Curious as to whether anybody has used this tactic and if so how much did you save?
Airline sues Web site that helps travelers find ?hidden city? ticketing discounts - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/airline-sues-web-site-that-helps-travelers-find-hidden-city-ticketing-discounts/2015/01/02/5f5976ec-92ca-11e4-a412-4b735edc7175_story.html)

Southwest I believe is the only airline that doesn't forbid it, though you can't do it if you check any bags. Also you lose any frequent flyer miles/points when you do it since the original trip isn't done.

For me the risk was always too high, even though I do not check bags anymore.

I've done it a couple of times, but it was before a site made it easy to figure out.

Now, I'd rather just book my flight and be done...But that's because I'm older and have less time and more money. :D

Even if I did it I would not "prance" out of the airport.

Southwest I believe is the only airline that doesn't forbid it, though you can't do it if you check any bags. Also you lose any frequent flyer miles/points when you do it since the original trip isn't done.

For me the risk was always too high, even though I do not check bags anymore.
Risk?

If you develop a pattern of it, the airline will forbid you from flying on them in the future.

It's nothing short of fraud.

I've done this twice for OKC > LAX > Palm Springs to get to LA for about 75% of the same flight booked just to LA. Warning though - If you book from Palm Springs to OKC return flight, they will not let you on in LA - the ticket clears as a no show and any standbys will get the seat.

Risk?

Violation of Contract of Carriage for most airlines. Any remaining segments on the reservation are cancelled out, miles/points lost, and remaining ticket value forfeited. As Catch said, some airlines get aggressive enough to block you from flying them in the future if they notice a pattern.

I've done this twice for OKC > LAX > Palm Springs to get to LA for about 75% of the same flight booked just to LA. Warning though - If you book from Palm Springs to OKC return flight, they will not let you on in LA - the ticket clears as a no show and any standbys will get the seat.

Just for your information, airlines have sophisticated software that is actively scanning for HCT violations, such as yours. They all get grouped together in their own database -- and every file is reviewed. If you've only done it once or twice, it's probably pretty low in the queue to be reviewed...it might sit in the queue for years as other people who do it often get flagged and jump higher in the queue to be reviewed. Airlines have their own team of revenue management analysts who specifically deal with fraud such as your case. You have a 40 hour a week job, and so do they. This is what they come in to work to do all day long, HCT..Mileage fraud..you name it, they are examining it. Like I said, though, if you've only done it only once...you probably don't have a file in the system. Done it twice...you probably have a file but it's at the bottom of some database that they will probably never getting around to reviewing.

But if you keep doing it, your file will build up and eventually float into a priority queue. Keep on doing it, and it will get flagged and will be reviewed very very quickly. If they discover you are a repeat violater, they will first probably force you to forfeit any and all mileage credits, status, etc. and depending on how severe may add you to the blacklist. If it's really bad, they'll notify other airlines to review their records.

It is fraud. You are entering a contract to use the service as you purchased it. They are removing at least 2 seats from inventory that would have been sold. One was used for a cheap connection, thus losing the value of potentially selling it to someone who would have paid full price, and the other seat was removed from inventory, again it could have been sold to a higher value customer...

Just some things to think about. You sign a contract, you need to stick to it.

You can't enter a contract to purchase a car, and then decide later you don't like the price and decide to stop making payments and expect the dealer to be okay with it. They gave you the keys in return for your signature on a legal contract to fulfill your duties as the contract instructed.

It is fraud. You are entering a contract to use the service as you purchased it.

i fail to see how it's fraud. if i sign a lease for 1 year, pay for the entire year, and then only live in the place for 8 months... have i committed fraud? that doesn't seem too different than what's happening here. if i pay for the seat, why am i contractually obligated to actually use it? -M

You can't enter a contract to purchase a car, and then decide later you don't like the price and decide to stop making payments and expect the dealer to be okay with it. They gave you the keys in return for your signature on a legal contract to fulfill your duties as the contract instructed.

Wouldn't be more like buying a car, driving the car into a lake a few months later, but continuing to pay the payments?

EDIT: Fraud implies illegality. While HCT is against airline rules, I don't think it is illegal.

i fail to see how it's fraud. if i sign a lease for 1 year, pay for the entire year, and then only live in the place for 8 months... have i committed fraud? that doesn't seem too different than what's happening here. if i pay for the seat, why am i contractually obligated to actually use it? -M
Because the contract you signed stated you would be present to travel on all the segments on your ticket.

