PLS HELP: use of tickets with connection

[Usuario Invitado]

Please, help me in that question:

Suppose that I am flying Madrid-Milan-Athens, and return
Athens-Milan-Madrid with a low-price ticket, which does not allow any
change or cancellation.

If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid? This is what my travel
agent claims, since according to the company, if I miss the first
flight, I cannot take the second connection…

If that’s right, I imagine following trick:

A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
and get my boarding passes for the two flights. Then I would not take
the first flight in Athens (obviously I would be already in Milan).We
would meet in Milan and my friend would give me the boarding card for
the flight Milan-Madrid, and I would take the plane.
Would in this instance the airline cancel my second boarding card,
because I did not use the first one?

Well, I would appreciate any enlightenment on that subject.

Thanks in advance.

JB

[Mark Hewitt]

"Usuario Invitado" > wrote in message
...
> Please, help me in that question:
>
> If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
> because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
> automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid?

Yes.. Unless (theres always an unless) you are flying with a low cost
carrier or your Milan-Madrid ticket is booked entirely seperately from your
Athens-Milan ticket

> This is what my travel
> agent claims, since according to the company, if I miss the first
> flight, I cannot take the second connection.

It's called hidden city ticketing I believe. Not permitted.

> If that's right, I imagine following trick:
>
> A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
> the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
> and get my boarding passes for the two flights.

How would he make the checkin for you and himself? The checking agent will
want to see you in person, not just your ID!

> Then I would not take
> the first flight in Athens (obviously I would be already in Milan).We
> would meet in Milan and my friend would give me the boarding card for
> the flight Milan-Madrid

He wouldn't be able to obtain the boarding card, you have to be there in
person, with your ID.

> and I would take the plane.
> Would in this instance the airline cancel my second boarding card,
> because I did not use the first one?

Yes. But anyway, you wouldn't be able to get a boarding card.

> Well, I would appreciate any enlightenment on that subject.

My advice would be to book your segments seperately. Book Madrid-Milan
return on one ticket, then book Athens-Milan on another ticket, and if
necessary don't use the return portion of that. You will not be able to have
your baggage checked through or get boarding passes at your origin so make
sure you leave enough time for your connection.

[Thur]

"Usuario Invitado" > wrote s...
> Suppose that I am flying Madrid-Milan-Athens, and return
> Athens-Milan-Madrid with a low-price ticket, which does not allow any
> change or cancellation.
> If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
> because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
> automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid?

Yes.

> If that's right, I imagine following trick:
> A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
> the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
> and get my boarding passes for the two flights.

Doubtful he can get you checked in, because they'll have to see the one who
is travelling in person and make sure the name matches the holder of the
passport. So just for security reasons that would probably not be possible.
Greetz,

*your travelagent was right*

[mrtravel]

Usuario Invitado wrote:
> Please, help me in that question:
>
> Suppose that I am flying Madrid-Milan-Athens, and return
> Athens-Milan-Madrid with a low-price ticket, which does not allow any
> change or cancellation.
>
> If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
> because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
> automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid? This is what my travel
> agent claims, since according to the company, if I miss the first
> flight, I cannot take the second connection…

The agent is correct. This is often discussed at rec.travel.air
>
> If that’s right, I imagine following trick:
>
> A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
> the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
> and get my boarding passes for the two flights. Then I would not take
> the first flight in Athens (obviously I would be already in Milan).We
> would meet in Milan and my friend would give me the boarding card for
> the flight Milan-Madrid, and I would take the plane.
> Would in this instance the airline cancel my second boarding card,
> because I did not use the first one?

Probably, since they would know you didn't actually board the flight.
The process doesn't end when you get a boarding pass. When you get to
the gate and board the plane, you give the agent your pass.
What ID would you be given your friend anyway? Wouldn't the airline be
lookng for a passport here, and wouldn't you need it to check in in Milan?

[Peter L]

Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without actually being
there in person. Just the id won't work. And even if your friend does get
your boarding pass, you'll actually have to board, otherwise the airline
will show one person not boarding.

"Usuario Invitado" > wrote in message
...
> Please, help me in that question:
>
> Suppose that I am flying Madrid-Milan-Athens, and return
> Athens-Milan-Madrid with a low-price ticket, which does not allow any
> change or cancellation.
>
> If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
> because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
> automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid? This is what my travel
> agent claims, since according to the company, if I miss the first
> flight, I cannot take the second connection.
>
> If that's right, I imagine following trick:
>
> A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
> the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
> and get my boarding passes for the two flights. Then I would not take
> the first flight in Athens (obviously I would be already in Milan).We
> would meet in Milan and my friend would give me the boarding card for
> the flight Milan-Madrid, and I would take the plane.
> Would in this instance the airline cancel my second boarding card,
> because I did not use the first one?
>
> Well, I would appreciate any enlightenment on that subject.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> JB
>
>

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
"Peter L" > wrote:

> Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without actually being
> there in person. Just the id won't work. And even if your friend does get
> your boarding pass, you'll actually have to board, otherwise the airline
> will show one person not boarding.

You can with certain airlines* (use automated or web checkin) but
probably not on the OP's airline of choice.

Anyway, how long after not boarding but having checked in would the
airline cancel subsequent flight segments? I don't believe it's all
that fast or immediate.

* At least Alaska/Horizon, Continental, Northwest, Southwest. Probably
American.

[Binyamin Dissen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:05:59 +0200 Usuario Invitado >
wrote:

:>Suppose that I am flying Madrid-Milan-Athens, and return
:>Athens-Milan-Madrid with a low-price ticket, which does not allow any
:>change or cancellation.

:>If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
:>because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
:>automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid? This is what my travel
:>agent claims, since according to the company, if I miss the first
:>flight, I cannot take the second connection…

Typically that is true.

:>If that’s right, I imagine following trick:

:>A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
:>the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
:>and get my boarding passes for the two flights. Then I would not take
:>the first flight in Athens (obviously I would be already in Milan).We
:>would meet in Milan and my friend would give me the boarding card for
:>the flight Milan-Madrid, and I would take the plane.
:>Would in this instance the airline cancel my second boarding card,
:>because I did not use the first one?

Assuming that your friend looks enough like you this should work. Would you be
able to manage a few days without your ID?

To the various airline toadies - no, I do not have an ethical problem with
using just part of a purchased service.

