Airlines Wage War on Ticket Ruses
1
A. All may be fair in love and war, but not when it comes to airfares. Airlines are waging a war against travel agents and travellers who exploit anomalies between different types of fares and conditions or fares at either end of a route due to currency rates or competition in a given market.
2
B. “Creative ticketing” and “fare construction” techniques — under the International Air Transport Association’s “maximum permitted mileage” system that allows you to travel up to 25 per cent more miles between two points at little extra cost — arc legitimate ways to save money. Such devices as "combined ticketing,” whereby you make separate round trips on the same ticket, or “split ticketing," where you buy two one-way tickets at each end to take advantage of currency rates and competition (or lack of competition), are standard procedure for a good business travel agent.
3
C. The challenge is to beat the system. What angers airlines on both sides of the Atlantic is the growing use of “back-to-back” ticketing. This is a ploy of savvy travellers who buy two round-trip excursion tickets with Saturday night stay restrictions, using the outward coupon of each ticket and throwing the other half away; they save more than half the cost of a normal midweek return. The cheapest flexible ticket you can buy — even in the back of the plane — can cost more than three times an excursion fare.
4
D. The magazine Holiday Which?, published by the Consumers’ Association in Britain, highlights in its current issue the plight of “Ms. G,” a traveller from London to Dallas who sought to save 300 pounds of the cost of a midweek fare by buying two round-trip excursion tickets. American Airlines check-in staff confiscated both tickets and forced her to buy a new full-fare return at a cost of 1,111 pounds.
5
E. United Airlines, TWA, US Air, Northwest and Delta Airlines say that the use of back-to-back tickets violates their "tariff rules”. The airlines’ threatened sanctions take the form of “debit memos” to “delinquent" travel agents — who risk losing their LATA license — and denied boarding to travellers.
6
F. A Comeaux, a spokesman at American, said: “Back-to-back ticketing violates the contract that passengers have with the airline, even if you use all coupons. You are agreeing to stay a Saturday night. If someone is taking up a seat by telling us they’re doing something else, they are taking a seat from us that could be used by someone who needs it at the last minute."
7
G. Isn’t it my prerogative to choose whether to use a seat that I’ve paid for? Do the airlines expect to sell the same seat twice? What really exasperates them, of course, is that their branding is out of sync with travellers’ needs — inviting us to beat the system. Travel agents say that some corporations insist on back-to-back ticketing or they'll go somewhere else — often to the airlines themselves. Many airlines sell back-to-backs to favoured frequent fliers.
8
H. Reasons for the crackdown are that carriers feel stronger in what is still a sellers’ market; there is a growing disparity between front-cabin and cattle-class fares, and new software detects back-to-backs and bills agents for the difference in fare or stops the traveller at the gate.
9
I. William Gaillard, a spokesman for IATA in Geneva, says: "Airlines prohibit the nonsequential use of ticket coupons. For example, business class fares out of London to the US are notoriously higher than other cities in Europe. So if you route Frankfurt-London-New York-London-Frankfurt and don’t use the Frankfurt-London coupon, that is not allowed under IATA rules." He adds: “But the rules may change. They are under investigation right now by the Office of Fair Trading in Britain and the EU Commission.”
10
J. Matthew Davis, manager for consulting services at American Express in London, says: “We’re raising these issues with IATA on behalf of clients who find it hard to understand that we’re not always able to do what they want because of our contracts with airlines.”
11
K. “There are some derices that are within the rules, such as the extra coupon at the end. For example, if you make a round trip from London to New York, it can be cheaper to go on to Paris than it is just to go from New York to London. So you’d either not use the final coupon or use it for a separate trip. That happens quite a lot. But it varies from one country to another. Some practices in Belgium, for example, would not be allowed in Britain.”
Here's a checklist to help avoid problems at check-in:
- Use ticket coupons in sequence. Airlines may cancel your onward journey if you skip an immediate sector.
- Who cares if you fail to use a final coupon! But never travel on “cross-border" tickets whereby you depart from a fictitious point, say, Nairobi, throw away the first coupon and start from London. No reputable travel agent will sell such a ticket. When buying a ticket from a “bucket shop”, check the top right-hand comer to see where it was issued. If it shows a foreign address or if the first coupon has been tom out, it could be “illegal” or stolen.
- Try buying back-to-back tickets direct with the airline. Airlines break their own rules, especially for frequent flier members. Keep a record of the transaction. If you strike trouble, it gives you a solid case with check-in staff.
