Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Products and Services Alignment Session Full Agenda Section I. General a. Welcome note b. A synthesis of the highlights from the previous days’ sessions will be presented c. Approve Summary Report from Online Conference April 2015
Section II. New Business Requests Group I: Optional Services and Branded Fares Business Request
Bus. Req. #
1. Optional Services and Branded Fares: Rich Media
689
2. New or Modified Brands in Features Table S8
690
3. Sub Codes Translation
691
4. Tier (Brand) Name/Code Identification
692
5. Industry-Approved Benefits and Ancillaries
693
6. Baggage Coding Option to Update Multiple Fields to Blank at Once
707
Group II: Automated and FareManager Rules Business Request
Bus. Req. #
1. Ability to View and Edit Override Date Table from Grid in Category 25
665
2. Add Override Date Table to Grid for All Categories
667
3. Category 25 Override Table Number Capability
721
4. Permitted Combinations End-On-End Combination
671
5. Linked Alliance Fares
681
6. Enhance Query – Ticket Designator
687
7. Passenger Type Code Mapping Changes
709
8. Warning Message when "No Charge" is Checked in Discounts (Categories 19-22)
716
9. New Parameter in Sales Restrictions (Category 15) Sell and Ticket Field
726
10. Increase Copy Table Limitations on “View Summary” Option
669
11. Ticket Validity of One Way Fares for Voluntary Charges (Category 31)
704
3
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Business Request
Bus. Req. #
12. Fare Type Grouping Indicators Usage in Rules Category Control (Record 2)
705
13. Cancellation Penalty as Sum of Flat Amount and Percentage
718
14. Expand User-Created Zone Table (Table 978) across all Category Control Record and RBD Charts 1 and 2
720
15. Allow Student Travel Organizations (STOs) as Validating Carrier(s) in ATPCO Fare Rules
686
16. RBD Processing Logic Change Based on Fare Class Code and Prime RBD
724
17. New Rules (Category 31) Processing Tag
747
Group III: Taxes Business Request
Bus. Req. #
1. Taxes on Service Fees
717
2. PFC Application Enhancements (XF tax code)
725
Section III. News Briefs a. Deliveries: Completed and Planned
Section IV. Product Updates a. b. c. d.
Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group Negotiated Fares and Fare By Rule Working Group Taxes Task Force 2015 Upcoming Working Groups and Webinars
Section V. How to do Business a. b. c. d.
Industry Development Prioritization Survey Results ATPCO Advisory Committee (AAC) Update Milestone 5: Production Implementation/Adoption Confirmation Industry Standards Alignment
Section VI. View to the Future a. ATPCO’s Proposed 2016–2017 Product Development Plan b. ATPCO’s Proposed 2016 Working Group and Event Schedule
4
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section I
Section I. General a. Welcome Note b. A synthesis of the highlights from the previous days’ sessions will be presented. c. Approve Summary Report from Online Conference April 2015
5
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Section II. New Business Requests New Automated Business Request Form We have streamlined the submission of new business requests. The new process ensures the requester information is complete, guarantees that the most current form is used, and automates the submission. The process includes confirmation of receipt at the time of submission as well as several days later to confirm the content of the submission.
Milestone 1 Sign-Off Forms for New Business Requests At the end of Section II you will find the combined Milestone 1 form for all new business requests for presentation at conference. On this single page you can indicate your support, or lack of it, for each new business request. Note: The Milestone 1 combined form is also available in an online version. Please submit one response for your organization by 8 October.
7
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Group I: Optional Services and Branded Fares Title
Optional Services and Branded Fares: Rich Media
Business Request No:
689
Submitted Date
27 May 2015
Submitted By
Finnair
Business Need
Format of rich media (numbering, rich media format) varies
Current Solution
Currently, the filing of the rich media is based on negotiations with GDSs and which pattern they use, e.g. reference number and format of the rich media is given by a GDS.
Proposed Solution
Industry should define a standardized format and numbering of the media, so that the same pictures could be used in various GDSs.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO has reviewed this business request and is working with the Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group to identify and implement an industry solution that will enable airlines to distribute their product attributes via rich media content. Working Group members have ranked rich media in the top 10 priorities within Optional Services and Branded Fares. An initial solution proposes to use the Picture Number field in the Optional Services S5 record as well as introduce a Picture Number field in both the Optional Services S7 record and the Branded Fares S8 record to enable airlines the ability to distribute rich media file references for their products and services. Data application standards will be reviewed with the working group members and should address industry needs for numbering and format. Additionally, the initial solution will require the creation of a new appendix that will contain the URLs of the rich media servers that hold the files. Industry implementation is pending solution approval and industry milestone response.
8
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
New or Modified Brands in Features Table S8
Business Request No:
690
Submitted Date
21 May 2015
Submitted By
Finnair
Business Need
When there is a new brand or the order of existing brands need to be modified the changes are very time consuming as it is not possible to cut/copy and paste information as the page is kind of static. If we have nine tiers and we want to add a new brand the system automatically creates a tier number 10. It is not possible to change the order or tier, but a user has to rewrite all the information incl. other tiers if the new tier now becomes e.g. a number 1.
Current Solution
Proposed Solution
Propose to develop the system so that it is possible: 1) insert a new column between /in front of columns and to be able to specify where the columns will be added. Automatically rearrange the tier numbering and keeping the related names/codes (related to other AY business case) and 2) delete a column and rearrange the numbering and keep the related brand names/codes. cut / copy paste data or 3) to be able to add a new column and rearrange the tier numbers, but keep the related brand names/codes
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the request in that the user must manually re-enter data in order to re-organize it once the Features Table has been established. Any changes to the table require manual coding, which can be time-consuming and cause errors. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
9
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Sub Codes Translation
Business Request No:
691
Submitted Date
21 May 2015
Submitted By
Finnair
Business Need
When filing a brand related features table in ATPCO the maintenance is challenging as there is no translation of sub codes in S8 or it has to be done by searching for the code. There might be dozens (or hundreds) sub codes per carrier, so identification of the brand features and linking them to the tiers will be easier.
Current Solution
No sub code names in S8. Proposed Solution
Propose to develop the system so that it takes the sub code information from S5 and either displays it next to the sub code field or by clicking the specific sub code a sub code name is displayed in S8.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
While there is a way to view sub code translation in the Branded Fares application using Help list for Sub Code in Record S8, ATPCO understands the challenges expressed in this request.
10
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Image 1: Features Table and Help List for Sub Code Pending industry support via Milestone 1, ATPCO would work with the requestor and other Branded Fares users to find the best solution to ease this pain point in the data maintenance process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
11
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Tier (Brand) Name/Code Identification
Business Request No:
692
Submitted Date
21 May 2015
Submitted By
Finnair
Business Need
When filing a features table (S8 record) in ATPCO, the maintenance is challenging as there is neither brand name nor brand code and the users must remember which tier number reflects which brand. This becomes even more challenging when various programs have different number brands.
Current Solution
No brand names or brands codes in S8, only tier number. Proposed Solution
We propose to develop the system so that it takes either brand name or brand code information from S5 and either displays it next to the tier field or by clicking the specific tier the name/code is displayed in S8.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the request and the challenges expressed. While making updates to the Features table in the Record S8, users cannot see the Brand Code or/and Brand Name corresponding to the specific Tier. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
12
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Industry-Approved Benefits and Ancillaries
Business Request No:
693
Submitted Date
27 May 2015
Submitted By
Finnair
Business Need
With ref. to 1A, SN and AY business case related to standardization of benefits and ancillaries, we would like to discuss the issue further.
Current Solution
We just recently implemented a hand bag only. A big travel agency chain rightly claimed how difficult it is to compare various elements, when each carrier has a different approach for benefits and ancillaries and GDSs might have an icon for bags only (included/not included). Also according to our study online travel agents have various ways of displaying /not displaying rules, benefits and ancillaries for a customer. Customers might not be informed at all whether a fare is nonrefundable or if there is not a baggage disclaimer of a hand bag only fare. Service providers are currently dependent on the development TAs are willing to make either to their sites or robotic tools. This is a challenge, especially for midsize carriers.
Proposed Solution
Industry should not only define the standardized features, but this agreement should be extended to GDSs to implement them accordingly. This would benefit the whole industry.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO has reviewed this business request and believes this falls within the Key Features of a Brand priority topic the Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group is addressing. Each feature associated with a brand has specific product attributes that can be used to describe the product offer as well as for comparison between airlines. This request will be considered by the working group when establishing any solution enhancements.
13
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Baggage Coding Option to Update Multiple Fields to Blank at Once
Business Request No:
707
Submitted Date
4 August 2015
Submitted By
Air Canada
Business Need
When amending baggage coding we would like the option to update multiple fields to blank at once.
Current Solution
Currently if we want to remove a value from 50 lines simultaneously, we have to manually go in each of those 50 lines and remove the value one at a time which is very time consuming and inefficient.
Proposed Solution
When selecting “update multiple” there should be an option to select “leave blank” in each field.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need to allow the user to select “Blank” value in each field when “Update Multiple” right-click functionality is selected in order to change the value to blank. ATPCO recognizes that adding this functionality to Record S7 will save time and eliminate the need to perform updates one segment at a time. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
14
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Group II: Automated and FareManager Rules Title
Ability to View and Edit Override Date Table from Grid in Category 25
Business Request No:
665
Submitted Date
21 April 2015
Submitted By
Tata Consultancy Services
Business Need
Currently, the Override Date Table can be accessed only from Form format of category 25. In order to view/add/delete/edit the ODT table, the user must go to each Cat 25 table manually and perform an update which is very time consuming and there is a chance of users skipping tables in between, in the event of multiple table numbers.
Current Solution
To view/add/delete/edit ODT table in cat 25, the user has to go to each Cat 25 table manually and perform the updates.
Proposed Solution
Cat 25 has Grid as well as form format. We would appreciate it if the ODT field is allowed to be seen and updated from Grid format as well.
Need By Date
As early as possible.
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need and challenge expressed. Currently, the Override Date Table has been created on the Grid level for categories that had high statistics of data usage or do not have a Form view. A new study on the usage of the Override Date Tables on the grid level would be required to determine customer impact and the current level of usage. As a workaround, users can use existing Query capabilities to Edit/Delete Override Date Table without manually accessing every single record. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
15
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
16
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Add Override Date Table to Grid for All Categories
Business Request No:
667
Submitted Date
22 April 2015
Submitted By
Tata Consultancy Services
Business Need
Currently, the Override Date Table can be accessed only from Form format of each category. In order to view/add/delete/edit the ODT table the user has to go each Category Data Table of each category manually and perform an update. This is a very time consuming process and there is a chance of users skipping tables in between in the event of multiple table numbers. It has been noticed that most of the category which has both Grid and Form format do not have ODT table in grid format. E.g. Category 4/19/20/21/22/31/35. However, category 15/19 with has ODT table in both Grid and Form format.
We would like to request ATPCO to add ODT table in grid format for other categories as well. Current Solution
To view/add/delete/edit ODT table, the user has to go to each Category data table manually and perform the updates.
Proposed Solution
We would appreciate if the ODT field is allowed to be seen and updated from Grid format also for all Grid + Form format category.
17
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need. Currently, the Override Date Table has been created on the Grid level for categories that had high statistics of data usage within the table or do not have a Form view. A new study on the usage of the Override Date Tables on the grid level would be required to determine the customer impact and current level of usage. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
18
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Category 25 Override Table Number Capability
Business Request No:
721
Submitted Date
21 August 2015
Submitted By
United Airlines
Business Need
Currently users have to review the CAT 25 override tag settings for each category in each table to ensure accuracy. At times, a category setting may have been set incorrectly in the point-and-click process or overlooked. In addition, the system resets the override tags when changing the Fare Indicator, which requires the user to have to make changes to the tag settings. This can be time consuming when we at times can have more than 100 tables.
Current Solution
None
Proposed Solution
Provide table number capabilities for the override tags. This will allow carriers to create tables specific to certain override settings and use table numbers in the coding process/ mass update process.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need and agrees that this would be a beneficial enhancement that will improve time to market and data accuracy for airlines. The same Business Request has been submitted by Tata Consultancy. Currently, users have two options for workarounds: 1.
Use the Simplified Rules solution, which allows the update of the following Category Overrides in a single screen view across multiple tables and sequences (up to 25 sequences): 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 18, 31, 33. Existing Rules may be updated in Simplified Rules as well.