--
Binyamin Dissen >
http://www.dissensoftware.com

[Peter L]

"Binyamin Dissen" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:05:59 +0200 Usuario Invitado
>
> wrote:
>
> :>Suppose that I am flying Madrid-Milan-Athens, and return
> :>Athens-Milan-Madrid with a low-price ticket, which does not allow any
> :>change or cancellation.
>
> :>If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
> :>because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
> :>automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid? This is what my travel
> :>agent claims, since according to the company, if I miss the first
> :>flight, I cannot take the second connection.
>
> Typically that is true.
>
> :>If that's right, I imagine following trick:
>
> :>A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
> :>the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
> :>and get my boarding passes for the two flights. Then I would not take
> :>the first flight in Athens (obviously I would be already in Milan).We
> :>would meet in Milan and my friend would give me the boarding card for
> :>the flight Milan-Madrid, and I would take the plane.
> :>Would in this instance the airline cancel my second boarding card,
> :>because I did not use the first one?
>
> Assuming that your friend looks enough like you this should work. Would
you be
> able to manage a few days without your ID?

See that the OP is talking about international travel, we are probably
talking passport as an ID. I wonder how the OP is planning to use his
passport to go from Greece to Italy and yet have another passport for his
friend to use to get the boarding pass.

>
> To the various airline toadies - no, I do not have an ethical problem with
> using just part of a purchased service.
>
> --
> Binyamin Dissen >
> http://www.dissensoftware.com

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
"Peter L" > wrote:


> See that the OP is talking about international travel, we are probably
> talking passport as an ID. I wonder how the OP is planning to use his
> passport to go from Greece to Italy and yet have another passport for his
> friend to use to get the boarding pass.

both are Schengen treaty countries IIRC. No need for immigration
procedures

[Hatunen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:40:07 +0000 (UTC), "Derek F"
> wrote:

>And when they did their head count on the plane there would be a missing
>passenger.

A missing passenger tends to get an airline very excited. They'll
hold up the plane while they check all the luggage to see if the
missing person checked any luggage and left it for on the plane,
for instance. If it was a through flight making a stop at the
airport tthey may empty the plane and look for any mystery
packages in the overheads and under the seats.

The TV program "Airport", chronicling day to day operations at
Heathrow, had a somewhat nerve-wracking sequence about a missing
passenger who was finally located.


************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

[mrtravel]

Not the Karl Orff wrote:
> In article >,
> "Peter L" > wrote:
>
>
>
>>See that the OP is talking about international travel, we are probably
>>talking passport as an ID. I wonder how the OP is planning to use his
>>passport to go from Greece to Italy and yet have another passport for his
>>friend to use to get the boarding pass.
>
>
> both are Schengen treaty countries IIRC. No need for immigration
> procedures

But, they will probably notice that he is not on the plane.

[Miguel Cruz]

Not the Karl Orff > wrote:
> "Peter L" > wrote:
>> Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without actually being
>> there in person. Just the id won't work. And even if your friend does get
>> your boarding pass, you'll actually have to board, otherwise the airline
>> will show one person not boarding.
>
> You can with certain airlines* (use automated or web checkin) but
> probably not on the OP's airline of choice.

Depends on the airline and airport too.

In Greece, I would not be surprised if they collected the boarding pass
stubs and had them typed into the computer by hand several days later.
Actually I would not be surprised if they just threw them away. Actually I
am surprised every time the plane successfully takes off from ATH (that
said, I like it there).

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
Site remodeled 10-Sept-2003: Hundreds of new photos, easier navigation.

[Jamess]

Well if he's talking about BA then it is immediate because the RES system
(called "RTZ") is linked to the Departure Control System (DCS). The
auto-cancellation occurs (I belive) as soon as the flight is finalised.



"Not the Karl Orff" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Peter L" > wrote:
>
> > Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without actually being
> > there in person. Just the id won't work. And even if your friend does
get
> > your boarding pass, you'll actually have to board, otherwise the airline
> > will show one person not boarding.
>
> You can with certain airlines* (use automated or web checkin) but
> probably not on the OP's airline of choice.
>
> Anyway, how long after not boarding but having checked in would the
> airline cancel subsequent flight segments? I don't believe it's all
> that fast or immediate.
>
> * At least Alaska/Horizon, Continental, Northwest, Southwest. Probably
> American.

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
"Jamess" > wrote:

> Well if he's talking about BA then it is immediate because the RES system
> (called "RTZ") is linked to the Departure Control System (DCS). The
> auto-cancellation occurs (I belive) as soon as the flight is finalised.

Thanks for that tip. I guess any airline that uses a computer system to
track boarding records would be able to do that but I didn;t see tha the
OP was flying to the U.k. on this way between Greece and italy.


I guess AS/QX, QF, AA and NW woulc cancel immediately too as they use
cmputerised pax borading tracking.

[Derek F]

And when they did their head count on the plane there would be a missing
passenger.
Derek.
"Mark Hewitt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Usuario Invitado" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Please, help me in that question:
> >
> > If in the return trip I do not use the ticket from Athens to Milan,
> > because I arrive to Milan by another mean, does the airline
> > automatically cancel my ticket Milan-Madrid?
>
> Yes.. Unless (theres always an unless) you are flying with a low cost
> carrier or your Milan-Madrid ticket is booked entirely seperately from
your
> Athens-Milan ticket
>
> > This is what my travel
> > agent claims, since according to the company, if I miss the first
> > flight, I cannot take the second connection.
>
> It's called hidden city ticketing I believe. Not permitted.
>
> > If that's right, I imagine following trick:
> >
> > A friend, who will fly the same schedule Athens-Milan-Madrid, would make
> > the check-in in Athens for me and for himself (I would give him an ID),
> > and get my boarding passes for the two flights.
>
> How would he make the checkin for you and himself? The checking agent will
> want to see you in person, not just your ID!
>
> > Then I would not take
> > the first flight in Athens (obviously I would be already in Milan).We
> > would meet in Milan and my friend would give me the boarding card for
> > the flight Milan-Madrid
>
> He wouldn't be able to obtain the boarding card, you have to be there in
> person, with your ID.
>
> > and I would take the plane.
> > Would in this instance the airline cancel my second boarding card,
> > because I did not use the first one?
>
> Yes. But anyway, you wouldn't be able to get a boarding card.
>
> > Well, I would appreciate any enlightenment on that subject.
>
> My advice would be to book your segments seperately. Book Madrid-Milan
> return on one ticket, then book Athens-Milan on another ticket, and if
> necessary don't use the return portion of that. You will not be able to
have
> your baggage checked through or get boarding passes at your origin so make
> sure you leave enough time for your connection.
>
>

[Malcolm Weir]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:02:12 GMT, Not the Karl Orff >
wrote:

>In article >,
> "Peter L" > wrote:
>
>> Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without actually being
>> there in person. Just the id won't work. And even if your friend does get
>> your boarding pass, you'll actually have to board, otherwise the airline
>> will show one person not boarding.
>
>You can with certain airlines* (use automated or web checkin) but
>probably not on the OP's airline of choice.

