Flight overbooking

[oldpax]

Can someone explain why if a flight is overbooked and volunteers are asked to leave that flight for a monetary gain why it is so important?I mean are there people waiting at check in who "just"have to be on that flight?I have just read an article where"Delta "are increasing the amount of inducement?!!!Surely the airline is the loser here?

[Offchocks]

The airlines have statistics for "no shows" on all their flights, even allowing for the specific route, day of the week and time of departure. So rather than sell the capacity of the aircraft, they apply these "no show" numbers to the capacity of the aircraft hoping that it will depart with no empty seats. When the procedure works they are making extra money with a full aircraft, however it doesn't always work.

[PDR1]

Passengers who get stuck in traffic, or are unable to travel due to injury/bereavement/illness etc have come to expect the right to a refund, or at least to be able to transfer to a different flight (varies with class of ticket). So the airline don't know whether they actually will have a full load of fare-paying passengers until just before closing the gate. The continual competitive pressure to reduce prices means hat flights are costed to break even on ever-higher levels of occupancy, so a few no-shows who then use their tickets on a later flight can result in a loss-making flight.

The airlines (like hotels) have tended to address this by deliberately over-selling flights on the assumption that some passengers won't turn up. Most of the time they get their sums right and it works, but sometimes it doesn't. You then have multiple people who all have what they see as a legitimate right to a seat. The airlines have a "priority" system which allows them to decide whose right is superior - types of ticket, frequent-flyer status, check-in times, lone or group bookings etc can all be a part of this, but if enopugh passengers have a "guaranteed reserved seat" or similar then they will end up in the auction to sell the deferment to the lowest bidder. If they get no bidders then (in many countries) there are legal provisions for compelling people to stand aside before boarding. If they do this before boarding then people will generally grumble, but comply. If they try to do it after boarding they have no legal basis and they find themselves splashed across social media and facing huge lawsuits.

There are alternatives:

1. They could put the prices up such that a flight with a 10% no-show still makes enough money to not need to fill the seats, and then over-selling would be unjustifiable and could be outlawed.

2. They could make all tickets non-refundable and non-transferable - you bought that seat and if you don't get to the airport on time then that's just tough. You could then (also) make over-selling illegal. It would mean the end of "flexible tickets" as we currently know them, and I could see a procession of injured/bereaved "victims" replacing the bumped passengers on social media, but as a system it would work.

3. You could enforce a strict legal "first come gets on the plane" physical check-in system, but that might be seen as discriminatory agianst those who use public transport that went on strike, or those who got stuck a mile away for an hour because of a crash on the motorway or a group of plainly stupid protestors.

Of course none of this applies to the UA incident at Chicago. That was just the airline forgetting that it had no legal right to deman boarded passengers give up their seats to dead-heading aircrew. That was just a mistake, and I suspect it's one that will cost them dearly.

So they just to to learn to make fewer mistakes...

PDR

[AerialPerspective]

Can someone explain why if a flight is overbooked and volunteers are asked to leave that flight for a monetary gain why it is so important?I mean are there people waiting at check in who "just"have to be on that flight?I have just read an article where"Delta "are increasing the amount of inducement?!!!Surely the airline is the loser here?
No. The root of it is that if a department store is selling televisions and they have a sales target but don't sell them all, they can always come back and try and sell them tomorrow... the TV boxes aren't going to go rotten like an apple if they don't get sold by certain date.

An airline seat however is highly perishable. Once the doors close and the aircraft departs the opportunity to sell the empty seats has gone forever.

So, governments have tolerated the practice as it is designed to ensure that the aircraft departs full or as close to full as possible.

The generally good airlines use fairly sophisticated software to predict based on previous results and time of year, even day of week/month how many people are likely to not turn up... they also factor in special events and ameliorate the sales profile/inventory during those periods. I believe QF only oversell to maximise load, they don't do it over the top like a lot of carriers do but their software is extremely sophisticated so it's pretty rare that it doesn't pan out.

As I say, governments around the world allow the practice as long as there is a compensatory payment scheme in place.

My experience is that if you manage the process well and seek volunteers it's almost unheard of to have someone left behind who didn't want to stay behind.

As the industry has got more and more competitive and the margins get thinner and thinner on most routes, the public also demands lower fares so it's almost impossible to meet the target without doing something like overselling to make sure the maximum yield is drawn from the aircraft.

It does work very well for the airlines... the basis of the rule is that you pay nothing if you get the pax to their destination within 4 hours of the originally scheduled time if it's involuntary denied boarding. But airlines have expanded that to include much more generous compensation, fact being so what if they pay out $500 each to backpackers who were happy to go on a later flight, have a hotel room overnight and 3 meals plus a guaranteed seat the next day... when you add up that cost, it is a fraction of what the airline makes by filling the aircraft.

[AerialPerspective]

Passengers who get stuck in traffic, or are unable to travel due to injury/bereavement/illness etc have come to expect the right to a refund, or at least to be able to transfer to a different flight (varies with class of ticket). So the airline don't know whether they actually will have a full load of fare-paying passengers until just before closing the gate. The continual competitive pressure to reduce prices means hat flights are costed to break even on ever-higher levels of occupancy, so a few no-shows who then use their tickets on a later flight can result in a loss-making flight.