Then it is Breach of Contract, for which you may be civilly liable, not criminally.

Then it is Breach of Contract, for which you may be civilly liable, not criminally.

this. -M

The car was a poor example. It's like signing a contract with a company to buy 2,000 units of a highly perishable item in bulk at a cheaper price than the 1000 you need. And you accept the 1,000 and let the company you purchased them from sit on the expired product. Sure you didn't use it, but now they can't sell it either as its expired.

Uh, just an FYI y'all. Fraud is a deception, misrepresentation. It can exist in a civil wrong context as well as in a criminal law context.

If this is "fraud", then isn't the act of overbooking "fraud" as well? Sorry I can't accept this as being any more fraudulent then choosing to buy a 20 oz. soda for 1.00 instead of a 12 oz. soda for a 1.25 and throwing away 8 oz. of it. As far as the above example, same as the soda, what I do with the excess is really none of the business of the seller. Additionally if it was fraud, the airlines would be going after folks for the fare and not just the forfeiting of miles. In this day of being charged for pillows, checked luggage, the airlines are squeezing the consumer for every penny. Might be unethical, but not fraudulent.

Uh, just an FYI y'all. Fraud is a deception, misrepresentation. It can exist in a civil wrong context as well as in a criminal law context.

Exactly. You are fraudulently agreeing to purchase more product at a cheaper rate with the intention of not fulfilling the contract.

If this is "fraud", then isn't the act of overbooking "fraud" as well? Sorry I can't accept this as being any more fraudulent then choosing to buy a 20 oz. soda for 1.00 instead of a 12 oz. soda for a 1.25 and throwing away 8 oz. of it. As far as the above example, same as the soda, what I do with the excess is really none of the business of the seller. Additionally if it was fraud, the airlines would be going after folks for the fare and not just the forfeiting of miles. In this day of being charged for pillows, checked luggage, the airlines are squeezing the consumer for every penny. Might be unethical, but not fraudulent.

You did not enter a contract to drink the entire soda, whereas you agreed to travel on the full itinerary. You also agreed in the contract that you were aware of overbooking.

Uh, just an FYI y'all. Fraud is a deception, misrepresentation. It can exist in a civil wrong context as well as in a criminal law context.
hmm... didn't know that. i thought that 'fraud' was a purely criminal thing. -M

The car was a poor example. It's like signing a contract with a company to buy 2,000 units of a highly perishable item in bulk at a cheaper price than the 1000 you need. And you accept the 1,000 and let the company you purchased them from sit on the expired product. Sure you didn't use it, but now they can't sell it either as its expired.

i don't think this is the best example, either. in your hypothetical, the product that "i" refused to take delivery of has costs associated with disposal. I think this would be more similar to "me" contracting to use 2,000 units of warehouse space but "i" end up using only the 1,000 units "i" want/need.

You did not enter a contract to drink the entire soda, whereas you agreed to travel on the full itinerary. You also agreed in the contract that you were aware of overbooking.

You have any examples you can document on those claims? Again if this is so, why are the airlines not pursuing collecting the full fare?

You did not enter a contract to drink the entire soda, whereas you agreed to travel on the full itinerary. You also agreed in the contract that you were aware of overbooking.

Let's say I DID enter into a contract with the seller of soda to drink the entire soda but threw away part of it. What are the damages to the soda seller due to my breach of contract?

Similarly, What are the damages to the airline if my butt is not in the seat that I paid for?

found (http://www.aa.com/i18n/agency/Booking_Ticketing/Ticketing/hidden_city_ltr.jsp&locale=de_DE) this on American airlines:


Dear,

Let me take the opportunity to clarify American Airlines position
on hidden city or point beyond ticketing. Purchasing a ticket to a point beyond
the actual destination and getting off the aircraft at the connecting point is
unethical. It is tantamount to switching price tags to obtain a lower price on
goods sold at department stores. Passengers who attempt to use hidden city
tickets may be denied boarding, have the remainder of their ticket confiscated
and may be assessed the difference between the fare paid and the lowest
applicable fare.

Because we compete with other airlines with different
route structures, we sometimes find it necessary to give a traveler who is
traveling beyond a connecting point a better price than travelers who are just
traveling to the connecting point. For example, a passenger who is traveling to
Austin, Texas from Los Angeles can go on one airline via Phoenix for a price
that is lower than the cost of traveling on American between Los Angeles and
Dallas. If we want to offer the same price to Austin as the other airline, but
the only way we can get travelers there is via Dallas, we find ourselves
charging the Austin passengers less than the Dallas passengers.