You can't, even with those airlines, on international travel.

Which, last time I checked, makes this point kinda irrelevant...
Madrid, Milan and Athens not being in the same country and all...

>Anyway, how long after not boarding but having checked in would the
>airline cancel subsequent flight segments? I don't believe it's all
>that fast or immediate.
>
>* At least Alaska/Horizon, Continental, Northwest, Southwest. Probably
>American.

Yes on AA (for US domestic only), ditto UA.

Malc.

[Malcolm Weir]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:02:50 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
> wrote:

[ Snip ]

> no, I do not have an ethical problem with
>using just part of a purchased service.

What Mr. Dissen meant to write is:

"I do not have an ethical problem with lying to obtain preferential
pricing when purchasing a service".

Malc.

[Binyamin Dissen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:10:59 -0700 Malcolm Weir > wrote:

:>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:02:50 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
> wrote:

:>> no, I do not have an ethical problem with
:>>using just part of a purchased service.

:>What Mr. Dissen meant to write is:

:>"I do not have an ethical problem with lying to obtain preferential
:>pricing when purchasing a service".

No, Mr. Dissen meant what he wrote: "I do not have an ethical problem with
using just part of a purchased service."

Exactly where is the lying that you assert?

What promises do you typically make during a ticket purchase?

--
Binyamin Dissen >
http://www.dissensoftware.com

[mrtravel]

Binyamin Dissen wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:10:59 -0700 Malcolm Weir > wrote:
>
> :>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:02:50 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
> > wrote:
>
> :>> no, I do not have an ethical problem with
> :>>using just part of a purchased service.
>
> :>What Mr. Dissen meant to write is:
>
> :>"I do not have an ethical problem with lying to obtain preferential
> :>pricing when purchasing a service".
>
> No, Mr. Dissen meant what he wrote: "I do not have an ethical problem with
> using just part of a purchased service."
>
> Exactly where is the lying that you assert?
>
> What promises do you typically make during a ticket purchase?
>

You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
the ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the
order they are booked and that you fly all segments.

[Binyamin Dissen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:08:57 GMT mrtravel > wrote:

:>Binyamin Dissen wrote:

:>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:10:59 -0700 Malcolm Weir > wrote:

:>> :>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:02:50 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
:>> > wrote:

:>> :>> no, I do not have an ethical problem with
:>> :>>using just part of a purchased service.

:>> :>What Mr. Dissen meant to write is:

:>> :>"I do not have an ethical problem with lying to obtain preferential
:>> :>pricing when purchasing a service".

:>> No, Mr. Dissen meant what he wrote: "I do not have an ethical problem with
:>> using just part of a purchased service."

:>> Exactly where is the lying that you assert?

:>> What promises do you typically make during a ticket purchase?

:>You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
:>the ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the
:>order they are booked and that you fly all segments.

I make no such promise. Perhaps you do?

Sometimes I toss the tickets.

--
Binyamin Dissen >
http://www.dissensoftware.com

[Hatunen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:23:56 GMT, "George Greene"
> wrote:

>
>mrtravel > wrote in message news:tXHcb.9506
>> You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
>> the ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the
>> order they are booked and that you fly all segments.
>
>The airline may be agreeing to those rules, but I am NOT agreeing, not
>what how you wish to interpet things

Oh, you are agreeing, at least legally, and it is an enforceable
contract. That fact that you have your fingers crossed when
making the agreement doesn't legally absolve you of the
agreement, nor does the fact that you can frequently get away
with violating the agreement, as when a round trip ticket from At
to C through B costs less than a oneway ticket from A to B, and
you simply toss the rest of the ticket on arriving at B. The
airline's recourse is negligible, whether legally enforceable or
not.

The airline's recourse is not negligible should you wish to use
the ticket from B to C because the RT A to C is cheaper; failure
to show up for the leg from A to B will result in automatic
cancellation of the leg from B to C (as well as the return trip).

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

[Juliana L Holm]

In rec.travel.europe Binyamin Dissen > wrote:
> I make no such promise. Perhaps you do?

Actually, Legally you do, as when you buy a ticket you are buying a
contract of carriage, and by implication accepting the restrictions
associated with the fares. I have no doubt that people get away with
using only part of tickets, but if you do not abide by the contract of
carriage, then the airline has a legal right to refuse you boarding on
a later segment.

> Sometimes I toss the tickets.

I have no problem with this. If you are denied boarding some day because
you tossed an earlier portion of a ticket, though, I would not be shocked.

Julie
> --
> Binyamin Dissen >
> http://www.dissensoftware.com

--
Julie
**********
Check out my Travel Pages (non-commercial) at
http://www.dragonsholm.org/travel.htm

[Miguel Cruz]

mrtravel > wrote:
> Binyamin Dissen wrote:
>> What promises do you typically make during a ticket purchase?
>
> You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought the
> ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the order
> they are booked and that you fly all segments.

It says that he will fly all segments, or otherwise they will cancel any
remaining segments and reserve the right to take other sanctions such as
billing him back.

So long as he accepts those terms, I don't see where he's breaking any
promises.

In a soccer game, if you intentionally kick the ball outside the boundaries,
thus allowing the opposing team a throw-in, have you cheated? No, you've
made a strategic decision within the parameters of the game. Everyone knew
it was a possibility you'd kick it out, and they hedged their bets
accordingly.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
Site remodeled 10-Sept-2003: Hundreds of new photos, easier navigation.

[George Greene]

The airline may be agreeing to those rules, but I am NOT agreeing, not
what how you wish to interpet things

mrtravel > wrote in message news:tXHcb.9506
> You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
> the ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the
> order they are booked and that you fly all segments.
>

[Hatunen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 22:55:38 GMT, "devil" >
wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:35:22 -0600, Hatunen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:23:56 GMT, "George Greene"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>mrtravel > wrote in message news:tXHcb.9506
>>>> You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
>>>> the ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the
>>>> order they are booked and that you fly all segments.
>>>
>>>The airline may be agreeing to those rules, but I am NOT agreeing, not
>>>what how you wish to interpet things
>>
>> Oh, you are agreeing, at least legally, and it is an enforceable
>> contract. That fact that you have your fingers crossed when
>> making the agreement doesn't legally absolve you of the
>> agreement, nor does the fact that you can frequently get away
>> with violating the agreement, as when a round trip ticket from At
>> to C through B costs less than a oneway ticket from A to B, and
>> you simply toss the rest of the ticket on arriving at B. The
>> airline's recourse is negligible, whether legally enforceable or
>> not.
>>
>> The airline's recourse is not negligible should you wish to use
>> the ticket from B to C because the RT A to C is cheaper; failure
>> to show up for the leg from A to B will result in automatic
>> cancellation of the leg from B to C (as well as the return trip).
>
>If the airlines were so sure it is indeed enforceable, surely they would
>try their best to have it tested in court? Until then, I'll take the view
>that these rules are not enforceable, so these parts of the CoC are not
>part of the contract.
>

"Enforceable" doesn't mean "worth enforcing".

