Preselecting Seating leaving Open Seat between you. Is it gaming?

[Sprucegoose]

I think the A+C seats thingy is inherently unfair. Most of us like to arrange things in advance to make our trips as comfortable as possible, partly to reduce the stresses associated with airline travel these days. For the person already faced with lengthy check-in queues, baggage and hand baggage weight restrictions, hanging around at the gate during any delays... the thought of also being stuck in a middle seat for 24 hours is no fun. Sure they might find out once on board that the A+C were 'chancing it' and willing to swap, but that doesn't relieve the stress in the days/weeks prior to getting on board.

Passengers wanting an A+C combo can easily purchase a comfort seat at heavily reduced prices.

I cant accept its unfair, I am not sure what unfair means. It is opportunistic and there is no downside to it whatsoever. You select AC and there is someone in B, you can accept that or ask B to go to A or C. Win all round in my books.

A worse case happened to me, I moved from C to B to be with my travelling partner and the purser upgraded the bod in C (who was always me - he was looking for highest status that day). The guy that was originally in B that moved to C was on his second flight ever !!

Some days you just need to suck up.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I cant accept its unfair, I am not sure what unfair means. It is opportunistic and there is no downside to it whatsoever. You select AC and there is someone in B, you can accept that or ask B to go to A or C. Win all round in my books.

A worse case happened to me, I moved from C to B to be with my travelling partner and the purser upgraded the bod in C (who was always me - he was looking for highest status that day). The guy that was originally in B that moved to C was on his second flight ever !!

Some days you just need to suck up.

The potential downside is those that fork out for seat selection when they might not otherwise have to. Easy for status holders to dismiss the additional costs. Not so easy for the individuals and families without status.

 

[zenyattamondatta]

The potential downside is those that fork out for seat selection when they might not otherwise have to. Easy for status holders to dismiss the additional costs. Not so easy for the individuals and families without status.

Good to see this thread hasn't become any less nuts in my brief absence.

Which particular 'gamer' gets blamed for the poor underpaid public servant ending up having to move out of a middle seat into a better one, but having to stress out in the meantime? The gamer that happens to be sitting in the same row, or one ten rows back?

I don't agree with your basic 'gaming' premise in the first place, but even if I did, I would dismiss it as utterly negligible in a cabin of 100 or more people (or even considerably fewer).

If someone pays for an extra seat, it's because they thought that a worthwhile option. Some abstract idea of whether they actually 'needed' to or not is irrelevant.

 

[JohnK]

The potential downside is those that fork out for seat selection when they might not otherwise have to. Easy for status holders to dismiss the additional costs. Not so easy for the individuals and families without status.

I always pay for seat selection on JQ/3K and AK/FD. Not leaving seat allocation to chance.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Good to see this thread hasn't become any less nuts in my brief absence.

Which particular 'gamer' gets blamed for the poor underpaid public servant ending up having to move out of a middle seat into a better one, but having to stress out in the meantime? The gamer that happens to be sitting in the same row, or one ten rows back?

I don't agree with your basic 'gaming' premise in the first place, but even if I did, I would dismiss it as utterly negligible in a cabin of 100 or more people (or even considerably fewer).

If someone pays for an extra seat, it's because they thought that a worthwhile option. Some abstract idea of whether they actually 'needed' to or not is irrelevant.

Paying for an extra seat is a different proposition to gaming the middle. If all members of a booking were required to take contiguous seating, it would leave more windows and aisles open at the time of check in. Removing the need for some at least to fork out for pre-assigned seating (to avoid a middle).

 

[zenyattamondatta]

If all members of a booking were required to take contiguous seating, it would leave more windows and aisles open at the time of check in. Removing the need for some at least to fork out for pre-assigned seating (to avoid a middle).

But by the time of check in it's already too late. You've paid, or you haven't.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

But by the time of check in it's already too late. You've paid, or you haven't.

Years ago, when seating was done at the airport, members of a party would turn up and be assigned seats next to each other.

