Allegiant Strands PAX in Vegas

  • Hi Guest, welcome to the help forum. You can get fast answers to your customer service questions here. We have a dedicated team of advocates who are ready to help. Just go to the section that matches your question and ask us!
  • If you've posted a question or issue for our advocates to assist with, please be sure to check back frequently for responses and requests for clarification.
  • Did you know you can get email notifications when something new posts to your favorite forum? It's easy. Just click the "watch" link right next to the "post new thread" button at the top of your favorite forum. The rest is easy. Now you'll never miss another conversation.
  • Want to become an expert user? Drop by the How to use this forum section and all will be revealed. We'll show you how to make the most of your experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jan 6, 2015
2,002
1,961
113
#2
Allegiant, Frontier, Spirit, and Southwest all offer flights with gaps in their schedules (i.e., they fly certain days of the week), depending on the to/from locations.

This issue, along with taking the last flight of the day place the onus on the flyers in my opinion. Always plan for the just-in-case.
 
Likes: jsn55
Apr 10, 2017
394
635
93
#3
It's "flyer beware" for sure with airlines such as these. My husband and I had an AA flight out of CLT to STX at the end of May. There was a mechanical issue with the plane but instead of being stranded for 4 days they had another plane ready in 30 minutes. I know we were at a hub airport but that wouldn't be an option on an ULCC.
 
Last edited:

jsn55

Verified Member
Dec 26, 2014
6,399
6,458
113
San Francisco
#4
I agree with you both, but the issue is that only 10% of us understand what's really going on with airlines. The traveller who ventures out a couple of times a year has no way of knowing which airlines to avoid. They all advertise, people believe what they see and hear. Booking the cheapest anything these days is a mantra for at least half of the travelling public. When we get a post from someone who has been stranded for days because they booked on an ULCC, I want to say "Well, can you think of some reasons why your airline doesn't have any extra planes? Could it be that this is what saved you $32 on a R/T tix and now you're stuck in Provo until Tuesday?". But people can't possibly know unless they're dialed into the travel world. I really do feel sorry for them.
 
Likes: AMA
Jan 6, 2015
2,002
1,961
113
#5
I see it a little differently. If the flight is the last one of the day (could be AA, Delta or United), any passenger should have alarms going off. "If I miss this one or it's cancelled I'm out of luck until tomorrow (at least on that airline)". And if the next scheduled flight is not for three days, same alarms should go off.

Regardless of the cost, this is simple logic to me. Have a backup plan ALWAYS ...
 
Oct 6, 2016
85
129
33
56
#6
Beware if you fly into say XYZ city, where the carrier only flies twice a week and no majors serve that city. If this happens, carriers don't keep spare planes sitting around.

Yet, this was Vegas, one of the carriers most advertised places to fly. Because of that, they've got spares there, or, nearby. If they have a contract for maintenance there, they've got the ability to do more.

And If Alligient shrugs it shoulders, then I'd contact the Las Vegas Tourism Bureau, the Mayors office, the Governors office, etc. Sure, they may not be able to help, but who knows. Alligients excuse doesn't pass the smell test and they shouldn't be allowed to just shrug their shoulders and walk away. There's also the Airport Authority. Airports have not renewed contracts with problem carriers and they need to know this.
 
Jan 5, 2015
75
142
33
42
#7
It's a mechanical problem and they're not helping their customers beyond a $300 check that may or may not arrive in the next 7 to 10 business days. Ridiculous.
 
Oct 6, 2016
85
129
33
56
#8
RAVEN: Wow! We all understand mechanical problems. The worst case I ever saw was a Boeing that had to land in Siberia, basically in the middle of nowhere. Can't remember who, but I think it was Singapore. They did their best with the paxs, flew in food, etc and had them outta there in 2 days.

Alligient, in Vegas, a prime destination, 7 to 10 days. Unbelievable. And the carrier 10 days from now can say, "well, we did get u from point A to B". I feel for the paxs. Many people save years to take a low cost vacation and these are the same people who have jobs that will fire if you miss work, unless your in hospital. There could be some sad stories out of this one.

Frankly, and i hate to get political, but this is when the Transportation Secretary should get involved and push some muscle. I wouldn't want to push repairs, as on pilot forums, there are already rumblings. This just astounds me.

Thanks for the update!
 
Jan 5, 2015
75
142
33
42
#9
Agreed, Michael.
This is ridiculous...$300 to be paid later, no help with accommodations/food, etc. I don't care if Allegiant is "Low Cost" or "No Frills" they are being completely useless here.
 
Jul 27, 2016
846
1,041
93
#10
Alliegiant is offering more than they have to. They're offering $300, plus either a later ticket, or a refund. You could buy a ticket LAS-OKC today for $363.

