Talk:Electronic ticket

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

electronic ticket

proposal of new contents and structure[edit]

I fully agree to the comment below and suggest to implement the following changes and new structure: I) Electronic Ticketing (e-Ticket): Overview information over all kinds of e-ticketing. I have just posted such general information at http://www.eTicketWorld.net. If welcome, then I'm ready to make a contribution along the lines of this text. I.1) Airline e-tickets. Here the current text can be used, with minor modifications. I.2) e-tickets in public transports. Wikipedia already contains lots of information about this, see e.g. the key word "Suica". I'm ready to make a contribution with links to other Wikipedia entries. I.3) e-tickets in event ticketing. Here new content is needed. I will add related information to eTicketWorld, and offer to make a suitable contribution later on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HRThomann (talkcontribs) 13:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

scope of article too limited[edit]

'Electronic ticket(ing)' is quite commonly used also in public transport. It's quite a big development in that area (bus, train, metro systems etc.) that paper tickets are replaced by electronic ones. In the past, this was mostly confined to (flat fare) metro systems, using magnetic stripe cards. Nowadays, there are many systems that integrate bus, train, metro & other modalities in one system. Because these systems use chip cards (memory cards, increasingly also smart cards) they can also be used in environments where the amount to pay depends on distance or zones.

I think we should widen the scope of this article, possibly create separate pages for electronic tickets in air traffic and public transport (and may be other environments, since the 'electronic ticket' is quite general). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.66.53.27 (talk) 08:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

check-in[edit]

In the article, it says "Online check in may take place up to 24 hours before the flight time." I know some airlines do allow check-in upto 48 hours. --124.106.135.198 08:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the wording to indicate that both the time limit and boarding priority are typical policies, but may vary by airline. A specific example was until a year or two ago, Southwest allowed online checkin starting at 12 midnight on the date of departure rather than 24 hours before departure. -- Hawaiian717 18:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

May I suggest it is further re-worded? Most airlines (certainly in Europe) will not allow online check in before 24h before departure, normally, the last check in time on line is 1 hour prior to scheduled push back. i.e. British Airways on line check in opens 24hours before departure and closes 1 hour before, as does Lufthansa's, flybe's, Air France, Iberia, KLM and bmi. 217.44.41.78 18:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Cathay Pacific allows on-line check-in 90 minutes to 48 hours prior to flight departure time. Here is an excerpt from their FAQ about on-line check-in:

12. When can I check in for my flights online?
For the Club / Asia Miles members and registered users of cathaypacific.com and e-ticket holders, Online Check-In is available beginning 48 hours up to 90 minutes before the flight departure time.

147.8.179.17 (talk) 2007-12-20 —Preceding comment was added at 05:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

reasons why an e-ticket can't be fully implemented yet in a particilar airline[edit]

Some airlines who issue e-tickets don't issue them for all their destinations, only selected destinations. Philippine Airlines for instance only implements them for domestic destinations, flights to the US and Canada as well as Hong Kong and Seoul. You may want to add to the article why an airline can't implement e-ticketing for all its destinations yet. --124.106.135.198 08:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I've added an E-ticket limitation section explaining when e-tickets can't be used. I don't think I've been quite as clear as I could, but I can't seem to find the wording. Please feel free to reword anything that is not clear.--Estradin 09:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Frequent flyer / credit cards and boarding passes[edit]

I thought frequent flyer and credit cards were common as e-tickets, instead of using print-outs and reservation numbers. In addition, boarding passes are not needed, at least not in Norway, to board the plane, if you're using a cc or frequent flyer card. The funny thing is, that in Oslo, you don't have to show a boarding pass/swipe your card to get through security, , but it is needed to go enter the international pier -- where there only are two security guards. Which means I can go all the way through the Schengen area by only showing a piece of plastic without validating (although I've gotten a few peculiar looks from someone who obviously wasn't used to the e-boarding pass... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.161.77.71 (talk) 03:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I won't call those cards "tickets". They aren't used once and the thrown away right after the flight. A ticket is an object (virtual or physical) that you use for a flight (or a series of flights) and then you discard it. A ticket is a document that assigns you the right to ride a flight. Nothing more. The ticket doesn't keep an account of your mileage points or credit card expenditure. Credit cards or mileage cards are, on the other hand, identification documents. They are to be used over and over (until they expire -- usually after a few years). The role of those cards here is to identify the holder. Once the system identifies the holder, it can retrieve the e-ticket from the database. The cards themselves are NOT the "tickets". 147.8.179.17 (talk) 2007-12-20

Digital ticket[edit]

There's a new article at digital ticket which might overlap a lot with this article. --Busy Stubber (talk) 22:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Outside of electronic ticket meaning[edit]

The term E-Ticket was used before electronic tickets, so the modern e-ticket may be a reference/pun in regards to the older term.

Czech Bus section in the lead[edit]

I think it should be rewritten to take out the focus from the Czech example to a more general description. I'll do that in the week. If you think those details should stay, explain why. 85.228.225.9 (talk) 01:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Last Part[edit]

The part about the industry being unable to comply... I would really recommend that unless citation is provided, that statement is deleted since it is inaccurate at best.--Estradin (talk) 07:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

  • I don't know about "unable" -- but I flew in 2009 on a non e-ticket. I think one of my 2010 flights was also with a paper ticket. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.225.30.91 (talk) 01:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Removed section for discussion.[edit]

I have removed the following for reasons listed below.

E-tickets are sometimes not available for some flights from an airline which usually offers them. This can be due to a number of reasons, the most common being software incompatibility. If an airline issues tickets for a codeshare flight with another company, and there is no e-ticket interlining agreement, the operating carrier would not be able to see the issuing carrier's ticket. Therefore, the carrier that books the flight needs to provide hard copy versions of the tickets so that the ticket can be processed. Similarly, if the destination airport does not have access to the airline who booked the flight, a paper ticket needs to be issued.

  • I find this highly dubious. I've never come accross an airline the still has the option of issuing paper tickets. (I work as a travel agent). Airlines either do or they don't, and those that don't are rare and usually very small airlines in remote parts of South America or Africa. Perhaps this is still feasable, but it is certainly extremly rare and not the norm as this quote implies.
  • The part about code-share is definitly incorrect. We frequently issue two or more tickets where airlines don't share a fare (it's got nothing to do with interline), but they are still etickts, not paper.
  • The software compatability claim is dubious - most bookings are made on a CRS/GDS which acts as a shell over the differing airline systems.

I'll leave the section here for discussion.--Dmol (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2011 (UTC)