Nicholas Kralev talks about his book “Decoding Air Travel” during a visit to Houston, TX, on Oct. 12, 2011.
Volunteering to get bumped from a flight is an issue often raised by participants in the events on my book tour. As is the case with most situations I discuss in “Decoding Air Travel,” I advice travelers to think carefully before giving up their seat and examine the alternative ways to get to their destination — and to know exactly what they would get in exchange.
U.S. airlines, which overbook flights all the time, offer discount vouchers valued at as much as $400 for bumps on domestic flights, and up to $800 on international flights. Those certificates are very tempting and can save you lots of money. In fact, many travelers take certain trips only because they have vouchers to use.
However, unless you are familiar with alternative flights that will get you to your destination, you may be asking for trouble.
I’ve never volunteered to get bumped. Comfort and convenience are very important to me during travel, so I’m unlikely to give up a Business or First Class seat for Economy.
I was prepared to relinquish my seat on a flight for the first time late last month, and even put my name on the list, but then I removed it. I was to fly nonstop from Denver (DEN) to Milwaukee (MKE) on a coach-only Canadair regional aircraft, and I could afford to arrive in MKE as much as four hours later than scheduled. I also knew my flight was oversold.
During online check-in the day before the flight, I was asked whether I’d give up my seat if it were needed, and I said yes. Later that night, however, I decided to take a look at my options. The only other nonstop flight to MKE was not until 8 p.m., which was too late for me, so I’d have to connect in Chicago (ORD). I checked out the DEN-ORD flights — there were two I could take, but one was sold out, and on the other one I would be stuck in a middle coach seat.
As soon as I got to the airport in the morning, I asked to be taken off the volunteer list.
Had I stayed on the list, I would have negotiated with the gate agent exactly what I would have received for diving up my seat, on which alternate flight I would have been rebooked, and whether I would have sat in Economy or First Class.
Even though most U.S. carriers are moving toward the discount-voucher approach, some agents might still try to give you “a free round trip anywhere in the United States.” Before you accept it, keep in mind that those certificates come with many restrictions, such as advance purchase and minimum-stay requirements. They must be booked in a certain coach booking class, which may not be available on the flights you want. In addition, you won’t earn any frequent-flier miles on that trip, and it cannot be upgraded.
A discount voucher, on the other hand, is just that — it will take $400 or more off a future ticket for you or someone else designated by you. Any restrictions depend on the rules of the fare you purchase, and any published fare is eligible. You will earn miles, including elite-qualifying ones, and you can upgrade your ticket.
Related stories:
The peculiarities of airline agent training
Predicting flight delays and cancellations
Preserving upgrades in case of rebooking
U.S. airlines handle disruptions best
Continue reading about Consider options before giving up seat
The 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks this week reminded me of how much can go wrong in the airline industry to no fault of its own. Despite everything outside the airlines’ control, there are many reasons to criticize their performance. But how much slack should we cut them?
I’ve written several times about the increased scrutiny of the airlines by both the media and the public, compared to other industries, simply because of the nature of their business. A commercial carrier has more front-line employees than almost any other company, and it’s easier to complain about a person we see in front of us than about an invisible — and sometimes anonymous — representative.
In addition, the airline industry gets more media attention than other types of businesses by default, as many more people are believed to be interested in aviation than in the workings of a cable company or the food industry, for example — even though the latter two affect no fewer consumers than airlines do.
Let’s face it, an aircraft in any position — sitting on ground, soaring in the sky or, God forbid, engulfed in flames — makes for much better photos and video than a food-processing chain.
Bashing the airlines has been common for decades, but it has become even easier in recent years, thanks for social media and the travel blogs that have mushroomed on the Internet.
All that attention has improved customer service, as well as other parts of the airlines’ performance. I’m not talking about the on-board service, which no longer includes free drinks, meals, pillows, blankets, etc. I mean employees’ desire and ability to resolve problems. There are certainly still those who just shrug shoulders and pass you on to someone else, but the helpful ones seem to be more these days.
As my book, “Decoding Air Travel,” and all my columns can testify, I’m by no means an apologist for the airlines. I criticize them and expose their dishonest practices when they deserve it, but I also praise them when they do things right. I’ve also urged other consumer-oriented businesses to learn from the customer-friendly policies of many airlines.