They're a lousy airline, and I won't fly them, but they're actually going beyond what they need to here.
 

johnbaker

Verified Member
Oct 2, 2014
802
1,338
93
44
#11
Sorry ... You get what you pay for... If you didn't realize that this is how the LCC do business, your not paying attention. Spirit, Allegiant ... they're on the same. There's a huge risk associated with their $49 fare.

If you choose to fly them and don't buy trip insurance, I'm sorry for you.
 
Oct 6, 2016
85
129
33
56
#12
I agree Raven.

The point isn't the cost of the ticket. All Americans, rich or poor, deserve respectful treatment at the Airport. If 3rd world countries, such as Indonesia can suffer the exact same thing, but get paxs transported in a day or two, then it's a sorry country we live in, when a carrier says 7 to 10 days and people say "You get what you pay for". I don't recall any of the applicable laws on civil transport in this country having an asterisk saying, "Tough luck if you could only afford a cheap ticket".
 
Likes: AMA
Nov 14, 2016
374
930
93
48
#13
I agree Raven.

The point isn't the cost of the ticket. All Americans, rich or poor, deserve respectful treatment at the Airport. If 3rd world countries, such as Indonesia can suffer the exact same thing, but get paxs transported in a day or two, then it's a sorry country we live in, when a carrier says 7 to 10 days and people say "You get what you pay for". I don't recall any of the applicable laws on civil transport in this country having an asterisk saying, "Tough luck if you could only afford a cheap ticket".
So what's the solution, Michael? Allegiant doesn't even have to pay the $300 so they are going above and beyond what they need to do.

Are you going to require them to have interline agreements? Have more planes on standby? Pay for hotels, food and walk-up fees on other airlines? Anything you propose is going to increase costs. So then it's "tough luck that you can't fly since cheap tickets aren't available anymore"?

I'm not defending Allegiant here. I'm just saying you can't have it both ways.
 
Likes: ADM
Oct 6, 2016
85
129
33
56
#14
I don't know what the solution is Kahhss, but no laws are written in regards to the amount you pay for a ticket. Personally, it just doesn't sit well with me that it affects many, who can least afford it.
If the standard is "You get what you pay for," and we're willing to settle for that, then we've sunk pretty low. Were talking Vegas here, not in the middle of the Yukon. And if a carrier, such as Alligient, can't spare a plane within a day of the event, then If I was a regulator, I'd be extremely concerned. Not because of price, but because of safety issues.

Every carrier sells some tickets in that price range, regardless of whether they are classed as a legacy carrier, an ULLC, etc.
 

johnbaker

Verified Member
Oct 2, 2014
802
1,338
93
44
#15
@Michael Anthony Do you get different levels of service at a Red Roof Inn and the Four Seasons when things go wrong? Both sell bedrooms and have beds about the same size. Red Roof Inn probably isn't going to walk you anywhere ... Four Seasons is going to make sure you're taken care of...

Allegiant isn't hiding who they are... Here's the answer from their FAQ sheet
If my flight is canceled or rescheduled, will Allegiant purchase a ticket on another airline for me?

Sorry, we do not make reservations on other airlines.

If there has been a flight cancellation or if your flight is rescheduled to another day, the options are:

  • to take the rescheduled flight,
  • to reserve an Allegiant flight on different dates for no difference in fare and no change fee,
  • or to cancel the remainder of your ticket for a refund of all unflown segments.

Manage Travel to view the options available for your itinerary.

Please note: Some reservations, such as those purchased using a Dollar Off Coupon or those which include a rental car or hotel package, may require Customer Care attention.
 
Likes: ADM
Oct 6, 2016
85
129
33
56
#16
Hotels are not an apt comparison. And the only difference in carriers, is amoint of fare paid.

Otherwise, all federal rules and regulations apply, regardless of the carrier, unless they are charter. That is my point. This "You get what you paid for" mentality is exactly what the carriers dish out to the consumer. When a carrier sets up shop, say at Vegas, they rent their gates, pay for their landing and takeoff slots, same as everyone else. The only difference is in fare paid. Yet, because its Vegas, there are just as many paxs traveling there on fares similar to Alligient. So, you get what you pay for is most likely applicable to just about every Domestic carrier that services Vegas.

My issue, and it's not with anyone because I understand exactly what you are saying, that somehow Alligient paxs kind of got in this boat on their own and it's their problem. It feels like a class system and the law doesn't allow for that. If we are an advanced a country as we tout, all of us should be outraged at this, regardless of whether we would fly them or not. Last week in Europe, there were 4 incidents that were classified as accidents. 2 on legacy, 2 on ULCCs. Yet, in each instance, all paxs were accommodated with other flights within 24 hours. I know they have different laws, but if we just shrug off Alligient and it's practices, what leg do we have to stand on, when it occurs on a legacy carrier who decides to leave paxs on their own? They may have done the bare minimum that is required, but id like to think we'd all push for more than the bare minimum. Not for a delay of hours, not for a small amount of money to eat, not for the simple things, but the true part of the bargain: travel there and back in a reasonable time frame.