2. Perform mass updates using existing Query capabilities, reducing manual updates for every single Category 25 Category Override section. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
19
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Option 1.
Option 2.
20
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Permitted Combinations End-On-End Combination
Business Request No:
671
Submitted Date
30 April 2015
Submitted By
Aegean Airlines
Business Need
We would like to check the possibility of hardcoding the following information: In Cat.10 in order to be auto priced: END-ON-END END-ON-END COMBINATIONS PERMITTED. VALIDATE ALL FARE COMPONENTS. SIDE TRIPS PERMITTED. END-ON-END NOTE END-ON-END WITHIN 24 HOURS IS NOT PERMITTED END-ON-END 24 HOURS OR MORE IS PERMITTED Our intent is to NOT to allow END ON END COMBINATION, ONLY for travel WITHIN 24 HOURS example:
Travel within 24HOURS / END ON END not permitted
A3 319 B 22JUN 1 HERATH HK1 A3 608 K 22JUN 1 ATHLHR HK1
1735 1825 320 1910 2110 321
Travel in more than 24HOURS / END ON END permitted
A3 319 B 22JUN 1 HERATH HK1 A3 608 K 25JUN 1 ATHLHR HK1
1735 1825 320 1910 2110 321
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands this business request and realizes that the current system may not provide a way to qualify end-on-end combinations based on elapsed time over the combination and to also ensure that the restriction only applies to those pricing units combined end-on-end over the same point. This will require further research to determine the best way to accommodate the business need. ATPCO suggests that this item be proposed as an agenda topic for the next Combinations (Category 10) Data Application Working Group scheduled for Second Quarter 2016 so that an agreeable approach can be proposed and discussed as the best way to address this need.
21
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Linked Alliance Fares
Business Request No:
681
Submitted Date
4 April 2015
Submitted By
Lufthansa
Business Need
Alignment of all ATPCO categories.
Current Solution
Not existing.
Proposed Solution
Currently, in “ATPCO Solution Linked Alliance Fares” the Rule Categories 4, 25, and 35 are always excluded. We propose to include these 3 categories. The Distribution Analyst would still be able to determine whether he/she wants to align these categories or not. In our current Star Alliance World we have standardized these 3 categories for major products. With the current COPY + PASTE function in the Rules System, we need to update CAT 35 / 4 / 25 for 1 Carrier, GFS it and then Copy + Paste it among 27 Carriers for Star Alliance Products, among at least 6 Carriers among JV products. Using the Linked Alliance Fares Solution would give us a major benefit on updating CAT 35 (PCC’s) and CAT 25’s.
Need By Date
As soon as possible.
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need and agrees that this would be a beneficial enhancement that will improve time-to-market and data accuracy for alliance partners. Other airlines also expressed the same need. In addition to the above request, ATPCO recommends reviewing the business requirements to validate what additional functionality may also be required to achieve original business intent. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
22
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Enhance Query – Ticket Designator
Business Request No:
687
Submitted Date
5 June 2015
Submitted By
American Airlines
Business Need
Need functionality to find/replace ticket designators in Record 1 and Category 25.
Current Solution
Manual
Proposed Solution
None
Need By Date
As Soon As Possible
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need to be able to find/replace Ticket Designators in Fare Class (Record 1) and Fare By Rule (Category 25) using Query functionality, and ATPCO recognizes the efficiencies to be gained with this enhancement. Currently users can find and modify Ticket Designators in Fare By Rule (Category 25) using Query functionality. For analysts who want to change Ticket Designator, these are the steps that need to be performed: o o
Select Query Type: Category Data, and Main Category – Category 25. Then specify Carrier/Tariff/Rule and select the desired action: Find or Modify. Specify the Ticket Designators that the analyst is trying to “find” and “change to”. The system will find the sequence that has the indicated Ticket Designator and modify it.
23
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Current data application processing defines a hierarchy for use in applying a Ticket Designator. The hierarchy begins with Negotiated Fares (Category 35) and, if not found, then moves to Discounts (Categories 19-22), followed by Fare By Rule (Category 25) and finally the Base Fare. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. ATPCO asks that you indicate via the Milestone 1 if the capability would also be needed for Negotiated Fares (Category 35) and also Discount Categories 19-22. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
24
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Passenger Type Code Mapping Changes
Business Request No:
709
Submitted Date
5 August 2015
Submitted By
Sabre
Business Need
Current PTC mapping structure does not map to the relevant PTC family. This has an impact to discounted PTCs. There are several discount/status children and infant PTCs that should map instead to the corresponding adult PTC, example • • •
Status infant PTC INR (Resident infant not occupying seat) maps to a child PTC CNN Status infant PTC ISR (Resident infant occupying seat) maps to a child PTC CNN Status child PTC CNN maps to ADT
Current Solution
Current solution does not align PTCs for children and other status/discount PTCs as often intended by carriers. This results in an unintended pricing application for all products that apply a PTC hierarchy, including but not limited to Automated Rules, Taxes, Carrier Imposed Fees (YQ/YR), Baggage and Optional Services.
Proposed Solution
Revise the PTC mapping hierarchy for all discount/status PTCs to ensure they map to the relevant PTC family. Our preference is to have this approved and a new PTC Data application in place before the Category 35 PTC matching exercise becomes implemented, so we have one development cycle to correct this across Cat 1 and Cat 35 PTC processing. For example, if mapping to the same PTC family the results should be as follows: •
INR (Residence infant not occupying seat) maps to CHR (Resident child)
• •
ISR (Residence infant occupying seat) maps to CHR (Resident child) CHR/UNR (Residence child/unaccompanied Resident child) maps to ADR
• • •
ENF (Emigrant infant not occupying seat) maps to EMN (Emigrant child) ENS (Emigrant infant occupying seat) maps to EMN (Emigrant child) EMN (Emigrant child) maps to EMI
• • •
GRI (Group Infant Without a Seat) maps to GNN (group child) GRS (Group infant occupying seat) maps to GNN (group child) GNN (Group child) maps to GRP (group)
•
TNF (Frequent Flyer Infant without a Seat) maps to TNN (Frequent Flyer Child) FIS (Frequent Flyer Infant with a Seat) maps to TNN (Frequent Flyer Child) TNN (Frequent Flyer Child) maps to FYY
• •
25
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Any status PTC should be looked at - e.g. LNN, MNN, etc. They should map up to their corresponding adult. And status infants should map up to their corresponding child, etc. Need By Date
Agreement and new Data Application by October 2015
ATPCO Response
ATPCO has discussed this request with Sabre and understands the issue. ATPCO recommends this not be tied to the Negotiated Fares (Category 35) PTC Mapping implementation currently scheduled for 3 April 2016 and instead be included for discussion at the First Quarter 2016 Data Application Webinar. The first step would be to define the hierarchies with a planned industry implementation once data application agreement is reached. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process.
26
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Warning Message when "No Charge" is Checked in Discounts (Categories 19-22)
Business Request No:
716
Submitted Date
13 August 2015
Submitted By
Cathay Pacific Airways
Business Need
Currently there is no warning message when “no charge” is checked on Categories 19-22. For revenue protection purposes (e.g. to avoid a wrong update of “no charge” by the coders and mis-interpretation by the systems), we request, once “no charge” is checked, ATPCO to show a warning message to ensure the coding is correct and then process the Discount categories.
Current Solution
None
Proposed Solution
Requesting a return warning message when “no charge” is checked in Cat19-22.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need to create safeguards within Category 19-22 to prohibit the creation of unintended fares. Currently, when the user selects the “No charge” checkbox, the system triggers a generic Warning pop-up window that the user has to acknowledge. In addition, the user will get a message stating that the Resulting fare amount is below 100 or the percent is below 50. During a recent working group, some carriers expressed a concern over the annoying, frequent pop-up windows and warnings and stated that pop-up windows and warnings should be an optional feature, giving carriers the ability to display the warnings at their discretion. This item requires additional research and analysis to determine an optimal solution. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
27
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
28
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
New Parameter in Sales Restrictions (Category 15) Sell and Ticket Field
Business Request No:
726
Submitted Date
25 August 2015
Submitted By
Turkish Airlines
Business Need
Today Sell and Ticket Field in cat.15 allows airlines to code* ticket and sell* restrictions. But, there is no data field/element to restrict ticket/sale to specific carrier. Carrier YQ/YR charges are not interlineable. Some Airlines give agents special incentive to any tickets issued by using their own ticket stock (includes segments/fares on another carrier). This could result in loss of revenue for fare owned carriers. New field required for coding this restriction*** Sale /Ticket permitted on OAL -Exclude XX Carrier ** in cat.15. This would allow carriers to manage YQ/YR revenue through *validating/ ticketing* coding in cat.15
Current Solution
None
Proposed Solution
In the Sell and Ticket field, following parameter is needed: • Sell and Ticket – Exclude XX Carrier for Ticket
Need By Date
As soon as possible.
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the intent of the request. This request would change current options in Category 15. Carriers can limit the validating carrier to only certain carriers, but cannot exclude one carrier while including all others in any kind of normal input coding. Category 35 has a negative function that allows a carrier to indicate NO plate/stock of a particular carrier. Category 35 is only for private tariffs. The terminology for ticketing in Category 35 is dated compared to the recent enhancements in Category 15. ATPCO will prioritize development of a solution for this pending Milestone 1 responses and in the meantime can work with TK on a workaround, if available.
29
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Increase Copy Table Limitations on “View Summary” Option
Business Request No:
669
Submitted Date
30 April 2015
Submitted By
Tata Consultancy Services
Business Need
Currently in the FareManager rules system, while copying table numbers from the “View Summary Option” if the number of rows in the summary screen exceeds 50, then the system displays an error and does not allow users to copy data. In addition, in “Advance Edit” mode the user can copy only up to 100 rows of data. As a result, if there are more than 100 rows in the Category Data Table, the user has to perform the copy action multiple times which is very time consuming and errorprone.
Current Solution
If there are more than 100 rows in the Category Data Table, the user has to perform the copy action multiple times which is very time consuming and error prone.
Proposed Solution
Increase the limit of copying rows from “View Summary Option” by at least 300 or maximum 500.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business need and recognizes that current processing does not allow users to perform the copy action for more than 100 rows in the Category Data Table. ATPCO defined the limits of the rows for copy/paste based on expected system performance and response time.
30
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
ATPCO needs to understand customer expectations of system response time and then evaluate the possibility of increasing the maximum limit of rows to copy/paste without affecting system performance. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This request is a user experience issue and can be accomplished without subscriber impact.
31
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Ticket Validity of One Way Fares for Voluntary Changes (Category 31)
Business Request No:
704
Submitted Date
22 July 2015
Submitted By
Aeroflot
Business Need
Currently Cat 31 (automated reissue) proposes only option to choose that the reissue could be made within ticket validity. But for OW fares there are no definition of ticket validity. So GDS’s allows reissuing of all OW fares including special fares with no restriction.
Current Solution
None
Proposed Solution
Update Category 31 so it would be a possibility for airline to choose time frames when ticket should be reissued. Same as it is now in cat33.
Need By Date
As soon as possible
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands SU’s request for ATPCO Voluntary Changes (Category 31) to facilitate the specification of a distinct period of validity for Special fares. Currently, Category 31 allows carriers only to specify within a fare rule that the voluntary change transaction must be within ticket validity, as specified in the carrier’s general rules. ATPCO’s Voluntary Changes and Refunds Working Group has discussed and tentatively approved a proposal for an automated method to specify ticket validity, but the working group members did not see a need for a distinction between normal and special fares. ATPCO has not yet initiated the milestone process for that proposal because of industry prioritization. ATPCO will amend that proposal to include a Normal/Special parameter, pending working group support and industry prioritization.
32
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Fare Type Grouping Indicators Usage in Rules Category Control (Record 2)
Business Request No:
705
Submitted Date
22 July 2015
Submitted By
Finnair
Business Need
We can currently use fare type grouping indicator (e.g.: *Y, *B) while coding RBD chart data. This option is not possible whilst coding rec 2 in the rule. Having such option would help us to improve efficiency and avoid over coding of identical data for multiple sequences. (e.g.: cat 50; cat 10)
Current Solution
Currently we need to multiple sequences for specific RBD/Fare family. Even data remain same.
