More on the fuel-dump


Last night's post was quick as it happened as I was on my way to bed.  Now, that said it is interesting that Airfarewatchdog has not only censored all the comments on their blog but also on their Facebook fan page.   I'm a firm believer when an organization or individual censors things said about them, they have something to hide.   No matter how good you are, you will always have negative press.  By hiding negative press you're admitting your fault and guilt instead of defending yourself.

Am I bummed that the fuel dump is gone?  Absolutely.  Am I surprised?  No, it was only a matter of time.

The fuel dump has been there for years and it will be missed.  As others have said, it is surprising how quickly it was fixed, perhaps this means a fix was in the works?  

Many have asked why it wasn't fixed sooner, an answer we likely will never have.  One can guess that the small number of people using it wasn't impacting the bottom line and in many cases generating extra revenue.  I can think of a few people who took trips they wouldn't otherwise take because of the fuel dump.  So, as an airline, is it better to have a seat fly empty or one that didn't have a fuel surcharge? 

On twitter, the einsteins at AFWD asked us: "Do you really think it's ethical to cheat airlines out of revenue considering how many billions they're losing?"  To them I point out a few things.

  1. Is it better for an airline to have an empty seat then a seat that has the fuel surchage removed?
  2. In your post, you encouraged throw-away ticketing, something the airlines frown upon.  By encouraging this behavior, how are you being ethical in promoting to consumers they engage in this practice
  3. Many people used this legitimately without engaging in throw-away ticketing.  In these cases, what is unethical?  An individual purchases a ticket, pays a price and flies all the segments.   Some folks didn't even know that the fuel surcharge has been dropped.

Personally, as a consumer, I would seriously question the validity of the information AFWD provides.  If they encouraged a frowned-upon (some airlines would call it illegal) practice, how much can you trust their information?

Between the questionable information they provided and their excessive censoring, i find them to be a useless entity.  Between them and their main competitor, Farecompare, i've always found the latter to be far more useful.



I'll post about this later too, but I'm really POed.

I took the sidetrips to YVR.

How dare AFWD lecture us.

Fozz March 30, 2010 at 01:16 pm

@Matthew: I know how you feel. At this point, AFWD is just attempting to save themselves after screwing the pooch royally, hence the lecturing. Though there is a certain amount of irony in their attempts to lecutre us when they themselves were promoting questionable behavior.

Mike March 30, 2010 at 01:19 pm

Although AFWD has deleted their post - it is still in the Google Cache

Mile-R March 30, 2010 at 01:44 pm

So let me get this straight -- these guys publish and tout something that they consider to be a useful bit of information. The airline responds by pulling it and AFWD does an about face, claiming that it's unethical and removing any and all references and criticism regarding it from its site? Sorry, AFWD -- that doesn't pass the sniff test. There was a pretty big disclaimer in your now-removed article You clearly knew what you were doing. Now you're just trying to cover your tracks. Shame on you.

Gray March 31, 2010 at 01:58 pm

Even our friend Chris Elliot has encouraged throwaway ticketing. Sigh.

Made some of my best MRs with the ol' FD.

Oliver April 1, 2010 at 02:50 am

Of course the argument that a fuel-dump-filled seat is better than an empty seat assumes that the seat would have gone empty otherwise. Given how full many flights these days are, is that always a valid assumption?