The airlines (like hotels) have tended to address this by deliberately over-selling flights on the assumption that some passengers won't turn up. Most of the time they get their sums right and it works, but sometimes it doesn't. You then have multiple people who all have what they see as a legitimate right to a seat. The airlines have a "priority" system which allows them to decide whose right is superior - types of ticket, frequent-flyer status, check-in times, lone or group bookings etc can all be a part of this, but if enopugh passengers have a "guaranteed reserved seat" or similar then they will end up in the auction to sell the deferment to the lowest bidder. If they get no bidders then (in many countries) there are legal provisions for compelling people to stand aside before boarding. If they do this before boarding then people will generally grumble, but comply. If they try to do it after boarding they have no legal basis and they find themselves splashed across social media and facing huge lawsuits.

There are alternatives:

1. They could put the prices up such that a flight with a 10% no-show still makes enough money to not need to fill the seats, and then over-selling would be unjustifiable and could be outlawed.

2. They could make all tickets non-refundable and non-transferable - you bought that seat and if you don't get to the airport on time then that's just tough. You could then (also) make over-selling illegal. It would mean the end of "flexible tickets" as we currently know them, and I could see a procession of injured/bereaved "victims" replacing the bumped passengers on social media, but as a system it would work.

3. You could enforce a strict legal "first come gets on the plane" physical check-in system, but that might be seen as discriminatory agianst those who use public transport that went on strike, or those who got stuck a mile away for an hour because of a crash on the motorway or a group of plainly stupid protestors.

Of course none of this applies to the UA incident at Chicago. That was just the airline forgetting that it had no legal right to deman boarded passengers give up their seats to dead-heading aircrew. That was just a mistake, and I suspect it's one that will cost them dearly.

So they just to to learn to make fewer mistakes...

PDR
Good points. However, there is already a system in place that automatically applies a protected status to certain classes of passenger - e.g. anyone with UMNR or WCHR/S/C on their booking will automatically get the status, certain grades of FF, etc.
The system basically does all that for the pax - I believe some of the systems are so sophisticated now like QF that they provide lists of flights, etc. if a flight is delayed and one click will re-accommodate pax plus messsage the baggage system to unload and re-load their bags, etc. so I wouldn't be surprised if it also highlights pax who have previously accepted voluntary re-accommodation.
The people that miss out are those that turn up later when the seats are starting to disappear (and there's no case for discrimination, the airline is not responsible for how people choose to get to the airport, just as they are not responsible for calling them to get out of bed and get ready on time to get to the airport) from the seat plan as the gap closes between seats freely available minus protected seats for pax not yet checked in but with protected status (if no seat is associated it will just protect 'a' seat in the class of travel). When this happens, if volunteers have been sought and their boarding passes held, the airline will start offloading them to standby and giving their seat to the pax remaining or will just ask them to wait if they don't want to lose the specific seats of the pax who've kindly volunteered. Normally it's pretty smooth and of course on many occasions there is room in P and J (or J and W), as applicable and pax will be upgraded on check in.
As for the airline having aright to request that someone disembark. Actually, they do have that right, it is amply covered by the carrier's legal rights BUT they do not have a right to physically abuse a passenger who refuses. Most airlines including UA have a policy to increase compensation until the pax agrees as the cost of the crew not flying (especially if it's a last minute thing after boarding has been completed - and believe me that DOES happen more often than you'd think) is hundreds of thousands of dollars and hundreds of pax inconvenienced then it's just logical to offer say $2000 instead of $800 because you're going to save maybe $50000 or $100000 by doing so.
Fortunately, in the majority of circumstances, the notification is in sufficient time. Besides, there are myriad other ways this can happen... aircraft change en-route... for example. I had a situation once where an aircraft arrived from AKL and the engineer noted a slide was inoperative so 30-40 pax had to be offloaded once boarded, randomly (the pax sitting near the affected slide) and placed on the next service the an engineer had to be placed on the aircraft to repair at the outport. It's not exactly the same but it's splitting hairs when talking about operational requirements.

[Sunfish]

I am travelling to Asia and Europe on separate holidays in the next few months. I am travelling business class and I have a web of hotels, tours, trains and internal flights booked.

I have some protection via travel insurance, but. my reaction to the practice of overbooking is unprintable.

It would be far better in my opinion to stop overbooking and instead enforce financial penalties (i.e. no refund) for no shows, require people to take out travel insurance and let the insurance companies deal with the matter.

I note in passing that the ACCC is already investigating airlines for the practice of charging allegedly ridiculous fees for changing flights, etc. that bear no relationship to the cost (if any) of the change.

To put that another way, inflexible fares sometimes allow an airline to profit by charging twice for the same seat on the same flight. Overbooking is unnecessary..

[AerialPerspective]

I am travelling to Asia and Europe on separate holidays in the next few months. I am travelling business class and I have a web of hotels, tours, trains and internal flights booked.

I have some protection via travel insurance, but. my reaction to the practice of overbooking is unprintable.

It would be far better in my opinion to stop overbooking and instead enforce financial penalties (i.e. no refund) for no shows, require people to take out travel insurance and let the insurance companies deal with the matter.

I note in passing that the ACCC is already investigating airlines for the practice of charging allegedly ridiculous fees for changing flights, etc. that bear no relationship to the cost (if any) of the change.

