Are the economics of Twitter airfares worth it?

by Grant Martin on

More and more budget-travel tipsters are pointing towards Twitter, Facebook and social media outlets as the source for wild cheap airfares these days. And it’s true, in a way. By subscribing to the pundit feeds online it’s possible to get the inside scoop on a few good routes, often saving a few shekels on a future itinerary.

Broad, dirt cheap fares (sometimes called bingos), however, are harder to pin down. You’ve probably heard about the one guy who got a $7 airfare to Iceland or the other woman who flew to Buenos Aires for $40. These (mistake) fares usually occur two or three times a year and more often than not, last less than 24 hours. Yet these are the tickets that fuel the pundit followers.

Now, with the proliferation of active Twitterers, Flyertalk and Slickdeals, bingo fares are becoming harder and harder to find. Rick Seaney (@rickseaney) is a great example. The CEO of Farecompare has access to a broad spectrum of ticket data before it gets sent to travel agents like Orbitz and Expedia and as such, has a virtual crystal-ball into airfares that are going to soon be available. Great position to Tweet from, right? But can’t the airlines follow the same feed? Could they perhaps pay Mr. Seaney to find mistakes before we do? It’s not unlikely.
Now, the more “viral” a fare goes (with mistake fares), the greater the chance that it’ll be canceled quickly. So effectively, this boils the bingo fares down to being in the right place at the right time — in front of your computer, with a credit card when the fare goes live. And booking it. Immediately. Were you busy updating your Facebook profile? Reading Ashton Kutcher’s Twitter Feed? Digging through the endless retweet drivel that isn’t relevant to YOUR ticket? Sorry, you missed it.

In the end, its a question of opportunity cost. How well worth your time is it to sit at your desk, reading pages of Twitter junk to sift out your special fare? The forty hours that cumulatively add up over the course of the year could easily be spent, well, working — the output of which would be the money to buy a regularly priced ticket.

What today’s travel consumer needs is a low frequency, high volume alarm, one website that makes a phone call or sends an SMS only when your perfect fare comes up, the red telephone on your desk, so to speak. This phone may only ring once or twice a year, but when it does, you can pick it up and book your dream ticket. And until then? Spend your time reading Ashton’s feed and not blindly pawing around for bingo fares.

Now, who’s willing to make that call?

Southwest apologies to deplaned mom

by Tom Johansmeyer on

Pamela Root, who was kicked off a Southwest Airlines flight Friday, will receive another chance to fly on the airline. She and her son were removed from a San Jose-bound plane when her two-year-old son wouldn’t stop screaming “Go! Plane! Go!” and “I want Daddy!”

In addition to an apology, the airline gave her a refund and a travel voucher for $300. Root had hoped to be compensated for the portable crib and diapers she said she had to buy, but alas, that wasn’t in the cards.

I have to admit, this seems like a tough call. While it’s never easy to boot a paying passenger, you need to balance that against the eardrums of everyone else who shelled out for a ticket. Of course, a bit of compassion for kids (who don’t know any better) is necessary, but that’s little consolation to everyone else.

It looks to me like Southwest made the right call in both parts of this. It removed what was obviously a problem for the other passengers, and it more than compensated Root for the trouble. Southwest is out a few extra bucks for the decision, but that seems to be a small price to pay for the goodwill it earned with the remaining fliers. And, it swiftly apologized and compensated the mom.

Two years in jail for pointing a laser at a plane

by Scott Carmichael on

The “sport” of pointing a laser pointer at a plane is not new – many people have been arrested for the stupid stunt.

Last week was a first though – someone caught pointing their laser at two planes was arrested, and sentenced to two and a half years in jail.

His first target was a United Airlines plane carrying 180 passengers. When the beam hit the cockpit window, the pilot caught it right in the eye, causing “flash blindness”. The second target was an Alaska Airlines jet, this time the pilot was able to duck below a glare shield, but did have to abort a critical turn.

There appears to be no shortage of stupidity in the world, and shining a laser pointer at a jet just reinforces that. I’m not even sure what is going through the mind of someone who thinks this is a fun game.

These planes are carrying a lot of people, and in many cases they are on their final approach, one of the most critical parts of the entire flight. To me, two and a half year is on the short side – but hopefully it’ll still send a message to anyone else who was thinking of messing around with their laser pointer.

%Gallery-76818%

Poll: Have you ever passed up the cheapest airfare to avoid a bad airline?

by Aaron Hotfelder on

People love to complain about the dismal state of air travel these days. Whether it’s the stomach-churning airline food (and there’s so little of it!), the complete lack of leg room, or the fact that your luggage was for some reason routed through Honolulu, we’ve come to expect some pretty poor service from quite a few airlines these days.

In any other industry, customers register their indignation by refusing to spend money at the offending establishment. Found a finger in your Caesar’s Salad? You’re probably never visiting that restaurant again. Tired of your cable cutting out in the middle of House? You just might cancel that company’s service and call up their competitor (who’ll probably even throw in a year of Starz at no extra charge!)

But with airlines, we’re like the pathetic girlfriend who’s been cheated on five times but still believes her boyfriend when he says, “Seriously, this time will be different! I’ve changed!” The worst airlines stay in business because by and large people are willing to put up with crummy service if it means they get a cheap flight.

I mean, imagine you’ve just done a search on Kayak for a flight from San Diego to Boston departing on November 4 and returning on the 15th. The lowest fare shows up as $228, but it’s with an airline that’s burned you in the past. (Let’s call them Cut-Rate Airlines.) This is an airline that’s arrived to its destination late almost half the time you’ve flown with them. They’ve lost your bags twice, and both times they shipped them to you two days later. Their food stinks and the flight attendants have never been especially pleasant either.

Fortunately, there’s an almost identical flight aboard Pleasant Air, a carrier you’ve flown with a dozen times without any problems. But that flight costs $288, sixty dollars more than the flight on Cut-Rate. So what do you do?

I’m interested in this question because as much as people love to complain about airlines, especially those incompetent bastards at [insert bad airline here], I usually find that people prefer the lowest airfare to paying more to fly with an airline with better service.

So, Gadling readers, am I wrong? Can airlines continue to treat their passengers like crap as long as they offer low fares? Make your voice heard in the poll below– or in the Comments.

British Airways flight greeted by hazmat team after 6 passengers faint

by Scott Carmichael on

Here is a sight you don’t want to be greeted by when you land at your destination – upon landing at London Heathrow, an ambulance hazmat team boarded the aircraft to check on the condition of six passengers who had fainted during the flight.

It probably isn’t too uncommon for one passenger to faint after the stress of a long haul flight, but six of them on a single plane usually warrants some kind of emergency response.

Thankfully, the passengers turned out to be fine, and emergency personnel allowed them to continue their journeys.

In this H1N1 panicked environment, it does make sense to be careful of anything out of the ordinary, even though in this case, it was probably one big coincidence.