Man Violently Dragged Off Plane After United Airlines Overbooks Flight

Companies spend millions to project a favorable "Brand" and when an incident such as this places the competition far ahead, Companies are force to make drastic adjustments in repairs. United however decided to double down and blame the passenger. Now they will be forced to offer substantially reduced ticket prices to even stay relevant in the market place.

Might work, might not.

Expect to see a revised advertising campaign.

Cell phones have become the most powerful tool the American citizen/working man can have. Record everything!!!!!!

originally posted by: roadgravel

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: InTheLight

Sure, that's may well be true. Being singled out is irritating. I am surprised a couple more people didn't go for the incentive and leave.

Sheeple-mind or bystander-mentality or programming complete? Pick one or all.

I suppose you are saying the average person should be able to control a company based on their belief.

What a world that would be.

Imagine if everyone on that plane protested with him? What power then?

Am I the only one that could care less about this Dr? I mean seriously, they asked him, he refused. They are under legal obligation to remove anyone they want. Ethically is it right? No but it is what it is. IMO, get over it. Sure I would not have been happy but I would have got a good deal to compensate.

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation
Am I the only one that could care less about this Dr? I mean seriously, they asked him, he refused. They are under legal obligation to remove anyone they want. Ethically is it right? No but it is what it is. IMO, get over it. Sure I would not have been happy but I would have got a good deal to compensate.

Imagine that you are sitting next to your partner ready for your trip when they randomly choose you to give up your seat, and you have no choice in the matter. That is fine if you can rearrange your schedule and accept compensation, but what if you have an important family wedding or funeral to attend? Circumstances change perspective.

The was bad for the person. People can deal with the airline, if it is such a major issue, with their dollars. Why is even a single person on a UA flight today if it is such an major issue.

I see bigger battles to pick in the world.

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation
Am I the only one that could care less about this Dr? I mean seriously, they asked him, he refused. They are under legal obligation to remove anyone they want. Ethically is it right? No but it is what it is. IMO, get over it. Sure I would not have been happy but I would have got a good deal to compensate.

You are correct..."it is what it is" And what "IS" is that the American consumer is sick and tired of being mistreated by corporate bullies. Deal with it.

Film it, post it, and strike a blow for Freedom!!

a reply to: olaru12

Correct. It is only with exposure like this can we identify corporate overreach like this to even do anything about it. If no one is talking about it or no one cared, where would the motivation be to change? The only time that companies care about morals and ethics is when it effects their bottom line.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Talk isn't going to do it. Not flying UA would. I bet not one person changed airlines over this.

originally posted by: roadgravel
Why is even a single person on a UA flight today if it is such an major issue.

I'm on my 3rd one in two days (soon to be 4th) because United runs 80% of the flights from my home airport. Even if I wanted to no longer fly United it would be very difficult to do my job at the same level as now due to the number of connections I would need to make where I can now fly direct.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation
Am I the only one that could care less about this Dr? I mean seriously, they asked him, he refused. They are under legal obligation to remove anyone they want. Ethically is it right? No but it is what it is. IMO, get over it. Sure I would not have been happy but I would have got a good deal to compensate.

Imagine that you are sitting next to your partner ready for your trip when they randomly choose you to give up your seat, and you have no choice in the matter. That is fine if you can rearrange your schedule and accept compensation, but what if you have an important family wedding or funeral to attend? Circumstances change perspective.

Look I get what you are saying and totally understand. I simply just don't have any sympathy over this. Maybe it's the fact that I'm still thinking about the chemical attacks in Syria that this has just moved this type of news very low in my emotions tree. I'm sure if it were me, yes, I would have felt very violated as well.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Sometimes it is a compromise. Give up a little to get what part is more important. Wouldn't that be you case.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: olaru12

Correct. It is only with exposure like this can we identify corporate overreach like this to even do anything about it. If no one is talking about it or no one cared, where would the motivation be to change? The only time that companies care about morals and ethics is when it effects their bottom line.

That is reasonable, just remember that taking things too far might result in unforeseen consequences where the outcome would actually be worse than the one you describe as being worthy of changing.

In other words, be careful what you wish for if you have not fully contemplated other factors that don't currently seem important to consider but will seem very important once your wish has already been granted.