To put that another way, inflexible fares sometimes allow an airline to profit by charging twice for the same seat on the same flight. Overbooking is unnecessary..
Although I've outlined above that it is tolerated and the reasons for it, I am still not a fan and never was... it looks great on paper but not so hot when you're standing at a counter being screamed at and threatened by someone who is aghast at having paid, turned up on time and adhered to all the other conditions only to be told they won't be flying. In the old days even worse when in the less sophisticated days when someone put a dot in the wrong place and oversold a flight by far too much, that was never going to clear due to no-shows. If I ever get caught in the situation I will ensure I extract the maximum finacial penalty from whatever airline it is.

[ExSp33db1rd]

Once the doors close and the aircraft departs the opportunity to sell the empty seats has gone forever.

So why - when I turn up early and request to be seated on the "just about to depart earlier aircraft with empty seats" do they charge me a fortune - quote Re-Booking fee" - to take one of the empty seats and give them the chance to sell my later seat again ?

I sit around and wait, stuff 'em.

[AerialPerspective]

So why - when I turn up early and request to be seated on the "just about to depart earlier aircraft with empty seats" do they charge me a fortune - quote Re-Booking fee" - to take one of the empty seats and give them the chance to sell my later seat again ?

I sit around and wait, stuff 'em.
Because it's a business like any other and if there's an opportunity to make money they will do it, just like any other business, just like a car dealer who gives you a shopping list of 'other items' that 'really need attention' when you get your car serviced and turn a car service that was going to be $300 into one that is now $600.
It really is no different and there is no difference to any other business yet people expect airlines to run according to some other sort of rules.
The answer to your question is that they already have your money so putting you in that empty seat is no financial advantage... besides, if it's not too late to put you in it then it's not too late for someone to come rushing through the door at the very last second to be able to be charged the full fare.
I'm no fan of the race to the bottom, I contend that the ones who charge $29 are not real airlines to begin with and in the case of Australia, one of the majors has been built on that foundation and the older of the two airlines while trying to maintain some semblence of airline standards has to do something to keep the bottom line fed.
If you think that older airline is not that great then I suggest you compare being caught in a disruption with then compared to the competitor. I can tell you as a one time customer of both that the newer of the two has ZERO idea, can't make a decision, doesn't have the economies of scale to recover and pax even have to line up and wait for someone in Brisbane to decide whether they can have a meal voucher or not.
If you go into a car dealer and he has one of a particular model left which is more expensive than the car you were going to purchase, why should he/she give it to you for a discount price when they can sell it to the next person for the full whack??? Why is it just business when it's a car dealer or anyone else but a mortal sin when it's an airline.

[Tankengine]

I am travelling to Asia and Europe on separate holidays in the next few months. I am travelling business class and I have a web of hotels, tours, trains and internal flights booked.

I have some protection via travel insurance, but. my reaction to the practice of overbooking is unprintable.

It would be far better in my opinion to stop overbooking and instead enforce financial penalties (i.e. no refund) for no shows, require people to take out travel insurance and let the insurance companies deal with the matter.

I note in passing that the ACCC is already investigating airlines for the practice of charging allegedly ridiculous fees for changing flights, etc. that bear no relationship to the cost (if any) of the change.

To put that another way, inflexible fares sometimes allow an airline to profit by charging twice for the same seat on the same flight. Overbooking is unnecessary..

You really cannot complain about charging for changing a ticket while at the same time wanting to charge more to stop overbooking!?
I remember years ago a huge percentage of suits would book both QF and United from LA to Sydney and decide which one to use at the last minute. You cannot expect airlines to continually go with 20% or more empty seats because of this and still allow you to change flights willy nilly.
I agree with financial penalties for all sorts of things, how about charging late pax for delays when they get lost in the shopping centre between checkin and the aircraft? ($1000 a minute might get their attention);)
I can increasingly see the attraction of freight! ;)

[ExSp33db1rd]

.......they already have your money so putting you in that empty seat is no financial advantage...

but .... they then have a better opportunity to sell my later seat to someone else, which would be a financial adv. maybe, nothing lost in getting rid of me earlier.

The excuse given was the "manpower" involved in changing the ticket. Bollocks, if I had requested an earlier flight before departing from my original destination than I would agree, but if my previous flight arrives early, and I have the chance to make an earlier connection, why not, I had no baggage, held a boarding card issued by the previous station - yes, the "wrong" flight number might have had to be re-issued - and was at the communal departure/arrival hall, just enter by one door and depart from the adjacent one. Easy ? No !

[bazza stub]

I wonder how many seats are going empty on united now because of the backlash. Problem with smartarses with smart ideas is they are usually lacking the smart bit. Oversell an aeroplane and then inconvenience (or beat up) pax in order to repair your self inflicted f__kup? Give that man a bonus!!

[AerialPerspective]

but .... they then have a better opportunity to sell my later seat to someone else, which would be a financial adv. maybe, nothing lost in getting rid of me earlier.

The excuse given was the "manpower" involved in changing the ticket. Bollocks, if I had requested an earlier flight before departing from my original destination than I would agree, but if my previous flight arrives early, and I have the chance to make an earlier connection, why not, I had no baggage, held a boarding card issued by the previous station - yes, the "wrong" flight number might have had to be re-issued - and was at the communal departure/arrival hall, just enter by one door and depart from the adjacent one. Easy ? No !
OK, well, in terms of the actual entry in the system, it's about 10 characters and enter or a few clicks and your flight is changed... and the airlines often do this anyway for free (it's called 'Flow Forward' at QF and happens when the later flights are oversold, they move people forward to flights as they check in... financial advantage for the airline as no potential denied boarding and theoretically all the flights even out load wise over the day.