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

[Hatunen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:35:24 -0700, "Peter L"
> wrote:

>I am quite sure no one can toss an earlier segment and still have later
>segments honored. But I don't see any ethnical problem with tossing the
>last segment of a ticket.

Only if one is an ethnic.

(I couldn't resist)

I feel pretty much the same but I remain aware that it is a
violation of the contract and therefore bears a taint of lack of
ethics.


************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

[Gary Nichols]

"Miguel Cruz" > wrote in message
...
> mrtravel > wrote:
> > Binyamin Dissen wrote:
> >> What promises do you typically make during a ticket purchase?
> >
> > You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
the
> > ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the order
> > they are booked and that you fly all segments.
>
> It says that he will fly all segments, or otherwise they will cancel any
> remaining segments and reserve the right to take other sanctions such as
> billing him back.
>
> So long as he accepts those terms, I don't see where he's breaking any
> promises.
>
> In a soccer game, if you intentionally kick the ball outside the
boundaries,
> thus allowing the opposing team a throw-in, have you cheated? No, you've
> made a strategic decision within the parameters of the game. Everyone knew
> it was a possibility you'd kick it out, and they hedged their bets
> accordingly.
>
> miguel
> --
> Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
> Site remodeled 10-Sept-2003: Hundreds of new photos, easier navigation.


If the airlines are so stupid as to, for instance, make the one way fare
LAX-MCO cheaper (by a couple of hundred dollars)flying via ATL than the
LAX-ATL fare they have to expect and accept that people will buy the LAX-MCO
ticket and get off in ATL.

It's there own dumb fault.

Gary Nichols

[Peter L]

"Juliana L Holm" > wrote in message
...
> In rec.travel.europe Binyamin Dissen > wrote:
> > I make no such promise. Perhaps you do?
>
> Actually, Legally you do, as when you buy a ticket you are buying a
> contract of carriage, and by implication accepting the restrictions
> associated with the fares. I have no doubt that people get away with
> using only part of tickets, but if you do not abide by the contract of
> carriage, then the airline has a legal right to refuse you boarding on
> a later segment.
>
> > Sometimes I toss the tickets.
>
> I have no problem with this. If you are denied boarding some day because
> you tossed an earlier portion of a ticket, though, I would not be shocked.
>

I am quite sure no one can toss an earlier segment and still have later
segments honored. But I don't see any ethnical problem with tossing the
last segment of a ticket.

> Julie
> > --
> > Binyamin Dissen >
> > http://www.dissensoftware.com
>
> --
> Julie
> **********
> Check out my Travel Pages (non-commercial) at
> http://www.dragonsholm.org/travel.htm

[devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:10:59 -0700, Malcolm Weir wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:02:50 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
> > wrote:
>
> [ Snip ]
>
>> no, I do not have an ethical problem with
>>using just part of a purchased service.
>
> What Mr. Dissen meant to write is:
>
> "I do not have an ethical problem with lying to obtain preferential
> pricing when purchasing a service".


So? Do you think most businesses have a problem with lying to you when
marketing their junk?

The issue is contractual, not ethical, I submit.

[Angela Gilham]

In article >,
Miguel Cruz > wrote:
>Not the Karl Orff > wrote:
>> "Peter L" > wrote:
>>> Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without
>>> actually being there in person. Just the id won't work.
>>> And even if your friend does get your boarding pass, you'll
>>> actually have to board, otherwise the airline will show one
>>> person not boarding.
>>
>> You can with certain airlines* (use automated or web checkin) but
>> probably not on the OP's airline of choice.
>
>Depends on the airline and airport too.
>
>In Greece, I would not be surprised if they collected the boarding
>pass stubs and had them typed into the computer by hand several
>days later. Actually I would not be surprised if they just threw
>them away. Actually I am surprised every time the plane successfully
>takes off from ATH (that said, I like it there).

At one of the little island airports you might just get away with it.
Having travelled through ATH in June I would be very surprised if
anybody did . . . Elefteros Venizelos is pretty much the newest
airport in the world and the information systems looked very much
up to snuff.

More to the point, asking somebody else to impersonate you at the
check-in for an international flight is asking for you and they
to spend the next seven years or so working out how awful prison
cooking can be. In the current security climate, any kind of
identity fraud is just not a avery good idea.

Ang

[devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:35:22 -0600, Hatunen wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:23:56 GMT, "George Greene"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>mrtravel > wrote in message news:tXHcb.9506
>>> You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
>>> the ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the
>>> order they are booked and that you fly all segments.
>>
>>The airline may be agreeing to those rules, but I am NOT agreeing, not
>>what how you wish to interpet things
>
> Oh, you are agreeing, at least legally, and it is an enforceable
> contract. That fact that you have your fingers crossed when
> making the agreement doesn't legally absolve you of the
> agreement, nor does the fact that you can frequently get away
> with violating the agreement, as when a round trip ticket from At
> to C through B costs less than a oneway ticket from A to B, and
> you simply toss the rest of the ticket on arriving at B. The
> airline's recourse is negligible, whether legally enforceable or
> not.
>
> The airline's recourse is not negligible should you wish to use
> the ticket from B to C because the RT A to C is cheaper; failure
> to show up for the leg from A to B will result in automatic
> cancellation of the leg from B to C (as well as the return trip).

If the airlines were so sure it is indeed enforceable, surely they would
try their best to have it tested in court? Until then, I'll take the view
that these rules are not enforceable, so these parts of the CoC are not
part of the contract.

[mrtravel]

devil wrote:

> If the airlines were so sure it is indeed enforceable, surely they would
> try their best to have it tested in court? Until then, I'll take the view
> that these rules are not enforceable, so these parts of the CoC are not
> part of the contract.
>


They have been tested in court.
Try this sometime.

1. Buy a round trip ticket SFO-ORD-MIA-ORD-SFO
2. Skip the SFO-ORD flight
3. Try boarding in ORD for the flight to MIA

So, if they don't let you board, are you going to sue?

