Snipped from The Times:

'From February 17, passengers will be able to demand compensation of up to €600 (£416) if a flight of more than 3,500km (1,800 miles) is cancelled or overbooked.

Cancelled flights of up to 1,500km will mean £173 compensation and up to £277 for flights up to 3,500km. Passengers will also be entitled to free meals, drinks and two free phone calls during long delays. The airline will have to provide them with a hotel room if the delay continues overnight.

The assistance must be provided even when the delay is caused by a factor outside the airline’s control, such as severe weather. The regulation applies to all airlines departing from airports in EU member states.'

---
---

That'll be interesting. Book a low cost ticket to Malaga for £25. Potential compensation claim £173 + free drinks, meals and phone calls. All because the French ATC/Spanish Baggage Handlers/Snow/Security Alert stopped you. What planet do these bureaucrats live on?


Cheers

WWW

I expect they think people still buy tickets so as long as they say something like 'holders of an airline ticket' that'll let everyone off the hook.

There must surely be a clause that states that compensation can't be more than the amount paid in the first place.

I think the LOCO market is now sufficiently mature for most users to understand what it is they're buying. easyJet in particular did an excellent marketing job with that TV programme, which seemed to mostly feature people turning up late for flights then having the terms of carriage explained to them. That would have cost millions in paid-for advertising to get the message across, I should think.

And what about people who buy a package holiday, where the flight is only a part of the deal? There is still a significant market here and of course in the UK consumers are protected by ATOL. I don't believe this protection exists for scheduled carriers, which of course all the LOCOs are.

Cheers,
TheOddOne

Seems unfair on the carriers if external reasons aren't taken into account, but for overbooking I totally agree: why should they be allowed to sell the same seat twice?
One positive thing about Ryanair, and it's a BIG plus, is that they don't overbook.

Both IATA and the LOCO association (can't remember the name) have law suits pending regarding this.

At the moment the way it reads, yes, a LOCO could end up paying more in compensation than they collected.

Excellent news:) Must bang in a few £1.99 bookings with Orange, timed for later on in the day when their masterplan is collapsing. I'll be coining in the compensation ;)

Having had the pleasure (?) of reading the directive which comes into force, obligations on the carrier are limited or excluded if the flight is cancelled due to weather, political instability, security risks, unexpected flight safety short comings or strike action! Further down it also refers to atc. I can see a few bust ups at the airports when passengers have been led to believe they will get something which they wont!

What planet do these bureaucrats live on?
I think they probably live on the planet that Ryanair also share, who a while ago cancelled a flight from Rome to Stansted (if I recall correctly - others will know) and said to returning UK passengers, including many teenage kids "The next flight home for you with any seats available is in 12 days time - or you can have your £25 back. Make your mind up quick". It caused a huge stink at the time.

One positive thing about Ryanair, and it's a BIG plus, is that they don't overbook.
Seen it happen myself - 732 substituted for a 738. About 30 pax left off.

as derbyram says it won't be as ridiculous as some may fear. And to be honest i think airlines should be slammed for overbooking - i see why they do it, but as a pax i couldn't give a toss what their reasons are. I want what i pay for.

here it is if you want to have a look http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/air/rights/index_en.htm

WHBM
"Seen it happen myself - 732 substituted for a 738. About 30 pax left off."
Nor the same as overbooking at all.
Unless I'm mistaken FR don't have overbooking or wait listing. If you book a seat you fly, unless, as in your example they replace a plane with one with lower capacity (presumably for technical reasons?)

And to be honest i think airlines should be slammed for overbooking - i see why they do it, but as a pax i couldn't give a toss what their reasons are. I want what i pay for.

Surely the problem is not with overbooking per se but with involuntary denied boarding?

Say a Simplifly Airlines flight has 100 seats and the airline knows from past experience that 10% of passengers are no-shows. (I'm simplifying - the no-show percentage will depend on fare type, day of week, time of day, whether it's the school holidays, etc.). Say they allow a bit of a safety margin and sell a total of 105 seats. Most of the time (what "most" means will depend on the statistical distribution of no-show numbers) there's no problem: the airline gets more revenue, and some people (those who were numbers 101-105 in booking) get to fly who otherwise wouldn't have been able to. And there'll be a couple of empty seats left too.

Relatively rarely, though (hopefully - if the airline has done the statistical analysis right), there'll be 101 or 102 pax for the 100 seats.

If volunteers are sought for rerouting (in exchange for vouchers, upgrades, etc.), this isn't a problem (sidenote: interesting tale of the originator of this "reverse auction" process for volunteers here (http://www.techcentralstation.com/082203C.html) ) since by definition people are getting something (upgrade, cash etc.) that is worth more to them than arriving at their originally scheduled time is.

The problem comes when the airline doesn't apply the right approach to "looking for volunteers" (e.g. proposing reroutes only to the last few passengers who check in, who are more likely to be rushed business passengers who have to be there on time).

