Passenger Bill of Rights for air travel

[pilot fish]

I would have to say that's ridiculous. I see no such thing in OGD's posts.

DD,you are entitled to that opinion of course. It just does not sit right with me. You could be right, in that, this is just a person who NEVER wants to be proven wrong and will go to passionate lengths to defend thier errors in judgement? It seems as if this person is not arguing from the consumer side but more from the supplier side?

 

[letterboy]

Worse. Since the airline is STILL OBLIGATED to get you where you're going, it's more like demanding 150% of your money back, PLUS a working product.

Know any stores that are offering that deal?

I know of one store that had a we will refund a product no matter the reason. . . . has anyone seen a WoolWorths lately?

 

[letterboy]

PilotFish,you are entitled to that opinion of course. It just does not sit right with me. You could be right, in that, this is just a person who NEVER wants to be proven wrong and will go to passionate lengths to defend thier errors in judgement? It seems as if this person is not arguing from the consumer side but more from the supplier side?

 

[pilot fish]

I know of one store that had a we will refund a product no matter the reason. . . . has anyone seen a WoolWorths lately?

Bad business example, jhb. Woolworths was a relec of the depression era and did not modernize. Costco's is a better example in the present market and they are thriving.

 

[pilot fish]

PilotFish,you are entitled to that opinion of course. It just does not sit right with me. You could be right, in that, this is just a person who NEVER wants to be proven wrong and will go to passionate lengths to defend thier errors in judgement? It seems as if this person is not arguing from the consumer side but more from the supplier side?

I'm glad we agree

 

[OHGoDive]

ohgodive's tone and passion in this thread raises some interesting questions for me. I question the motivation of his AIRLINE ADVOCACY? This, to me, sounds agenda driven, goal oriented and like a mission. His posts are not the product of a person questioning what is the proper proceedure to prevent the Jetblue debacle from accurring again, to the defense of the industry from ANY system that would hold it accountable at all. Is this person a shill for the industry, or just a contrarian?

Any suggestion of remedy, passenger restitution, corrective measures or prevention are met with many industry "talking point" rebutals. Seems odd to me. A simple thing like defining what constitutes what was OBVIOUS ABUSE is deflected and the softer word EXCESSIVE is substituted. Anyone that does not admit that what occured on JetBlue was passenger abuse, is, in my estimation, not capable of reasonable discussion on this matter.

Ah yes, we are on to another desperate attempt to prove yourself correct while not actually addressing the issue being discussed.

You don't agree with me, so I must be a part of the very establishment that you are espousing as evil. You are nothing, if not predictable.

Nope, I don't work for an airline, or for anyone who does business with any airline. Never have been. I am not in transportation. I have no relatives working for airlines.

I am, however, a consumer of airline products, ie, air travel. I use it for work and for pleasure.

The only vested interest that I have is in paying the least amount of money possible for a safe, efficient product. Nothing more. My passion on this issue is because people are out to capitalize on a non-issue at the expense of my wallet. Again.

[Ok, I admit, it's also partly just to see what kind of response it's going to incite from you, but, seriously, it's mostly just that I don't want to pay more for air travel while getting nothing in return.]

You keep attacking me personally, instead of ever putting forth, let alone justifying any position whatsoever. It makes your argument look weak, and you, personally, look juvenile.

I'm simply providing facts and ideas that I think support my position. I'm sorry if they conflict with your views and attitudes. You're not helping your cause.

 

[dlndavid]

Bad troll PiFi, bad troll :shakehead, you don't and can not see your own hypocracy?
Every thread you start is a thread to complain, blame the person, business, cause, you don't like, then when everybody (mostly) disagrees with you, you try, I repeat try to insult them, try to put them down, again, I say try. You are an embarassment to this board, and the way it is being moderated. Most people that act like you are not only warned but put on SB vacation. Lighten up Francise. Sorry for not addressing you with my usual one liners that aren't funny.

 

[pilot fish]

[[[My passion on this issue is because people are out to capitalize on a non-issue at the expense of my wallet.]]]

ohgo stills see this as a non issue.sigh

 

[OHGoDive]

Bad business example, jhb. Woolworths was a relec of the depression era and did not modernize. Costco's is a better example in the present market and they are thriving.

You are not just asking for the airline to refund your purchase price.

You are asking them to refund 150% of the purchase price AND deliver the product.

This would be akin to buying something at Costco, asking them to deliver it the next day, receiving the product in 2 days, and having them send you a check for 150% of the price of the item. While you keep the item.

Costco doesn't do that. No one does that.

 

[OHGoDive]

[[[My passion on this issue is because people are out to capitalize on a non-issue at the expense of my wallet.]]]

ohgo stills see this as a non issue.sigh

475 incidents out of 650,000,000 events. Yes friend, that qualifies as a non-issue in my book.

Would you pay $10 more per ticket to reduce it to 100 incidents? And if so, WHY?????