They have already won, in court, against travel agents that have sold
tickets to avoid ticketing rules.

[devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:02:54 +0000, mrtravel wrote:

> devil wrote:
>
>> If the airlines were so sure it is indeed enforceable, surely they would
>> try their best to have it tested in court? Until then, I'll take the view
>> that these rules are not enforceable, so these parts of the CoC are not
>> part of the contract.
>>
>
>
> They have been tested in court.
> Try this sometime.
>
> 1. Buy a round trip ticket SFO-ORD-MIA-ORD-SFO
> 2. Skip the SFO-ORD flight
> 3. Try boarding in ORD for the flight to MIA
>
> So, if they don't let you board, are you going to sue?

This is not testing in court. In situations where you would have to go to
court, they win; when the situation would be for them to go to court, you
win. Isn't that fair, BTW? :-)

> They have already won, in court, against travel agents that have sold
> tickets to avoid ticketing rules.

Sure. But that's a very different issue. Different contract. The TA is
the agent of the airline, and as such he is under contractual obligation
to the airline to enforce their rules regardless of whether they would
stand in court, against the customer.

[devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:20:03 -0600, Hatunen wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 22:55:38 GMT, "devil" >
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:35:22 -0600, Hatunen wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:23:56 GMT, "George Greene"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>mrtravel > wrote in message news:tXHcb.9506
>>>>> You and the airline agree to the rules regarding the tariff you bought
>>>>> the ticket under. These rules state that you fly the segments in the
>>>>> order they are booked and that you fly all segments.
>>>>
>>>>The airline may be agreeing to those rules, but I am NOT agreeing, not
>>>>what how you wish to interpet things
>>>
>>> Oh, you are agreeing, at least legally, and it is an enforceable
>>> contract. That fact that you have your fingers crossed when
>>> making the agreement doesn't legally absolve you of the
>>> agreement, nor does the fact that you can frequently get away
>>> with violating the agreement, as when a round trip ticket from At
>>> to C through B costs less than a oneway ticket from A to B, and
>>> you simply toss the rest of the ticket on arriving at B. The
>>> airline's recourse is negligible, whether legally enforceable or
>>> not.
>>>
>>> The airline's recourse is not negligible should you wish to use
>>> the ticket from B to C because the RT A to C is cheaper; failure
>>> to show up for the leg from A to B will result in automatic
>>> cancellation of the leg from B to C (as well as the return trip).
>>
>>If the airlines were so sure it is indeed enforceable, surely they would
>>try their best to have it tested in court? Until then, I'll take the view
>>that these rules are not enforceable, so these parts of the CoC are not
>>part of the contract.
>>
>
> "Enforceable" doesn't mean "worth enforcing".

Sure.

Except, in the current case, surely these rules would be worth enforcing,
I would think.

They do go to court against TAs, against whom they have a strong case
since the TAs are their agents. So, seems like they think it's worth
enforcing, doesn't it?

[devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:22:39 -0600, Hatunen wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:35:24 -0700, "Peter L"
> > wrote:
>
>>I am quite sure no one can toss an earlier segment and still have later
>>segments honored. But I don't see any ethnical problem with tossing the
>>last segment of a ticket.
>
> Only if one is an ethnic.
>
> (I couldn't resist)
>
> I feel pretty much the same but I remain aware that it is a
> violation of the contract and therefore bears a taint of lack of
> ethics.

Violation of the letter of the contract. But when the "contract" is pure
blackmail (i.e., "these are my rules, if you don't like them, go get
lost"), I would expect the courts would tend to be sympathetic to the
small guy. At least if there is some ground for interpretation.

[mrtravel]

devil wrote:
>
>
> Violation of the letter of the contract. But when the "contract" is pure
> blackmail (i.e., "these are my rules, if you don't like them, go get
> lost"), I would expect the courts would tend to be sympathetic to the
> small guy. At least if there is some ground for interpretation.

They don't say "if you don't like them, get lost".
They say "if you want a discounted ticket, you agree to these restrictions".

They don't force you to buy a discounted ticket.

[Deirdre Saoirse Moen]

In article >, mrtravel
> wrote:

> They have been tested in court.
> Try this sometime.
>
> 1. Buy a round trip ticket SFO-ORD-MIA-ORD-SFO
> 2. Skip the SFO-ORD flight
> 3. Try boarding in ORD for the flight to MIA

Actually, I have done some variant on this. I had a ticket SFO-PIT-LBE-PIT-SFO.

When I arrived in Latrobe, I found that I'd have to be in the airport
before cabs were running and I had no way to get to the airport! I
couldn't take a later flight or I'd have missed my long flight back home.

So I called US Air, explained the situation, and they allowed me to skip
that leg without a change fee and without cancelling my later segment.
Then again, I asked ahead of time, I didn't just skip the flight.

--
_Deirdre http://deirdre.net
"Dogs may have kept us company on the hunt, but it was the cats who
insisted we invent houses and discover fire." -- Khiem Tran

[mrtravel]

Gary Nichols wrote:

> If the airlines are so stupid as to, for instance, make the one way fare
> LAX-MCO cheaper (by a couple of hundred dollars)flying via ATL than the
> LAX-ATL fare they have to expect and accept that people will buy the LAX-MCO
> ticket and get off in ATL.
>
> It's there own dumb fault.

Fine, but most people buy round trip tickets.. Then we will see who the
"stupid" party is when they try to catch the return flight from Atlanta
to LAX when they didn't fly the Orlando to Atlanta leg.

This is actually similar to the way other things are priced.
Gas prices in well to do areas tend to be higher than not so affluent
neighborhoods. The difference is not just due to real estate prices. It
is due to the willingless of the higher income people to pay more money.

So, when the airlines due it, it could be related to different things,
but in this case let's assume competition. There could be more
ocmpetition on the LAX-MCO route, than LAX-ATL, so the fare is lower.

[Hatunen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:28:42 GMT, "devil" >
wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:22:39 -0600, Hatunen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:35:24 -0700, "Peter L"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>I am quite sure no one can toss an earlier segment and still have later
>>>segments honored. But I don't see any ethnical problem with tossing the
>>>last segment of a ticket.
>>
>> Only if one is an ethnic.
>>
>> (I couldn't resist)
>>
>> I feel pretty much the same but I remain aware that it is a
>> violation of the contract and therefore bears a taint of lack of
>> ethics.
>
>Violation of the letter of the contract. But when the "contract" is pure
>blackmail (i.e., "these are my rules, if you don't like them, go get
>lost"), I would expect the courts would tend to be sympathetic to the
>small guy. At least if there is some ground for interpretation.