In terms of the actual entry to issue a new BP, granted, bollocks, but if you had baggage, while the system knows where your bag is and it will not allow release of the flight you were on until your bag is removed, if you are, from the flight, someone still has to stop what they are doing and go to that flight which is departing later, go through the container - perhaps unload the whole thing, scan your tags to registered them as having been offloaded the take them to the lateral for the 'to' flight and scan it and load it.

That is likely what they are referring to with the manpower aspect... it's not totally known how long that will take so there is an element of truth in the manpower argument. When it's done though flow-forward (Ansett used to call them 'jumpers') it is done before bags are accepted, etc. so the check in transaction is still happening as it would but for a different flight.

There is more to it than just waving a wand and it all happens... as automation increases perhaps that will be the case but not at the moment.

[AerialPerspective]

I wonder how many seats are going empty on united now because of the backlash. Problem with smartarses with smart ideas is they are usually lacking the smart bit. Oversell an aeroplane and then inconvenience (or beat up) pax in order to repair your self inflicted f__kup? Give that man a bonus!!
It wasn't oversold. The flight was boarded and ready to go and Ops advised there were crew that had to travel. They decided to take 4 pax off to accommodate them. One didn't like the compensation and refused, so they beat the sh*t out of him and dragged him off the aircraft.

It was nothing to do with an oversale but your point is taken. No problem finding a seat for paxing crew now I suspect.

[Wot No Engines]

So why - when I turn up early and request to be seated on the "just about to depart earlier aircraft with empty seats" do they charge me a fortune - quote Re-Booking fee" - to take one of the empty seats and give them the chance to sell my later seat again ?

I sit around and wait, stuff 'em.

Wrong approach. Politely ask how full your booked flight is. If it's full suggest you would agree to be moved to the earlier flight to help out. I have about a 50% success rate with this. The earlier you are the easier it is.

[mikewil]

So why - when I turn up early and request to be seated on the "just about to depart earlier aircraft with empty seats" do they charge me a fortune - quote Re-Booking fee" - to take one of the empty seats and give them the chance to sell my later seat again ?

I sit around and wait, stuff 'em.



With Virgin Australia I was travelling on a business class ticket (admittedly bought with Velocity points) from Melbourne to Adelaide and arrived at the airport 3 hours early and asked if they could transfer me to the flight that was an hour before my scheduled one.


Despite all business class seats on that aircraft being empty, they still wouldn't transfer me to it without wanting to charge a large flight change fee. I politely declined and spent the next 3 hours indulging in the free food and liquor in the lounge (obviously included in my business class ticket). Would've been cheaper for them to allow me on the earlier flight....

[Beer Baron]

My understanding is that there are certain classes of ticket that allow free changes of flight and others (cheaper ones) that do not. Obviously the airline will not let you change flights for free on the cheaper ticket as then there is no incentive to purchase the higher ticket class.
While there is no cost to the airline on the day to allow you onto the earlier flight, they will damage their ability to charge you (or anyone else) more for a higher ticket class in future. Why would you pay for something if you can get it for free.

[AerialPerspective]

With Virgin Australia I was travelling on a business class ticket (admittedly bought with Velocity points) from Melbourne to Adelaide and arrived at the airport 3 hours early and asked if they could transfer me to the flight that was an hour before my scheduled one.


Despite all business class seats on that aircraft being empty, they still wouldn't transfer me to it without wanting to charge a large flight change fee. I politely declined and spent the next 3 hours indulging in the free food and liquor in the lounge (obviously included in my business class ticket). Would've been cheaper for them to allow me on the earlier flight....
Yes. But if you're going to use an example, at least use an example involving a real airline.

[AerialPerspective]

My understanding is that there are certain classes of ticket that allow free changes of flight and others (cheaper ones) that do not. Obviously the airline will not let you change flights for free on the cheaper ticket as then there is no incentive to purchase the higher ticket class.
While there is no cost to the airline on the day to allow you onto the earlier flight, they will damage their ability to charge you (or anyone else) more for a higher ticket class in future. Why would you pay for something if you can get it for free.
Yep. They're called full fare and discounted. Generally any full fare ticket will allow you to change as many times as you like, a discounted ticket will have restrictions and a fee... although there are some types of ticket that are middle of the road that will allow changes within certain parameters - e.g. within 72 hours of departure, etc. or similar (don't quote me but something along those lines).

Generally, the more you pay, the more flexibility but total flexibility comes with paying full fare.

[mikewil]

Yes. But if you're going to use an example, at least use an example involving a real airline.

Are you suggesting that Virgin Australia isn't a "real airline"?

[BNEA320]

I am travelling to Asia and Europe on separate holidays in the next few months. I am travelling business class and I have a web of hotels, tours, trains and internal flights booked.

I have some protection via travel insurance, but. my reaction to the practice of overbooking is unprintable.

It would be far better in my opinion to stop overbooking and instead enforce financial penalties (i.e. no refund) for no shows, require people to take out travel insurance and let the insurance companies deal with the matter.

I note in passing that the ACCC is already investigating airlines for the practice of charging allegedly ridiculous fees for changing flights, etc. that bear no relationship to the cost (if any) of the change.

