Hacker News Reader

Comment by mipmap04 | Hacker News Reader

>Why is using "empty seats" the superior solution to raising the financial incentives to attract volunteers be bumped?

I travel 90% of the year and there is no reasonable financial incentive (especially if they are just flight vouchers) they could offer that would make me volunteer my seat. If I'm travelling, it's for business and I have no desire to be late. If it's travelling back home, I want to see my family and I'm not going to miss that flight if I don't have to. On busy commuter flights, I would imagine most passengers share my sentiment. This would ultimately lead us into a situation where someone is randomly removed from the aircraft against their will.

Furthermore, being offered flight vouchers to give up your seat is really stupid on commuter flights. Pretty much every person on those flights has more miles than they know what to do with. Offer cash instead.

View on HN

Then you're not the target. There are people that will say yes to this

I'm a heavy business traveler, though not a business commuter per se. In my experience with oversold flights, there are a few people who will eventually cave and take the buyout -- but I want to place sharp emphasis on the word eventually.

The moment an airline attendant announces an oversold situation, that announcement kicks off a frantic battle between dopey consumer game theory calculus on the one hand, and rigid airline offer-escalation procedure on the other. This slow, maddeningly predictable war of attrition often results in delays of 45 minutes or more. Those delays cascade into further delays when the flight misses its departure window.

We have a "not enough dopes" problem. There need to be more people willing to take buyouts, and since that's not happening, we can consider pretty much any alternative solutions that make sense.

Right. The solution is for them to immediately say: We need 3 people to take this offer of $800 in US cash (not vouchers), or 3 people will be selected randomly.

I guarantee there will be enough takers. The issue is, even though the cost of overbooking is already factored into the cost of the flight, the airline is still trying to eek out extra dollars by offering less than the cost (vouchers, starting with lowball offers, etc).

I'm not a lawyer, but pre-announcing that three unfortunate souls will be summarily booted from the plane seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen. I'm guessing they go through the whole song and dance partially to minimize the payout, partially to collect data on average payouts and equilibrium pricing, and partially to create the opportunity for volunteers to leave willingly.

Don't get me wrong; I'd love if they simply cut to the chase. But airlines are not in the business of customer service, as is often painfully obvious. They seem to take their business practices from the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition. (In particular, the dictum, "Once you've got their money, never give it back.")

>This slow, maddeningly predictable war of attrition often results in delays of 45 minutes or more.

I'm a 2-million-miles frequent flyer on American Airlines and I've never seen voucher auctions require 45 minutes. Usually it takes less than 5 minutes. Often, the gate agents run the auction in the lounge which doesn't add any delay to the plane pushing away from the gate.

>We have a "not enough dopes" problem. There need to be more people willing to take buyouts, and since that's not happening,

Is the goal to have zero involuntary bumps? Because 40,000 involuntary bumps out of 660,000,000[1] seems like there are "enough dopes" on virtually every plane.

[1] https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2017/03/20/hold...

Your experience differs from mine, is all I can say. What I wouldn't give for 5-minute auction games.

You're a business flyer, have status, and would never be bumped involuntarily due to your status. (I'm a UA 1K, so I'm in the same boat.)

But the point is that it's a market. Pretty much always there will be a price at which someone is willing to give up their seats for whatever incentive. The overall system with overbooking, voluntary bumps, and the occasional involuntary bump is overall much more efficient.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com