Proposed Solution
Allow usage of fare type grouping indicators in rule record 2.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands how this change would improve coding efficiencies. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process. This change would affect system processing of Record 2.
33
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Cancellation Penalty as Sum of Flat Amount and Percentage
Business Request No:
718
Submitted Date
21 August 2015
Submitted By
JSC Ural Airlines
Business Need
U6 faces to the problem with filing 31/33 category. In cat 33 U6 has two requirements in case of voluntary refund less than 24 hours before departure: - 25% of the fare paid for unused portion of travel - plus charge 1000 RUB But it is not possible to put two penalties both. Cat 31/33 does not support it. We could file only a flat cancellation penalty or a percentage cancellation penalty.
Current Solution
No solution
Proposed Solution
Add technical possibility in cat 31/33 to file two requirements – amount and percent in the same time.
Need By Date
As soon as possible
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands U6’s request for ATPCO Voluntary Refunds (Category 33) to facilitate the specification of a cancellation penalty as the sum of a percentage of the fares on the unflown portion of travel and a flat amount. Currently Category 33 permits the specification of a percentage of a single fare component or pricing unit or a flat amount, but only the higher or lower of the two is applied, not the sum. U6 does not specify how they would want the automation to handle scenarios in which • •
there are several unflown fare components, each with a different percentage change fee or the fare component that carries a percentage cancellation penalty is partially flown
U6 mentions both Category 31 (Voluntary Changes) and Category 33 but mentions only refund transactions. ATPCO will seek clarification from U6. Pending industry support expressed via the Milestone 1 form, this request will be placed on the development list for working group prioritization and discussion to resolve all open issues.
34
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Expand User-Created Zone Table (Table 978) across all Category Control and RBD Charts 1 and 2
Business Request No:
720
Submitted Date
21 August 2015
Submitted By
United Airlines
Business Need
Expand the 978 table across all fare rule categories and Chart 1/Chart2.
Current Solution
Currently carriers are forced to file each O&D at the REC 2 level when filing geographic exceptions at the city level. This can take a significant amount of time to code as well as maintenance.
Proposed Solution
Add additional columns to each REC 2 of each fare rule category like in CAT 25(Zone 1/Zone 2).
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands that providing this capability for the User-Created Zone Table (978) across the Rules categories and Charts 1 and 2 would streamline coding and provide for efficiencies. ATPCO has received previous requests for the addition of User-Created Zone Table in additional records. ATPCO recognizes the added data maintenance efficiencies but also acknowledges the system processing changes that must occur if the capabilities were added. ATPCO would recommend prioritizing the categories that require this capability and evaluating the industry impacts of each. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process.
35
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
Allow Student Travel Organizations (STOs) as Validating Carrier(s) in ATPCO Fare Rules
Business Request No:
686
Submitted Date
1 June 2015
Submitted By
STA Travel
Business Need
As a Student organization (STO), STA Travel (STA) offers a service to the airline community by providing a portal through which carriers distribute distressed inventory in the form of exclusive fares for student/youth customers. Fares are offered by a diverse range of operating carriers for plating on STA’s own ticket product, eSATA. They are issued via an industry standard e-ticket server and settled with our partners using interline settlement standards outlined by IATA in the Revenue Account Manual (RAM) via IATA’s Simplified Interline Settlement standard (SIS) using industry standard interline billing files as specified in IATA’s Interline Settlement Participation Guides (ISPG). A number of fares that leverage this offering are distributed by carriers to STA Travel agents and affiliates via ATPCO tools and services. The processes of issuance and settlement are complicated by the fact that it is not possible to select STA as a validating carrier at point of fare or rule distribution which leads to issues at point of quoting, pricing, ticketing, auditing, billing and settlement – essentially the full interline ticket cycle. The following examples highlight two common problems that ultimately lead to discrepancies at time of settlement. Hypothetical carriers XX and ZZ have been used taking current issues experienced with several interline partners. EXAMPLE 1: Sales restrictions (CAT15/25) Data represented in form of fares and rules as would be returned from quotes for carrier XX in Amadeus GDS (market DE) >FQDFRAAUH/AXX/R,UP TAX MAY APPLY ROE 0.913391 UP TO 1.00 EUR SURCHG MAY APPLY-CK 12MAY15**12MAY15/XX FRAAUH/NSP;EH/TPM 3014/MPM 3932 LN FARE BASIS OW EUR RT B PEN DATES/DAYS AP MIN 01 QLNRTDE1 212 Q NRF S30MAR 08SEP+ + + 02 QLNRTDE1 230 Q NRF S30MAR 08SEP+ + +
>FQN1*SR ** RULES DISPLAY
RULE MAXFR 12MAR 12M R
**
TAX MAY APPLY SURCHG MAY APPLY-CK RULE 12MAY15**12MAY15/XX FRAAUH/NSP;EH/TPM 3014/MPM 3932 LN FARE BASIS OW EUR RT B PEN DATES/DAYS AP MIN MAXFR 01 QLNRTDE1 212 Q NRF S30MAR 08SEP+ + + 12MAR FCL: QLNRTDE1 TRF: 903 RULE: STUD BK: Q PTC: STU-STUDENT FTC: XPX-INSTANT PURCHASE EXCURSION SR.SALES RESTRICT BASE FARE NOTE -
36
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
DUE TO GOVERMENT RESTRICTIONS TICKETS MAY NOT BE SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES IF ANY FLIGHT TO/FROM/VIA CUBA IS INCLUDED ON THE TICKET. FARE BY RULE TICKETS MUST BE ISSUED ON XX . *** GENERAL RULE FOLLOWS ***
NOTE DUE TO GOVERMENT RESTRICTIONS TICKETS MAY NOT BE SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES IF ANY FLIGHT TO/FROM/VIA CUBA IS INCLUDED ON THE TICKET.
>FQN2*SR ** RULES DISPLAY
**
TAX MAY APPLY SURCHG MAY APPLY-CK RULE 12MAY15**12MAY15/XX FRAAUH/NSP;EH/TPM 3014/MPM 3932 LN FARE BASIS OW EUR RT B PEN DATES/DAYS AP MIN MAXFR 02 QLNRTDE1 230 Q NRF S30MAR 08SEP+ + + 12M R FCL: QLNRTDE1 TRF: 22 RULE: 5000 BK: Q PTC: ADT-ADULT FTC: XPX-INSTANT PURCHASE EXCURSION FARE FAMILY : FLYDEAL SR.SALES RESTRICT NOTE DUE TO GOVERMENT RESTRICTIONS TICKETS MAY NOT BE SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES IF ANY FLIGHT TO/FROM/VIA CUBA IS INCLUDED ON THE TICKET
In the above example, Carrier XX’s private STU fare (Fare 1) has a sales restriction that allows issuance on XX stock ONLY. XX allows 0O to sell this fare on 0O stock, but is unable to add 0O to the list of permitted validating carriers. As per business agreement, a workaround is required to allow STA to quote, price and ticket this fare. At point of quoting and pricing, STA automated workflow selects the STU fare and prices with XX as validating carrier. At point of ticketing, STA overwrites the validating carrier with 0O. At point of billing, XX reads 0O as validating carrier and via automation determines that the ADT fare is applicable for interline billing (Fare 2). The ADT fare is higher which leads to a fare billing difference at time of settlement. EXAMPLE 2: Fuel Surcharge application As part of a bilateral interline agreement for student fares, Carrier ZZ and 0O have stipulated the method by which fuel surcharges should be quoted, priced, collected and settled. Carrier ZZ determines that STA should apply fuel surcharges as a YQ tax. Carrier ZZ’s standard interline business model uses the following logic at point of surcharge data distribution to determine fuel surcharge application: • •
Tickets issued by Alliance partner/JV/Student Organization: Apply YQ as tax Tickets issued by other interline partner: Apply Q to fare
This business logic requires that applicable surcharge rules be distributed in two separate products and services offered by ATPCO, namely Cat12 (Q Surcharges) and the ATPCO YQ/YR table. The 2 parts of the example below illustrate a scenario
37
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
where STA correctly collects and tickets YQ but at point of billing, ZZ determines that Q should be applicable instead. 2.1 Q Surcharge Application (CAT12) This is an excerpt of the Surcharge Category as would be returned from fare rules for carrier ZZ in Amadeus GDS (Market GB): >FQDLONSYD/AZZ/R,UP TAX MAY APPLY ROE 0.658662 NEAREST 1.00 GBP SURCHG MAY APPLY-CK RULE 15MAY15**15MAY15/ZZ LONSYD/NSP;TS/TPM ...../MPM 13292 LN FARE BASIS OW GBP RT B PEN DATES/DAYS AP MIN MAXFR 01 HLXEEGB 591 H + S25DEC 25JUN+ - - AR >FQN01*SU 15MAY15**15MAY15/YY LONSYD/NSP;TS/TPM ...../MPM 13292 LN FARE BASIS OW GBP RT B PEN DATES/DAYS AP MIN MAXFR 01 HLXEEGB 591 H + S25DEC 25JUN+ - - AR FCL: HLOXEW TRF: 901 RULE: GB24 BK: H SELLING UPDATER: S4 2GBLON222 PTC: STU-STUDENT FTC: XOX-ONE WAY EXCURSION SU.SURCHARGES BASE FARE BETWEEN AUSTRALIA AND UNITED KINGDOM IF INFANT UNDER 02 WITHOUT A SEAT. THERE IS NO CHARGE FOR TRAVEL. THE PROVISIONS BELOW APPLY ONLY AS FOLLOWS TICKETS MUST BE ISSUED ON YY OR ZZ. THERE IS NO CHARGE FOR TRAVEL. NOTE YQ FEE MAY APPLY OTHERWISE ORIGINATING UNITED KINGDOM A SURCHARGE OF GBP 130.00 WILL BE ADDED TO THE APPLICABLE FARE FOR TRAVEL. NOTE THE SURCHARGE APPLIES IN ADDITION TO ALL OTHER CHARGES AND IS NOT SUBJECT TO ANY DISCOUNT INCLUDING THOSE FOR CHILDREN. THE SURCHARGE MUST BE COLLECTED AT TIME OF TICKET ISSUANCE AND WILL BE INCORPORATED IN THE FARE CALCULATION AS A -Q- SURCHARGE BY CONVERTING THE SURCHARGE INTO NUC USING THE APPLICABLE IATA RATE OF EXCHANGE /IROE/.
ZZ distributes global surcharge rules (CAT12) determining how Q surcharges are to be applied to ZZ fares. The rules state: 1. Carrier YY and ZZ are exempted from Q charges. 2. A Q surcharge of GBP 130 each way is applicable for any fare issued on an interline partner’s own ticket stock. ZZ is unable to add 0O to the Q exemption rule. As per business agreement, a workaround is required to allow STA to quote, price and ticket this fare. At point of quoting and pricing, STA automated workflow selects the STU fare and prices with ZZ as validating carrier; so no Q is added. At point of ticketing, STA overwrites the validating carrier with 0O. As a result, the ticket is issued with no Q surcharge applied (correct as per agreement between ZZ and STA) However, at point of billing, ZZ reads 0O as validating carrier and via automation
38
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
determines that a Q surcharge is applicable. The resulting higher fare billing leads to a difference at point of settlement.