- Buy separate tickets with different airlines for a back-to-back combination, for example, between Nice and London, buy one round-trip excursion with British Airways and another with British Midland. Or else buy tickets from two different travel agencies with different IATA registration numbers.
- Should you be denied boarding or asked to pay the cost of a full-fare return, seek alternatives, such as buying a one-way ticket or a round-trip excursion ticket or a round-trip excursion ticket with another airline. Never submit to interrogation or hand over other tickets that are not relevant to that particular flight.
- Stay cool. Remember that you may be breaking airline rules but you are not doing anything “illegal”.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Question Focus: Main idea - airlines fighting fare manipulation
Why this is correct: This paragraph introduces the overall conflict. Airlines are described as actively fighting travellers and agents who take advantage of fare differences.
Passage Reference: All may be fair in love and war, but not when it comes to airfares. Airlines are waging a war against travel agents and travellers who exploit anomalies between different types of fares and conditions or fares at either end of a route due to currency rates or competition in a given market.
Tips: For the first paragraph, look for the overall topic and tone of the article.
Why the other options are wrong:
- What legitimate ticketing involves: This paragraph is about fighting abuse, not explaining legal methods. This is a context shift trap.
- Possible punishment illegitimate ticketing might incur: No penalties are mentioned here. That comes later. This is a wrong section trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- anomalies = irregular differences
- waging = fighting
Question Focus: Main idea - legal ways to save money on tickets
Passage Reference: “Creative ticketing” and “fare construction” techniques — under the International Air Transport Association’s “maximum permitted mileage” system that allows you to travel up to 25 per cent more miles between two points at little extra cost — are legitimate ways to save money. Such devices as "combined ticketing,” whereby you make separate round trips on the same ticket, or “split ticketing," where you buy two one-way tickets at each end to take advantage of currency rates and competition (or lack of competition), are standard procedure for a good business travel agent.
Why this is correct: The paragraph explains legal methods like combined and split ticketing. It clearly says these are legitimate and commonly used.
Tips: When a paragraph explains definitions or examples, choose an explanatory heading.
Why the other options are wrong:
- "Back-to-back" ticketing: Back-to-back ticketing is not described here. This is a wrong section trap.
- The cheapest business fare: Prices are mentioned, but the focus is methods, not fare levels. This is a partial truth trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- legitimate = allowed
- procedure = usual method
Question Focus: Main idea - explanation of back-to-back ticketing
Passage Reference: What angers airlines on both sides of the Atlantic is the growing use of “back-to-back” ticketing. This is a ploy of savvy travellers who buy two round-trip excursion tickets with Saturday night stay restrictions, using the outward coupon of each ticket and throwing the other half away; they save more than half the cost of a normal midweek return. The cheapest flexible ticket you can buy — even in the back of the plane — can cost more than three times an excursion fare.
Why this is correct: This paragraph defines and explains back-to-back ticketing and why airlines dislike it.
Tips: If a paragraph repeatedly names one concept, that is usually the heading.
Why the other options are wrong:
- A breach of contract: Contract issues are explained later by airline spokespeople. This is a wrong section trap.
- The cheapest business fare: Fare comparison is supporting detail, not the main idea. This is an example-as-main-idea trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- ploy = clever trick
- excursion fare = discounted return ticket
Question Focus: Main idea - real example of punishment
Passage Reference: highlights in its current issue the plight of “Ms. G,” a traveller from London to Dallas who sought to save 300 pounds of the cost of a midweek fare by buying two round-trip excursion tickets. American Airlines check-in staff confiscated both tickets and forced her to buy a new full-fare return at a cost of 1,111 pounds.
Why this is correct: The paragraph tells a real story of one traveller who suffered financially.
Tips: Personal names and stories usually signal an example-based heading.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Possible punishment illegitimate ticketing might incur: This is a single case, not a general policy. This is a specific-example trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- plight = difficult situation
- confiscated = taken away
Question Focus: Main idea - sanctions imposed by airlines
Passage Reference: s say that the use of back-to-back tickets violates their "tariff rules”. The airlines’ threatened sanctions take the form of “debit memos” to “delinquent" travel agents — who risk losing their LATA license — and denied boarding to travellers.
Why this is correct: This paragraph lists penalties airlines threaten, such as fines and denied boarding.
Tips: Look for consequence words like punish, deny, risk.
Why the other options are wrong:
- A breach of contract: The legal reasoning comes later. This paragraph focuses on punishment. This is a context shift trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- sanctions = punishments
- tariff rules = pricing rules
Question Focus: Main idea - airline justification
Passage Reference: “Back-to-back ticketing violates the contract that passengers have with the airline, even if you use all coupons. You are agreeing to stay a Saturday night. If someone is taking up a seat by telling us they’re doing something else, they are taking a seat from us that could be used by someone who needs it at the last minute."
