Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ozgrakkurt 52 days ago
Ideally, they should have stopped selling tickets and then stopped the flights when the sold flights were done. At least within some time frame like 1 month
2 comments

Unfortunately continuing to burn money with no hope of recovery is not a popular strategy among judges and creditor's lawyers. Customers will either get refunds or join the back of the creditor line.
I doubt many people would buy tickets for a flight with a failing airline. That said, shutting down with effectively zero notice is pretty terrible, and they will probably need to do a bunch of repositioning flights, so they could have kept the lights on for one or two more days.
I agree with this.

I initially meant that they should have finished the flights they already sold tickets for, in some timeframe like one month.

Changed the phrasing so it is more clear.