$200 to fly, $400 more to bring your bag

Airline after airline is approaching bankruptcy only to be rescued by another airline. At the announcement of most of these mergers the airline proudly proclaims that they will be taking the best of both airlines and making one new better airline. In reality most of these mergers were done for two reasons. The airline wanted to buy more gates and reduce competition in its more profitable markets.

The major airlines do everything they can to manipulate the supply of seats from one city to another. Another way they accomplish this is by treating a seat on a flight differently for those flying direct than for those flying a connection. Same plane, same seat different cost. In many cases it’s pay more get less.

An example: To fly direct from LGA (New York) to DTW (Detroit) on a flight tomorrow the lowest fare on a major airline is $585. However, for flights on the same day you can fly to MCO (Orlando) for $215. What is incredibly interesting is that the $215 to MCO is a connecting flight which stops in DTW. By spending an extra $370 you get a seat on the same plane from LGA to DTW but you give up the seat from DTW to MCO and gain the right to check bags. You thought $30 to check a bag was a steep price. Keep in mind you could already be paying over $300 for that ability.

I’m a huge proponent of analytic based pricing; it’s what I do for a living. But, somewhere along the way airlines allowed computer pricing to take over and common sense went out the window. Then again if consumers want to complain they need to use the power of the purse. Next time you fly see if you can’t get less for more.

FBI Tracking Device Removal

A resident of Santa Clara, California discovered by accident that the FBI planted a tracking device on his car

Afifi said the strange series of events began Sunday, when he took his car in for an oil change to a garage not far from his Santa Clara home. As the car was raised, Afifi said he noticed “a wire hanging out.” Then he noticed “a black, glimmering device.”

Mazher Khan, owner of Ali’s Auto Care, had no idea what it was but he agreed to yank it out. Afifi left with the device and drove home.

On Tuesday, Afifi said he had just gotten home from work when one of his roommates came in and said, “There are two suspicious people standing right by your car in the complex.”

It is a strange story to begin with, but then it gets even more strange when the FBI show up and request that the big black devices of wires-and-magnets be returned to them.

“All right, where’s the device you found under your hood,” the agent said, according to Afifi. “He goes, ‘Yeah, we put it there.’ “

[…]

“I gave it back to them and said, ‘Is this what you needed?’ ” Afifi said. “He goes, ‘Yeah, this is it.’ “

Ali’s Auto Care now can update their ads to include “Tracking Device Removal”, or maybe even offer an Internet coupon. Note that Divorcenet.com suggests GPS tracking devices could be a wider problem than just with law enforcement.

The use of GPS systems is increasingly being used to monitor cheating spouses. The falling price and shrinking size of GPS systems have spouses from all walks of life keeping track of their “better” halves. Spouses can now use a GPS device to follow a vehicle, and presumably the cheater, behind the wheel. The GPS system’s software works seamlessly with online map services such as Google Maps. Thereafter, the suspecting spouse can sit back and wait for that “gotcha” moment.

Spouses are said to legally be entitled to track their “own” vehicles. The question becomes one of ownership, and then privacy.

The legality of secretly planting a GPS system is a very fact-sensitive analysis. Like checking a spouse’s email, the legality of secretly planting a GPS tracker depends on who owns the vehicle. In a purely technical sense, if you own the vehicle or have joint ownership of it, then it is perfectly legal to use a GPS system to monitor it. Spouses can legally access their spouse’s email in scenarios where there is a jointly-owned computer or a computer that is used by the entire family. The key issue in the planting of a GPS system is whether the spouse who was tracked had a reasonable expectation of privacy. The question apparently has yet to be raised in a divorce case in New Jersey. The law is normally five years behind technological developments.

I am not a lawyer but the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test seems a bit weak. The courts have already ruled in the US that there should be no expectation of privacy in your driveway from the government, for example.

Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn’t violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn’t tracking your movements.

Another opportunity for the security market. Someone should start selling Fourth Amendment tents for the  driveway — now even you can set up a reasonable expectation of privacy on your own property.

Our Scale is Wrong

I walked behind a nurse into the doctor’s office.

“Shoes off please and stand on the scale so I can measure your weight and height” she said in monotone, clearly excited to be taking a reading for the hundredth time that day.

I complied; she read the results to me.

“Are you certain?” I asked “That height measurement seems off by a factor…”

She shrugged and started to turn away “Oh, a lot of people say our scale is wrong.”

When a health care provider has a hard time calibrating height I am tempted to question how they measure dosages and other more important metrics, let alone privacy controls.