the first place.

My point is that airlines are in a position to require that any person
who is too wide should have to buy two tickets, but they choose not
to do so, thereby passing the problem onto other passengers.

Alternatively they could install wider seats into planes.
From: hummingbird on 1 Mar 2007 07:42
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:20:15 -0900 'Dennis P. Harris'
posted this onto rec.travel.air:

>On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:16:00 +0000 in rec.travel.air, hummingbird
><RHBIYDTNPPAX(a)spammotel.com> wrote:
>
>> Adding the flight origin wouldn't be too difficult
>> but I suspect it's a piece of information that airlines try hard not
>> to reveal for commercial reasons.
>
>They don't bother because it's usually irrelvant to anyone but
>chronic whiners like you the customer from hell. You're the kind
>of guy that would complain about the cheap rope while they're
>tying the noose for your hanging.
>
>You wanted a cheap seat, you got one. You knew how small they
>were.

Rotfl. Why you describe an overbooked flight and only getting 2/3rds
of my seat as whining is a mystery. Another idiot who must have been
at the back of the queue when brains were handed out. Oooooh for
the days when the riff-raff didn't have access to the Internet...
From: Tchiowa on 1 Mar 2007 20:49
On Mar 1, 5:47 pm, hummingbird <RHBIYDTNP...(a)spammotel.com> wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2007 21:04:37 -0800 'Tchiowa'
> posted this onto rec.travel.air:

> >There is a difference between being a defeatist and complaining
> >because the world doesn't work the way you want it to. The world was
> >not designed to make everything happen exactly the way you want it to.
> >Understanding that is part of "growing up".
>
> Lol. An American joker...
>
> You are being defeatist because you are essentially arguing in support
> of the current airline model

No, I'm arguing in favor of the free market because it has been shown
to be the best way to solve problems like this.

> even though many people dread flying
> nowadays because of the way they are treated and packed in like
> cattle.

Yet give them the option to pay a bit more and get better seats and
they overwhelmingly turn it down.

> If you carefully read my original post and my additional posts, you
> will see that I have raised genuine concerns about the current model
> of airline business. EG: I believe that airline seats are simply not
> wide enough for anybody larger than small-to-medium width;

And, again (and again and again) that is as a result of passenger
demand. Airlines have tried bigger seats and more legroom at slightly
higher prices and passengers rejected it. The airlines are doing what
customer demand makes them do.

The airlines would be happy to have one passenger for a whole 747
paying a million dollars for the flight. But there aren't enough who
will do that. Whenever the airlines have tried increasing seat pitch,
for example, and charging slightly more for it, the passengers beat a
path to their competitor's door in order to save money.

> airlines are overbooking seats and causing passenger disruptions/delays etc.

There is a simple solution to the overbooking situation. Whenever a
passenger reserves a flight but doesn't take it without cancelling a
week in advance he is forced to pay for it anyway. Are you ready to
accept that??? How about it they raise prices 10% without any
additional service to cover the cost of empty seats from "no shows"?
That is why the airlines overbook. They know that typically a certain
percentage of people with reservations won't show. So they overbook in
order to fill the seats. Otherwise they lose and will have to pass the
cost to the customer in higher prices or penalties for cancellations.
Which would you prefer?

> It cannot be fair that a passenger buys a long haul ticket only to
> find that he/she is seated next to another passenger who is larger
> than medium and overflows their seat space for 13hrs.

We've all agreed with that. And some airlines have tried to force
obese passengers to buy 2 tickets. Which resulted in lawsuits claiming
discrimination so the airlines were forced to back off.

> And exactly what should an airline do in the BA situation in Bangkok
> I first described? If I assume that BA had not overbooked my flight
> *as they claimed* but were actually trying to find seats on my flight
> for passengers dumped off the previous night's flight due to a techy
> problem, should they roll over the problem to my flight? or should
> they try to isolate it and deal with it without affecting my flight?

In other words you don't care who gets hurt as long as it's not you???

> I was told that the reason they rolled it over was due to some 24hr
> rule on compensation but I have no info on this.

Could very well be.

> Most of these things are not in the interest of passengers, only the
> airlines. Airlines *choose* their business model and obviously it's
> designed to maximise their bottom lines. IE they don't have to pack
> seats into planes like a sardine can, but they choose to.

Again, airlines have tried to do it differently and the passengers
forced them to change.

> All I'm really saying is that there are problems with the current
> model as evidenced by the growing numbers of people who dread flying
> nowadays, but I have not actually set out my own ideas for change.
> I wanted to see what other people had to say about it.

????? Remember your comment about the flight? 100% full. I have a hard
time getting seats on flights between Asia and the US when booking a
month in advance. US flights are at full capacity. Seems like the
airlines have plenty of passengers.