Although
the issuance and usage of hidden city tickets is not illegal in the sense that
one could be fined or sent to jail by the government, it is unethical and a
breach of a passengers contract with AA. Both tariff rule 100AA and American's
Condition of Carriage, which are incorporated into every ticket sold by American
as part of our agreement to carry the passenger named on the ticket, bar hidden
city ticketing. In addition, it violates the agencies' contract to act as an
agent for American Airlines.

If American Airlines continues to lose
revenue as a result of hidden city transactions, the fares we charge must
inevitably rise.

Sincerely,

while contractual obligation is given a mention at the end of the letter, aa's primary argument against 'hidden city ticketing' is that it's unethical. you'd think aa would lead with the contract angle if it were really that iron-clad. -M

here is aa's conditions of carriage (http://www.aa.com/i18n/customerService/customerCommitment/conditionsOfCarriage.jsp?anchorLocation=DirectURL&title=conditionsofcarriage)

under 'compliance with terms and conditions of sale:



American specifically prohibits the practices commonly known as:
...
Hidden City/Point Beyond Ticketing: Purchase of a fare from a point before the passenger's actual origin or to a point beyond the passenger's actual destination.
...
Where a ticket is invalidated as the result of the passenger's non-compliance with any term or condition of sale, American has the right in its sole discretion to:

Cancel any remaining portion of the passenger's itinerary,
Confiscate unused flight coupons,
Refuse to board the passenger or check the passenger's luggage,
Refuse to refund an otherwise refundable ticket, or
Assess the passenger for the reasonable remaining value of the ticket, which shall be no less than the difference between the fare actually paid and the lowest fare applicable to the passenger's actual itinerary

If nothing else, this issue is proof positive that the airline's fare structures are totally screwed up.

Thanks Martin for doing the "heavy lifting". It seems to bolster my previous assertion of being unethical rather than fraudulent.

There are almost always standbys at busier airports. If you skipped out they would still fill the seat and make money. They need to close that loophole if they don't want it abused. For ANY loophole there are thousands of people lined up to jump through it.

here is aa's conditions of carriage (http://www.aa.com/i18n/customerService/customerCommitment/conditionsOfCarriage.jsp?anchorLocation=DirectURL&title=conditionsofcarriage)

under 'compliance with terms and conditions of sale:
Martin,

I promise that the airlines absolutely do make good on number 5 in your list if a ticket is issued by a travel agency and they determine that it was known in advance that the passenger might not travel the complete schedule. They will require the travel agency to pay them the difference if they want to continue to issue tickets on that airline. Although that decision can be appealed they are the complete and final arbiters of making a decision like that, barring going to court.

As for number one in your list, that is almost certain to happen.

This is not a new issue. It has been around for many years. The main difference has been their ability to track this in recent years.

People just don't understand what they are buying. Fate structures aren't screwed up, you just don't know what you are purchasing.

Airlines are selling OKC-LAX via many hubs. When you purchase OKC-LAX via DEN, you are not buying OKC-DEN-LAX, you are still buying OKC-LAX with a stop in DEN. DEN is irrelevant. If you want To go to DEN, you need to buy a fare for that MARKET. They price city pairs, the stop is largely irrelevant.

People say you paid for the seat - yes. But by reserving a seat you don't intent to use, you are robbing the airline of the ability to sell that seat to someone who will purchase it.

It's unethical, and since you are signing a contract it is fraudulent to enter a contract in bad faith.

You are, as that article said, switching the price tag in the department store.

People just don't understand what they are buying. Fate structures aren't screwed up, you just don't know what you are purchasing.


That is the absolute truth. The public knows how much they pay but most have no clue about how the airlines decide on prices. That's not to say that the prices are always reasonable or make sense but that's how it is.

People just don't understand what they are buying. Fate structures aren't screwed up, you just don't know what you are purchasing.

Airlines are selling OKC-LAX via many hubs. When you purchase OKC-LAX via DEN, you are not buying OKC-DEN-LAX, you are still buying OKC-LAX with a stop in DEN. DEN is irrelevant. If you want To go to DEN, you need to buy a fare for that MARKET. They price city pairs, the stop is largely irrelevant.

People say you paid for the seat - yes. But by reserving a seat you don't intent to use, you are robbing the airline of the ability to sell that seat to someone who will purchase it.

It's unethical, and since you are signing a contract it is fraudulent to enter a contract in bad faith.

