Passengers 'upgrading' themselves - what do you do?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two sides to every coin.
Great analogy.
Empty seat at concert.
OK is it empty because
1.) it hasn't been sold?
2.) it has been sold but nobody has turned up?
In case 1. it has failed to attract revenue and that fact that someone else is occupying is it opportunistic but ( and remember it has failed to sell) this hasn't cost the organiser anything. Neither the bloke from the cheapseats nor anyone esle was going to pay to sit there but the seat exists and the concert goes on. So someone makes use of it.
In case 2. The seat is bought and paid for but no-one shows for whatever reason. The seat is has generated revenue for the organiser - he has suffered no loss. The concert goes on. The bloke that decides to occupy it has, presumably also paid for a seat. If the rightful owner shows up he will get his seat and the interloper goes back to the cheapseats.
For any commercial flight the second the door closes ( gate closes or 35 minutes pre departure at T5 ) then an empty seat on an aircraft is worthless. It is a drag on revenue, a cost to the airline. It has failed to sell , yield has not been maximised. The cost of that seat whether it be in row 1 or row 21 is exactly the same. Their respective revenue generating potential is significantly different only until the ticket desk closes. On board, they are indistinguishable - every empty seat costs the same. Arguably, the cost of an empty premium seat is higher as the middle row seats are usually not sold. It would therefore always make sense to upgrade pax if there is a better opportunity to sell an economy seat where there is no prospect of selling premium.
If the seats had anything other than perceived value it would be easy to auction the seats after boarding! Clearly, this is a. not practical and b. would only serve to alienate those willing to pay premium prices for ordinary seats.
So let's just put things in perspective. If I or anyone else gets away with sitting in a 'better' seat it is opportunistic and subject to fair challenge. In the absence of any challenge from CC, with the benefit of pax manifest, seat allocation and loyalty card staus etc. is that down solely to theft/trespass on their part or ineptitude or complacency on the part of CC - or both? Knock for knock.
Finally, I would seriously challenge the assertion that one seat is 'better' than another simply by the placement of a moveable curtain - which more often than not is what differentiates premium from cattle class on short haul flights - I know you will tell me if I'm wrong!
For the avoidance of doubt, whilst the economics of long haul are essentially the same I do regard premium seats as offering more than 'perceived' value on longhaul services.
Empty seat at concert.
OK is it empty because
1.) it hasn't been sold?
2.) it has been sold but nobody has turned up?
In case 1. it has failed to attract revenue and that fact that someone else is occupying is it opportunistic but ( and remember it has failed to sell) this hasn't cost the organiser anything. Neither the bloke from the cheapseats nor anyone esle was going to pay to sit there but the seat exists and the concert goes on. So someone makes use of it.
In case 2. The seat is bought and paid for but no-one shows for whatever reason. The seat is has generated revenue for the organiser - he has suffered no loss. The concert goes on. The bloke that decides to occupy it has, presumably also paid for a seat. If the rightful owner shows up he will get his seat and the interloper goes back to the cheapseats.
For any commercial flight the second the door closes ( gate closes or 35 minutes pre departure at T5 ) then an empty seat on an aircraft is worthless. It is a drag on revenue, a cost to the airline. It has failed to sell , yield has not been maximised. The cost of that seat whether it be in row 1 or row 21 is exactly the same. Their respective revenue generating potential is significantly different only until the ticket desk closes. On board, they are indistinguishable - every empty seat costs the same. Arguably, the cost of an empty premium seat is higher as the middle row seats are usually not sold. It would therefore always make sense to upgrade pax if there is a better opportunity to sell an economy seat where there is no prospect of selling premium.
If the seats had anything other than perceived value it would be easy to auction the seats after boarding! Clearly, this is a. not practical and b. would only serve to alienate those willing to pay premium prices for ordinary seats.
So let's just put things in perspective. If I or anyone else gets away with sitting in a 'better' seat it is opportunistic and subject to fair challenge. In the absence of any challenge from CC, with the benefit of pax manifest, seat allocation and loyalty card staus etc. is that down solely to theft/trespass on their part or ineptitude or complacency on the part of CC - or both? Knock for knock.
