<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] more on Survey on putting electronics in checked airline baggage





Begin forwarded message:

From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: August 15, 2006 10:02:14 AM EDT
To: Edward Almasy <ealmasy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lauren Weinstein <lauren@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@xxxxxxxxx>, Dave Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [IP] more on Survey on putting electronics in checked airline baggage

From: Edward Almasy <ealmasy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: August 15, 2006 9:34:20 AM EDT
To: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] Survey on putting electronics in checked airline baggage

On Aug 11, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Lauren Weinstein wrote:
I'm conducting a little unscientific survey on whether or not airline
passengers are willing to place their expensive or important
electronic equipment in airline checked baggage (whether "locked" or
not, but on most flights unlocked will be required), and how this
would affect their flying patterns.

   It may be interesting to note that as of Sunday,
   when I was flying home from Rochester, Northwest
   was still specifically instructing passengers at
   checkin to *not* put computer equipment, cameras,
   etc in checked baggage, presumably because of the
   likelihood of damage or theft.  (They explicitly
   disclaim liability for damage or loss on those items
   and many others in their Contract of Carriage.)

A group of us were discussing the possible ramifications of this new (although now discontinued) policy. We decided it couldn't work because:

1) Although people can be lemmings and allow the gov't to run over them, they do get upset when you take away their iPods & game boys.

2) We thought 80+% (we thought it was 84%, but couldn't find a cite) of airline revenue is business travel. And business travelers are _not_ going to give up their laptops.

3) The resulting suits of people suing the airlines over damaged / stolen equipment they were _forced_ to check would hurt the airlines even more than they are already hurting.

4) The gov't might be forced to actually screen the screeners. Or worse, allow prosecutions of TSA employees who steal things. This would be disastrous to our currently infallible administration.

5) People will just drive, fly, take boats, video conference, or even just plain not go places, which would probably be the death knell for the already "beleaguered" industry.

Etc., etc.

--
TTFN,
patrick


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/