You are, as that article said, switching the price tag in the department store.

I'll start by saying I've never purposefully bought a "hidden-city" ticket (did get off at ORD once when ticketed to MKE, but that was because I could get a ride to Milwaukee quicker than sitting at ORD 3 hours waiting to take a 20 minute flight) - but, the only reason this is an issue now are that the cartel/triopoly are now making money again, billions of it, and the suits running them don't want anything to get in the way of their stocks and bonuses. Take OKC-LAX on AA for example. Was just looking last week - a one-way ticket on AA's nonstop to LAX was over $400 - however if you bought a one way OKC-LAX-SAN, it dropped to $176. Now does that make any sense at all? Yes I get it, higher demand on OKC-LAX, nonstop, can charge a premium, blah blah blah, but is that in any way logical? Now my wife and I both have quite a few miles with AA so we're going to steer clear of this - the last thing I want is to deal with their fraud department (Is There a Rogue Airline Employee Shutting Down Frequent Flyer Accounts Without Reason? - View from the Wing - View from the Wing (http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2014/05/23/rogue-airline-employee-shutting-frequent-flyer-accounts-without-reason/)). And thankfully AA seems to have pretty good award availability on OKC-LAX so another chance to burn off our miles. But still - I don't blame anyone one bit for taking advantage of this. The airlines are the ones who created this game - now they want to sue us for playing it?

I'll start by saying I've never purposefully bought a "hidden-city" ticket (did get off at ORD once when ticketed to MKE, but that was because I could get a ride to Milwaukee quicker than sitting at ORD 3 hours waiting to take a 20 minute flight) - but, the only reason this is an issue now are that the cartel/triopoly are now making money again, billions of it, and the suits running them don't want anything to get in the way of their stocks and bonuses.

As I mentioned previously, this is not a new or recent issue. I've been dealing directly with airlines for many, many years and the same policy was definitely in effect when they were losing money and long before that even. They just have better capabilities to track it now than they used to.

I agree that HCT is technically fraudulent because 1) the traveler represents that they will complete the travel that they book, without any intent to do so, and 2) the traveler gains financially the difference between the prices of the HCT fare and the real fare. However, the airline doesn't lose anything and I would argue that the airline has a small gain. I've never done it, but I definitely wouldn't consider it "unethical" by society's standards. It's unreasonable for the contract to include the requirement to use the seat in the first place. However, I personally try to fulfill whatever terms I agree to, so you probably won't see me using this trick.

They have the right to set their prices how they want to and need to to be competitive. But by advertising a $10 fare from OKC>LAX>SFO, the airline is saying they consider $10 a fair (or at least agreeable) price for that trip. If a traveler agrees to the $10 fare but doesn't actually continue to SFO, the airline has lost nothing. The seat on the LAX>SFO leg of the journey is still paid for at the agreed price. If anything, having no traveler in that seat, and less luggage, saves fuel (even if an indeterminately small amount). The airline may even get to sell that seat a second time to a traveler on standby.

The fact that the airline also advertises a fare for the shorter OKC>LAX at $20 doesn't change anything.


But by reserving a seat you don't intent to use, you are robbing the airline of the ability to sell that seat to someone who will purchase it.

Nope. The seat is sold. I bought it. The airline still has my money whether I sit in the seat or not. Plus, they have the opportunity to sell it again to someone on standby.

Nope. The seat is sold. I bought it. The airline still has my money whether I sit in the seat or not. Plus, they have the opportunity to sell it again to someone on standby.

Seems to me that the airline would've made more money if you would have been truthful with them as you would've only paid for a ticket to L.A. and someone else would've paid for a ticket to San Fran and since you never had any intention to fly there, it is an empty seat that is not being utilized. The airlines were doing you a favor and you screwed them. I don't know much about the airline industry, but from what I read, that is how I see it. They are providing a service to you and if you don't like their prices, it's called a bus or car. If not, then you should be mindful that no matter how they make, it is their company, their planes, their operation, and no matter how you rationalize it, their service that they offer to you. If the prices are too high, I'm sure people will slow down flying and the airlines will notice and drop their prices accordingly.

Nope. The seat is sold. I bought it. The airline still has my money whether I sit in the seat or not. Plus, they have the opportunity to sell it again to someone on standby.

Regardless of the legalese in the tiny print on the ticket, I have to agree with this from an ethical standpoint. If someone tried to get a refund for the unused leg, then I think you get into the realm of leaving the airline hanging with a seat they "could have" sold.

