I agree with you regarding on-line WN. However, when you look at trans con., or Canada/US, it's a lot of $ x many PAX. Are there any "winner's" in back to back ticketing - in the long term, I doubt it. Liam. YVR. ----- Original Message ----- From: "W Wilson" <wlw-jr@att.net> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 9:36 PM Subject: Re: If I ran United... > LOL...I think Matthew said exactly the same thing about WN when I posted a > similar message almost 2 years ago. > ...but if two back-to-back tickets on WN save a few dollars, what difference > does it make if the fare is based on point to point? > ...I haven't worked the numbers, but the point to point fare concept at WN, > for the max advance purchase choice, goes out the window at about 750-1000 > miles when the fares are usually topped at $99 one way. This is where it > works like a champ if needed. Back-to-back will probably not work or > segments shorter than 750 miles or there abouts where point to point fare > structuring is more apparent. > I've used back-to-back 3 times now at WN after discovering their allowance > with never a problem; saving funds for another trip. > > Walter > DCA > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Liam Tully" <lrtully@sprint.ca> > To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> > > > > As Matthew correctly pointed out, there is a BIG difference between > > the practice at WN and the "Majors". The latter are NOT happy > > with back to back tickets and are making significant inroads into > > their elimination - TA's beware!. > > > > Liam. > > YVR. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Matthew Montano" <mmontano@direct.ca> > > To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> > > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 8:41 PM > > Subject: Re: If I ran United... > > > > > > > Most, if not all airlines try and catch back-to-back by having a clause > > tha= > > > t > > > threatens cancellation of all outstanding segments if you book segments > > tha= > > > t > > > you don=B9t intend to travel on. The classic definition of back-to-back > > yield= > > > s > > > a situation where you physically can=B9t take the flights you=B9ve > booked. > > > > > > WN may permit it, but they have clauses regarding the use of unused > > segment= > > > s > > > that make it unappealing. WN also have pricing that differs from > major=B9s > > > standard pricing practice; their pricing is mostly segment based rather > > tha= > > > n > > > round-trip discounting. > > > > > > Matthew=20 > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/6/02 8:18 PM, "Addison Schonland" <addison@schonland.com> wrote: > > > > > > > back to back is illegal - but buy one ticke on airline 1 and another > on > > > > airline 2, you pick up the cheap fare and can't be caught doing > anything > > > > "bad".... > > > >=20 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU]On Behalf Of > > > > Liam Tully > > > > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 8:09 PM > > > > To: AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU > > > > Subject: Re: If I ran United... > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > Mark. > > > >=20 > > > > My understanding is that "back to back" tickets are somewhat > > "frowne= > > > d" > > > > upon > > > > by most, if not all carrier's - is that not correct? I might suggest > to > > y= > > > ou > > > > that in the > > > > event of an IROP situation, or having to make a change en-route, your > > cli= > > > ent > > > > with > > > > a B2B tkt. could find him/herself in a most uncomfortable situation. > > > >=20 > > > > Liam. > > > > YVR. > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Mark Greenwood" <mgreenwood@telus.net> > > > > To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> > > > > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 6:56 PM > > > > Subject: Re: If I ran United... > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > >> > We don't get a stream of random customers walking through our doors > > > > because we > > > >> > are not a store front agency. Yes it is more profitable to look > > after= > > > the > > > >> > clients I already have. 80% of your business comes from 20% of > your > > > >> > customers. Very few of my clients travel on unrestricted tickets. > > Wi= > > > th > > > > the > > > >> > business climate the way it is, they are planning in advance or > using > > = > > > back > > > > to > > > >> > back tickets. Many of them are top tier frequent flyers and are > > often > > > >> > upgrading from the 14 day advance purchase fare. > > > >> > > > > >> > Nick Laflamme wrote: > > > >> > > > > >>> > > At 07:37 PM 5/3/2002 -0700, Mark Greenwood wrote: > > > >>>> > > >How would doing away with FC adversely affect yield? Right > now > > y= > > > ou > > > > have > > > >>>> > > >someone who has paid the lowest fare possible occupying a high > > yi= > > > eld > > > > seat. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > You're kidding, right? They people who fly the most often fly on > > > >>> > > unrestricted tickets or on very short notice. They may have a 5% > > > > corporate > > > >>> > > discount worked out by their employer (I did when I was with > > Nortel= > > > ), > > > > but > > > >>> > > that's 5% off a very high fare, not 5% off what the cheapest > fare > > o= > > > n the > > > >>> > > plane is! > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > United got my business last year on four IAD-MSP round trips > > (throu= > > > gh > > > > ORD, > > > >>> > > no less!) instead of NW because they treat me well, because I > did > > l= > > > ots > > > > of > > > >>> > > Star Alliance miles in 2000. (UA and LH were by far the easiest > > way= > > > to > > > >>> > > Hamburg when I was doing lots of IAD/HAM trips.) When I say > "treat > > = > > > me > > > >>> > > well," I mean extra leg room in Economy Plus and a less busy > > check-= > > > in > > > >>> > > counter at most UA airports. If United decides the only perk I > get > > = > > > for > > > > my > > > >>> > > consistent patronage of them is the occasional free flights, > I'll > > s= > > > pend > > > >>> > > down my current Mileage Plus balance on free tickets and then go > > ba= > > > ck to > > > >>> > > choosing between Midwest Express (I miss Legend Airlines!) and > > Sout= > > > hwest > > > >>> > > depending on when I'm in economy mode or more-room-please mode. > > And > > > > instead > > > >>> > > of counting on my patronage to fill seats on twenty or fifty > > flight= > > > s a > > > >>> > > year, UA will have to win over someone else to be their > customer. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > Was I part of a niche worth being catered to when I worked for > > Nort= > > > el > > > > and > > > >>> > > travelled a lot as a consultant? United thought so. That's the > > whol= > > > e > > > > basis > > > >>> > > of the FF programs: it's easier to retain (and milk) an > > established= > > > FF > > > > than > > > >>> > > it is to compete for other airlines' frequent fliers. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > Tell me, Mark (and you other travel agents), is it more > profitable > > = > > > to > > > > take > > > >>> > > care of your established customers or to try to make a profit on > a > > > > stream > > > >>> > > of random customers walking through your doors? > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > Sigh, > > > >>> > > Nick > > > >> > > > > >=20 > > >