2.2 Carrier Imposed (YQ/YR) Fees To supplement the CAT12 filing, carrier ZZ distributes a carrier imposed (YQ/YR) fee rule that applies to YY and ZZ ticket stock and applies to the same fare: 0889999 YQ F
SALES_VFD SALES_VTD USE_VFD USE_VTD DEL DATE JOURORIG JOURDEST/JOURTURN PORTION BETWEEN PORTION VIA TICKETSTOCK SEC/POR Transfer Exempt TAX VALUE
20.03.2015 31.12.2099 20.03.2015 31.12.2099 19.01.2015 PTC2 PTC3 UKING & SPACIF SKORE YY/ZZ P X 130.00 GBP per direction
Due to the workaround outlined above, STA automated workflow prices with ZZ as validating carrier so YQ is included in the TST. At point of ticketing, STA overwrites the validating carrier to 0O without re-pricing The ticket is therefore issued including the YQ. Again, this is correct as per agreement between ZZ and STA. However, at point of billing, ZZ reads 0O as validating carrier and via automation determines that no YQ tax is applicable. The resulting lower tax billing leads to a difference at point of settlement. So STA collects YQs (as per agreement) but settlement determines that Qs are applicable. The net difference is close to zero, but the different elements of a ticket are not aggregated at point of settlement – fare and tax values are assessed as distinct elements in all major revenue accounting systems. The ability for carriers XX and ZZ to control the validating carrier at time of rule distribution would aid systematic discrepancies at time of quoting, pricing, ticketing, billing and settlement. STA Travel would like to propose an enhancement to ATPCO’s distribution tools that would allow Student Organizations to be selected as a validating/plating carrier when a carrier intends for a fare to be issued by STA agents on 0O ticket stock. Current Solution
In order to facilitate STA Travel issued tickets, the validating carrier field is manually overridden at a number of points in the lifecycle of a booking from pricing through to settlement. As a result, many customized procedures are required at point of: • • • • •
Distribution Pricing Ticketing Audit Settlement
39
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Synchronizing custom processes and systems development across agency, airline and GDS is complex and leads to frequent discrepancies. Proposed Solution
If carriers were able to select a carrier code used by a student organization in the validating carrier field of ATPCO’s tools at point of filing/distribution (for STA, this is “0O”), downstream manual override processes across the booking and settlement cycle could be greatly reduced, adding to efficiencies and standardization of the steps highlighted above. This would benefit both STA Travel and carriers who choose to distribute Student Youth fares for issuance via this process.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the challenge with the current workaround. ATPCO has talked with IATA in the past regarding assigning a carrier code to companies such as STA Travel and understands that it cannot assign them a code since they are not an actual airline. ATPCO proposes consideration of a solution that would create a "non-carrier"' carrier code. Any solution would require considerations of the impact on fields and records where this should not be used, such as the Fare Record. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process.
40
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Title
Section II
RBD Processing Logic Change Based on Fare Class Code and Prime RBD
Business Request No:
724
Submitted Date
21 August 2015
Submitted By
United Airlines
Business Need
Currently carriers are required to create a 999 table in the REC 1 or in FBR CAT 25 when the prime RBD does not match the first character of the FBC (first alpha logic) and wants to apply the RBD exceptions of the resulting RBD.
Current Solution
When the Prime RBD does not match the first character of the FBC go to Chart 1 and pull in the RBD exceptions based on the RBD that is populated as the prime (associated fare family). Example: FBC = JOW, Prime RBD = C, go to CHART 1 and look for C- fare family and apply the RBD exceptions specified under C-. FBC = JOW Prime RBD = C Chart 1 = V C P F R Y V C P F R Y V C P F R Y R C
CCCCCCCCCC-
Nation CA Nation CA Nation CA Nation CA Nation CA Nation CA Nation US Nation US Nation US Nation US Nation US Nation US Nation US Nation CA Nation US Nation CA Nation US Nation CA
Proposed Solution
None
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the business request to better control RBD processing based on the Fare Class and Prime RBD. This change would need to be discussed to determine how processing logic could use this alternate logic path in lieu of the current process, which uses Fare Class code only. Pending industry support via Milestone1, ATPCO suggests this be discussed at an RBD working group to gain an industry solution.
41
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
New Rules (Category 31) Processing Tag
Business Request No:
747
Submitted Date
10 September 2015
Submitted By
British Airways
Business Need
We require a new Processing Tag in Category31 to facilitate automated reissues of Dual Inventory Fares (DIFs). Today, prior to implementation of DIFs, we code our Cat31 conditions to closely align to IATA reso 017f. As such, generally speaking, before departure of journey when changes are made to the first fare component tickets must be repriced using current fares (Tag 5). At all other times, tickets can be repriced using historic fares (Tag 2). When testing DIFs, we found issues because systems do not maintain a record of historic availability. Thus, even when a DIF fare component is not changed, the fare component is repriced using the current availability of the booked flight. This results in the fare often being repriced using a more expensive fare, which we see as unfair if the customer has not made a change to that fare component and if the original DIF fare is still applicable (in terms of min/max stay, seasonality, etc.). To counter this, we have tried coding Tag 10 (“Keep the fare for unchanged fare components, use current fares for changed fare components”) in Cat31 reissue table. Within the Tag 10 ‘Revalidation and Ticketing’ section, we have coded “Do not revalidate RBD” which only applies when the repricing solution is keeping the fare. All other fare rule categories still have to be validated. In theory, this should allow any unchanged DIF fare to be repriced, regardless of the current availability of the unchanged flight. Any changed fare components (DIF or not) get repriced using current fares. Example: Say we have dual inventory fares: LON NYC JDIFA GBP 2900 – Requires J and A class availability LON NYC JDIFB GBP 2800 – Requires J and B class availability LON NYC JDIFC GBP 2700 – Requires J and C class availability and a non-DIF: LON NYC JNONDIF GBP 3000 – Just requires J-class availability Assume passenger has ticket: LON BA123 01JAN JDIFB NYC BA124 08JAN JDIFB LON FARE TOTAL: 2800 GBP And they want to change their inbound flight: LON BA123 J 01JAN NYC BA126 J 09JAN LON
42
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
At the time of making the change the availability of J, A, B, & C classes are: BA123 01JAN: J0, A0, B0, C0 BA126 09JAN: J9, A9, B0, C0 Without Tag 10 coding, system would reprice: LON BA123 J 01JAN JNONDIF – JDIFB was, and still should be, applicable. NYC BA126 J 09JAN JDIFA – This is ok because this FC is changed. LON FARE TOTAL: 2950 GBP With Tag 10 coding, system would reprice: LON BA123 J 01JAN JDIFB – “Keep the fare for unchanged FC” NYC BA126 J 09JAN JDIFA – This is ok because this FC is changed. LON FARE TOTAL: 2850 GBP Notice however, that we are not changing the first fare component, and as such, we should be repricing the ticket using historic fares (reissue). Tag 10 either “keeps the fare” or reprices using current fares. Hence, we require a new processing tag, similar to Tag 10 that “Keeps the fare for unchanged fare components and uses historic fares for changed fare components”. This will allow us to utilize dual inventory fares but still be able to service the tickets using automated tools whilst following IATA Resolution 017f and staying fair to the customer. In exchange scenarios, where the customer changes their first fare component, we have the options to either: 1. Use current fares (Tag 5), which will also use the current availability of the flights to quote any DIFs. 2. ‘Keep the fare’ for unchanged DIFs, ignoring the current availability of those flights, and reprice changed fare components with current fares (Tag 10) It is likely that we’d use Tag10 for exchange scenarios that involve DIFs, but otherwise continue to use Tag5 as per today. However, we already have these options to choose from, unlike in reissue scenarios where there is not an equivalent tag to Tag10 that uses historic fares instead of current fares Current Solution
Tag 10 Cat 31 processing tag is the closest solution we have that enables automated servicing of DIFs but is not ideal because it uses current fares.
Proposed Solution
Introduce a new Cat31 processing tag that “Keeps the fare for unchanged fare components and uses historic fares for changed fare components”.
Need By Date
ASAP – We are already trialing use of dual inventory fares and have issues with automated servicing.
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands the need to not validate the secondary RBD for a flight segment that is not being changed in a voluntary itinerary change transaction. Introduction of a new Category 31 process tag may or not be the best solution. Pending industry support via Milestone1, this request will be placed on the development list and follow the standard development process, including analysis to determine what the best solution may be.
43
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Group III: Taxes Title
Taxes on Service Fees
Business Request No:
717
Submitted Date
13 August 2015
Submitted By
Cathay Pacific Airways
Business Need
A carrier filed ancillary service fee in OC table (e.g. More legroom) which is taxable for some countries according to IATA/TTBS, however ATPCO requires such information on carrier specific basis, despite the tax should apply to all carriers.
Current Solution Each carrier has to fill in all the required information for the service on a “Taxes on Service Fees template” to ATPCO for auto-pricing. Proposed Solution
Request ATPCO to automate the taxes on service fee on behalf of all carriers so that carrier do not require to fill in the template individually
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO has reviewed the request and understands the value to airlines in having a central source for tax on service fee data. IATA's Ticket Tax Box Service provides a central collection of data for transportation taxes, and ATPCO provides these and carrier exceptions in our Tax Collection & Distribution product today. Currently any taxes on service fees must be specified by the carrier selling the service, because the tax legislation is not limited to transportation (it could be any form of Goods and Services) and so ATPCO must be directed by the tax-liable carrier. ATPCO recognizes that this can differ from carrier to carrier, as ultimately the liability for remittance, and for any fines for non-remittance, lies with each carrier. However, ATPCO’s ultimate stated goal is to build a critical mass of service fee tax data to be able to consider the information “industry standard.” There is a significant industry effort required to get to this point. As an interim step, ATPCO proposes undertaking an exercise, in conjunction with IATA taxation, to establish the applicability of percentage taxes to the highest value and most sold services—namely, seats and baggage—as an industry standard. Any carrier could specify an exception to the industry standard rule. With the support of industry prioritization, ATPCO could begin this exercise in Q1 2016.
44
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Title
PFC Application Enhancements (XF tax code)
Business Request No:
725
Submitted Date
21 August 2015
Submitted By
United Airlines
Business Need
PFC data is not currently included in the ATPCO Tax product and does not permit enough flexibility regarding ticket/travel dates and exemptions for bus/train.
Current Solution
None
Proposed Solution
Allow separate effective dates for both ticket issuance and travel comparable to other tax applications. Allow multiple flight ranges and travel effective dates. Allow exemptions by equipment type for BUS and TRN. Include PFC data in ATPCO tax product, since it is maintained in the IATA TTBS product.
Need By Date
None
ATPCO Response
ATPCO understands this business request, and there is a long-term plan to migrate PFC functionality into ATPCO's Tax Collection & Distribution product. The current PFC product will not be enhanced to cope with the requested changes. Our subscribers have requested that PFCs remain in the current product while they implement the Tax Collection & Distribution product, and migration should be considered after this time. The addition of PFC data to the Tax Collection & Distribution product will be sized accordingly and presented as a Tax Enhancement with a timeline appropriate to the priority given.
45
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section II
Milestone 1: Business Request Respondent Information Printed Name: Title: Organization: Telephone Number: E-mail address: Signature:
Date:
My organization:
Reviewed
Agrees Industrywide
Agrees for Org.
Org. Benefits
Type of Benefits
Est. Cost
Supports schedule/ budgeting within
689 – Optional Services and Branded Fares: Rich Media None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Med
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
High Unknown
690 – New or Modified Brands in Features Table S8 None Low Med High Won’t use
Med High Unknown
691 – Sub Codes Translation None Low Med High Won’t use
46
Med High Unknown
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Reviewed
Agrees Industrywide
Agrees for Org.
Org. Benefits
Section II
Type of Benefits
Est. Cost
Supports schedule/ budgeting within
692 – Tier (Brand) Name/Code Identification None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Med
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
High Unknown
693 – Industry-Approved Benefits and Ancillaries None Low Med High Won’t use
Med High Unknown
707 – Baggage Coding Option to Update Multiple Fields to Blank at Once None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med High Unknown
665 – Ability to View and Edit Override Date Table from Grid in Category 25 None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med High Unknown
667 – Add Override Date Table to Grid for All Categories None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
47
Low Med High Unknown
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Reviewed
Agrees Industrywide
Agrees for Org.
Org. Benefits
Section II
Type of Benefits
Est. Cost
Supports schedule/ budgeting within
721 – Category 25 Override Table Number Capability None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
High Unknown
671 – Permitted Combinations End-On-End Combination None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Med High Unknown
681 – Linked Alliance Fares None Low Med High Won’t use
Med High Unknown
687 – Enhance Query – Ticket Designator None Low Med High Won’t use
Med High Unknown
709 – Passenger Type Code Mapping Changes None Low Med High Won’t use
48
Med High Unknown
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Reviewed
Agrees Industrywide
Agrees for Org.
Org. Benefits
Section II
Type of Benefits
Est. Cost
Supports schedule/ budgeting within
716 – Warning Message when "No Charge" is Checked in Discounts (Categories 19-22) None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
High Unknown
726 – New Parameter in Sales Restrictions (Category 15) Sell and Ticket Field None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med High Unknown
669 – Increase Copy Table Limitations on “View Summary” Option None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med High Unknown
704 – Ticket Validity of One Way Fares for Voluntary Charges (Category 31) None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med High Unknown
705 – Fare Type Grouping Indicators Usage in Rules Category Control (Record 2) None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
49
Low Med High Unknown
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Reviewed
Agrees Industrywide
Agrees for Org.
