Talk:First and business class flights

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Eh, wouldn't this type of behaviour constitute a breach of contract even if it is not illegal as in criminal law? Do we really want to get our hands dirty with this sort of thing? I am not a lawyer, but if you have to "hide" your deal from your contract partner (airline) something can't be quite correct. --(WT-en) Nils 18:57, 25 Mar 2004 (EST)

Perhaps this is something to go under common scams too. I feel the page is incomplete and probably should be part of a larger article about Airmiles or whatever they are called. It lacks surrounding context and is listed as a dead end page, and could be an orphan page too, if it didn't appear on the Main Page and in Travel topics. I think it is a valid article on a travel related topic but its title makes it look like a commercial. Also see the discussion about this page on the Main Page - Talk page. -- (WT-en) Huttite 06:43, 26 Mar 2004 (EST)
No, hmmm, maybe I was not too clear. If the information in this article is correct, then it sounds a LOT like a breach of contract with the airline whose frequent flier ("air miles") system you are taking part in. I do not think that we would like to be part in that or give it credibility. It does not read like "information on a scam" but like "hey this is a neat trick everybody should try". -- (WT-en) Nils 06:14, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)


I moved the page to an un-capped version of the name. --(WT-en) Evan 12:01, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Scam Article?[edit]

Moved from Project:travellers' pub by (WT-en) Evan

Someone with a bit of legal background should check out First and Business Discounters. It sounds rather fraudulent to me. I would vote for removing the article in its current form entirely. -- (WT-en) Nils 06:18, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Seems okay to me. What's wrong with it? (WT-en) Professorbiscuit
It's most likely a breach of contract with the airlines... Did you even read it? If it calls to "hide" the behaviour from the airline, then that can't be a good sign. -- (WT-en) Nils 08:46, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)
None of the sites listed on that page will even give you the time of day without your giving them personal information. I think it's a scam. -- (WT-en) Mark 09:04, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)
I think the article should be included in a more general article about Air Miles or Air Points and similar loyalty schemes offering discounted travel. See Talk:First and Business Discounters. -- (WT-en) Huttite 09:21, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)
Why? Why why why would you include the article if it's a scam? Discussion of airline frequent traveller programs is one thing, advising our readers to breach the contracts with their airlines is a BIG no-no! In the current form, the information presented in the article is AT LEAST questionable. -- (WT-en) Nils 09:25, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)
I think you should probably do some research and edit the article itself. We also need to start an Project:illegal activity policy. I don't think stuff should be kept out of Wikivoyage just because it's illegal or questionable in one or another country. Everything is illegal somewhere, after all, and sometimes doing things that are technically illegal are the only way to get things done. --(WT-en) Evan 11:16, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)
It's probably a matter of civil law rather than criminal law (contract breach vs. fraud). I am not a lawyer. However, speaking for the more general case: If you allow one type of illegal content, then with what right would you take down material that is illegal in the US, but not other places? In fact, you actually seem to condone illegal activity in "some cases". So let's see, I could probably get many articles done quite quickly by copying material from some other website, or a paper based travel guide. If you don't allow that, but other cases, you'd be a hipocrite. Yes, it's a big can of worms. The only solution, of course, is to abide by the laws of your country of residence (and that of the webserver's location, if the two differ). And as a server operator you might still have to take down some content eventually (remember nazi memorabilia and yahoo france, a few years ago). -- (WT-en) Nils 13:14, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)
It's a huge can of worms, I agree, and I readily admit that I haven't thought it through (which is why the above is a missing link). But, as always, the traveller comes first. I don't think we want to put travellers in legal jeopardy, or advise them to do things that will possibly cost them serious time in the slammer or a lot of money. At the same time, if we leave illegal things out of the guide that travellers will hear about somewhere else, they might think it's OK.
I also think there's a difference between mentioning illegal activities and doing them ourselves. Copying protected works into Wikivoyage is different from referencing gay bars in Texas (which has anti-sodomy laws on the books). We should give info on illegal activities, even if the only info we give is "this is illegal".
I guess maybe the tack I'd take is harm reduction. Keep travellers informed, let them know the consequences, and let them make decisions on their own. --(WT-en) Evan 15:45, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)
Fair enough, the article in its current form however basically says "this is a great idea, just don't get caught". And that is not the approach we are at liberty to take for illegal activities. It's difficult to find information on google on this subject, by the way (or I am using the wrong keywords). Of course we have to advise travellers on matters which will put them in jeopardy one way or another. That's the whole point of having a travel guide after all. -- (WT-en) Nils 04:29, 7 Apr 2004 (EDT)
So, I'm listing the article on Project:articles needing attention, and hopefully we can get some more information on the topic. There's probably some info at airline industry Web sites, US Transportation agency, EU transportation agency... Let's start doing some research. --(WT-en) Evan 15:26, 11 Apr 2004 (EDT)
I've looked into how we handle it. You can find the terms & conditions of Lufthansa's "Miles & More" frequent flyer program here. It quite clearly states that "Award documents may only be given as presents to individuals with whom the Member has a close personal relationship, e.g. friends and relatives, but may not be exchanged for other awards or cash.". Since these rules are dated as valid starting April 1st, 2004 (and certainly no april's fool joke), and I am confident that Lufthansa would have incorporated any EU/German court decisions, I think it's quite clear that at least in this example, miles may not be traded, exchanged, and so on. It becomes a breach of contract case, which will be a hassle to the traveller at least.
I don't think there's even any way to transfer Miles & More bonus point from one person to another.
As a next step, I will post a short notice on the article that the information is disputed, since it could perceivedly lead to problems for the traveller. -- (WT-en) Nils 09:16, 19 Apr 2004 (EDT)
The article says that the airlines will take you off the plane if they find out you got your ticket from a f.&.b.d. If you dispute the information, put up some other information, rather than adding a "disputed" notice. --(WT-en) Evan 09:31, 19 Apr 2004 (EDT)
I did. See Lufthansa terms & conditions. It's a breach of contract issue, at least in Germany. We can not advise our readers to break their legally binding contracts. If anybody disagrees, please provide links to back up your claims. I could not find anything that clearly states "this is okay because so-and-so". Just people who claim "it's legal" without backing it up. -- (WT-en) Nils 09:38, 19 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Okay, nevermind. I changed the article. I have rewritten it to describe the situation based on the verified information we do have.