Now, we are able to select seats on line, and members of a party wanting to select A+C can do so, and in many cases free of charge with silver or above. Non status members looking at seat maps... perhaps burned once... may now feel compelled to pay for a seat they wouldn’t otherwise have the need to.

 

[zenyattamondatta]

There is no end.

Assume a 3-3-3 layout. Couples are now 'forced' to sit next to each other, and many opt for window+middle.

Do you then force the 'gaming' single to sit next to them rather than taking an aisle seat from the middle three in the hope of getting an empty seat next to them, and thereby crowding out all the poor groups of three people that want to sit next to each other in the middle?

 

[JohnK]

Paying for an extra seat is a different proposition to gaming the middle. If all members of a booking were required to take contiguous seating, it would leave more windows and aisles open at the time of check in. Removing the need for some at least to fork out for pre-assigned seating (to avoid a middle).

Contiguous seating? I don't do middle seats even in emergency. Wife doesn't mind but I prefer she have an aisle seat.

This is not gaming. This is choosing best possible seats and I do the same on JQ/3K and AK/FD. I pay for 2 aisles.

Now with daughter turning 2 soon it's a different proposition but as mentioned I'll take window exit row seat free and they'll have 2 seats behind me. I'm not sitting in the block of 4 seats with 2 middle seats so someone else can have a better chance at the free window exit row seat.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Contiguous seating? I don't do middle seats even in emergency. Wife doesn't mind but I prefer she have an aisle seat.

This is not gaming. This is choosing best possible seats and I do the same on JQ/3K and AK/FD. I pay for 2 aisles.

Now with daughter turning 2 soon it's a different proposition but as mentioned I'll take window exit row seat free and they'll have 2 seats behind me. I'm not sitting in the block of 4 seats with 2 middle seats so someone else can have a better chance at the free window exit row seat.

Agree. It’s not gaming provided the reason you’re doing the A+C is not to try and discourage others from taking B and hence gaming a free seat.

 

[suze2000]

Hubby and I are both large units. You can bet we are going to try to get an empty seat in the middle by selecting A+C. This is as much for our comfort as for anyone who comes to share the row with us, because it'll be a tight fit anyway. We aren't large enough to require a "comfort" seat purchase, but by the same token, we ain't small. Now when the poor sap arrives to sit in B between two fatties, he's now overjoyed when one of us gets up and offers to take the middle seat. I see that as a win for him, and I honestly do not understand your complaint. If there's going to be empty seats on the plane, why shouldn't one of them be between my husband and me?

And you can bet that when I am travelling alone, I will also try to get an empty seat next to me by picking a window where someone has already chosen the aisle. Even if that means abandoning my forward seat for one a long way back (see above about being a large unit). It's better for everyone that way. And I don't see the difference between that and the above.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

For myself, when kids were younger, they got the middle. As kids got older (and not too old) they wanted the window so often +1 or I got a middle. Now it's often just +1 and me and I select window and aisle. If someone turns up to B, we sometimes offer to swap, sometimes not. +1 and I have been together for some 33 years, we can cope with a few hours apart and comfort is important, so if I'm permitted to seat select, than I will and to be honest, I totally disagree this is "gaming" the system. It's using a benefit of status afforded to me.

Of course I most often fly alone so I always select a window or aisle, never a middle. Is this also considered "gaming" the system (as really, it's no different)? If so, than I confess, I'm a gamer and I fully intend to continue to do it!

 

[Pushka]

Agree. It’s not gaming provided the reason you’re doing the A+C is not to try and discourage others from taking B and hence gaming a free seat.

The issue really is that people don’t want to sit in between 2 strangers in a tube. That is more the aim rather than the gaming you describe of having a spare middle seat.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I guess it’s a difference in perspective... those with status selecting A+C won’t see any problems, those without free access to seating will be potentially inconvenienced.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

I guess it’s a difference in perspective... those with status selecting A+C won’t see any problems, those without free access to seating will be potentially inconvenienced.