Org. Benefits
Section II
Type of Benefits
Est. Cost
Supports schedule/ budgeting within
718 – Cancellation Penalty as Sum of Flat Amount and Percentage None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med
12 months
12-24 months
High Unknown
720 – Expand User-Created Zone Table (Table 978)across all Category Control Record and RBD Charts 1 and 2 None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
High Unknown
686 – Allow Student Travel Organizations (STOs) as Validating Carrier(s) in ATPCO Fare Rules None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low Med High Unknown
724 – RBD Processing Logic Change Based on Fare Class Code and Prime RBD None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Med High Unknown
747 – New Rules (Category 31) Processing Tag None Low Med High Won’t use
50
Med High Unknown
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Reviewed
Agrees Industrywide
Agrees for Org.
Org. Benefits
Section II
Type of Benefits
Est. Cost
Supports schedule/ budgeting within
717 – Taxes on Service Fees None Low Med High Won’t use
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Increases revenue Shortens time to market Reduces costs Minimizes errors Improves processes Facilitates monitoring/analysis
Low
Med
12 months
12-24 months
12 months
12-24 months
High Unknown
725 – PFC Application Enhancements (XF tax code) None Low Med High Won’t use
Med High Unknown
If you have comments, please submit them using the online version of this form.
51
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section III
Section III. News Briefs Item a. Deliveries: Completed and Planned Completed Deliveries: 2Q2015 Alliance Fares: Round the World (RTW) and Circle Trip (CT) Fares In response to industry requests for an efficient automated solution to automate the collection, distribution, and pricing of Round the World (RTW) and Circle Trip (CT) fares, new functionality and edits have been added to Fares, Full Map Routings, and Rules. Implemented 7 September 2014, Industry Adoption Date 15 March 2015; refer to Bulletin 50, issued March 2015, for additional details
Sales Restrictions (Category 15) Enhancements Customers expressed a business need to exclude the fare owner as the validating carrier to allow carriers to more accurately reflect their intent for validating/ticketing requirements and also to allow their customers to take advantage of automated ticketing functionality. Additionally, systems requested an edit requiring that applicable GDS be coded when U (Home Travel Agency Code) and T (Travel Agency) are entered. This enhancement supports system processing efficiency. Implemented 7 September 2014, Industry Adoption Date 15 March 2015; refer to Bulletin 50, issued March 2015, for additional details.
RBD Table 999: Special Processing for Dual Inventory Validation Customers requested an RBD dual inventory availability check, similar to existing functionality in Fare By Rule (Category 25), for specified published fares. ATPCO introduced two new values (B: If RBD 1 is Available then RBD 2 is Permitted, and D: If RBD 1 is Available then RBD 2 is Required). This enhancement is available in Chart 1, within Fare Class Application (Record 1) and Record 6 (Chart 1 Rule level), and supports the industry business needs to support the up-sell of fares. Implemented 7 September 2014, Industry Adoption Date 15 March 2015; refer to Bulletin 50, issued March 2015, for additional details.
Data Application Updates: Tax Collection & Distribution ATPCO plans to make several modifications—some large, some small—to our Tax Collection & Distribution data application documents later this year and in 2016, in order to accurately apply or exempt all taxes accurately. The changes include the following: •
Three methods to determine the amount subject to a percentage tax when the tax applies to only the domestic portion of an international fare component: •
Select a “like fare” for the domestic portion and assess the tax on that fare amount
53
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section III
•
Select a comparable international fare between the international point and the gateway point and assess the tax on the difference between that fare and the ticketed fare
•
Compute a straight mileage prorate amount for the domestic portion
•
Supply tax ratios applicable to US Transportation Tax for travel between Mexican buffer zone airports (those within 225 miles of the US border) and Alaska or Hawaii
•
Logic to exempt the train/bus portion of travel from application of a specified percentage tax
•
Logic for taxation of bundled services, in cases where all services in the bundle are not all subject to the same tax rate
•
Logic to apply tax to a refund cancellation penalty
•
Logic to back out taxes from service fees that are filed as tax-inclusive
•
Logic to link carrier exceptions to sales tax on Carrier-Imposed Fees to the fee-owning carrier
•
Alternative method for determining point of journey turnaround for use with specific taxes
•
Logic to specify that a tax amount is to be based on the portion of travel between two points that both attract that tax
•
Logic to specify that a tax is to be applied only if the itinerary includes a further point in another country
•
Logic to specify that a tax amount is to be determined based on the distance between the tax point and the furthest point in the itinerary from the tax point
Implemented 2 June 2015 with Portugal, Slovenia, Romania, Lithuania, Norway, and Germany; refer to Bulletin 101, issued June 2015, for additional details.
Optional Services: Picture Identification Field Customers requested a way to provide rich media (picture) to promote their Services offerings. ATPCO has enabled the Picture Identification field in the Services Record (S5) of Optional Services. The field offers carriers the ability to reference a media file number that can be associated to a sub code, improving the appearance and consistency of their product presentation. Airlines will need to work independently with each system on where to find and how to access the media file or picture that relates to this reference number. A future phase will address the best way to deliver the actual media to the system. Implemented 17 May 2015; refer to Bulletin 82, issued May 2015, for additional details.
PIPPS Weighted Miles for Involuntary Reroutes ATPCO implemented new functionality in PIPPS to improve navigation and to align PIPPS with an industry mandate. The enhanced functionality includes the following: •
Proration using Weighted Mileages (WM) Factors. Proration of involuntary reroute tickets are now calculated using WM factors instead of local fares. The involuntary reroute percentage used to determine the prorate share is based on the date of issue.
54
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section III
•
Proration of Flight Interruption Manifests (FIMS). The Involuntary Reroute Calculator now provides the ability to prorate FIMS using the invoice month to determine the involuntary reroute percentage used to calculate the prorate share.
•
Navigation to Prorate Factor/Base Amount Display screen. Navigation from the Involuntary Reroute screen to the Prorate Factor screen is now available. This allows you to confirm the weighted mileage factor without first navigating to the International Fare Display screen. From the Prorate Factor/Base Amount Display screen, you can also navigate back to the Involuntary Reroute screen.
Implemented 7 March 2015, Industry Adoption Date 1 April 2015; refer to Bulletin 39, issued March 2015, for additional details.
Sales Data Exchange New BSP Dish version 22 – Phase 1 In response to an IATA industry change, ATPCO implemented the Industry Sales Record (ISR) enhancements to accommodate the new Billing Settlement Plan (BSP) Data Interchange Standards Handbook (DISH) version 22. This enhancement ensures that version 22 BSP data is captured, augmented, and mapped to the ISR format with no interruption to the service. The changes indicated in the BSP DISH version 22 documents, including the deletion of records and elements, the expansion of existing elements, and the addition of new elements are included in this enhancement. Implemented 1 June 2015; refer to Bulletin 88, issued May 2015, for additional details.
Baggage Allowance and Charges IATA Resolution 302 was revised to propose that the rules of the Most Significant Marketing Carrier’s (MSMC) should apply for interline itineraries. IATA declared this change to be effective on 1 April 2015. This revision to Resolution 302 follows the 2014 decision by the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) to change baggage rules for interline journeys to/from Canada to reflect a marketing carrier focus much like the US Department of Transportation (DOT) action in 2011 for journeys to/from the United States. Implemented 1 April 2015; refer to Bulletin 52, issued March 2015, for additional details. ATPCO Action ATPCO has updated the necessary Data Application documents to incorporate this change in IATA Resolution 302 baggage rules. Under the new baggage rules of Resolution 302, the baggage rules of the Most Significant Marketing Carrier will be chosen for interline itineraries. ATPCO also added a new value in the Not Available/No Charge field (Byte 288) in the Provisions Record (S7). This new value, O, provides carriers with the option to ‘Defer Baggage Rules to the Most Significant Operating Carrier,’ which will override the selection of the marketing carrier’s baggage rules.
Market View 2.0 Market View is an analysis tool that provides airlines with a comprehensive view of fares and associated rule provisions in a single display with seamless navigation to fares, rules, and footnotes, enabling analysts to quickly create and distribute a competitive response to meet market demands. Market View 2.0 enables users to view days of the week (Category 2), view and
55
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section III
display seasonal dates (Category 3), view the surcharge (Category 12) for each fare on the results grid, if applicable, and view and compare surcharge text side-by-side. In addition, there is an enhanced advance reservation/ticketing (Category 5) selection process to better align with product definition. Lastly, applicable travel dates are now compared to the seasonal dates of the fare to display only valid fares within the specified travel dates. Implemented 17 May 2015; refer to Bulletin 87, issued May 2015, for additional details.
Total Price Comparison 2.0 Total Price Comparison was launched in 2014 to address the industry’s total price monitoring and analysis needs. Analysts must have access to surcharges, carrier-imposed fees, and taxes in addition to the base fare for their competitive analysis. This complexity of the total price makes it difficult to analyze pricing initiatives effectively because monitoring the total price today requires a labor-intensive process to assemble all components for the markets and competitors that need to be included. Total Price Comparison 2.0 delivered the following enhancements to provide additional customer efficiencies in the tool: For monitoring sets, the capability to analyze large volumes of data in a summarized view; for on-demand search, the capability to specify searches for one-way fares, increased criteria to allow searching multiple markets, and expanded capabilities by allowing compound and multiple criteria sets into a single search. Implemented 17 May 2015; refer to Bulletin 89, issued May 2015, for additional details.
Contract Management: Simplified Rules Negotiated contracts that are coded in Fare By Rule on ATPCO’s database, as well as other Fare By Rule fares, are a significant source of revenue for the airline industry. Over time, they have become highly complex and are primarily distributed through ATPCO and autopriced by global distribution systems. The coding of negotiated contracts and Fare By Rule fares into the ATPCO systems is a timeconsuming process and requires extensive knowledge. This process can take a few hours or up to a few days, depending on the complexity, employee knowledge, and the involvement of any joint venture or alliance partners. Airlines are seeking an automated and more efficient way to code negotiated contracts and Fare By Rule fares that reduces the extensive training and labor costs, improves accuracy and consistency, and gets their products into the market quickly. ATPCO's Simplified Rules provides a more efficient and expedient way to code and distribute negotiated contracts and Fare By Rule fares by facilitating the coding of data in Categories 25 (Fare By Rule), 35 (Negotiated Fares), 1 (Eligibility), 4 (Flight Application), 10 (Combinations), 14 (Travel Restrictions), 15 (Sales Restrictions), 18 (Ticket Endorsements), 50 (Application and Other Conditions), and the Fare By Rule Index in a single-screen view. The solution’s streamlined interface and pre-populated data from carrier-defined templates reduces coding time by 50 percent and increases speed to market. ATPCO’s Simplified Rules product preview began in May 2015. The product preview process involves direct interaction with ATPCO to set up the Simplified Rules to accurately and efficiently implement a carrier’s contracts. ATPCO works with each carrier to identify common data elements and default coding practices that are particular to each airline in order to help create a template repository for Simplified Rules.
56
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section III
Some level of dedicated resources is required of each product preview customer, so the actual length of the preview period varies depending on the level of resources each carrier is willing to invest and over what period of time. We are working closely with carriers throughout the preview period to help ensure the required standardization and workflow testing is completed so there is a seamless transition into production and that upon implementation, Simplified Rules provides immediate value. Implemented 17 May 2015.
Completed and Planned Deliveries: Third Quarter 2015 Branded Fares enhancement Customers expressed a business need to remove special characters slash (/), hyphen (-), and period (.) in the Branded Fares product, specifically in the Program Name, Program Code, Brand Name and Brand Code fields. Implemented 22 August 2015; refer to Bulletin 132, issued August 2015, for additional details.
Optional Services: UI Enhancements To enhance user experience and increase efficiencies, ATPCO implemented user interface (UI) enhancements to Optional Services. After careful analysis, ATPCO identified multiple enhancements that would yield the most efficient user experience and could be delivered quickly: •
Keep the highlighted row in the viewing area when navigating back to the Record S7 Results grid from the Details page. This change reduces the scrolling needed to navigate to the sequence for which the details were viewed.