I'm not disagreeing with you. And, for that matter, you're not
disagreeing with me.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

[devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:55:47 +0000, mrtravel wrote:

> devil wrote:
>>
>>
>> Violation of the letter of the contract. But when the "contract" is pure
>> blackmail (i.e., "these are my rules, if you don't like them, go get
>> lost"), I would expect the courts would tend to be sympathetic to the
>> small guy. At least if there is some ground for interpretation.
>
> They don't say "if you don't like them, get lost".
> They say "if you want a discounted ticket, you agree to these restrictions".
>
> They don't force you to buy a discounted ticket.

But that's not my point. They impose *their* rules on you. And these
rules are an artificial construct strictly for the sake of market
segmentation.

With a few exceptions, it's not that the rules make it cheaper for them to
bring you there, it's merely that they expect you'll be prepared to pay
more.

Such as, if it comes from a business account, then we are dealing with
deeper pockets and we should be able to grab more. So let's invent
artificial rules that will allow us to do that.

(Mind you, I am not advocating low fare airlines. I am actually willing
to pay more for better service. But grabbing more money simply on the
basis that you'll pay is something else. The business model increasingly
looks like it's flawed.)

[Roland Perry]

In message >, mrtravel
> writes
>1. Buy a round trip ticket SFO-ORD-MIA-ORD-SFO
>2. Skip the SFO-ORD flight
>3. Try boarding in ORD for the flight to MIA
>
>So, if they don't let you board, are you going to sue?

I would get extremely cross if, for example, my appointment in MIA was
cancelled while I was en-route, and I decided to overnight in ORD rather
than suffer what would amount to "false imprisonment" in flying to MIA
and back for no reason.
--
Roland Perry

[mrtravel]

Roland Perry wrote:

> In message >, mrtravel
> > writes
>
>> 1. Buy a round trip ticket SFO-ORD-MIA-ORD-SFO
>> 2. Skip the SFO-ORD flight
>> 3. Try boarding in ORD for the flight to MIA
>>
>> So, if they don't let you board, are you going to sue?
>
>
> I would get extremely cross if, for example, my appointment in MIA was
> cancelled while I was en-route, and I decided to overnight in ORD rather
> than suffer what would amount to "false imprisonment" in flying to MIA
> and back for no reason.

It's not "false imprisonment". If you chose to not follow the rules of
the ticket, the ticket becomes invalid and you are free to buy another
one. Follow the contract or face the penalties. It's like working. It's
not "false imprisonment" if you don't want to leave because you will
lose financially if you do.

[DALing]

and usually if you explain that (example), they will accommodate you

"Roland Perry" > wrote in message
...
> In message >, mrtravel
> > writes
> >1. Buy a round trip ticket SFO-ORD-MIA-ORD-SFO
> >2. Skip the SFO-ORD flight
> >3. Try boarding in ORD for the flight to MIA
> >
> >So, if they don't let you board, are you going to sue?
>
> I would get extremely cross if, for example, my appointment in MIA was
> cancelled while I was en-route, and I decided to overnight in ORD rather
> than suffer what would amount to "false imprisonment" in flying to MIA
> and back for no reason.
> --
> Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message >, mrtravel
> writes
>If you chose to not follow the rules of the ticket, the ticket becomes
>invalid and you are free to buy another one. Follow the contract or
>face the penalties.

It's totally bizarre that the airline would want to incur the
unnecessary extra cost of flying me.
--
Roland Perry

[Binyamin Dissen]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 21:10:56 +0100 Roland Perry > wrote:

:>In message >, mrtravel
> writes

:>>If you chose to not follow the rules of the ticket, the ticket becomes
:>>invalid and you are free to buy another one. Follow the contract or
:>>face the penalties.

:>It's totally bizarre that the airline would want to incur the
:>unnecessary extra cost of flying me.

Several years ago I had a VUSA (on American I believe) where my appointment in
San Francisco was canceled (I was in Chicago). I rescheduled the flights so
that I arrived in the afternoon and flew out that night. I wanted to see the
city and I wanted the FF miles.

--
Binyamin Dissen >
http://www.dissensoftware.com

[Marcos Woehrmann]

In article >,
Malcolm Weir > wrote:
>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:02:12 GMT, Not the Karl Orff >
>wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> "Peter L" > wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without actually being
>>> there in person. Just the id won't work. And even if your friend does get
>>> your boarding pass, you'll actually have to board, otherwise the airline
>>> will show one person not boarding.
>>
>>You can with certain airlines* (use automated or web checkin) but
>>probably not on the OP's airline of choice.
>
>You can't, even with those airlines, on international travel.

Alaska has ticket machines in SJD (San Jose del Cabo in Mexico)
which issue boarding passes for flights to the US. Or is Mexico->US
not considered international?

marcos

--
Marcos H. Woehrmann | | http://www.panix.com/~marcos
"I thought you didn't like talking to people?"
"I don't like talking to people I know, but strangers I have no
problem with." - Curb Your Enthusiasm

[me]

Hatunen > wrote in message >...
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:35:24 -0700, "Peter L"
> > wrote:
>
> >I am quite sure no one can toss an earlier segment and still have later
> >segments honored. But I don't see any ethnical problem with tossing the
> >last segment of a ticket.
>
> Only if one is an ethnic.
>
> (I couldn't resist)
>
> I feel pretty much the same but I remain aware that it is a
> violation of the contract and therefore bears a taint of lack of
> ethics.


"violating" contracts is not unethical. It ain't illegal either.
There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
businesses do it all the time, and frequently have the terms and
conditions of doing so written right into the contracts themselves.
What is "unethical" about this is, and is in business as well,
is entering into the contract with the intention of violating it.
I think the usual expression is "good faith effort". I think,
IIRC, that entering a contract with no intent of executing a "good
faith effort" to comply with it _IS_ illegal.

[Dick Locke]

On 29 Sep 2003 05:18:54 -0700, (me) wrote:

> "violating" contracts is not unethical. It ain't illegal either.
>There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
>businesses do it all the time

Bravo...I've been fuming all weekend after reading an article that
said that Californians must pay high energy costs for 10 years because
the state signed a contract during a shortage. WTF?

[mrtravel]

Dick Locke wrote:

> On 29 Sep 2003 05:18:54 -0700, (me) wrote:
>
>
>>"violating" contracts is not unethical. It ain't illegal either.
>>There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
>>businesses do it all the time
>
>
> Bravo...I've been fuming all weekend after reading an article that
> said that Californians must pay high energy costs for 10 years because
> the state signed a contract during a shortage. WTF?

Maybe it was a 10 year contract.

[Hatunen]

On 29 Sep 2003 05:18:54 -0700, (me)
wrote:

>Hatunen > wrote in message >...
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:35:24 -0700, "Peter L"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >I am quite sure no one can toss an earlier segment and still have later
>> >segments honored. But I don't see any ethnical problem with tossing the
>> >last segment of a ticket.
>>
>> Only if one is an ethnic.
>>
>> (I couldn't resist)
>>
>> I feel pretty much the same but I remain aware that it is a
>> violation of the contract and therefore bears a taint of lack of
>> ethics.
>
>
> "violating" contracts is not unethical. It ain't illegal either.

Not in the sense of being a violation of criminal law. Wheterh
"illegal" is the proper term for violating a contract I leave to
philosophers.

>There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
>businesses do it all the time, and frequently have the terms and
>conditions of doing so written right into the contracts themselves.

Um. If the terms and conditions for violating the contract are
written into the contract, then it isn't a violation at all to
exercise them.

>What is "unethical" about this is, and is in business as well,
>is entering into the contract with the intention of violating it.

Sure. And so is deciding after the fact that you didn't really
mean it when you signed the contract.

>I think the usual expression is "good faith effort". I think,
>IIRC, that entering a contract with no intent of executing a "good
>faith effort" to comply with it _IS_ illegal.

It can be fraud, civil or criminal.


************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

[Dick Locke]

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:17:50 GMT, mrtravel >
wrote:

>
>
>Dick Locke wrote:
>
>> On 29 Sep 2003 05:18:54 -0700, (me) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"violating" contracts is not unethical. It ain't illegal either.
>>>There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
>>>businesses do it all the time
>>
>>
>> Bravo...I've been fuming all weekend after reading an article that
>> said that Californians must pay high energy costs for 10 years because
>> the state signed a contract during a shortage. WTF?
>
>Maybe it was a 10 year contract.

I think it was. It was a signed under duress without full knowledge of
the shenanigans uncovered at Enron and a few other places. It deserves
to be, ah, "terminated." I hate to say it because I don't like the
recall, but the current admin in Sacramento doesn't seem to have the
energy to do that.

If the state abrogated the contract, I doubt the energy companies
would have much in the way of damages to claim. Courts are
historically reluctant to asses damages just on the basis of "you
didn't buy as much as you said you would."

[Binyamin Dissen]

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 00:45:12 GMT Dick Locke > wrote:

:>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:17:50 GMT, mrtravel >
:>wrote:

:>>Dick Locke wrote:

:>>> On 29 Sep 2003 05:18:54 -0700, (me) wrote:

:>>>>"violating" contracts is not unethical. It ain't illegal either.
:>>>>There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
:>>>>businesses do it all the time

:>>> Bravo...I've been fuming all weekend after reading an article that
:>>> said that Californians must pay high energy costs for 10 years because
:>>> the state signed a contract during a shortage. WTF?

:>>Maybe it was a 10 year contract.

:>I think it was. It was a signed under duress without full knowledge of
:>the shenanigans uncovered at Enron and a few other places.

Unless the contract was signed with "Enron and a few other places" the
statement is irrelevant.

:> It deserves
:>to be, ah, "terminated." I hate to say it because I don't like the
:>recall, but the current admin in Sacramento doesn't seem to have the
:>energy to do that.

Why?

The State of CA was free to sign a shorter term contract or buy on the spot
market.

:>If the state abrogated the contract, I doubt the energy companies
:>would have much in the way of damages to claim. Courts are
:>historically reluctant to asses damages just on the basis of "you
:>didn't buy as much as you said you would."

Huh?

Foobars for sale.

1-10 25/each
10-100 20/each
100-1000 18/each
etc.

You make a contract to purchase 900 at $18/each, and when the spot price drops
decide to stop after purchasing five.

No court would support paying $90 in place of the $125 because 'Courts are
historically reluctant to asses damages just on the basis of "you didn't buy
as much as you said you would."'

--
Binyamin Dissen >
http://www.dissensoftware.com

[mrtravel]

Binyamin Dissen wrote:

>>
> The State of CA was free to sign a shorter term contract or buy on the spot
> market.
>

At the time, they were stuck. The problem at the time was the spot market.

> :>If the state abrogated the contract, I doubt the energy companies
> :>would have much in the way of damages to claim. Courts are
> :>historically reluctant to asses damages just on the basis of "you
> :>didn't buy as much as you said you would."
>
> Huh?
>
> Foobars for sale.
>
> 1-10 25/each
> 10-100 20/each
> 100-1000 18/each
> etc.
>
> You make a contract to purchase 900 at $18/each, and when the spot price drops
> decide to stop after purchasing five.

Agree with that. If you agree to buy a certain amoutn to get a discount,
I don't see why the court wouldn't award damages if you didn't buy the
required amount.

[Binyamin Dissen]

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 07:30:59 GMT mrtravel > wrote:

:>Binyamin Dissen wrote:

:>> The State of CA was free to sign a shorter term contract or buy on the spot
:>> market.

:>At the time, they were stuck. The problem at the time was the spot market.

The price on the spot market was quite a bit higher than the price for a ten
year contract (with minimums and maximums each year).

They chose to sign a long term contract to get a lower unit price.

:>> :>If the state abrogated the contract, I doubt the energy companies
:>> :>would have much in the way of damages to claim. Courts are
:>> :>historically reluctant to asses damages just on the basis of "you
:>> :>didn't buy as much as you said you would."

:>> Huh?

:>> Foobars for sale.

:>> 1-10 25/each
:>> 10-100 20/each
:>> 100-1000 18/each
:>> etc.

:>> You make a contract to purchase 900 at $18/each, and when the spot price drops
:>> decide to stop after purchasing five.

:>Agree with that. If you agree to buy a certain amoutn to get a discount,
:>I don't see why the court wouldn't award damages if you didn't buy the
:>required amount.

--
Binyamin Dissen >
http://www.dissensoftware.com

[me]

Hatunen > wrote in message >...
> On 29 Sep 2003 05:18:54 -0700, (me)
> wrote:
[snip]
> >There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
> >businesses do it all the time, and frequently have the terms and
> >conditions of doing so written right into the contracts themselves.
>
> Um. If the terms and conditions for violating the contract are
> written into the contract, then it isn't a violation at all to
> exercise them.
[snip]

This is dangerous because it is about predominately state law,
which varies widely, not to mention contract law isn't anywhere
uniform internationally. However, just because issues of contract
violation are written into a contract doesn't change the fact
that it can be violated. Violating a contract allows the offended
party to pursue several lines of redress. Indicating which ones
will be pursued, and agreeing to them in advance, can help avoid
the courts involvement, but the legal rights of the offended are
still intact.