To put that another way, inflexible fares sometimes allow an airline to profit by charging twice for the same seat on the same flight. Overbooking is unnecessary..
Most tickets sold these days are non-refundable & it's up to the individual airline, whether it will allow no shows on nonref tix to go subload on a later flight.


There's an urban myth about an Australian family flying from CTS to NRT to connect with a JQ flight home. The CTS/NRT leg was late. When they finally got to the JQ gate, their seats had been given away & when the family asked could they get on the next flight, the next day, the JQ staff said sure. Just pay the equivalent of AUD$7500.


If airlines didn't charge a decent fee to change flights, some pax would do it all the time. As most Australians want to do this by phone to an Australian call centre, who has to pay Australian wages/conditions, the costs would be high.


Overbooking is absolutely necessary for the survival of many airlines, especially now the OZ real estate market has completely collapsed esp in SYD/MEL & the recession we had to have is upon us + we now have WW3 likely in Korea, which will do wonders for airline load factors. Here there are some very cheap fares via S Korea at present.

[BNEA320]

So why - when I turn up early and request to be seated on the "just about to depart earlier aircraft with empty seats" do they charge me a fortune - quote Re-Booking fee" - to take one of the empty seats and give them the chance to sell my later seat again ?

I sit around and wait, stuff 'em. because then eg. everyone would book the 2100 SYD/MEL flight, as is much cheaper than the 1800 flight & then expect to be put on the 1800 flight, if they turn up early, which now has a few empty seats.


However, if you are a real heavy frequent flyer with that airline, of course you can get on an earlier flight, OR, as can often be done, if you're a QF Club member booked on a later flight, you can keep asking nicely to be put on an earlier flight & they can only say no, sorry, but have seen it, many times, where people get put on earlier flight.

[AerialPerspective]

Are you suggesting that Virgin Australia isn't a "real airline"?
In a manner of speaking, yes. I believe Air NZ give disrupted pax to QF in preference to going 17 rounds with 10 different people at VA because of their chronic aversion to and total misconception of what an FIM is, they don't conform to many international or basic airline industry standards and want cooperation from other airlines but they don't want to use established mechanisms for dealing with those airlines (see the NZ example above) and they demonstrate constantly through the long line of corporate cockups (millions spent on lounges and cabins and no profit after 7 years, bought other airlines then sold off their aircraft, the abortive and totally laughable escapade into DPS with TT now abandoned because of a case of simply not crossing i's and dotting t's it would seem (something that another airline would unlikely fall into), selling the E190s and now using another operator to fill the gap because, gee, they didn't plan beyond the end of their collective noses... yes, for all these reasons, they are not a real airline but rather an elaborate facade with very little substance below the surface... just get disrupted on them as a customer as opposed to QF in this country and you'll soon see how customer focused they are when you go hours because they can't make a decision and take time to even issue a measly meal voucher because they have to get 'approval' from someone in BNE who controls the vouchers which are issued from the system.

[TT738]

In a manner of speaking, yes. I believe Air NZ give disrupted pax to QF in preference to going 17 rounds with 10 different people at VA because of their chronic aversion to and total misconception of what an FIM is, they don't conform to many international or basic airline industry standards and want cooperation from other airlines but they don't want to use established mechanisms for dealing with those airlines (see the NZ example above) and they demonstrate constantly through the long line of corporate cockups (millions spent on lounges and cabins and no profit after 7 years, bought other airlines then sold off their aircraft, the abortive and totally laughable escapade into DPS with TT now abandoned because of a case of simply not crossing i's and dotting t's it would seem (something that another airline would unlikely fall into), selling the E190s and now using another operator to fill the gap because, gee, they didn't plan beyond the end of their collective noses... yes, for all these reasons, they are not a real airline but rather an elaborate facade with very little substance below the surface... just get disrupted on them as a customer as opposed to QF in this country and you'll soon see how customer focused they are when you go hours because they can't make a decision and take time to even issue a measly meal voucher because they have to get 'approval' from someone in BNE who controls the vouchers which are issued from the system.
Yes the bureaucracy at VA now seems worse than at QF if thats possible.

[AerialPerspective]

Yes the bureaucracy at VA now seems worse than at QF if thats possible.
Actually, I think there's no comparison. QF is an established and profitably airline and VA is, I don't know what VA is, a sheltered workshop or something. Impression is many don't know what they're doing and those that do are ignored. I don't think bureaucracy is the right word. One company will sack people the other never does. Sorry, I know people have different perspectives but give me QF any day.

[TCTC]

Can anyone point me to a source of information which shows by how much airlines overbook? From an article, in the Guardian newspaper, it seems that it is information which the airlines keep very much to themselves!

[AerialPerspective]

Can anyone point me to a source of information which shows by how much airlines overbook? From an article, in the Guardian newspaper, it seems that it is information which the airlines keep very much to themselves!
No, it's not a secret, it's just a question without an answer. Most of the decent airlines (and I include QF in that regardless of what others think as they have invested millions in very smart software and they combine it with people who have years of experience.
The reason it can't be answered is because there is a variance across all locations because it is based on no-show rates.
How it was explained to me many years ago was that, for example, when QF was operating to POM, people generally want to get the hell out of there so no-show rate is virtually nothing so (and I'm just surmising here) it would be say, one or two pax, maximum. I believe the software and the human element also take into consideration availability of alternatives. You might say London for example has a higher no-show rate because of later than normal in bound connections mis-connecting, etc. So, so many local variances come into it that it isn't possible to pin down. I believe a few years ago VA were just starting to do it and without the background info they just dipped their toe in the water so to speak. I do believe the airlines in this region genuinely (whether they based it on hard historic data and human intuition/experience like QF or just a guess like others) don't overbook to deny boarding but just to maximize the load to, hopefully, 100%.
You see, it varies by day of the week and on some routes by time of day so it can't be quantified unless the question is, for example, how much do you overbook in each class (usually First never because there's nowhere to go, Business if First is present and has seats), on a Tuesday from MEL to SYD at noon. That's why they don't share it because to quote even an average across all routes would be meaningless. They're not being evasive.

[AEROMEDIC]

I was travelling from Sydney to Hobart recently on QF. As I was returning from a cruise around NZ, I did not check in online (which is something I am loathe to do anyway because it I am doing the airline a favour for free). I was a couple of hours early at the terminal.
My ticket was via MEL and a flight to HBA a few hours later, which was OK, but on using the kiosk, I was asked if I would take an earlier flight.
Never happened before and no fee too. Seems to say that Qantas finally realizes the practicalities of doing this.
Still had to wait for the Hobart leg, but safely in the Qantas Club, not a problem.
So, no issues on this occasion. It seems today airlines CAN be sensible if they try.
This used to be a standard practice decades ago.

[Derfred]

To my knowledge this has always been standard practice in QF. Although they may reserve the offers to the more frequent flyers (or those with flexible tickets) depending upon the number of seats available on the earlier flight. That would appear to be a purely sensible commercial protocol. Furthermore, if they know a later flight is likely to be delayed or cancelled, they will "flow forward" as many passengers as they can to minimise disruption.

But buying a bargain-basement non-flexible ticket and then turning up early at the airport and "asking" for an earlier flight and then getting upset when they ask for the flight-change fee that was clearly accepted in the terms of the cheap ticket is a bit rich.

[Chris2303]

QF do it quite often in bad weather situations that may possibly result in cancellations or severe delays.

It's called "flow forward".

[AerialPerspective]

QF do it quite often in bad weather situations that may possibly result in cancellations or severe delays.

It's called "flow forward".
They also do it and it is part of the planning for, oversales. They know later flights will be heavier (e.g. approaching 5/6pm on Friday) so they oversell those flights and when the punters turn up they offer them the next flight instead so by the time they get to the 5/6 period, just about all the oversales are cleared and the previous 5-6 flights went out full.

Yes, it is called flow forward. I also mentioned that term on an earlier post.

Ansett did exactly the same thing but they called the pax 'jumpers' because they 'jumped' to an earlier flight.

[david1300]

So why - when I turn up early and request to be seated on the "just about to depart earlier aircraft with empty seats" do they charge me a fortune - quote Re-Booking fee" - to take one of the empty seats and give them the chance to sell my later seat again ?

I sit around and wait, stuff 'em.

I've had the opposite, and a pleasant experience flying out of AKL to YVR via LAX. Finished business in AKL early and got to the airport in time to politely ask if there was a possibility of being put on an earlier flight. They said yes very quickly (no cost, even though our tickets were the cheapest we could get) but advised that the connection to YVR would not change, so we would wait at LAX instead of AKL. We were quite happy with the process.

[BNEA320]

Actually, I think there's no comparison. QF is an established and profitably airline and VA is, I don't know what VA is, a sheltered workshop or something. Impression is many don't know what they're doing and those that do are ignored. I don't think bureaucracy is the right word. One company will sack people the other never does. Sorry, I know people have different perspectives but give me QF any day.interesting or creative accounting at QF. From record loss to profit in a year. Very dodgy.

[BNEA320]

They also do it and it is part of the planning for, oversales. They know later flights will be heavier (e.g. approaching 5/6pm on Friday) so they oversell those flights and when the punters turn up they offer them the next flight instead so by the time they get to the 5/6 period, just about all the oversales are cleared and the previous 5-6 flights went out full.

Yes, it is called flow forward. I also mentioned that term on an earlier post.

Ansett did exactly the same thing but they called the pax 'jumpers' because they 'jumped' to an earlier flight.

with business class sales falling, with masses of people trying to upgrade, all airlines should overbook economy.

eg. if an aircraft has 400 seats (50C & 350Y) & if very few booking business, they should take 400+ economy bookings & then 50 or so people will have to be upgraded. Rather than upgrade someone for nothing, they should offer upgrades at check in for cash, then if they don't get enough takers, then then upgrade their best frequent flyers FOC. Flew Scoot OOL/SIN for $88 one way & they were even offering upgrades to their bus class, even when we were seated in economy. Nothing like last minute revenue. With the massive recession we had to have, some of the less switched on airlines won't survive.

[Octane]

Garuda in Melbourne used to have a hand written sign at check in offering business class upgrades to Bali for $150. I did it occasionally, don't know if they still do it (my taxi fare was $90 odd so it seemed a good deal). Only a 6 hour flight though..

[cattletruck]

20 years ago I got off the Piccadilly line at Heathrow Airport 15 minutes before my departure back to Oz. I can still remember the face drop of the poor 'ol sod waiting in the holding lounge as I boarded the plane 2 minutes before they closed the door.

I've since returned the favour by missing other international flights through ultimately faults of my own making.