•
Enhancement to Update Multiple capabilities to add a new option, Calculate Amounts, that allows an increase/decrease calculation by an amount or a percentage, regardless of the currency. This new function saves time and eliminates the need to perform calculations manually.
•
Added new Page View option when accessing Detail View. You will now have a choice to view details in the current Tab View or the new single Page View. This fulfills requests to view all data in one single view, thereby minimizing navigation between tabs.
•
Expansion to Record S7 Search Criteria with new data elements that will enable you to find specific data more quickly and efficiently.
•
Ability to include or to exclude security data when performing Copy Segment functionality. This new capability enables you to copy across private and public sequences while still keeping data integrity.
These enhancements are user interface enhancements only; there is no impact to subscribers as a result of these updates. Implemented 22 August 2015; refer to Bulletin 132, issued August 2015, for additional details.
57
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section III
Sales Data Exchange New Validity Checks ATPCO will implement the second phase of validity checks on incoming sales data in an effort to improve data quality and ensure that all transactions are distributed to all involved airlines. In this phase, ATPCO will implement Mandatory Element Edits to set edits on all elements that are identified as “mandatory” in the Sales Data Specifications Guide. The edits are designed to verify two things: •
That all required fields are populated
•
That all fields that must contain specific values contain only those values
Planned Implementation 1 September 2015; refer to Bulletin 144, issued August 2015, for additional details.
Sales Data Exchange New BSP DISH Version 22 – Phase 2 ATPCO will implement the Industry Sales Record (ISR) enhancements to include the following new Billing Settlement Plan (BSP) Data Interchange Standards Handbook (DISH) version 22 optional records: •
Record 15 – EMD Coupon Detail Record
•
Record 16 – EMD Service and Baggage Record
•
Record 17 – EMD Service Description Record
•
Record 18 – EMD Remarks Record
Planned Implementation 29 September 2015; refer to Bulletin 145, issued August 2015, for additional details.
Prorate Manual – Passenger (PMP) ATPCO implemented the creation of Premium Economy base amounts effective with the September PMP. Fare Types WR and WU are now recognized as Premium Economy for the purpose of the selection of fares for base amounts. This aligns the PMP with the IATA industry mandate for Premium Economy. While included in the September PMP, Premium Economy base amounts will not be recognized until 1 October 2015. Implemented 1 July 2015, Industry Adoption Date 1 October 2015; refer to Bulletin 106, issued June 2015, for additional details.
Data Application Updates: Automated Rules and Service Fees Data Application Clarifications To ensure that the industry is aligned on technical aspects of rule applications, ATPCO has implemented updated Data Application documentation to include requested clarifications and additional examples. These clarifications and updates have been discussed and agreed to in Data Application webinars and administered through the accepted ATPCO milestone processes. •
Measurement of month validation (Advance Reservation and Ticketing [Category 5], Minimum Stay [Category 6], Maximum Stay [Category 7}, Optional Services [Record S7]) When validating if a ticket has been issued within a time span that covers multiple months, clarification has been added to cover instances where the measurement starts from a month with fewer days than preceding months. As an example, one month earlier than 28 February is 31 January.
58
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda •
Section III
‘000’ as within a specified time window (Advance Reservation and Ticketing [Category 5]) Clarification that tickets must be issued within the same hour, or same day, or same month as reservations made have been provided in the revised document.
•
Fare By Rule clarifications When creating a new fare that is based on a fare with multiple passenger types, the match is made to the passenger type in the Base Fare Table 989, and only the matched fare passenger type data, is applied to the new fare.
•
Examples have been added to clarify how to apply a percentage surcharge in Category 12 to fares created as a percentage of a base fare. Clarification has been added for creating and validating fares using the ‘highest indicator.’
•
Footnote and Rule Reconciliation (Category Control [Record 2]) Clarification and updated examples have been added to the documentation showing that a footnote stating that the category assumption should apply will take precedence in rule, general rule, and footnote reconciliation.
•
Examples have been added to show processing of the directional tags when the second location is blank.
•
Fare By Rule Index (Record 8) Clarification was added to show how the tariff and rule provided in the index record are used to find the Fare By Rule tariffs and rules to create a new fare.
Implemented 24 August; refer to Bulletin 136, issued August 2015, for additional details.
Suppression of Sales ATPCO has been asked to help when a mistaken fare has been offered for sale in the market. Phase 1 of this solution allows for the carrier to contact ATPCO, who will then contact all subscribers and inform them the fare should be removed. This contact will occur via e-mail and the carrier will receive confirmation from ATPCO that the communication was received by each system. Planned Implementation September 2015. Phase 2 of this process will provide an automated solution and is planned for 2016.
59
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section III
Planned Deliveries: Fourth Quarter 2015 Answer Tables: Customer ‘View Only’ Access ATPCO is building an automated solution that pulls data from Answer Tables and displays it visually through ATPCO’s FareManager. The solution will be open to all ATPCO customers. Answer Table subscribers will be allowed to view data consistent with their subscription, while non-subscribers will have access to view only their own and pseudo-carrier YY data for the RBD and FFY tables. All subscribers will be able to view the BIN Answer Table data. •
Offers instant access to the most recent and historical RBD Cabin mapping and frequent flyer tier mapping, and current BIN data, saving time and labor resources to request these details from customer service
•
Provides airlines and systems with easy access to ATCPO Answer Table data using the familiar FareManager interface at no additional cost
•
Allows limited Answer Table data downloads for storage and analysis, improving decision making, troubleshooting, and pricing processes
Planned Implementation 2015.
Answer Tables: RBD (Reservation Booking Designator Table) Answer Table This Answer Table is being enhanced to include Equipment Codes and Flight Number ranges to further clarify mapping. Planned Implementation 2015.
PIPPS Premium Economy ATPCO will implement an enhancement to allow for Premium Economy base amounts in Multilateral Prorate Agreement (MPA) proration. The proration process will apply a Premium Economy Base Amount where applicable to align with the Premium Economy industry mandate. Planned Implementation 1 October 2015.
Planned Deliveries: Second Quarter 2016 Negotiated Fares (Category 35) Passenger Type Code Matching Data Application This project will amend Data Application for Category 35 to align Passenger Type Code matching rules to those currently used for Category 1 (Eligibility). This request came from the Negotiated Fares Working Group. Planned Implementation 3 April 2016.
PIPPS Ticket Retrieval An enhancement to PIPPS would allow for the entry of a ticket number that would generate a request to the ARC COMPASS database to retrieve ticket information, which would then populate the screen to avoid the manual entry of data and provide workflow efficiencies. This enhancement will also enable you to retrieve information related to the fare that was sold on the ticket. Planned Implementation 2016.
60
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section IV
Section IV. Product Updates Item a. Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group Overview The Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group was formed to automate and centralize the collection and distribution of ancillary and branded fare content with associated pricing standards. Since the implementation of Optional Services and Branded Fares in 2008 and 2009, respectively, the working group remains focused on ensuring that the evolution of airline retailing is captured in the defined capabilities. With ATPCO’s Optional Services and Branded Fares, airlines can promote their à la carte, full service, and fare family products in all sales channels to gain new sources of revenue and build brand loyalty. Optional Services supports both product and customer segmentation and provides additional value to passengers by allowing them to customize their travel experience by choosing the services that matter to them, like lounge access or on-board meals. Our Branded Fares solution increases airline customers’ satisfaction by letting them choose fares that better suit their travel and ensures the accurate and consistent presentation of fare brands across all points of sale. Together these solutions ensure the accurate and consistent collection of ancillary revenues while providing the flexibility to create upsell opportunities and promote brand differentiation by allowing full customization of brand offerings.
What We’ve Been Doing The Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group was most recently held on 16–19 June 2015 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The meeting discussed many items, including recent enhancements to both Branded Fares and Optional Services, the newly created Task Force and its pilots, and the following most notable points:
1. Branded Fares Upsell Branded Fares Upsell is a key mechanism that allows airlines to generate additional revenue. Some airlines and systems voiced the need for an industry solution for upsell, so a) Systems can quote the correct upsell that is defined in the ATPCO Branded Fares product and analyze defined ranking and features belonging to the brand, and b) Airlines/users can validate/analyze the outcome and establish ranking hierarchies. ATPCO will define a solution based on the discussion for presentation at the next working group. Minimum requirements should include •
Upsell is always to a higher branded fare tier
•
Amount could drive upsell, but should be at the discretion of the airline
2. Dynamic Pricing of Optional Services Optional Services was originally designed to accommodate selling de-bundled à la carte products and services. As the industry has progressed and is becoming more and more sophisticated in managing ancillary services pricing, many airlines see the need for a more dynamic application to better support an actively changing market
61
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section IV
environment. Increasingly airlines want to have the flexibility to control and adjust their ancillary product offering by different variables. ATPCO presented a high-level solution to allow dynamic creation of Record S7s for seats and compiled feedback from the working group to be used in the development of these capabilities.
3. Pre-reserved Seats The group reviewed the business problems associated with a single industry sub code. When evaluating the best way to move forward, it was requested to build upon the current single 0B5 sub code solution with expanded capabilities within Record S7, such as these: •
Expand to support all seat characteristics including numeric
•
Provide a commercial name at the S7 level
•
Enable rich media content at the S7 level
In addition, ATPCO will work with the IATA Ticketing Committee to discuss the addition of the PADIS seat characteristics code in the EMD. ATPCO will evaluate the need for standardized codes beyond the current PADIS codes. ATPCO will define a solution proposal and validate the solution with current seat functionality to determine whether it meets current business needs.
4. Optional Services and Branded Fares Task Force The Task Force first meeting was held in Minneapolis before the working group. Participants set the scope of the Task Force and agreed on two primary deliverables: •
Consolidated industry capabilities documentation
•
Baseline Set of Use Cases defining current industry needs
The Task Force is expected to initiate small pilot efforts to validate baseline use cases and document industry gaps and an industry alignment plan by the end of 2015.
Next Steps The next meeting of the Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group will be held in the first quarter of 2016, location to be determined. These key topics will be reviewed at the meeting: •
Upsell solution proposal
•
Rich media next steps
•
Dynamic Optional Services data maintenance solution
•
Seat process evolution
•
Bundled Services processing
•
Task Force industry capability alignment plan
62
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section IV
Item b. Negotiated Fares and Fare By Rule Working Group Overview ATPCO did a considerable amount of analysis between the December 2014 Working Group and the July 2015 Working Group. A number of discussions were held with carriers and systems to determine the true business needs and challenges for FBR-on-FBR and other requests. As a result of these activities, ATPCO presented some options and recommended solutions at the July 2015 Working Group. The following details the outcomes of these discussions. ADT in Public Fare By Rule Tariffs ATPCO proposed a solution, the Fare Creator alternative, for some of the life cycle issues inherent in the FBR-on-FBR approach to creating Adult fares in public tariffs. Some of the major issues are presentation of fares to governments, fare construction principles, and settlement. The solution was that ATPCO should create specified fares and then maintain a change detection process internally that will update the fares automatically based on a change in the base fares or the instruction set, but maintaining rules in this system would present issues. A better solution to solve the other issues was not identified. The group agreed to continue development on the Fare Creator alternative presented at the meeting. ATPCO will perform research on open questions and the concept will be presented at the ATPCO Global Conference. Development will begin in 2016. It was also noted that the group did not want to abandon discussion of FBR-on-FBR although this ranked a lower priority for the industry than the need to provide Adult fares in public tariffs. Security Table Maintenance The need to provide a more streamlined approach to maintaining the distribution of Negotiated Fares has been cited as a top priority by the industry. At the Working Group, three solutions were presented. The group agreed to a new ATPCO record to support large numbers of points of sale in Category 35 and Category 15. Milestone 2 documents will be issued in 2015 and development will begin in 2016. Category 25 changes to include RBD Validation Option and a new Fare Calculation Option when Base Fares are Constructed Fares The group agreed to issue a Milestone 3 in 2015 on both of these items, with a targeted implementation date in 2016. Category 35 Passenger Type Code (PTC) Matching Report The proposal to amend the PTC matching rules has been pending for quite a while. The group agreed to implement this change effective 3 April 2016. Fare By Rule on Fare By Rule The group agreed to a follow-up conference call in Fourth Quarter 2015 to continue discussion of an option to use Category 22 for FBR on FBR. Delivery is targeted for 2016–2017. Mileage Currency A mileage currency has been requested again by Google, which is a duplicate of a request received in 2006 (Request Number 633/06-011). A solution will be revived and considered again.
