LUV has that clause SPECIFICALLY to entice. It means nothing. Back-to-Back ticketing is meant to take advantage of Saturday stay required round-trip pricing when there is to be no Saturday stay. WN doesn't offer any round-trip fares that require a Saturday stay so back-to-back bookings aren't required to save money. But it does make for great marketing... I'm guessing that Herb also has lenient change fee and cancellation policies. The majors do it not to punish their customers or as a revenue source, their primary goals is so that their load-factor predictions don't get all wobbly. Herb achieves load-factor predictions using a more disciplined approach to pricing yield management. I really wish people would get into their head (not you specifically Walter) that Southwest/WestJet/JetBlue etc. and the majors all play the same game with yield management, fare restrictions and rules. They do play the game very differently, but it is the same game. Matthew On 5/6/02 9:50 PM, "W Wilson" <wlw-jr@att.net> wrote: > LOL....I specifically researched it two years ago before a trip. I was one > happy camper when I saw it in writing, because I knew I would have been > breaking a rule if it was another airline,.......and I was saving funds in > the process. > > I also think it is unique at WN. I have not been able to find it permitted > on other carriers. In fact, similar to WN blatantly saying they permit > back-to-back, the rest of the industry seems blatantly state it is strictly > forbidden. > > Friends are also flying free on WN. > > Walter > DCA > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Liam Tully" <lrtully@sprint.ca> > To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> > Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 00:16 > Subject: Re: If I ran United... > > >> Thanks Walter. >> >> I should have known you would have that at your >> fingertips! LOL. Herb is/was no dummy when he allowed >> that to be included in the rules. However, I think that may >> be unique to WN. Are you aware of any others with a similar >> rule? >> >> Liam. >> YVR. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "W Wilson" <wlw-jr@att.net> >> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> >> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 9:02 PM >> Subject: Re: If I ran United... >> >> >>> http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/contract_of_carriage.html >>> Item 20 D >>> >>> Walter >>> DCA >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Liam Tully" <lrtully@sprint.ca> >>> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> >>> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 23:46 >>> Subject: Re: If I ran United... >>> >>> >>>> Walter. >>>> >>>> Where can I find a copy of the WN rule that >>>> states "it's OK to undercut a one way fare, if you >>>> issue 2 tickets, and this is how you do it!" Jeez - >>>> they are not THAT dumb. >>>> >>>> Liam. >>>> YVR. >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "W Wilson" <wlw-jr@att.net> >>>> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 8:33 PM >>>> Subject: Re: If I ran United... >>>> >>>> >>>>> All except WN.... >>>>> Even in their rules they specifically state they ALLOW back-to-back > or >>>> open >>>>> ended round trip ticketing. >>>>> >>>>> Walter >>>>> DCA >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Liam Tully" <lrtully@sprint.ca> >>>>> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> >>>>> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 23:09 >>>>> Subject: Re: If I ran United... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Mark. >>>>>> >>>>>> My understanding is that "back to back" tickets are somewhat >>>>> "frowned" >>>>>> upon >>>>>> by most, if not all carrier's - is that not correct? I might > suggest >>> to >>>>> you >>>>>> that in the >>>>>> event of an IROP situation, or having to make a change en-route, >> your >>>>> client >>>>>> with >>>>>> a B2B tkt. could find him/herself in a most uncomfortable > situation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Liam. >>>>>> YVR. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- 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... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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. >>>> With >>>>>> 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 >>> you >>>>>> have >>>>>>>>> someone who has paid the lowest fare possible occupying a > high >>>> yield >>>>>> 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 >>> on >>>>> the >>>>>>>> plane is! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> United got my business last year on four IAD-MSP round trips >>>> (through >>>>>> ORD, >>>>>>>> no less!) instead of NW because they treat me well, because I >> did >>>> lots >>>>>> 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 >>>>> spend >>>>>>>> down my current Mileage Plus balance on free tickets and then > go >>>> back >>>>> to >>>>>>>> choosing between Midwest Express (I miss Legend Airlines!) and >>>>> Southwest >>>>>>>> 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 >>> flights >>>> 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 >>>> Nortel >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> travelled a lot as a consultant? United thought so. That's the >>> whole >>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>> >>> >