> >No need for government intervention. The free market will take care of
> >itself. And despite what you want, it is the free market that is
> >demanding smaller, cheaper seats.
>
> I disagree. A large part of the problem is that airlines are virtually
> above the law across the world. The rights of passengers are pitiful.
> Witness that the seating problem I described provides me with little
> recourse.
> And free markets are not the solution to many problems, despite the
> American obsession with them.

America is far and away the most successful country on the planet
economically. It's people live better than anyone else. Make more
money, take more flights, have bigger houses, drive nicer cars, etc.
The American obsession with the free market is based on the fact that
is WORKS!

> I could also rant on about the current situation with Microsoft and its new Vista Op/Sys.

If someone had a better standard that people were willing to pay for
then MicroSoft would be forced out of business.

> >> >For the record I fly
> >> >over 100,000 miles a year, every year and have for a couple of
> >> >decades. So I'm well aware of what flying is like.
>
> >> Yippy for you. I have also done *a lot* of flying in my life but I
> >> don't see what that's got to do with it.
>
> >You had made a comment to another poster about him not having much
> >experience in flying.
>
> No I did not.

You mean you didn't make this comment to Thur: "If you can't see the
bad experience I described here, I'm sorry for
you...perhaps you aren't aware of what a nightmare flying is becoming
these days: "

"Perhaps he's not aware..."???

> Yes, I said it was mentioned "unofficially" (by other passengers).
>
> I repeat: BA made no mention of a cancelled flight the previous day
> - only that they had overbooked my flight. That's what their memo
> revealed at check-in after we had queued for two hours or so.

So your complaint is that they didn't communicate well? Yeah, that's a
problem.

> Q, should BA have boarded my flight in the certain knowledge that we
> would not take-off until the 35 other passengers had been brought to
> the airport and ticketed?

Yes.

> >> >Some of your complaint are "off the board". Examples:
>
> >> >Inadequate seating: You asked for a small seat. You bargained for a
> >> >small seat. There are bigger seats available but you chose not to pay
> >> >for one. People have complained a long time about small seats in
> >> >Economy, but when given a choice between slightly larger seats at a
> >> >slightly higher cost in Economy the vast majority choose cost over
> >> >comfort. So you get what you pay for.
>
> >> Wrong. *I did not ask for a small seat*.
>
> >Of course you did. You booked Economy. Are you telling me that BA
> >doesn't have Business or First?
>
> This is nonsense.

Really? You complained about seat size. You *CHOSE* your seat.
Multiple classes of service with different size seats and different
costs. You chose *CHEAP*.

> >> The choices available to me at booking were economy, business or
> >> first. BA do not offer "slightly larger seats at a slightly higher
> >> cost in Economy" as you say.
>
> >Read what I said. The customers have spoken that they won't pay for
> >more space so the airlines don't offer it.
>
> IYO. Others may disagree.

Sorry, but it's been proven. Airlines tried. Jet Blue and SouthWest
won by having smaller seats and less service. Other airlines are
forced to change in order to compete.

> >> I would usually happily pay a premium on long haul flights for a
> >> larger seat with more space but this isn't available on most airlines.
> >> Business and first are way too expensive.
>
> >As they are for most people. But that is still a choice you make. You
> >put money as your first consideration ahead of service then complain
> >because of the choice you made.
>
> Who is now behaving like an immature poster?

??? How is that immature? You made a choice. Now you are complaining
about the results of *YOUR* choice.

> When I book a flight, I expect a minimum acceptable standard of
> service but I rarely receive it.

You "expect"??? You know what the service is. You know you can get
better service if you pay for it. But you won't.

> >> It is my opinion that airlines cram too many seats into their planes
> >> to maximise numbers and profits.
>
> >Of course they do. And, again, if passengers were willing to pay a bit
> >more for less seats on the plane the airlines would offer them. But
> >they don't so the airlines don't. You are a "victim" of the free
> >market.
>
> Indeed. I'm a victim of the commercial-driven free market which is
> more concerned with running itself for its own benefit than meeting
> customer expectations.

No, it's concerned with running itself as the customers demand they
run it. Customers vote with their wallets every day.

> >It's not an "agent" either. It's a site that sells tickets. You want
> >proper travel advice, use a travel agent.
>
> If Expedia is not a travel agent or even an agent, then what is it?

A website that sells tickets.

> >Again, you made your choice and put money first before service. Then
> >you complain about the service.
>
> More nonsense.

More facts.

> >I thought it was Sydney-Bangkok-London which is around 24 hours
> >including layovers. You were just on part of the flight.
>
> I didn't fly from Sydney.

The plane did.

> As far as I was concerned my flight was from Bangkok to London.
> I didn't even know that my flight had originated in Sydney until I
> spoke to several other passengers.

Why didn't you know? You chose to buy your tickets yourself rather
than using a travel agent. You are responsible for finding those
things out.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Prev: Jews Strive To Restore Christmas Trees At Seattle Airport
Next: United Mileage Plus mystery terms