G.
Why this is correct: The spokesman clearly states this practice breaks the contract passengers agree to.
Tips: Direct quotes often clearly reveal the paragraph's main point.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Who is at fault?: The paragraph only gives the airline's view. This is a partial truth trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- violates = breaks
- contract = legal agreement
Question Focus: Main idea - questioning airline responsibility
Passage Reference: . Isn’t it my prerogative to choose whether to use a seat that I’ve paid for? Do the airlines expect to sell the same seat twice? What really exasperates them, of course, is that their branding is out of sync with travellers’ needs — inviting us to beat the system. Travel agents say that some corporations insist on back-to-back ticketing or they'll go somewhere else — often to the airlines themselves. Many airlines sell back-to-backs to favoured frequent fliers.
Why this is correct: The paragraph questions airline behaviour and suggests they are partly responsible.
Tips: Rhetorical questions often signal opinion or criticism.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Travellers' needs taken into consideration: Needs are mentioned, but the focus is blame. This is a paraphrase trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- prerogative = right
- exasperates = annoys greatly
Question Focus: Main idea - reasons for airline crackdown
Passage Reference: . Reasons for the crackdown are that carriers feel stronger in what is still a sellers’ market; there is a growing disparity between front-cabin and cattle-class fares, and new software detects back-to-backs and bills agents for the difference in fare or stops the traveller at the gate.
Why this is correct: This paragraph explains why airlines are acting now, including market strength and technology.
Tips: Headings starting with why usually match explanation paragraphs.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Possible punishment illegitimate ticketing might incur: This paragraph explains causes, not penalties. This is a causation trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- crackdown = strict action
- disparity = difference
Question Focus: Main idea - IATA rules and investigations
Passage Reference: , says: "Airlines prohibit the non sequential use of ticket coupons. For example, business class fares out of London to the US are notoriously higher than other cities in Europe. So if you route Frankfurt-London-New York-London-Frankfurt and don’t use the Frankfurt-London coupon, that is not allowed under IATA rules." He adds: “But the rules may change. They are under investigation right now by the Office of Fair Trading in Britain and the EU Commission.”
J.
Why this is correct: The paragraph explains that airlines prohibit nonsequential use of ticket coupons and describes specific IATA rules about routing. The focus is on the requirement that coupons must be used in order, with the agent noting these rules may change.
Tips: Organization names often signal policy or regulation headings.
Why the other options are wrong:
- IATA's attention required: The previous heading focused on IATA's role, but this paragraph specifically discusses the sequential use rule for coupons - a more specific topic than IATA attention in general. This is a partial truth trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- nonsequential = out of order
- notoriously = famously
Question Focus: Main idea - agents representing clients
Passage Reference: “We’re raising these issues with IATA on behalf of clients who find it hard to understand that we’re not always able to do what they want because of our contracts with airlines.”
K.
Why this is correct: The agent explains they are raising issues with IATA on behalf of clients who find it hard to understand the restrictions. The paragraph is about getting IATA's attention to address these problems.
Tips: Ask who is speaking and whose interests they support.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Travellers' needs taken into consideration: While travellers' needs are mentioned, the paragraph is specifically about raising issues with IATA, not about considering travellers' needs directly. This is a context shift trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- on behalf of = representing
- contracts = formal agreements
Question Focus: Main idea - rules about coupon use
Passage Reference: “There are some devices that are within the rules, such as the extra coupon at the end. For example, if you make a round trip from London to New York, it can be cheaper to go on to Paris than it is just to go from New York to London. So you’d either not use the final coupon or use it for a separate trip. That happens quite a lot. But it varies from one country to another. Some practices in Belgium, for example, would not be allowed in Brita
Why this is correct: The paragraph gives practical advice about what is within the rules, such as not using the final coupon or using it for a separate trip. This is clearly tips from an agent - practical guidance on what travellers can legally do.
Tips: Rule explanations often contrast allowed vs not allowed.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Coupons must be used in order: The paragraph does mention coupon rules, but the main purpose is to give practical tips about what is allowed, not to explain the ordering requirement. This is a partial truth trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- coupon = part of a ticket
- varies = changes
General Tips:
- Read all headings first and underline key words.
- Match headings to the MAIN idea, not a small detail.
- Paragraphs usually follow the order of headings.
- Examples and stories rarely make good general headings.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation