BA Back to Back tickets

In message <l71m101rhdsm3ksn0m62mf6vn4q1qf4ti4@>, Malcolm Weir
<malc@gelt.org> writes

>>>*Sigh* Who determines the fare? Is it (a) you, or (b) the airline?
>>
>>The airline, based on me telling them what they ask about.
>
>Now, now, Roland. The answer is the airline.
>
>Not the airline based on what you choose to tell them.

Ah, the famous mind-reading airline. They determine the fare based on
things I've not told them.

--
Roland Perry

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 02:02:11 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <l71m101rhdsm3ksn0m62mf6vn4q1qf4ti4@>, Malcolm Weir
><malc@gelt.org> writes
>
>>>>*Sigh* Who determines the fare? Is it (a) you, or (b) the airline?
>>>
>>>The airline, based on me telling them what they ask about.
>>
>>Now, now, Roland. The answer is the airline.
>>
>>Not the airline based on what you choose to tell them.
>
>Ah, the famous mind-reading airline. They determine the fare based on
>things I've not told them.

All birds are not, in fact, penguins!

You are making a logical of assuming the inverse.

The airline determines the fare.

You, obviously, have input into the process. But "things you tell
them" is not the *only* input into the process.

The correct version of your statement would be something like "The
airline, based on a number of factors including but not limited to
what you tell them, which is a subset of things they ask about".

Malc.

In message <e4dt109kualmsce7n58llksvu480tmpei5@>, Malcolm Weir
<malc@gelt.org> writes
>The correct version of your statement would be something like "The
>airline, based on a number of factors including but not limited to
>what you tell them, which is a subset of things they ask about".

I always tell them everything they ask about.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 22:43:44 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <e4dt109kualmsce7n58llksvu480tmpei5@>, Malcolm Weir
><malc@gelt.org> writes
>>The correct version of your statement would be something like "The
>>airline, based on a number of factors including but not limited to
>>what you tell them, which is a subset of things they ask about".
>
>I always tell them everything they ask about.

Which part of "including but not limited to what you tell them, which
is a subset of things they ask about" is confusing you?

Malc.

In message <la3020pd3d6m2s59fesgqh35n6ho0ppp6e@>, Malcolm Weir
<malc@gelt.org> writes
>Which part of "including but not limited to what you tell them, which
>is a subset of things they ask about" is confusing you?

None of it. I can't tell them something they don't ask about.

(hint: there is no free-form entry on the booking site for "anything
else you want to tell us about".)
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:48:14 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <la3020pd3d6m2s59fesgqh35n6ho0ppp6e@>, Malcolm Weir
><malc@gelt.org> writes
>>Which part of "including but not limited to what you tell them, which
>>is a subset of things they ask about" is confusing you?
>
>None of it. I can't tell them something they don't ask about.

Yes, you can.

Are you trying to pretend, in your increasingly desperate and
ludicrous thrashing around, that it's somehow impossible for you to
volunteer information?

>(hint: there is no free-form entry on the booking site for "anything
>else you want to tell us about".)

Hint: not all tickets can be purchased from a booking site, and not
all tickets purchased from a booking site are valid.

Clue: whether or not you can do something on a booking site is
evidence of nothing except what you can do on that booking site.

Extra Clue: Telephones. An invention by which one contacts people.

Malc.

In message <k1e020tdlfnm71o7cjpc4vppjc217cali1@>, Malcolm Weir
<malc@gelt.org> writes

>Now you are reduced to claiming that circle trips are round the world
>trips. Round the world trips are called... "round the world trips".

Circle trips are routes where you travel from your start around a series
of destinations, which don't repeat. And as I said *typically* round the
world trips. Few people travel (eg) London > Paris > Berlin > London on
one ticket. It's simply a rare thing to happen.

>>The other 99.9% of airline travel is from home to a destination [maybe
>>over several legs] <pause> destination to home [usually over the same
>>legs in reverse].
>
>So people don't fly from home to point A to point B to home?

Not very often, no. (And as such a trip is entirely irrelevant to
back-to-back ticketing, can you try to explain why you are niggling it
to death?)

>What I see, Roland, is an increasingly desperate attempt on your end
>to justify a single specific usage of the word "journey" that happens
>to suit your utterly incorrect interpretation of BA's conditions of
>carriage.