Finally, I would seriously challenge the assertion that one seat is 'better' than another simply by the placement of a moveable curtain - which more often than not is what differentiates premium from cattle class on short haul flights - I know you will tell me if I'm wrong!
For the avoidance of doubt, whilst the economics of long haul are essentially the same I do regard premium seats as offering more than 'perceived' value on longhaul services.
Like I said you can give as many reasons that make you feel OK about stealing or opportunistically sitting in an empty seat as you like but YOU know that it's the wrong thing to do. 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Munnyspinner, whilst I applaud you for trying to state your case in this debate, that is where my admiration for your behaviour ends.
I am the quiet, law-abiding (larger) customer that pays for my ticket, boards the aircraft when called, avoids asking for extra service as the CC have enough work to do, never put my seat back unless the seat behind is empty, takes whatever seat is assigned to me, and send compliments to the airline should the service warrant it. I'm not a martyr, just getting from point A to point B as quickly and efficiently as possible. Petty things like an extra degree of seat pitch just aren't worth the effect on my conscience.
If there are other people on the flight like you, then the CC have to spend precious pre-takeoff time dealing with the issue of who gets which seat, delaying me and my fellow pax. It's not about revenue, theft, or misappropriation, just 'doing what is right'.
I believe that given that the anti-terror 'air police' presence and/or requirements, that there should be an additional crew member on all 100+ pax flights dressed as a security guard (without a firearm). For selfish idiots that try jumping classes or Y class louts drinking everyone elses share of beverage, their name is taken, they are escorted back to their assigned seat, and a note made in the airlines loyalty system so that next time they fly, check-in crew can be on the lookout for them.
If I had paid US$5k for a business class seat, and Joe Economy slides in next to me on his US$1k Y class fare, I'd sure be upset with the airline that he be allowed to get away with it...
My 2c.
I am the quiet, law-abiding (larger) customer that pays for my ticket, boards the aircraft when called, avoids asking for extra service as the CC have enough work to do, never put my seat back unless the seat behind is empty, takes whatever seat is assigned to me, and send compliments to the airline should the service warrant it. I'm not a martyr, just getting from point A to point B as quickly and efficiently as possible. Petty things like an extra degree of seat pitch just aren't worth the effect on my conscience.
If there are other people on the flight like you, then the CC have to spend precious pre-takeoff time dealing with the issue of who gets which seat, delaying me and my fellow pax. It's not about revenue, theft, or misappropriation, just 'doing what is right'.
I believe that given that the anti-terror 'air police' presence and/or requirements, that there should be an additional crew member on all 100+ pax flights dressed as a security guard (without a firearm). For selfish idiots that try jumping classes or Y class louts drinking everyone elses share of beverage, their name is taken, they are escorted back to their assigned seat, and a note made in the airlines loyalty system so that next time they fly, check-in crew can be on the lookout for them.
If I had paid US$5k for a business class seat, and Joe Economy slides in next to me on his US$1k Y class fare, I'd sure be upset with the airline that he be allowed to get away with it...
My 2c.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taking something, whether it be goods or service, without paying for it is theft pure and simple. If your moral compass will allow you to do that then no argument on here will persuade you that you are wrong. However, be prepared to accept that a judge may not see things in the same light as you. Also be prepared that the place where you may be arguing your case may be a country where theft is viewed a little more harshly than the in the western world. Remember the law of the land you are in applies with the doors open - so if you fly into Saudi Arabia, then you will be charged with theft in Saudi Arabia.
The old maxim of if you can't do the time don't do the crime is very apt here. Also gaining a criminal record can directly affect your career prospects - many employers take a dim view of their employees engaging in criminal activity. But hey if you are happy to be a thief, please do carry on.
The old maxim of if you can't do the time don't do the crime is very apt here. Also gaining a criminal record can directly affect your career prospects - many employers take a dim view of their employees engaging in criminal activity. But hey if you are happy to be a thief, please do carry on.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: somewhere near LTN
Age: 50
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my current line of work I deal with theft every day. The definition is (basically) when someone dishonestly appropriates from another with the intent to permanently deprive them.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: W Sussex
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose thats an argument munnyspinner, I wouldnt like to rely on it though.