Sorry, it was not supposed to be a "minor edit", as I turned the article upside down. I misclicked; too much sun on my computer screen... :-( -- (WT-en) Nils 09:55, 19 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Okay Evan - Now it's YOUR article. If you claim that it has been "tested in court", please provide a link to back this up. Seriously. I couldn't find one. -- (WT-en) Nils 10:21, 19 Apr 2004 (EDT)

I'm working on trying to find links about the legality of the practice. Here's a couple I've found so far. Most agree that the practice violates the airline's policy, and a couple say it's illegal.
We had an edit conflict and I overwrote your version with my longer one. I'll try to integrate your changes. --(WT-en) Evan 10:37, 19 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Lie flat vs. flat bed seats[edit]

Should we have a dedicated section discussing the differences between the 2 said seats? My understanding is as a rule of thumb, lie-flat seats are straight but not parallel to the floor and are likely to be found in business class. Flat-bed seats on the other hand are parallel to the floor, recline a full 180 degrees and are more likely to be found in first class. -- 04:23, 21 December 2006 (EST)

Isn't that pretty much what it says in the article? (WT-en) Jpatokal 04:30, 21 December 2006 (EST)

With a mature body, but one who can only fly "econo" (a few times 14-15 hours), I've often thought seat widths can seem almost as important as seat pitch/leg suggestion here that legroom should be neglected. Regards, Hennejohn (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

domestic vs. international first class[edit]

How different is domestic first class from long-haul and regional first class we know of? I like to think that internationally at least, first class is slowly being phased out by an enhanced business class as the article mentions but it looks like in some countries like the US, the first class section provided there will always be called first class. -- 05:12, 21 December 2006 (EST)

Isn't what also pretty much what it says in the article? US first class == Regional biz elsewhere. I don't know of any other country where the term "first" is used for anything except long-haul ("real") first class. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:13, 21 December 2006 (EST)
I wasn't able to see it in the article. Besides, I never got the chance to ride on a US "first class" cabin before so I wouldn't know. But thanks for clarifying the equivalent of US first class in other standards. -- 05:19, 21 December 2006 (EST)

Non-aviation first class[edit]

IMO, something should be said about first class travel on buses, trains, boats and other forms of public transport.

For a start: On trains in Great Britain (sorry, don't know about fares in Northern Ireland), walk-up first class fares are typically about 50% more expensive than full-fare open tickets (e.g. London to Manchester is £180 one-way in first class and £115 one-way in full fare standard class). Young Persons' and Family railcards are *not* accepted, though Senior and Disabled Persons' railcards are. Generally there are no walk-up off-peak first class fares, though this is changing and some operators do now offer these depending on your route, so if you particularly want to travel in first class you may wish to ask. In addition, at weekends passengers (with walk-up tickets) on many routes can buy an "upgrade" to first class (the surcharge varies but tends to be about £15-£20 per person per leg of the journey). Advance purchase first class tickets can sometimes be *very* reasonable depending on the way the quotas work out (either slightly more expensive, or sometimes considerably cheaper, than the cheapest available standard class ticket). The perks offered to first class passengers differ; they are more generous during the week on long-distance trains (with free refreshments served at your seat) than on commuter routes (where all you get is a bit more space).

I've not put this in the article; this ought to be discussed, fact-checked and globalised a bit more first. 16:28, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Business brokers[edit]

I think we should remove the list of business brokers at the bottom of this page. We say right above that this is a "dodgy" business anyway, and the list is slowly growing to an unwieldy size as people add their favorite brokers. I can't imagine any criteria by which to endorse a particular reselling site, so let's just remove them all. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:52, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

No disagreement here although it might make sense to keep a paragraph explaining what a "business broker" is and why they are dodgy - the preceding section provides more than enough overview of these businesses without the need to list them individually. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:35, 10 May 2011 (EDT)