So I’m more than willing to cut the airline industry some slack — not only in situations beyond its control, but also when honest mistakes have been made. For example, late last month, I had a schedule change on a future ticket, which had to be reissued. The agent I spoke with on the phone was supposed to send the reservation to a certain “queue,” but as I learned a few days later, she sent it to the refund queue. As a result, the entire itinerary was canceled, and of course no one notified me. Good thing I called back.
Things happen, so I didn’t get angry in this case. This week, however, I did get mad at US Airways for its failure to invest in a modern website — not a new issue, about which I’ve also written before. That site is probably one of the worst in the industry.
I tried to check in online for a flight from Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA) to New York’s LaGuardia (LGA). Before that, I had attempted to get a seat assignment, but that’s not allowed on shuttle flights until check-in, even in First Class. I did see on the seat map, however, that my preferred 2F was available. So I began the check-in process, but the seat map didn’t open. I tried several times, to no avail. I finally exited, only to find out that the system had automatically assigned me seat 1F.
I didn’t want the bulkhead, but there was no way to change the seat I had. Web support couldn’t help, either, telling me it could only be done at the airport. Of course, by the time I got there the next day, all other seats were gone.
Why is it so difficult for US Airways to offer a working seat map during online check-in? Why is it so hard to allow changes to seat assignments? Why can the websites of United, American and many other airlines provide that service? Is it really rocket science? Almost every airline website has its problems, but US Airways’ beats them all. Its CEO, Doug Parker, needs to realize that it’s 2011.
Related stories:
US Airways’ website fails at basics
US Airways hears feedback, fixes website
Does badmouthing airlines help anyone?
Travel companies teach customer-service lessons
Continue reading about How much slack do the airlines deserve?
When was the last time you used a travel agent? I asked that question in my book “Decoding Air Travel.” Last month, President Obama asked it, too, and the American Society of Travel Agents speedily protested. So let’s examine the modern — or perhaps not modern enough — travel-agency system and the value it brings.
Many young people don’t even remember the time when using a travel agent was the only practical way to book a trip. While many consumers today book their own travel, using travel agencies is still quite prevalent in the corporate world.
However, many business travelers I know are unhappy with their company’s travel agency. It’s clear the current system isn’t working well anymore for a variety of reasons. Without taking sides, let’s look at those reasons from the perspective of travel agencies and their customers.
If you are a traveler — for work or pleasure — you probably have at least one of the following problems with travel agents:
• They don’t always offer you the lowest fares or best itineraries;
• They only book tickets and leave the rest to you;
• They know little, if anything, about frequent-flier programs, elite status, miles and upgrades;
• They are not familiar with on-board products and don’t know which airlines have flat beds in Business Class;
• They don’t travel frequently, if at all, but sit in an office and rely on computers to tell them what to do;
• They are inflexible when schedule changes affect your tickets;
• They don’t take care of all your travel needs.
As the air travel system has become more complex and customer-unfriendly in recent years, the needs of the modern traveler have grown and diversified enormously. The traditional travel agency model has so far survived the Internet threat, but its relevance has diminished significantly, because it hasn’t caught up with the changes in travelers’ needs and demands.
Booking a ticket is no longer even close to enough. You have to be able to compare fares and products of different airlines and alliances, and to offer your customers the options that provide the best combination of price, comfort, convenience, maximizing frequent-flier miles, progress toward elite status, best upgrade opportunities and the most effective use of elite benefits.
For this to happen, you need a wealth of knowledge, which most travel agents don’t have. For example, you need to know what booking classes are eligible for upgrades and which don’t earn miles. It’s certainly unreasonable to expect one person to be familiar with each airline’s requirements, but there are ways to deal with that — an agency can have employees or teams specializing in the different alliances or groups of carriers.
Probably the two most important and consequential weaknesses of the agency model are its use of limited data and booking sources — often just one Global Distribution System (GDS) — and its almost exclusive reliance on automated systems to do all the work.
If you’ve read my book, you already know more than the average travel agent — and you realize why those two weaknesses result in millions of customers paying much more than they could be. Automation is no doubt vital for the travel-booking process, but given the intricacies of airfares and the tricks airlines have adopted to “maximize revenues,” sometimes we need to rely more on our brains than on machines.
One other thing to keep in mind when dealing with a travel agency is whether it has contracts with specific airlines. Airline commissions were discontinued years ago, but large agencies still have contracts. How does that affect you? The purpose of those contracts, of course, is to encourage agencies to send more business to the respective carrier. If your agency receives its biggest commission from American Airlines, it might book you on American even if Delta has a lower fare.