I'd never heard of this before but really don't see it as any less ethical than the airline overbooking - they know how many seats are on the aircraft and they should not be permitted to sell any number that exceeds that capacity. If they want to sell more seats, bring a larger aircraft.

I have to laugh outloud when I see American Airlines accusing anybody or entity of being unethical. I'm sure whomever wrote that chuckled as well.

I have to laugh outloud when I see American Airlines accusing anybody or entity of being unethical. I'm sure whomever wrote that chuckled as well.

Meh, I have heard the same complaints about every airline at some time or another.

Regardless of the legalese in the tiny print on the ticket, I have to agree with this from an ethical standpoint. If someone tried to get a refund for the unused leg, then I think you get into the realm of leaving the airline hanging with a seat they "could have" sold.

I'd never heard of this before but really don't see it as any less ethical than the airline overbooking - they know how many seats are on the aircraft and they should not be permitted to sell any number that exceeds that capacity. If they want to sell more seats, bring a larger aircraft.

When you sign a contract, you should pay attention to the legalese.

It's not just text they add for fun, it's a legal binding contract you are purchasing.

The airline has the legal right to overbook their flights, the contract YOU signed gave them that permission. The contract you signed did not permit you to change your itinerary without consulting them.

You are robbing product. You bought a nonstop flight between Market A and Market C, via Market B. You did not buy separate flights between Market A- B and B-C.

Again, you people have no idea what product you are buying. It's a very easy concept once you understand that connecting in a hub, is not the city pair you purchased.

You are saying they got free revenue for you not showing up for a seat you bought. False.

You bought a one-stop flight for $210, with HCT. Nonstop service in Market A to Market B is $350, and Market B to Market C is $400. Market A to C via B is $210. You just stole $140 of revenue for the nonstop service which you used. And by reserving a seat on a flight you did not intend to take, you cost them the opportunity to sell that seat for the nonstop market of $400. That one ticket was theft of $140 of product, and with additional opportunity cost loss of $400 for a combined potential financial impact of $540.

No company I know of likes people stealing hundreds of dollars at a time. But, since people don't like airlines -- it's okay to steal from them.

If it was a local coffee shop getting the shaft on fraudulent contracts from a supplier, people would be crying a river on here. But since you don't like the fares, you people think it's okay to agree to contracts in bad faith.

I suppose if you people don't like Uber fares, you can just pay half. I'm sure they will be cool with it. After all -- in your opinion you don't like the fare and think it should be cheaper.

If I am taking a cab from the city to Moore, and its cheaper to take a cab from the city to Norman, I would have no qualms to take the later and get out when he gases up in Moore. Of course I can't imagine a cab company having such a nonsensical business model.

When you sign a contract, you should pay attention to the legalese.

It's not just text they add for fun, it's a legal binding contract you are purchasing.

The airline has the legal right to overbook their flights, the contract YOU signed gave them that permission. The contract you signed did not permit you to change your itinerary without consulting them.

You are robbing product. You bought a nonstop flight between Market A and Market C, via Market B. You did not buy separate flights between Market A- B and B-C.

Again, you people have no idea what product you are buying. It's a very easy concept once you understand that connecting in a hub, is not the city pair you purchased.

You are saying they got free revenue for you not showing up for a seat you bought. False.

You bought a one-stop flight for $210, with HCT. Nonstop service in Market A to Market B is $350, and Market B to Market C is $400. Market A to C via B is $210. You just stole $140 of revenue for the nonstop service which you used. And by reserving a seat on a flight you did not intend to take, you cost them the opportunity to sell that seat for the nonstop market of $400. That one ticket was theft of $140 of product, and with additional opportunity cost loss of $400 for a combined potential financial impact of $540.

No company I know of likes people stealing hundreds of dollars at a time. But, since people don't like airlines -- it's okay to steal from them.

If it was a local coffee shop getting the shaft on fraudulent contracts from a supplier, people would be crying a river on here. But since you don't like the fares, you people think it's okay to agree to contracts in bad faith.

Most people do not consider the purchase of an airplane ticket to be entering into a "contract", anymore than when they purchase a ticket to a sporting event or a movie.

Most people do not consider the purchase of an airplane ticket to be entering into a "contract", anymore than when they purchase a ticket to a sporting event or a movie.