Surely any passenger who 'self upgrades' will only take the seat space. I'm sure the Cabin Crew know who their class passengers are, and the upgrader is unlikely to get fed or watered in addition to nicking the seat space. (Id hope!) But if its not theft per se, it's what we used to call 'improper possession'.
Surely any passenger who 'self upgrades' will only take the seat space. I'm sure the Cabin Crew know who their class passengers are, and the upgrader is unlikely to get fed or watered in addition to nicking the seat space. (Id hope!) But if its not theft per se, it's what we used to call 'improper possession'.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I suggest that any CC working out of T5 on short-haul watch out our good friend moneyspinner.
If you catch him, please let us know what you do to him. And moneyspinner, if they catch you and get you arrested, let us know what the foreign judge thinks of your explanation that it is not fraud or theft.
If you catch him, please let us know what you do to him. And moneyspinner, if they catch you and get you arrested, let us know what the foreign judge thinks of your explanation that it is not fraud or theft.
You can argue the legalities as much as you like. Speaking as SLF myself, what really grates is the arrogant presumption of some of my "fellow" passengers in this regard.
Rest assured all you FAs out there, a polite but firm hand with all these self important idiots generates considerable admiration from those of us who appear to be sitting quietly reading our newspaper.
Rest assured all you FAs out there, a polite but firm hand with all these self important idiots generates considerable admiration from those of us who appear to be sitting quietly reading our newspaper.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: suffolk
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a curtain that separates 'cattle 'from premium,so why on the last overnight flight i did were all the passengers in prem.economy all fast asleep,while all in 'cattle' class wide awake !!!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Setting the record straight
I'm not surprised at the self righteous prognostication on this subject but decided to do some proper research.
The offence would not be theft but fraud, in terms of the Fraud act of 2006, this of course depends on which airline the 'offence' occured and in which country. Obtaining services by fraudelent representation . i.e. presenting oneself as a premium class passenger when knowingly not. The test applied here in the UK would that established in R vs Ghosh. That a reasonable person ( the one of the clapham omnibus) would know what he was doing was wrong.
However, looking for examples of cases and prosecutions of individuals in such cases I can find none. Surely, there will be some but they are certainly not as well recorded as prosecutions for other offences on board or against airline employees for theft and fraud.
I wondered why this might be.
First, that it would be reasonable for CC to check that passengers are sitting where they should be and challenge them if not. If CC knows that someone is sitting in the worng seat and then serves them a premium meal as a premium passenger knowing that they are cattle class then the CC is also committing an offence. Two wrongs don't make a right and if the airline wanted to make a complaint of fraud then both may be liable to prosecution.
Second. Even where offences have been perpetrated and the airline may wish to prosecute it is probably not cost effective to do so given that their loss is nominal. It is not something that happens very often, the cost is insignificant and the time and resource to follow it up isn't worth it ( CC appearing in court etc. )
Third, and this is speculation on my part. Were a prosecution to arise the ailine would be called upon the state their loss. Now many will argue that this is simply the difference between the price of a premium class ticket and economy class but it is not. The actual loss is negligible as the seat which was occupied fraudulently was only done so after the opportunity to sell that seat at the full price had passed. The prosecutors would also need to demonstrate that the fraudster had boarded the flight with the specific intention of sitting in Premium class without the appropriate ticket - very difficult to do.
Yes it is wrong. Yes it may be a criminal matter although there are civil remedies available. But, based on the evidence in the UK at least, it doesn't appear to be a problem that the airlines complain about or , if they do, that the authorities successfully prosecute.
Let's see which airline wants to draw attention the sparse difference between the basic service and premium service on short haul flights but the huge price differential!
The offence would not be theft but fraud, in terms of the Fraud act of 2006, this of course depends on which airline the 'offence' occured and in which country. Obtaining services by fraudelent representation . i.e. presenting oneself as a premium class passenger when knowingly not. The test applied here in the UK would that established in R vs Ghosh. That a reasonable person ( the one of the clapham omnibus) would know what he was doing was wrong.
However, looking for examples of cases and prosecutions of individuals in such cases I can find none. Surely, there will be some but they are certainly not as well recorded as prosecutions for other offences on board or against airline employees for theft and fraud.