[Dick Locke]

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:55:25 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
> wrote:

>Huh?
>
>Foobars for sale.
>
>1-10 25/each
>10-100 20/each
>100-1000 18/each
>etc.
>
>You make a contract to purchase 900 at $18/each, and when the spot price drops
>decide to stop after purchasing five.
>
>No court would support paying $90 in place of the $125 because 'Courts are
>historically reluctant to asses damages just on the basis of "you didn't buy
>as much as you said you would."'

This happens all the time, usually not due to market prices dropping
but due to the buyer's organization not selling what they expected.

You are right that the seller would probably have a good claim for the
$35 difference. However, the seller would usually not have a decent
claim for the profit on 882 more foobars and there is almost no chance
the buyer would be forced to buy them.

There could be an problem if the buyer requested the seller to put in
a new foobar production line, but most smart buyers and sellers would
cover that issue in the sales agreement and not include it in the
price of the foobars.



So, the buyer can and should figure out the cost of following the
contract versus the cost of breaking the contract, getting a lower
price and paying for some damages. In the case of state contracting, I
think it's the state's fiduciary obligationto its citizens to do this.

The only time I think this is unethical is if the buyer intended to
break the contract all along and either assumed the seller woud not
sue or made a ridiculous defense against the suit.

In this particular case, there could probably be a defense against the
claim on the real equvalent of the $35 also. Yes, the behavior of
Enron and others is relevant.

[Hatunen]

On 30 Sep 2003 04:57:01 -0700, (me)
wrote:

>Hatunen > wrote in message >...
>> On 29 Sep 2003 05:18:54 -0700, (me)
>> wrote:
>[snip]
>> >There are consequences, and it isn't always a really good idea, but
>> >businesses do it all the time, and frequently have the terms and
>> >conditions of doing so written right into the contracts themselves.
>>
>> Um. If the terms and conditions for violating the contract are
>> written into the contract, then it isn't a violation at all to
>> exercise them.
>[snip]
>
> This is dangerous because it is about predominately state law,
>which varies widely, not to mention contract law isn't anywhere
>uniform internationally. However, just because issues of contract
>violation are written into a contract doesn't change the fact
>that it can be violated. Violating a contract allows the offended
>party to pursue several lines of redress. Indicating which ones
>will be pursued, and agreeing to them in advance, can help avoid
>the courts involvement, but the legal rights of the offended are
>still intact.

ou may need to be a little clearere about what you meant by the
terms of violation being written tinto the contract. It sounds
like you mean the remedy for party A is written into the contract
should party B violate it. Very ambiguous, as is almost anything
written about contract law.



************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
(Marcos Woehrmann) wrote:


> Alaska has ticket machines in SJD (San Jose del Cabo in Mexico)
> which issue boarding passes for flights to the US. Or is Mexico->US
> not considered international?

You can use the kiosks to get boarding passes for non-U.S. flights on
Alaska/Horizon. You can't, however, check in for international flights
on the internet and print your own boarding pass

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
Malcolm Weir > wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:02:12 GMT, Not the Karl Orff >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > "Peter L" > wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry don't work. You can't get a boarding pass without actually being
> >> there in person. Just the id won't work. And even if your friend does get
> >> your boarding pass, you'll actually have to board, otherwise the airline
> >> will show one person not boarding.
> >
> >You can with certain airlines* (use automated or web checkin) but
> >probably not on the OP's airline of choice.
>
> You can't, even with those airlines, on international travel.

Not too sure which airlines we're talking about now but the only airline
that I know for certain will allow web checkin for international flights
is Northwest. You can checkin on the web for most NW-operated flights
from anywhere to anywhere.

Still not applicable to the OP's situation.

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
AJC > wrote:


> KL, BA, SQ allow web check-in for international flights.

Sorry, I meant to say, "and PRINT your boarding pass". I can fly NW and
not have to deal with an airline agent or deal with airline machinery
until I get to the gate!

BA doesn't allow for printing your own BP. You still have to pick up
your BP. Not sure what SQ ffers.

I thik KL's web checkin is limited to certain points of origin for now

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
AJC > wrote:

> On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 14:41:32 GMT, Not the Karl Orff >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > AJC > wrote:
> >
> >
> >> KL, BA, SQ allow web check-in for international flights.
> >
> >Sorry, I meant to say, "and PRINT your boarding pass". I can fly NW and
> >not have to deal with an airline agent or deal with airline machinery
> >until I get to the gate!
> >
>
> Ah yes, that is different. Are the NW boarding passes printed with bar
> codes?

yes. Rather nice. However, if you are flying from Asia, they only let
you checkin and print 4 hours in advance (or that was the case when they
first extended this to Asia a few months ago). Not much good for a 6 am
flight! You can even web checkin for KLM flights from the U.S. and
parts of Canada except Toronto.

BTW, it appear as that you can't check in by web and print your BP if
originating in Europe.

[Not the Karl Orff]

In article >,
AJC > wrote:


> Well I've never seen bar code reading machines at gates in Europe,
> only in the US. Of course they could enter the details manually but
> wouldn't want too many of those. Departing AMS you can now check in at

I can't remember when I last flew NW from Europe in 2001 (AMS) but
looking at it, you can web checkin from FRA, LGW, AMS and CDG for n/s
flights to the U.S. More European airports are supposed to be added
this year.

> the web site from 30 hours before departure, currently only for hand
> luggage only, but I was in the airport on Sunday and saw some work
> going on where they are installing some new machines for passengers
> with luggage. Hopefully we can then check-in on-line and do whatever
> with the luggage at the machine.

It'd be nice if KL (and a good many of the other airlines) adopts some
of the stuff that NW has developed.

here's an illustrated process including sample BP:

http://www.nwa.com/checkin/

[Sjoerd]

"AJC" > schreef in bericht
...
>
> KL has always been rather conservative, though they tend to update
> infrequently but in large steps. Their booking/ticketing procedure was
> rather outdated then was upgraded to be one of the best, imo. Booking
> is now very user friendly and the e-ticket receipt arrives as a .pdf
> within seconds. Their check-in/boarding pass machines at AMS are also
> one of the few types I have seen that will work on a passport as well
> as FF and credit card.

I have never got them to work for me. Not with my FF card, not with a
passport. I tried 3 or 4 times, never worked, went to manual check-in, asked
the agent what was wrong, he/she would say something along the lines of
"half the time those machines don't work", and ever since I check-in in the
old fashioned way.
Much nicer actually to have some human to human interaction.

Sjoerd