63
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section IV
Next Steps The next meeting of the Negotiated Fares and Fare By Rule Working Group will be a conference call later in 2015 to discuss Fare By Rule on Fare By Rule.
Item c. Taxes Task Force Overview ATPCO implemented an automated tax data and data application solution for 100 percent of itinerary taxes in 2010. The year 2015 has been a critical one for the industry to achieve the intended benefits as major systems migrate to use ATPCO’s tax data as their single source for transportation tax data for pricing. As a result, the ATPCO Advisory Committee noted that there are some taxes which are highly complex in the marketplace and are inconsistently applied by systems and airlines today; they therefore approved and resourced a task force, to be facilitated by ATPCO, to identify these taxes, identify inconsistencies, and create an action plan to resolve them.
What We’ve Been Doing ATPCO held the Tax Task Force meeting from 17 to 21 August 2015. Attended by tax pricing experts from Sabre, Amadeus, Travelport, Google, and with representation from IATA, the group covered the following topics: •
Identification of pricing misalignment for the identified 15 “world’s most complex” taxes
•
Discussion and brainstorming for improvement of 75 problem taxes identified by the Finance Development Group to IATA
•
Discussion of industry tax pricing issues that apply to multiple taxes and require consensus
•
Discussion of a Sprint Plan to facilitate the implementation by all attending systems of ATPCO tax data as one global standard source for automated pricing data
•
Creation of an action plan to draw all of the above to conclusion
Next Steps The Task Force group agreed that members would form the basis of a new “rapid response group” for tax pricing issues; as such, an action plan was generated from the meeting, and ATPCO, IATA, and the members will work together to close all actions by December 2015. The group will meet monthly (via webinar) to monitor progress of the plan.
64
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section IV
Item d. 2015 Upcoming Working Groups and Webinars Data Application Webinar A webinar on 18 November 2015 will discuss the following potential topics: •
PTC Hierarchy
•
Constructed Fares data application
•
Category 9 examples and revisions that were discussed in 2014–2015
•
Full Map Routings clarifications and examples (for instance, for Round-The-World and Circle Trips) •
Record 2 IF/AND/AND logic
•
Categories 6-7: Examples of RTW/CT
•
Category 11: Examples of value D with differing dates
65
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Section V. How to Do Business Item a. Industry Development Prioritization Survey Results (to be presented at conference)
Item b. ATPCO Advisory Committee (AAC) Update (to be presented at conference)
Item c. Milestone 5: Production Implementation/Adoption Confirmation (to be presented at conference)
Item d. Industry Standards Alignment Premium Economy Industry Mandate The IATA Premium Economy industry mandate will be implemented 1 October 2015. In order to comply with this mandate: •
Rules Application and Other Conditions (Category 50) was updated to support a fourth cabin application. Although Category 50 is not a pricing category (display purposes only), it is required by the Government for presentation. ATPCO renamed the existing “Coach” Class of Service field to “Premium Economy”. Additionally, since the “Coach” label no longer exists, ATPCO renamed “Off-Peak” Coach to “Off-Peak Economy” per industry request.
•
PIPPS will be enhanced to apply Premium Economy base amounts in Multilateral Prorate Agreement (MPA) proration where applicable. The Prorate Manual— Passenger (PMP) processing was enhanced to create Premium Economy base amounts effective with the September 2015 PMP. This enhancement allows fare types WR and WU to be recognized as Premium Economy for the purpose of selecting fares for base amounts. While included in the September PMP, these base amounts will not be available for proration until 1 October 2015 to align with the industry date.
•
ATPCO is also enhancing the RBD Answer table to include Flight Number Ranges and Equipment codes to aid in mapping RBDs correctly. The new record will first be seen in subscription transmissions on Sunday, 27 September 2015, at 1700 US Eastern Time.
Fare Selection Industry Mandate The new IATA Tariff Composite Resolution 17ha regarding Carrier Fare Selection will be implemented 30 June 2016. This Resolution introduces dual fare selection criteria so that the carrier whose fare is selected will be the marketing carrier on the most significant sector or with the longest Ticketed Point Mileage (TPM). The resolution also requires that pricing systems consider Carrier-Imposed (YQ/YR) Fees when determining the lowest pricing solution. The new resolution has the potential to significantly impact new and existing markets.
67
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda •
Section V
New markets: Fares may be eligible for selection in markets where they are not currently selected (subject to government requirements) Example:
SEL—NYC fare where travel is SEL–XX–LON–ZZ–NYC Carrier whose SEL—NYC fare will be selected = Carrier XX’
•
Existing markets: Fares may no longer be selected in a market where they are currently selected; and/or a carrier may become a secondary carrier in a market where they are currently only a primary carrier. Example:
AKL—PAR fare where travel is AKL–XX–BKK–ZZ–PAR
Carrier whose AKL—PAR fare will be selected = Carrier XX (as the carrier with the longest TPM) -orCarrier ZZ (as the carrier on the most significant sector) Carriers are advised to review and revise (as necessary) all fare and fare-related data relative to •
Ticketing carrier
•
Primary carrier
•
Secondary carrier
•
Fare owning carrier
•
Resulting Fare Class
All Reservation Booking Designator (RBD) Chart 2 data must be up-to-date upon implementation of the new resolution. Chart 2 provides RBD data for carriers when they are a secondary carrier on another carrier’s fare or a primary or secondary carrier on a YY fare. Carriers are advised to review and revise Chart 2 data to ensure the data covers new and existing markets where they may now be considered a secondary carrier. Example:
In the AKL–XX–BKK–ZZ–PAR example above, Carrier ZZ would be a secondary carrier on the AKL—PAR XX fare. Therefore, ZZ should ensure its Chart 2 is up-todate for this scenario. (Note it is possible for Chart 2 to indicate “no booking allowed” if ZZ does not want to participate in this fare.)
Since there is a limit on the number of sequences permitted in Chart 2, carriers should advise ATPCO as soon as possible if they anticipate the need to exceed this limit. Any expansion of the limit will impact both ATPCO and pricing systems and would require industry agreement. The following ATPCO products are being revised to support the new fare selection criteria: •
Revenue Accounting (AIA) Services (Applicable Fare)
•
Passenger Interline Pricing/Prorate System (PIPPS)
•
Data application clarifications (additional examples and/or explanation)
68
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Combinations (Category 10) IATA Alignment ATPCO continues to work with airlines, pricing systems, and the IATA Resolution Advisory Working Group (RADWG) to ensure Category 10 provides functionality to support all requirements in the resolutions. The end goal is that carriers will have full control of their combination requirements and will not rely on hard code in the pricing systems. Currently, many of the combination restrictions expressed in the IATA Tariff Composite resolutions are applied based on hard-coded data within each pricing system. The result is that both YY fares and carrier fares are subject to the restriction. This results in the following issues: •
Carriers do not always want their fares subject to the same restrictions as the YY fare. They prefer an automated solution to specify when and under what restrictions their fares can or cannot combine.
•
Most of the restrictions in the resolutions can be controlled via automated data in Combinations (Category 10). Very few restrictions are not supported.
•
Each pricing system has slight differences in what restrictions they hard code and in what they apply via automated data from Category 10.
Having the Combinations requirements data driven via Category 10 will ensure a consistent application across systems. To meet this goal, ATPCO is working on the following initiatives: 1. Alignment with IATA ATPCO worked closely with IATA to: •
Identify gaps between requirements in the Resolutions and Category 10
•
Create a coding template illustrating how to utilize Category 10 to control requirements specified in the Resolutions. Click here for a copy of the template.
The Resolution Advisory Working Group (RADWG) recognized that the current Category 10 functionality already supports most requirements and the existing gaps are minor. RADWG requests ATPCO to first work with carriers to utilize the existing functionality to express their requirements, thus alleviating the need for most hard-coded logic. This will provide both carriers and systems will confidence in moving away from hard code. Once this goal is accomplished, the industry can work toward the initiatives below. 2. Data Application Enhancements The purpose of these enhancements is to align some ATPCO applications and definitions with IATA and to clarify existing applications by providing additional explanation and examples, as follows: •
Expand the application of the Validity Check (mileage check) in Open Jaws to apply to both single and double open jaws. Currently the check applies only to single open jaws; however, the resolutions require a check on both single and double open jaws. This will align ATPCO’s application with the resolutions.
•
Revise the “same country” exceptions for the open segment of an Open Jaw to indicate that Aruba, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, Saba, Curacao, and St. Maarten are considered one country. The purpose of this change is to align with the Resolutions.
•
Add examples regarding negative string processing in order to provide additional clarity of the existing application.
•
Add clarification that restrictions on stopovers at fare break points apply within the pricing unit in order to provide additional clarity of the existing application.
69
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda •
Section V
(Future) Revise the definition of Round Trip and Circle Trip (as necessary) pending possible changes that may be submitted for approval at the IATA Composite meeting in 2016.
These enhancements represent no changes to record layouts and field descriptions. ATPCO is working closely with subscribers on an implementation date. 3. New Automated Functionality The purpose of the following proposed enhancements is to close any gaps between Category 10 functionality and IATA Tariff Composite Resolutions and carrier requirements (refer to Request No. 448): •
•
Add functionality to allow carriers to specify that when pricing One Way fares: •
If the journey meets the definition of an Open Jaw, then it cannot be priced as an End-on-End solution
•
If the journey meets the definition of a Circle Trip, then it cannot be priced as an Endon-End solution
Provide full functionality to express restrictions on Side Trip combinations
To move forward with the above enhancements, ATPCO recommends convening a 2016 Combinations Working Group in order to fully identify requirements and propose a solution (to include revised record layouts, field descriptions, and data application). 4. Revised User Interface Category 10 is complex, and carriers find it difficult to navigate, to know where and how to specify restrictions, and to accurately and consistently maintain their data across fare products. The purpose of the following enhancements is to revise ATPCO’s user interface (and Combinations application as necessary) to make it easier for airlines to quickly and accurately specify and maintain combination restrictions for their carrier fares: •
Provide an easier means for airlines to quickly and accurately apply IATA Tariff Composite Resolution requirements to their carrier fares (refer to Request No. 628). This solution could entail new templates, new default values on the user interface, new general rule type levels, new values for expressing fare type groupings, new mass update functionality, and training initiatives.
•
Allow carriers to specify combination restrictions at a General Rule or Alternate General Rule level (refer to Request No. 575). This request aligns with the request above.
To move forward with the above enhancements, ATPCO recommends working with carriers to fully document their requirements and then investigate the best possible solution with minimal or no subscription changes. Any proposed changes could be discussed at the proposed 2016 Combinations Working Group as necessary.
Message Hub The Message Hub is envisioned as a conversion layer and intermediary that translates and directs pricing, shopping, and ancillary messages between airlines and aggregators in real time. The primary objective of the Message Hub is to ease NDC implementation and maintenance for airlines by offering XML translation services between NDC schemas such as OA (Open AXIS), OTA (Open Travel Alliance) and NDC 1.1 (including future releases), and to provide access to additional distribution partners. In addition, the Message Hub is expected to offer other value-
70
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
added services including translation to ATPCO formatted data, which allows for integrating NDCbased fare data into existing systems for government filing, fare management, and revenue accounting. This project is currently in the research and development stage and ATPCO expects to complete a working prototype in 2016.
Airline Profile The Airline Profile Business Requirements Document was approved as “Fit for Purpose” in 3Q2014 by PADIS, and work continued to the next step, which was the development of the Airline Profile XML Schema. This first version of the Airline Profile XML Schema is in the process of PADIS approval for inclusion in the 2016.1 PADIS release. To allow airlines to maintain their own, individual parameters in a centralized database, ATPCO is moving forward with the first production version of the Airline Profile. Targeted for implementation in the fourth quarter of 2015, updated Airline Profiles will regularly be sent to airlines and subscribers selected and authorized by each airline. Going forward, as airlines are updating their distribution controls in ATPCO and instructing schedule changes in OAG, they should, at the same time, be updating their Airline Profile as part of their distribution control workflow. In the future, the Profile will be connected directly to airlines’ fares, rules, and schedules. ATPCO and OAG are working together to incorporate airlines’ existing data into the Profile, providing ease of maintenance by making this tool an extension of current workflows.