I wondered why this might be.
First, that it would be reasonable for CC to check that passengers are sitting where they should be and challenge them if not. If CC knows that someone is sitting in the worng seat and then serves them a premium meal as a premium passenger knowing that they are cattle class then the CC is also committing an offence. Two wrongs don't make a right and if the airline wanted to make a complaint of fraud then both may be liable to prosecution.
Second. Even where offences have been perpetrated and the airline may wish to prosecute it is probably not cost effective to do so given that their loss is nominal. It is not something that happens very often, the cost is insignificant and the time and resource to follow it up isn't worth it ( CC appearing in court etc. )
Third, and this is speculation on my part. Were a prosecution to arise the ailine would be called upon the state their loss. Now many will argue that this is simply the difference between the price of a premium class ticket and economy class but it is not. The actual loss is negligible as the seat which was occupied fraudulently was only done so after the opportunity to sell that seat at the full price had passed. The prosecutors would also need to demonstrate that the fraudster had boarded the flight with the specific intention of sitting in Premium class without the appropriate ticket - very difficult to do.
Yes it is wrong. Yes it may be a criminal matter although there are civil remedies available. But, based on the evidence in the UK at least, it doesn't appear to be a problem that the airlines complain about or , if they do, that the authorities successfully prosecute.
Let's see which airline wants to draw attention the sparse difference between the basic service and premium service on short haul flights but the huge price differential!
Theft or Deception? It all comes down to Standards
As very frequent flyer I'll use points to upgrade if there's availability - often my flights are at short notice so I'll ask at check-in. There've been a couple of occasions I've been asked by the Crew if "I'd mind moving up forward?", and I don't mind at all - I like to think it's recognition of the "get what you give" attitude.
Obnoxious, anything "challenged" SLF don't deserve the time of day! More often than not they've deliberately tried the bluff/bluster so give it back to them "in the nicest possible way" of course.
If you didn't pay for it, it's not yours to take! If the crew offer, be grateful, but to take advantage of busy crew is deceitful -
!
Obnoxious, anything "challenged" SLF don't deserve the time of day! More often than not they've deliberately tried the bluff/bluster so give it back to them "in the nicest possible way" of course.
If you didn't pay for it, it's not yours to take! If the crew offer, be grateful, but to take advantage of busy crew is deceitful -
!
Last edited by flapsforty; 31st Mar 2009 at 13:17.
just a curtain that separates 'cattle 'from premium,so why on the last overnight flight i did were all the passengers in prem.economy all fast asleep,while all in 'cattle' class wide awake !!!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If he is a lawyer, then Munnyspinner will have also noted my comment about the offence being relevant to the country the aircraft landed in. UK law applies in the air on G registered aircraft, but not when the doors are open, on the ground in another country. Then the local laws apply and these are the laws you would be charged with. The points made by Munnyspinner are valid in the UK but are subject to the law of other lands when elsewhere. If you are happy to argue legal niceties when the loss of a hand may be at stake keep moving seat.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: France
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...when the loss of a hand may be at stake
Getting back on topic. You can argue that some things are hard to prove and you can weasel out of criminal prosecutions but we all know you are wrong. Especially the idiotic part about it being the responsability of CC to make sure you are not committing fraud. So if I rob a bank and the staff don't stop me then it is legal? If you ever pass your old law school go and ask for your money back.
Quite apart from being thoroughly astonished at his attitude, I've finally clicked about the derivation of Munnyspinner's choice of monniker - quite simply, someone who spins money is by definition a "tosser"!
Jack
Jack
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr free-upgrade 
will not convince anybody here.
It doesn't seem likely anybody here will penetrate his wall of blatantly invalid justifications.
He's wrong and he knows it, but he can't admit it on open forum.
Before we get to the suspend-him-by-his-testicles-from-a-class-divider stage, let's call it a day.
will not convince anybody here.It doesn't seem likely anybody here will penetrate his wall of blatantly invalid justifications.
He's wrong and he knows it, but he can't admit it on open forum.
Before we get to the suspend-him-by-his-testicles-from-a-class-divider stage, let's call it a day.
