Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

• 

  Col. Klink (profile), 20 Feb 2001 @ 8:54am

  
  

  Bait & Switch

  I'll give United the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was a mistake. I'm taking their word for it, and not assunming that it was "too good to be true". Businesses have been known to sell stuff at a loss to either get business (loss leaders) or to drive others out of business (dumping).

  Even with the assumption that it was a mistake, I feel that United needed to honor those prices. Otherwise, what's to keep a dishonest travel agent from offering too-good-to-be-true rates, only to claim a mistake after selling the tickets. How can a consumer ever prove that a business isn't running a scam? I suppose you could file suit and subpoena their records, but that's no way to save money...

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  lissell, 20 Feb 2001 @ 11:53am

  
  

  legalities

  Somthing to keep in mind in all of this is uniteds legal obligation. Selling a ticket online for $25 bucks and then say oops, it was a mistake its actuall * is legally no different from target marking a nice sweater as being $25 and then telling you that the item was "mismarked" and therfore $50. If it is the businesses mistake then they have to simply take it. Otherwise they can be charged with a whole load of nasty things including bait and switch. This is why we have rainchecks as well.
  
  just my $.2
  
  Lissell

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Mark F, 20 Feb 2001 @ 4:15pm

    
    

    Re: legalities

    This is a difference between bait and switch and "we made an honest mistake". Look through any newpaper, over the course of a week you'll likely see correction notices. A $25 flight to Paris is not believable and should not be honored.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • 

      Ryan, 20 Feb 2001 @ 7:55pm

      
      

      Re: legalities

      A $25 dollar flight could well be believable! Here in London, you can have normal flight prices for the equivelent of several hundred dollars that due to special promotions are reduced to essentially loss making fares (pretty close to $25 on company websites) to get people interested in flying in certain types of airlines (like easyjet and etc.). To be honest I'm glad that consumers actually have power to change the will of corporations, it's too easy to forget that out side of the US, large corporations really could give a Sh*t if they got bad publicity (taking into the fact that customer services in many other countries means just that, if a customer gets served they should feel lucky!)

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • 

        mhh5, 21 Feb 2001 @ 1:54am

        
        

        Re: legalities

        Um. So all mistakes are final? Seller beware? I agree with Masnick here... There should be return policies that work both ways in order to protect everyone -- buyers and sellers alike... But I guess the customer is always right.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Jim_Nance (profile), 26 May 2010 @ 9:13pm

  
  

  UNITED BLOWS IT then UNITED EATS IT

  I understand why United decided to absorb the cost of this ad glitch. The advertising they'll get from this story and their ultimately taking the high road will probably equal the 1.6 meg it cost them.
  
  And, they can certainly cut some of the flight costs, such as fueling the plane(s) with the not-so-fresh stuff that sat a while and took on water and the other contaminants that enter all liquid fuel vessels through their vent pipes.
  
  And, they can stretch the maintenance schedule, i.e. delay engine overhauls, lube changes, pressurization stress inspections, etc., because after all, this is what corporations feel compelled to do to keep stockholders happy, especially in uncertain economic times such as these.
  
  For added perspective let's compare: Of all the past and present accusations against British Petroleum (BP) none are ever for any questionable spending of potential dividends to guarantee-or even overkill, if you'll pardon the metaphor when deaths are mounting-the safety of their workers, the public or the environment.
  
  Sure, big corporations will magnanimously spend what they must to maintain the images and illusions, but they have ways of compensating that we aren't ever supposed to learn about....
  
  Have a nice flight, folks! And, don't worry, the tires are probably safe for one more takeoff and landing, even if they may be due for replacement....(that fine print in the logs of the equipment install dates, total air miles and cabin pressurizations, etc., are really hard to read sometimes. And, workers, mechanics and even inspectors can make mistakes, especially if they're exhausted from working to cover permanent staff and crew shortages....)
  
  25 dollars from San Fran to Paris? Wow! Now, that's what I call tempting fate!

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]