Back-to-back ticketing doesn't have a meaning for circle trips. All
other trips are two journeys: one out, and the other back.

>You've
>tried to claim that there is a *single* exception, namely round the
>world trips.

No, "circle trips" of which "RTW" is merely a *typical* example.
--
Roland Perry

In message <8ae0201tld1au5rj24dlr7nrmsg7bdc3eb@>, Malcolm Weir
<malc@gelt.org> writes

>Are you trying to pretend, that it's somehow impossible for you to
>volunteer information?

If I book online at ba.com, yes. They ask questions, I give answers. If
there are parameters they don't ask about, that's their problem. If the
answers I give result in "no ticket available online, please phone",
that's my problem.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:57:22 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <k1e020tdlfnm71o7cjpc4vppjc217cali1@>, Malcolm Weir
><malc@gelt.org> writes
>
>>Now you are reduced to claiming that circle trips are round the world
>>trips. Round the world trips are called... "round the world trips".
>
>Circle trips are routes where you travel from your start around a series
>of destinations, which don't repeat. And as I said *typically* round the
>world trips. Few people travel (eg) London > Paris > Berlin > London on
>one ticket. It's simply a rare thing to happen.

No, it isn't. It happens all the time. Now, it may not happen *to
you*, but so what?

>>>The other 99.9% of airline travel is from home to a destination [maybe
>>>over several legs] <pause> destination to home [usually over the same
>>>legs in reverse].
>>
>>So people don't fly from home to point A to point B to home?
>
>Not very often, no. (And as such a trip is entirely irrelevant to
>back-to-back ticketing, can you try to explain why you are niggling it
>to death?)

Because your entire thesis is based on your patently false limited
definition of the word "journey".

Even you admit that your definition (that *excludes* the idea that
"out and back" trips are journeys) fails in the case of circle trips.

Hence your claim that the word "journey" has your _only_ limited
definition *must* be incorrect. You acknowledge this.

>>What I see, Roland, is an increasingly desperate attempt on your end
>>to justify a single specific usage of the word "journey" that happens
>>to suit your utterly incorrect interpretation of BA's conditions of
>>carriage.
>
>Back-to-back ticketing doesn't have a meaning for circle trips. All
>other trips are two journeys: one out, and the other back.

This issue, Roland, is that your claim that the word "journey"
*cannot* mean "all the travel you plan on doing until you get home
again" is unsubstantiatable.

Since it is demonstrably wrong with respect to circle trips, the
definition that you claim applied for the usage in the Conditions of
Carriage cannot be correct. Even you agree that journey *can* mean
travel from A to A via anywhere.

>>You've
>>tried to claim that there is a *single* exception, namely round the
>>world trips.
>
>No, "circle trips" of which "RTW" is merely a *typical* example.

OK, so by your magic definition given above:

"Circle trips are routes where you travel from your start around a
series of destinations, which don't repeat."

Now, "a series of destinations" can obviously also be one remote
destination, too (e.g. LHR-AKL-LHR outbound via SIN return via LAX:
the destinations are AKL and then LHR).

So A-B-A can be, by your definition, a "circle trip": it's a series of
destinations, they don't repeat, so it can be a "circle trip" and thus
it can be a journey, singular.

Which takes us back to the point you've been denying all this time:
your claim that BA cannot deny your boarding in the case that you
employ back to back ticketing is based on your claim that A-B-A is not
"a journey" but is "two journeys" (at least). Your claim that A-B-A
is not "a journey" is based on a definition of the word "journey"
which demonstrably incorrect. Hence your claim that A-B-A *cannot* be
described as "a journey" is incorrect. Hence your claim that BA
cannot invoke their Conditions of Carriage to deny you travel is
incorrect.

Malc.

In message <t272201d2joncsi9d5ahbbtig9l0d56lvl@>, Malcolm Weir
<malc@gelt.org> writes
> It happens all the time.

Maybe it does. But only to a small percentage of travellers. I've yet to
find an airline website that can book them, for example, and if it's a
significant part of their business they'd make it available. Most people
fly from home to somewhere (business trip, holiday, etc), then back
home. Not very many go on a circular jaunt. Indeed, judging by how often
people ask about such things on newsgroups, not many people realise such
tickets exist.

>Because your entire thesis is based on your patently false limited
>definition of the word "journey".

And your [response] on disagreeing with me. Time for a rest, perhaps?

--
Roland Perry