However, once on the way to the airport for an international flight with family, our taxi driver swerved suddenly and avoided hitting the car in front of us on the freeway. The taxi behind us which was most likely going to the same destination didn't fair so well and collected the stationary car. Stuff happens, it's not a perfect world.

[AerialPerspective]

with business class sales falling, with masses of people trying to upgrade, all airlines should overbook economy.

eg. if an aircraft has 400 seats (50C & 350Y) & if very few booking business, they should take 400+ economy bookings & then 50 or so people will have to be upgraded. Rather than upgrade someone for nothing, they should offer upgrades at check in for cash, then if they don't get enough takers, then then upgrade their best frequent flyers FOC. Flew Scoot OOL/SIN for $88 one way & they were even offering upgrades to their bus class, even when we were seated in economy. Nothing like last minute revenue. With the massive recession we had to have, some of the less switched on airlines won't survive.
I think you'll find this is old news and Qantas and others, such as Air NZ have been doing this for years... offering cheap upgrades (e.g. Air NZ when flying SYD-LAX used to do it for $500 one way - any Economy fare to Business) in order to reduce an oversale. I'd say it's a matter of GA just catching on... The airlines don't advertise it for obvious reasons and with QF, as with NZ out of SYD, it is usually only offered outside main base/country of origin.

[ranmar850]

Honestly, my attitude is let the great unwashed stay home, put fares back to where they should be and bring back the services lost.

Apart from the repugnant elitism obvious in that post, you do realise that half of you would be unemployed if the "great unwashed" just stayed home, as befits their lowly status, and we went back to only ladies and gentlemen flying?

[AerialPerspective]

Apart from the repugnant elitism obvious in that post, you do realise that half of you would be unemployed if the "great unwashed" just stayed home, as befits their lowly status, and we went back to only ladies and gentlemen flying?
Well, anyone that's spent time at somewhere like Avalon Airport and seen the totally unacceptable and disgusting way people doing their jobs are treated by an element of these so-called 'unwashed', would beg to differ.

It is not elitist to expect a reasonable level of civil behavior from people, not all, but many, who cannot take responsibility for turning up too late, bringing too much baggage, not reading their itinerary or listening to the conditions and rather than take some responsibility they lash out and threaten violence and use the most lowly and abusive language... the sort of language that would clear the front bar at Young and Jackson's in it's heyday.

Some people are truly at the shallow end of the gene pool and have no concept how to conduct themselves in public. Airport staff shouldn't have to be at risk of violence or abuse for doing their jobs. I have personally witnessed some years back Police having to be called to a small airport to sort out a number of disgusting individuals on numerous occasions.

Many ports like AVV (not sure if it's changed) have no Federal Police presence and no security other than the people scanning baggage, etc. I'm happy to be corrected and will be happy to know if that's changed because if you combine strict rules about baggage and flight close times with extremely low fares, you attract a number of people who don't know how to conduct themselves in public and the result is significant levels of stress and virtually no back up other than Police sometimes 30 mins away to fall back on.

I can only say that from observations, the eventual arrival of Police in these situations supports the old adage "You get further with a kind word and a gun than you can with just a kind word"

Let's face it, one airline in particular when it launched deliberately pitched it's product at such people by featuring a comedian characterized as uneducated and daggy. Let these airlines appeal to that market but restore the services to the premium carriers and raise the prices slightly. Many people will pay a marginal amount extra to avoid being stranded due to delays that are tenuously blamed on weather and the like.

Having said that, from a domestic point of view at least, why people complain about Qantas I will never know. They have introduced technology way ahead of their competition, electronic bag tags and kiosks/bag drops that actually work (not require the customer to tag their own bags then line up to show their boarding pass to deposit them like another airline - why bother doing the self check in in the first place???) and baggage systems that pretty much ensure bags will be loaded correctly.

On top of that both the Qantas and Virgin inflight product domestically is so far in advance of the rest of the world's domestic standards it's in its own universe.

[BNEA320]

I think you'll find this is old news and Qantas and others, such as Air NZ have been doing this for years... offering cheap upgrades (e.g. Air NZ when flying SYD-LAX used to do it for $500 one way - any Economy fare to Business) in order to reduce an oversale. I'd say it's a matter of GA just catching on... The airlines don't advertise it for obvious reasons and with QF, as with NZ out of SYD, it is usually only offered outside main base/country of origin.but it is advertised & it is available in main bases !!!

Speaking of SYD/LAX some airlines have just dropped their pants & bent over. $1199 return to U.S. west coast departing Xmas Day, $100 to $200 more departing later in December. Thought it was the only time of year some airlines made any money. Obviously forward bookings are awful.

Some airlines surely won't survive this massive recession. Plenty of real estate developers/builders/speculators going under, so they won't be travelling anywhere, anytime soon.

[Derfred]

the sort of language that would clear the front bar at Young and Jackson's in it's heyday

Wow! That sounds serious!

But not that I would know, I only ever went to Chloe's bar. Sorry if that sounds elitist! :p

[AerialPerspective]

but it is advertised & it is available in main bases !!!

Speaking of SYD/LAX some airlines have just dropped their pants & bent over. $1199 return to U.S. west coast departing Xmas Day, $100 to $200 more departing later in December. Thought it was the only time of year some airlines made any money. Obviously forward bookings are awful.