Dynamic Pricing ATPCO currently provides three methods for airlines to deliver dynamic/personalized pricing now through the fare filing process: Dynamic Pricing
Dynamic Pricing Goal
ATPCO Product Functionality
1. Dynamic Availability Using Fare Levels
Ability to offer different fare levels across a broad spectrum of demand
Fares (Specified, Constructed, Discounted, Fare By Rule)
Negotiated Fares Fare Type RBD Rules
2. Bundling/ Unbundling
Ability to include and price optional services either independently or as a bundle with the fare
Optional Services Carrier-Imposed Fees
Ticketing Fees Branded Fares
3. Personalization
Ability to offer fares and/or optional services in conjunction to a specific passenger or subset of passengers
Specific Market Segment Account Code Ticket Designator Point of Sale
Specific Passenger Frequent Flyer Status (Tier) Level Customer Index Score Passenger Nationality or Residency
ATPCO and some of our key customers and partners have explored concepts that would extend our capabilities, including ideas such as dual RBD and Business Rules Distribution.
71
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Moreover, as carriers continue to establish more joint venture partnerships, integration of revenue management, services/branding, and customer management systems become a key driver for revenue opportunities. The exchange of availability and bid price information between partners can result in higher revenues through more accurate fare value assignments, inventory optimization, and messaging efficiencies. We anticipate exploring a neutral bid price exchange platform first through R&D by collaborating with interested carriers. By providing real-time fare information along with availability that can further enrich the data exchange between carriers, carriers can make the most optimal inventory decision. Dual RBD There are two Reservation Booking Designator (RBD) areas that have been increasingly noted as pain points. •
•
With the growing number of fare products, the current single character is too limiting. •
Processing for current Night coach functionality (e.g., Y, YN) shows that twocharacter RBDs are possible. Some carriers are currently using two-character RBDs internally.
•
In order to support two-character RBDs, systems would need to identify and address all areas where RBDs are processed, displayed, or passed along. There are also some conventions that already use the second position for other purposes.
In some situations, the number of sequences in the Chart 2 is not large enough. The codeshare, Special Prorate Agreement provisions, and new Carrier Fare Selection usage could create challenges in the future. In the past, ATPCO had suggestions from the industry to create public and private Chart 2s. Other segmentations have also been discussed.
To address these areas, ATPCO proposes to discuss the challenges and solutions in an upcoming working group.
Optional Services: Retirement of Baggage Charges Filed as Flight-Related Services Current Status Currently 108 carriers have baggage data filed in ATPCO systems using Flight-Related Services (Service Type F) with baggage sub codes to express excess baggage charges. The correct application for baggage, as outlined in data application, is to use Baggage Charges (Service Type C), or in some cases Prepaid Charges (Service Type P), for any bag charges. Use of Flight-Related Services (Service Type F) with baggage results in airlines having to manage duplicate data and may risk presenting different baggage allowance and charges results at various passenger touch-points. The problem with filing baggage using Service Type F is that it does not always communicate the correct application of the baggage provisions in combination with baggage rules selection governed by IATA Resolution 302 and the US and Canadian reservations. In some cases, incorrect rules are applied. This can cause customer dissatisfaction, interline settlement disputes, revenue leakage, and additional costs associated with data maintenance and dispute processing. ATPCO is aligning the industry to resolve this issue. ATPCO had originally proposed a preliminary date of Second Quarter 2016 as the target date for removing all baggage charges filed as Service Type F. We understand it is not only GDS and hosting systems that are using
72
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Service Type F for baggage, but other airline internal systems such as departure control systems and online tools for corporate sales that may also need time to switch over. In January 2015, we surveyed the carriers to ensure the targeted industry timeline is feasible and realistic. Responses indicate that the end of 2016 is a more likely target date. The Optional Services and Branded Fares Working Group in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in June 2015, requested ATPCO initiate the Baggage Allowance and Charges Working Group to discuss the usage of Baggage Charges (Service Type C) and Prepaid Charges (Service Type P) to ensure the industry is aligned on which service type is appropriate and that the system providers have the same application of each. The current proposed target date is now the fourth quarter of 2016. ATPCO will continue to work with the industry to confirm an achievable industry date to retire Baggage filed as FlightRelated Services.
Alliance Fares RTW/CT and Airpass Alignment Discussion With the implementation of automated Round the World (RTW) and Circle Trip (CT) fares, carriers are now looking to automate their Airpass (Regional Pass) fares. The Alliance Fare Working Group identified two types of Airpass fares: •
Type 1 – Single Coupon These are one way nonstop or direct fares that must be combined end-on-end with other Airpass (Regional Pass) fares.
•
Type 2 – Single Fare Component These are circle trip (CT) fares consisting of multiple coupons, where the origin and destination of the fare component are the same point.
For both types of Airpass fares, the working group agreed to the following requirements: Fares Fares can be of these types: •
Public or private
•
Published or created via Fare By Rule (Category 25)
•
Specified or constructed via the use of add-ons
Passenger Type Code (PTC) The PTC must be an Airpass PTC, such as but not limited to the following: •
APA: Air Pass Adult
•
APC: Air Pass Child
•
API: Air Pass Infant Without a Seat
•
APS: Air Pass Infant With a Seat
•
SKY: Regional Passes for Sky Team Carriers
Note: It is possible some pricing systems may have limitations on which of the above PTCs they will accept. Fare Type Code (FTC) The FTC must be an Airpass FTC, such as but not limited to: •
PAP: Airpass
73
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Type 1 – Single Coupon Fares While these fares seem to be the most prevalent type of Airpass fare, they are not fully supported by automation. 1 In addition to the above requirements for PTC and FTC, the following are best practice recommendations for these types of fares, with the understanding that all requirements cannot be met by automation. Fares Must be OW Tag 3 (one-way fare that cannot be doubled). This information is entered in the Fare Class Application Construction Data box, as illustrated below:
Rules Minimum Number of Coupons Required This requirement cannot be specifically controlled via automated data. An interim solution is to indicate End-on-End Required in the Combinations (Category 10) Scoreboard, as illustrated below.
Restrictions that the Airpass fare should be used in combination with other Airpass fares must be specified in Category 10 qualifying data, such as Subcategory 107 (Tariff/Rule) and/or Subcategory 108 (Fare Class/Type). 1
Full automation for these types of Airpass fares is pending industry implementation.
74
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Maximum Number of Coupons Permitted This requirement cannot be specifically controlled via automated data. However, at this time, pricing systems indicate they are unable to price a ticket with more than 16 coupons. Path of Travel These are single coupon fares. They must be used as a one-way pricing unit (due to the OW Tag 3) end-on-end with other Airpass fares (because Category 10 End-on-End indicates Required). Therefore, the following apply: •
Flight application (Category 4) •
There may be no Category 4 data, or
•
Category 4 may indicate travel must be Nonstop or Direct
•
Stopovers (Category 8) are not permitted.
•
Transfers (Category 9) are not permitted
•
Limitations on indirect travel: Many pricing systems have hard-coded logic to impose certain limitations on indirect travel (for example, they may not price an itinerary that contains travel that transits a fare break point more than once). These limitations may be based on IATA resolutions and/or individual pricing system requirements. It is possible these limitations will be imposed on Type 1 Airpass fares.
Minimum/Maximum Stay Minimum Stay (Category 6) and Maximum Stay (Category 7) are not applicable. Data in these categories is not applied to a one-way pricing unit. Sold in conjunction with an International/Long-Haul Ticket If these fares must be end-on-end with an international/long-haul fare, then this can be controlled in Combinations (Category 10) by specifying End-on-End as Required as well as applicable qualifying geographic, tariff/rule, and/or fare class/type requirements. If these fares must be on a ticket that must be purchased in addition to another international/longhaul ticket (for example, there is a ticket for the Airpass travel and there is a separate, nonconjunctive ticket for the international/long-haul travel) then this restriction is not automated and must be manually applied.
75
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Type 2 – Single Fare Component This type of Airpass fare is expressed as a CT fare and is subject to the same best practices and requirements regarding RTW/CT fares. This solution requires carriers to set the fare amount per number of coupons and to consider all possible paths of travel on the CT (Airpass) fare. While this type of Airpass fare can be a specified fare, ATPCO recommends utilizing Fare By Rule (Category 25) because Fare By Rule provides more flexibility and offers a greater ease of data maintenance. The Fare By Rule must be specified in an applicable CT tariff (such as FBRCT2). Note: ATPCO may need to create additional domestic CT FBR tariffs to support this solution. Fare By Rule Geography The Fare By Rule should apply to a large geographic area (at a country or zone level) representative of the Airpass program. •
Example 1:
Southeast Asia Airpass fares: Record 8/Category 25 should apply within Zone 320
•
Example 2:
Europe Airpass Program: Record 8/Category 25 should apply within Zone 210
Per CT fare automation requirements, pricing systems must only create fares between the same points (such as HKG—HKG and SIN—SIN). Transfers (Category 9) Fare Break Surface fields can be used to allow travel to return to a point that is not the origin. Minimum Number of Coupons Required Use Transfers (Category 9) to specify the minimum number of coupons required. For example, if four coupons are required, code that three transfers are required.
Maximum Number of Coupons Permitted Automated Rules offers two options for controlling the maximum number of coupons permitted on the CT (Airpass) Fare By Rule: Option 1:
Fare By Rule (Category 25) Number of Flight Coupons field. Note: It is possible that at least one pricing system is not able to process this field.
Option 2:
Transfers (Category 9) Maximum Number of Transfers field. For example, if a maximum of six coupons are permitted, then code a maximum of five transfers permitted.
76
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Category 25 – Fare Amount Per Coupon Option 1 (Fare By Rule) provides greater ease of maintenance when indicating the applicable fare amount per number of coupons since all data will be contained in Category 25. Many Airpass fares are charged per coupon. Because this solution is based on a single fare component with multiple coupons, the fare amount in Category 25 needs to be qualified based on the number of coupons. Example: If the charge is 100.00 per coupon and a maximum of six coupons are allowed, then this is expressed in multiple Category 25 Record 3s. Category 25 Record 3s Relational Indicator
Specified Fare Amount
Maximum Number of Flight Coupons
THEN
600.00
6
OR
500.00
5
OR
400.00
4
OR
300.00
3
Path of Travel These are multi-coupon fare components. The path of travel can be controlled via applicable data in •
Flight Application (Category 4)
•
Stopovers (Category 8)
•
Transfers (Category 9)
•
Full Map Routings
Limitations on indirect travel that may be hard-coded into pricing systems are not applicable to CT fares. Minimum/Maximum Stay Minimum Stay (Category 6) and Maximum Stay (Category 7) can be expressed (as applicable) in the same manner they would be expressed for other CT fares.
77
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section V
Sold in conjunction with an International/Long-Haul Ticket If these fares must be end-on-end with an international/long-haul fare, then this can be controlled in Combinations (Category 10) by specifying End-on-End as Required, as well as applicable qualifying geographic, tariff/rule, and/or fare class/type requirements. If these fares must be on a ticket that must be purchased in addition to another international/longhaul ticket (for example, there is a ticket for the Airpass travel and there is a separate, nonconjunctive ticket for the international/long-haul travel) then this restriction is not automated and must be manually applied. Airpass Discussion Does the industry require both the Type 1 (Single Coupon) and Type 2 (CT Fare) Airpass fares solutions? If Type 1 is required, then ATPCO’s understanding is that subscriber development is necessary to support the solution. Is this correct? If so, then what is the development effort for subscribers? What is required from ATPCO and carriers to support this solution? What is the earliest possible implementation date? If Type 2 is required, then ATPCO’s understanding is that the solution is already supported by existing functionality. Do subscribers support the proposed solution? Is any development required? If so, then what is the development effort for subscribers? What is required from ATPCO and carriers to support this solution? What is the earliest possible implementation date?
78
24 September 2015
Products and Services Alignment Session Agenda
Section VI
Section VI. View to the Future Item a. ATPCO’s Proposed 2016–2017 Product Development Plan (to be presented at conference)
Item b. ATPCO’s Proposed 2016 Working Group and Event Schedule (to be presented at conference)
79
24 September 2015