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation
Am I the only one that could care less about this Dr? I mean seriously, they asked him, he refused. They are under legal obligation to remove anyone they want. Ethically is it right? No but it is what it is. IMO, get over it. Sure I would not have been happy but I would have got a good deal to compensate.

You are correct..."it is what it is" And what "IS" is that the American consumer is sick and tired of being mistreated by corporate bullies. Deal with it.

Film it, post it, and strike a blow for Freedom!!

But yet we are still flying UA at probably 100% capacity today. What would have made this a non issue is if he would have complied or someone else stepped up and volunteered. Whether we like it or not they have the LEGAL rights to do what they did. He refused to leave. No different if I were at a bar and they asked me to leave and I refused. The damn bouncers or cops would have drug my ass out in a not so friendly manner.

originally posted by: roadgravel
Sometimes it is a compromise. Give up a little to get what part is more important. Wouldn't that be you case.

Not spending a hugely unnecessary time in the air or transiting airports is what is important to me when I travel.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Talk isn't going to do it. Not flying UA would. I bet not one person changed airlines over this.

United’s stock is falling 3.7% and wiping $830 million off the airline’s market cap
How much you want to bet?

Shares in United Continental Holdings Inc. were falling 3.7% in morning action on Tuesday, as the airline continued to draw flak for having a passenger forcibly dragged off a plane Sunday.

If the carrier’s stock is that much lower at the closing bell, United UAL, -4.18% will have about $830 million wiped off its market capitalization. The company’s market cap was $22.5 billion as of Monday’s close, according to FactSet data.

Early Tuesday ahead of the market’s open, United shares had been down by as much as 6% in premarket trading.

Investors largely shrugged on Monday at the widespread criticism of United, as the airline’s stock finished yesterday’s session 0.9% higher, adding about $200 million to the company’s market cap. But now with Tuesday’s drop, the stock is on pace to be down around 2.8% for the week, reducing the carrier’s market value by more than $600 million since Friday’s close.

Meanwhile, the S&P 500 SPX, -0.74% — the broad U.S. stock benchmark — has lost 0.4% for the week, as it trades lower Tuesday morning.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: rockintitz

Love how the other cattle sat and watched the other animal get his.

The conditioning has worked perfectly.

No they didn't I've heard and seen this... one woman saying how awful it was. It's not like they were hijscking the plane and driving it into the pentagon or something ....,but yah what are we supposed to do ....it would be nice to
Think this man was resisting a fascist regime but according to the story he just thought he was being targeted for being Chinese. Why didn't he resist the backscatter machines or the federal groping?????

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Well I'm being careful not to sign off on the extreme retribution ideas that some members are suggesting against UA. Right now I'm awaiting the Fed's decision on UA's overbooking mishandling investigation.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Talk isn't going to do it. Not flying UA would. I bet not one person changed airlines over this.

No it didn't hurt them I'm the least. Because people that don't fly are all up in arms so to speak. And regular flyers know this is pretty standard stuff he'll I've been bumped from a flight though I didn't mind they paid me 2200 and my flight took off the next morning.. so I got a room breakfast and cash for changing to a 930 am flight.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes, I saw the stock earlier. Let's hope it sends a message. But my gut says it's a quick profit for traders and back to normal in a day or two. Just another day or two of emotions which is what runs the markets.

a reply to: roadgravel

Alright. Let's review at the end of the week and see what happens. Though they are NOT being kind to UA in the PR department:
United Airlines shows how to make a PR crisis a total disaster

Rupert Younger, a PR expert and director of the Oxford University Centre for Corporate Reputation, said that Munoz's response was a major disappointment, and that United should have moved much more quickly to limit damage from the video.

"The apology by the CEO was, at best, lukewarm or, at worst, trying to dismiss the incident," said Younger. "The CEO should make a better, more heartfelt, more meaningful and more personal apology."

Younger said that United should also address public concerns over industry policies related to bumping passengers from their flights.

The United response "looks uncaring and it looks like it's effectively trying to apologize for the incident without really addressing the core issue of how they deal with customers," said Younger, co-founder of the PR firm Finsbury.

United is now struggling to contain fallout from the incident. On Tuesday, the top trending topic on Twitter in the U.S. was #NewUnitedAirlinesMottos, with users suggesting slogans such as "not enough seating, prepare for a beating."

Lol at the bold.