Some airlines surely won't survive this massive recession. Plenty of real estate developers/builders/speculators going under, so they won't be travelling anywhere, anytime soon.
Generally, airlines make their money in the first half of the fiscal year (1 July - 31 December) and they coast in the second half, hoping to at least break even. That's the only periods I'm aware of that differentiate returns.

Christmas day and the days surrounding it any worker at an airport will tell you are among the deadest of the year as generally, people have traveled weeks before.

[BNEA320]

Generally, airlines make their money in the first half of the fiscal year (1 July - 31 December) and they coast in the second half, hoping to at least break even. That's the only periods I'm aware of that differentiate returns.

Christmas day and the days surrounding it any worker at an airport will tell you are among the deadest of the year as generally, people have traveled weeks before.think you might be talking OZ domestic flights ?

school holidays are incredibly busy, esp xmas school hols. Only few years back, when only QF & UA were only carriers that flew nonstop, you'd be lucky to find a fare under $3k return.

Xmas Day simply has less flights internationally. The days of getting seats for almost nothing if you fly 25DEC internationally are gone.

But just prior to 25DEC & just after 25DEC are incredibly busy esp for flights to Europe/USA/Canada from OZ. You only have to look at normal sort of fares at this time of year.

You won't get any $799-$999 return airfares to USA/Canada or Europe in school holidays, but plenty around right now & in other low season periods.

[AerialPerspective]

think you might be talking OZ domestic flights ?

school holidays are incredibly busy, esp xmas school hols. Only few years back, when only QF & UA were only carriers that flew nonstop, you'd be lucky to find a fare under $3k return.

Xmas Day simply has less flights internationally. The days of getting seats for almost nothing if you fly 25DEC internationally are gone.

But just prior to 25DEC & just after 25DEC are incredibly busy esp for flights to Europe/USA/Canada from OZ. You only have to look at normal sort of fares at this time of year.

You won't get any $799-$999 return airfares to USA/Canada or Europe in school holidays, but plenty around right now & in other low season periods.
Probably wasn't as specific as I intended, yes, I remember flights going out (747s) with 20 pax on them on Xmas day... I wasn't aware the schedules had reduced to take account of that but it makes sense. My experience (and I admit it's some time ago) at International were of fairly light loads a couple of days out and after but intensely busy in the weeks before and after. Fair point but I was referring to International not Domestic.

I think back in those days when there were so many flights to/from Europe and the US for example, it was not possible to just not operate flights on Xmas day, etc. because that meant the aircraft required in those places for return services either side would not be there.

[BNEA320]

Probably wasn't as specific as I intended, yes, I remember flights going out (747s) with 20 pax on them on Xmas day... I wasn't aware the schedules had reduced to take account of that but it makes sense. My experience (and I admit it's some time ago) at International were of fairly light loads a couple of days out and after but intensely busy in the weeks before and after. Fair point but I was referring to International not Domestic.

I think back in those days when there were so many flights to/from Europe and the US for example, it was not possible to just not operate flights on Xmas day, etc. because that meant the aircraft required in those places for return services either side would not be there.for USA, if depart here Dec 25, same aircraft would depart USA Dec 25 & both have low demand.

[CurtainTwitcher]

A small selection from the broken record...


15th Dec 2013, 22:15
who will buy QF tickets 11 months in advance anymore
traditionally (before GFC) the cheapest international tickets were ALWAYS available as soon as loaded in CRS's, which with most legacy airlines meant around 50 weeks out.

Worked in travel until a few years ago & would get the regulars, those who would go overseas to Europe or USA every Xmas holidays, call as soon as they got back in late Jan to book the following Dec.

But now, no one will book QF & this will also hurt other airlines, so cash flow will dry up, at least as far as QF international is concerned.

Many members of the public are already resigned to the "fact" that QF is stuffed.

The more QF management & the media talk about it, the worse it will get.

Does this mean that QF will offer incredible earlybird deals ?



11th Jun 2014, 06:54
is this the end of QF INT ?
$1499 from OZ to LAX return at Xmas, the busiest time of the year.


Things must be really bad.


If they can't sell seats Boxing day to LAX what chance has QF INT of surviving in any form ?


What happens if JQ takes over more QF INT routes ?


In a previous thread someone suggest Flight Centre in NZL were selling AKL/LAX return for $999 but this wouldn't have been peak season, ie. departing mid-late DEC or early JAN.


10th Apr 2015, 02:50
$999 BNE or SYD/LAX return in peak xmas school hols
now there are $999 return fares (including taxes) from both BNE & SYD to LAX departing from 10JAN, which means could do 2 weeks in USA & still get back before kids go back to school January 27 or 28.


Why are airlines doing this ? & we're not talking just a few seats here.


Many bus class types don't pay their own fares, so these aren't as price sensitive.


6th May 2017, 06:58
your kidding right ?? Real estate developers/builders/speculators are going belly up left right & centre. It's going to be a bad one. We had to have it though. Everyone thinks they should be paid a $1000 an hour for doing SFA & everyone thinks their ****ty little house is worth $2m. Reality is coming home fast.

Airlines have just started dumping seats at Xmas. Just saw online, an $1100ish return airfare SYD/LAX direct, departing late December. This is when airfares are meant to be very high.

Why don't you take you lithium, p1ss off and leave the rest of us in peace?

[AerialPerspective]

for USA, if depart here Dec 25, same aircraft would depart USA Dec 25 & both have low demand.
Yes alright, I was speaking broadly. I didn't have a world clock open in front of me at the time.