Yes, there is travel insurance, but, as we've seen, it's not always the solution.

Until all US carriers act in a responsible manner and take care if their paxs, they are pretty much given Carte Blanche. In this case, I don't see it. And I think it's a prime reason why consumers should push for equality in air travel. A carrier should never be allowed to just walk away from stranded paxs. If they can't follow some basic tenets of decency, then they shouldn't be allowed to fly. Carriers who act irresponsibly in one arena, probably do so in others.
 
Nov 14, 2016
374
930
93
48
#18
Hotels are not an apt comparison. And the only difference in carriers, is amoint of fare paid.

Otherwise, all federal rules and regulations apply, regardless of the carrier, unless they are charter. That is my point. This "You get what you paid for" mentality is exactly what the carriers dish out to the consumer. When a carrier sets up shop, say at Vegas, they rent their gates, pay for their landing and takeoff slots, same as everyone else. The only difference is in fare paid. Yet, because its Vegas, there are just as many paxs traveling there on fares similar to Alligient. So, you get what you pay for is most likely applicable to just about every Domestic carrier that services Vegas.

My issue, and it's not with anyone because I understand exactly what you are saying, that somehow Alligient paxs kind of got in this boat on their own and it's their problem. It feels like a class system and the law doesn't allow for that. If we are an advanced a country as we tout, all of us should be outraged at this, regardless of whether we would fly them or not. Last week in Europe, there were 4 incidents that were classified as accidents. 2 on legacy, 2 on ULCCs. Yet, in each instance, all paxs were accommodated with other flights within 24 hours. I know they have different laws, but if we just shrug off Alligient and it's practices, what leg do we have to stand on, when it occurs on a legacy carrier who decides to leave paxs on their own? They may have done the bare minimum that is required, but id like to think we'd all push for more than the bare minimum. Not for a delay of hours, not for a small amount of money to eat, not for the simple things, but the true part of the bargain: travel there and back in a reasonable time frame.

Yes, there is travel insurance, but, as we've seen, it's not always the solution.

Until all US carriers act in a responsible manner and take care if their paxs, they are pretty much given Carte Blanche. In this case, I don't see it. And I think it's a prime reason why consumers should push for equality in air travel. A carrier should never be allowed to just walk away from stranded paxs. If they can't follow some basic tenets of decency, then they shouldn't be allowed to fly. Carriers who act irresponsibly in one arena, probably do so in others.
Hotels are a fine comparison because, as we see here, the only difference is NOT the fare paid. Seat sizes, drinks, upgrades, availability, interline agreements - these are amenities that you pay extra for. These amenities aren't fundamentally any different than a pool, the ability to be walked to a different hotel or a concierge room. The comparison is apt.

The bare minimum is all that is required. You can push for more but that is all they are offering and that's what your're paying for. When you "push for equality" then, by definition, you're also pushing for price equality and that eliminates ULCCs. I'm not necessarily against beefing up the PAX Bill of Rights to something that offers the equivalent of EU 261, better care for stranded passengers and so forth. But I also realize the full consequences of taking that stance - higher prices. These things raise prices and makes flying un-affordable for a segment of the market. Again, you can't have it both ways.

I don't think they acted irresponsibility. They acted entirely within the law, FAA rules and their own Contract of Carriage. If you think following those are irresponsible then your problem isn't with the airline, it's with the law. Your problem isn't that they got what they paid for because that is exactly what happened here. Your issue is that you shouldn't be able to get so little guaranteed for your money and that's an entirely different argument.
 
Jan 5, 2015
151
125
43
50
Spring, Texas
#19
There was a mechanical issue with the plane but instead of being stranded for 4 days they had another plane ready in 30 minutes. I know we were at a hub airport but that wouldn't be an option on an ULCC.
Allegiant is based in Las Vegas, so any extra available planes would presumably be based there. However as others have discussed in the past, planes are very expensive so no airline will leave an operationally ready plane just sitting around waiting for a possible problem.
 
Oct 6, 2016
85
129
33
56
#20
Of course, you pay more, you get more. That was never the point. Same as with hotels, cruises, rentals, etc. I've akways understood that.

My point was when something goes wrong with a plane, and it leads to a several days cancellation, you create the perfect storm of the haves and the have nots. I know of no legislation that states that those who pay more are entitled to more when a plane breaks down. That's my point.

I cannot fathom a public that thinks a multi day delay, from their own home base, is acceptable, under any circumstances. Forget the fare paid, this is just another case of a carrier doing as it pleases. I'm just surprised to see so many in support. "They did all they are required to do". While that may be technically true, it's not very consumer friendly.

That's been my point all along. Im not trying to change the industry, but with Frontier practically declaring war on some routes, if these tactics work and take away from the Legacy carriers, we will see the same changes in other carriers. I feel for those who have to deal with this kind of headache. I'd hate to see other carriers take after Alligients model.
 
Last edited:
Likes: AMA
Status
Not open for further replies.