I agree that I don't see the problem. I actually don't see any difference with this and any other status benefit. Others have to line up whilst I walk past them to the front of the queue. Others stand watching me pick up my bags from the carousel first. Others sit wistfully outside the lounge entrance whilst I just waltz past. Hang, what about QF and reward bookings ... even as a WP I get trumped by WP1. NB's have little to no chance.

I can't see the point of offering status benefits if one is shamed into not using them or worse still, denied the benefit because a once in a lifetime flyer feels aggrieved because he/she has the inconsolable indignity of a middle seat allocation that they, for some God unknown reason, think a regular status flyer should have taken so they can have an aisle or window. I'm sorry, but I cannot see the issue, or the problem.

 

[zenyattamondatta]

Consider again a 3-3-3 layout.

ABC DEF GHI

Under the enforced-contiguous-seating rule, the first couple chooses AB (you'd better hope there's a preference for window seating, because there's only one option for couples in the middle). The next couple chooses HI.

XXC DEF GXX

Then a single comes along. Unless you look into their heart, assess their 'gaming' intentions, and force them to do otherwise, they're going to choose D or F. The next single will choose the other.

XXC XEX GXX

Couples now have no options, and the next two singles to come along will obviously choose C and G. If E ends up unfilled, the first two singles have been gifted an empty seat next to them at the expense of the couples who booked first.

Back to the drawing board on that proposal, I reckon.

The logical extension of what MEL_Traveller is proposing is that all the status passengers and people who get in early are deliberately crammed together like sardines, and no-status, no-money, no-ability-to-preplan Hans gets to waltz in and sit in the middle of a row of three with nobody on either side and empty rows in front and behind for good measure.

 

[JohnK]

Agree. It’s not gaming provided the reason you’re doing the A+C is not to try and discourage others from taking B and hence gaming a free seat.

It's not gaming even if I'm trying to score a free seat. Better the vacant middle seat goes to a statused flyer or someone who has paid for seat selection rather than the person who has turned up to the airport without a seat.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I agree that I don't see the problem. I actually don't see any difference with this and any other status benefit. Others have to line up whilst I walk past them to the front of the queue. Others stand watching me pick up my bags from the carousel first. Others sit wistfully outside the lounge entrance whilst I just waltz past. Hang, what about QF and reward bookings ... even as a WP I get trumped by WP1. NB's have little to no chance.

I can't see the point of offering status benefits if one is shamed into not using them or worse still, denied the benefit because a once in a lifetime flyer feels aggrieved because he/she has the inconsolable indignity of a middle seat allocation that they, for some God unknown reason, think a regular status flyer should have taken so they can have an aisle or window. I'm sorry, but I cannot see the issue, or the problem.

But none of these other status benefits potentially cause the non status person to lose money by paying for seat selection they mightn’t need to (if the benefit was not available to status holders).

 

[Pushka]

I guess it’s a difference in perspective... those with status selecting A+C won’t see any problems, those without free access to seating will be potentially inconvenienced.

You mean the same as when I can use the lounge and they can’t.

But none of these other status benefits potentially cause the non status person to lose money by paying for seat selection they mightn’t need to (if the benefit was not available to status holders).

They are getting what they paid for - a seat on the plane.

 

[burmans]

The potential downside is those that fork out for seat selection when they might not otherwise have to. Easy for status holders to dismiss the additional costs. Not so easy for the individuals and families without status.

This is misinterpreting what status holders think (and given you've done it multiple time I'd suggest deliberately). Status holders believe their status has benefits because Qantas has told them it does, this applies equally for singles and couple. They use this benefit to select seats as they are entitled to.

Non status holders can also select seats, they need to pay for this priviledge, once again this applies equally to singles and couples.

We get it, status holders have benefits that non-status holders don't. But that's a benefit of being a status holder, not a singles vs couples thing. If your argument is against status then lets make this the argument, not whether people using a benefit they are entitled to is abuse.