Dave Proctor wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:14:04 -0500,
> texan.usenet@texas.removethisbit.usa.com wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:05:37 +1000, Dave Proctor
> > wrote:
> >
> >>On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:11:57 -0500,
> >>texan.usenet@texasremovethisbit.usa.com wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 03:05:44 +1000, Dave Proctor
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 20:09:03 -0700, "Wacheena" wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hey folks. I'm looking for a reasonable (sub $1000) ticket to NZ leaving in
> >>>>>Jan. I can find lots, but they all have a 90 day limit on them. I'm
> >>>>>planning on staying for a year. Anyone know why the airlines set up the
> >>>>>tickets that way, and more importantly, know how I can find a fare in my
> >>>>>range for a full year?
> >>>>
> >>>>SYD-AKL can be had all year round for far less than $1000.
> >>>>
> >>>>(You WERE referring to flights from Australia weren't you? A bit hard
> >>>>to tell from your post).
> >>>>
> >>>>Dave
> >>>>
> >>>Since when has NZ [as in the first line of his post] been an
> >>>abbreviation of Australia Dave?
> >>
> >>
> >>Re-read what I wrote, oh self appointed moderator - the OP asked about
> >>fares TO NZ, and the last time I looked SYD-AKL was a flight TO NZ.
> >>
> >>Dave
> >
> >
> >Did your training not teach you about transiting passengers through
> >Australia?
> >
> >If you were such a good travel agent, you would know better.
> >
> >Mmmm, my tutor [from Qantas] ensured in no uncertain terms we knew NOT
> >to do such.....
>
> Who mentioned transitting? It was a simple question (paraphrased) "How
> much to New Zealand" - it was a simple answer (paraphrased) "Plenty of
> cheap fares available from Sydney to Auckland".
Come on Dave! Cath can read stuff which was never written (and vice
versa), so you can at least *try* to do the same!
> It was a subtle way of hinting to the OP that we shouldn't have to
> look at headers in able to determine where they were flying from, that
> they should include as much info as possible when asking a question.
> My aim was to have the OP look at my answer and think "Oops, I forgot
> to say where I was flying from" and respond with further info, which
> seems to be too difficult a concept for you to handle Cath.
Not only that, but, as shown by Cath's incorrect jumping to
conclusions, it is incorrect to assume that one's Organization:
("University of Washington") is in any way related to where (i.e.
city/airport) one is intending to fly from (*later* given as "the US
West Coast (LAX or SEA)"). Last time I checked, "Washington" was not
quite equal to "LAX or SEA".
Also last time I checked, New Zealand was not a city or an airport, but
a country, so a desired destination city/airport would be a nice piece of
information to have, but it was not given either. |