InsideFlyer.com [English] United States InsideFlyer.uk [English] United Kingdom InsideFlyer.de [German] Germany InsideFlyer.no [Norwegian] Norway InsideFlyer.se [Swedish] Sweden InsideFlyer.dk [Danish] Denmark InsideFlyer.nl [Dutch] Benelux
Discussion in 'American Airlines | AAdvantage' started by LarryInNYC, Aug 28, 2013.
| Print Topic
As someone said, we've all been here long enough to know that the airlines have problems with their IT systems, whether it's updating policies or with mistake fares or what-not.
Of course this change sucks in the end... it sucks that it went into effect without notice and without a grace period, that much we can all agree on.
I feel bad though for anybody that emptied out their accounts or cancelled a bunch of tickets based on a few tweets and rumors of a memo that I'm not sure anybody outside of AA has actually seen.
I'm not sure, because thinking about it, I'm not sure what the change really was.
Of course, for revenue tickets on partners, AA must be collecting the full fare, including YQ already. Otherwise, you could book revenue tickets at more-or-less half price via AA.
So I'm thinking the change must have been the way they allocate or report the fare breakdown, not in the net amount of the fare.
If I'm guessing correctly (and it's all just uninformed guesswork) then, had this been implemented properly, it would have been a "change that is not a change" for end users -- the tickets would have cost the same but been reported differently.
American wasn't collecting YQ on all AAdvantage international redemptions. The change reported was that they would be on every airline that lists it.
No, not the change that caused the scare (YQ on redemptions). What's not clear to me is what change AA is saying they intended to roll out. They said they made the change to "collect" the YQ on partner revenue tickets. But surely they were already doing that. If a ticket cost $900 at the partner (450 fare / 450 YQ) and AA sold it without the 450 YQ surely we'd know about that.
So, what actual change do they claim they were attempting to make last night that spilled over to the redemption pricing system?
I'm glad I always follow the credo of A HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE UNIVERSE: "Don't Panic!" (And always carry a towel in your carry-on...)
Little known fact. While "Don't Panic" did originate in A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe the advice about carrying a towel was actually cribbed from the letters section of Hitchhiker's Guide to Europe.
Didn't that one also include the warning about bringing your own roll of toilet paper too?
Isn't a towel just reusable toilet paper? Besides, if you take a shower after you don't NEED toilet paper... two for the price of one!
That's what has me thinking as well... forget about what actually happened, explain to me what you were trying to do
Now I haven't been paying attention, so maybe they are just trying to itemize the fare to show YQ on their site for revenue tickets with partners? I'm entirely too lazy to go look, but if you go price an MH ticket now does it actually show YQ as a separate line item (and more importantly, did it show it yesterday)?
Regardless of how people perceive the airlines and their IT systems, we all should know better than assume that they're crap. These are horrendously complicated setups and I'm sure it's very, very easy to end up with a configuration change that ends up in production when it was supposed to be in QA / staging / development / whatever.
With that said, when you go around testing things it's usually because you have intentions to roll them out eventually, so what interests me is what they were testing, not what actually happened.
You mean like this one, that's still up on AA's website as I write this?
I bet it wasn't a "False Alarm", but rather a "Test Alarm". The test is over, but the intent is not. Does anyone really think that AA would never consider a sneak devaluation as an option for balancing their books?
Right now they're probably busy calculating potential damages and benefits of such a move.