Now let’s look at the above-described picture from a travel agency’s perspective. Most agencies don’t have the pull of American Express and Carlson Wagonlit, and they don’t receive airline commissions. They do get GDS kickbacks, as well as transaction fees for provided services directly from clients — about $35 on average, though some charge as much as $90.
For what you pay them, they have decided that it’s not worth more than several minutes of an agent’s time to work on booking you a ticket. Then how do you expect them to do more than letting the computer do all the work? Would you pay them more to take care of your upgrade and other needs? I suppose it depends on whether you trust that agent to do a good job. There is no point in paying for something that you later have to fix yourself.
So what’s the solution? Should everyone stop using travel agencies? Of course not — they do have a place in the travel industry. Many companies simply can’t handle their travel volume without outside professional help. At the same time, the gap between agency services and travelers’ needs keeps widening.
One solution could be for agencies to have teams dedicated to high-end, high-demand executives, who are willing to pay more for additional services. Some large agencies already have such teams, but their tasks usually don’t include creative ways to save on airfare or any of the frequent-flier services described above.
There is another solution, which was suggested to me by — ironically — travel agency owners last year. They shared my observation about the gap between what they do and what their clients want, and urged me to bridge it. How? First, by educating their clients in seminars and private training how to do for themselves what the agencies don’t offer. Clients who don’t have the time or patience to learn can ask me to provide those additional services to them.
So to bridge that gap, I started my company, Kralev International LLC. As one of my clients says, we can do your homework if you don’t have time to do it yourself.
Related stories:
My book ‘Decoding Air Travel’ is out
Corporate travel’s lack of innovation
Kralev International launches website
Continue reading about Is the travel-agency model sustainable?
United Airlines, already one of the biggest abusers of fake “direct” flights before its merger with Continental, has increased further the number of those flights in its schedule. Its oddest decision was to introduce fictitious “direct” flights, which consist of two or more segments with nothing in common but their number, between its hubs.
If you are shopping for a ticket from Chicago (ORD) to Denver (DEN), be very careful which flight you book. In addition to 10 daily nonstops with flying time of about 2 hours, United currently has three “direct” flights on that route, but they make a “stop” in Minneapolis (MSP), Des Moines, Iowa, (DSM) and Kansas City, Mo., (MCI), respectively.
Watch out for any indication of that, as obscure as it may be. In most cases, those are not just “stops” — the two “legs” are operated by different aircraft, so they are simply connecting flights. For example, the first “leg” of flight 817 yesterday arrived in Minneapolis at gate E6, but the “continuation” departed from gate E10.
As I’ve written before, most flights labelled “direct” by U.S. carriers are fictitious — they don’t exist in real life. They are meant to make more money for the airlines by tricking customers and perverting a practice that was actually started to help travelers. In fact, they spell nothing but trouble for passengers.
Historically, United and Delta have had more fake “direct” flights in their schedules than any other U.S. carriers, though all airlines engage in that practice.
For years, United has focused on adding at least one domestic tag to most of its international flights. For instance, flight 917 from Frankfurt (FRA) to Washington (IAD) “continues” on to Seattle (SEA), though the second flight has nothing in common with the fist. Yesterday, the flight from FRA was operated by a three-cabin Boeing 777, as usual, and arrived at IAD at gate C1. The flight to SEA was operated by a two-cabin Boeing 757 and departed from gate D4.
In the last several months, United has significantly stepped up the questionable practice on purely domestic flights. Currently, there are very few flights with only one segment. Most flights between Washington National (DCA) and Chicago (ORD) used to be one-leg flights. Now, most are part of fake “direct” flights with two or three segments.
It’s clear why the airline is selling “direct” flights from DCA to San Francisco (SFO) — it wants you to think that you can go all the way to the West coast from DCA with no hassle.
But why on earth is it selling fake “direct” flights from IAD to SFO, given that there are nine nonstops on that hub-to-hub route on most days? In its upcoming winter schedule, it has four “direct” flights between those cities. Two of them have two segments — one “stopping” in Dallas (DFW) and one in SEA. The other two have three segments each — one “stopping” in DEN and Las Vegas (LAS), and the other one in ORD and San Diego (SAN).
Is it possible that United has run out of flight numbers because of the merger? That may be the case with three-digit numbers, but what’s wrong with four-digit ones?
Related stories:
DOT should ban fictitious flights
Airlines abuse ‘direct’ flights
United, Continental execs at odds over loyalty program
Continue reading about United steps up fake ‘direct’ flights