The alternative, of course, is a no-overbooking policy. In my Simplifly example above, assume the carrier needs GBP10,000 revenue per flight on average to break even (I'm disregarding per-passenger costs here). With 105 seats sold, that's an average fare of about GBP95. With no overbooking (100 seats) the fare goes up to GBP100. So the price of no overbooking is simply higher fares all round. I have to say that for me, overbooking - provided that volunteers to be bumped are sought in the right way - seems to be the best approach.

What could be simpler than selling 100 seats for a 100 seat flight?
The seats are sold and the carrier gets the cash regardless of whether all the pax turn up or not.
If people want to go on a waiting list after the flight is fully booked, they can do so.

Because it doesn't account for flexible tickets which allow people to show up for any flight they choose. Some element of overbooking allows control over ensuring that all seats are filled for no-shows on the flexible tickets who will show for another flight.

Would you prefer the end to flexible tickets for all your valuable high-end customers? Where adequate facilities to reroute and get passengers to their destination exist (which is fine to legally enforce) it should work in the majority of cases.

To abandon people and offer next available seat as in the Ryanair example is far more unacceptable in my opinion.

"Because it doesn't account for flexible tickets which allow people to show up for any flight they choose"
Fair point. But what proportion of tickets sold are NOT for a specific flight? Why should people who have paid for a seat on a specific flight be bumped for the flexible ticket holders' convenience?
Regarding the Ryanair case, I've been critical of them in the past for some of their practices, but overbooking is not something they normally do. I really don't see how WHBM's example of passengers being abandoned due to a change of A/c relates to overbooking?

But surely a "flexible ticket" only permits you to have the flexibility of changing your flights. It does not guarantee that space will be available for you on a given flight unless you hold a specific and confirmed reservation on said flight. If you hold a confirmed reservation and are bumped then you have an entitlement. Without a confirmed reservation no specific contract of carriage exists for that defined sector, and you take your chances effectively on a standby ( or space available) basis. A flexible ticket only affords you the opportunity to be flexible in your choice of travel arrangements as defined in the terms and conditions of the contract. It doesn't normally guarantee that space will be made available on any flight of your choosing.

What could be simpler than selling 100 seats for a 100 seat flight?
The seats are sold and the carrier gets the cash regardless of whether all the pax turn up or not.
If people want to go on a waiting list after the flight is fully booked, they can do so.

Nothing could be simpler; but overbooking could be more lucrative for the airline (and allow lower average fares; see earlier example above).

Sure, airlines can decide to follow a no-overbooking policy because they figure that the cost/complexity of implementing overbooking properly would outweigh the benefits. But done properly, I maintain that it's worthwhile.

The easiest way to prevent the overbooking of flights is, as stated, to not overbook them!!

You say there are are alot of no-shows, therefore the airlines must overbook to get max capacity etc. right?...Well the easiest way to achieve this is to change the way the fare structures are set up.

I think it is mind-boglingly obvious that if it is possible to buy a return ticket for less than a one way ticket that you are going to get alot of no-shows...... It is even possible to buy TWO return tickets in opposite directions for less that a one way ticket........And most of the time you can buy two return tickets on opposite directions for less than a return ticket with a changable return date.....

If you want examples for this I can happily provide them for most routes.

Now tell me, why are there alot of no-shows again????

I am of the opinion that one reason why the so called LoCos are becoming increasingly popular with business poeple is because they dont have this stupid fare system. A one way ticket is half the price of a return ticket - How simple is that??

Regards, SD..

A one way ticket is half the price of a return ticket
Well that's not entirely true - just you pay for each sector that you intend to fly almost as a separate transaction.

The point is that a flexible ticketholder may choose not to show for a flight. Fair point that ridiculous fare structure may cause people to buy a ticket and not use a portion of it, which is crazy and also breaks fare rules.

Imagine your aveage businessman however whose meeting runs late, but whose flexible ticket allows him to list for the next flight. Would you expect the airline to cover the costs for seat 1 left empty and seat 2 that he actually takes, or follow some sort of system (overbooking) to gain some sort of higher load factor?

Could one of you kind people point me in the direction of official documentation?

Thanks! :ok:

is 11 posts above this one.

Oops! :O Thanks Memetic! :ok:

No-shows are for a range of reasons other than pax booking a return and only using the outward half. One of the principal reasons out of a hub like Heathrow is non-arrival of connecting passengers due to the late landing of their incoming aircraft; they just get sent on by the next flight of course.

Sat a course on this last week.

One of the things that I particularly liked was that airlines cant just cancel flights without out paying masses in compensation.
It disgraces me when airlines such as EZY and BABY etc cancel flights at the drop of the hat because their programme is running behind.
Charter airlines dont do it (or very rarely), why should sched's? Fair enough if it gets to the stage where they just have to cancel flights - but they now have to pay out :ok:

Also it will prevent ailrines like KLM purposely overbooking just to ensure flights go full. What about the poor individuals that get bumped off and sent to another airport or similar!

I think it is changing for the better, but the scheduled airlines are going to find it awkward at times!:8