Doesn't matter what you consider a contract. You agreed to it when you clicked the checkmark saying you fully read and understand the terms and conditions. "CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE" is a contract between the AIRLINE and the passenger. Both have distinct responsibilities, and obligations to fulfill the contract-- as well as protections for each party if the other fails. If the airline fails, to their fault (maintenance, staffing, etc.), they will, at their cost, provide the best available routing, including paying a premium on another airline to fulfill their duties of the contract. I've seen some very expensive($x,xxx) last minute other airline fares bought by the airline, to fulfill a customer who only paid $210. The airline will pay whatever it takes to fulfill the contract. Do you think the airline stomped it's feet and whined on internet forums when paying $1,100 to Delta on only $210 revenue from the customer?

I'll be honest -- I never read the T&C or at least very rarely do, unless a large sum of money is involved. But, when things go wrong -- I look at the contract I agreed to before I come screaming and yelling to a poor customer service agent that was just doing their job. If I get stiffed by the mobile phone company, and I look at the contract I signed...where what they did to me was included in that contract. I can't complain. I slap my forehead and say lesson learned.

If I find that they broke the contract, or did not make a reasonable attempt to keep it, I will complain to CS. But if I look at the contract I signed, and find I agreed to something that the company did...I don't make a fuss even if it angers me. I'll usually be upset at myself for not being more thorough. What am I going to tell them? "Sorry I didn't read the contract I signed and told you I read, but can you please bend the rules just once?"

If you people want to do HCT, go ahead and keep doing it. But don't get angry when you try to book a flight someday and find a message stating your reservation cannot be completed. You pick up the phone and the agent tells you your business is no longer welcome.

That one ticket was theft of $140 of product, and with additional opportunity cost loss of $400 for a combined potential financial impact of $540.

I think it's a fine point to make that HCT can be breach of contract, but it borders on laughable to say it's theft, let alone robbery! I'm not really sympathetic to airlines that advertise multiple prices and complain when customers choose a lower price for a comparable service.

It isn't really relevant to me anyway. As I said, I haven't and wouldn't do it. And I have no need to. Other than travel for business, I started flying only on Southwest about 5 years ago and I've never been a happier traveler.

I think it's a fine point to make that HCT can be breach of contract, but it borders on laughable to say it's theft, let alone robbery! I'm not really sympathetic to airlines that advertise multiple prices and complain when customers choose a lower price for a comparable service.

It isn't really relevant to me anyway. As I said, I haven't and wouldn't do it. And I have no need to. Other than travel for business, I started flying only on Southwest about 5 years ago and I've never been a happier traveler.

It is theft. You are paying for a cheaper product, and using the expensive product.

I wonder whatever happened with this class action suit (usatoday30.usatoday.com/travel/news/2003/06/04-hidden-city.htm) -M

It is theft. You are paying for a cheaper product, and using the expensive product.

Are you employed by an airline?

Are you employed by an airline?

I think catch has made it pretty clear his whole time on this board what industry he works in.

Are you employed by an airline?

Which gives me pretty good insight to how fares work. The only reason you guys don't thibk you are doing anything wrong is because you don't understand how fares work. Just because you don't understand the formulas or the fare structure does not mean it's okay to pay for one product and take another.

I have no clue how a lot of industries work, but I respect their rules and pricing structures and don't try and cheat their systems of making money. If I don't like their prices I will use a competitor or alternate product. But for some reason it's okay to do that with airlines because people don't like them.

Which gives me pretty good insight to how fares work. The only reason you guys don't thibk you are doing anything wrong is because you don't understand how fares work. Just because you don't understand the formulas or the fare structure does not mean it's okay to pay for one product and take another.

I have no clue how a lot of industries work, but I respect their rules and pricing structures and don't try and cheat their systems of making money. If I don't like their prices I will use a competitor or alternate product. But for some reason it's okay to do that with airlines because people don't like them.

Why should we have to know how fares work, why are they so complicated?

And I'm assuming you understand the many, many, many, many reasons people don't like airlines? The way they price fares is one of them. What would it be like if every other person on a bus had paid a different price from the others, depending on where and when they bought their ticket? That's just a start....

Why should we have to know how fares work, why are they so complicated?

And I'm assuming you understand the many, many, many, many reasons people don't like airlines? The way they price fares is one of them. What would it be like if every other person on a bus had paid a different price from the others, depending on where and when they bought their ticket? That's just a start....

Welcome to the world of revenue management. Things got complicated once people started connecting through hubs. If people don't like the current pricing structure, I guess the airlines could always switch to segment pricing and away from market pricing. Though I think some would raise a massive stink when fares shoot through the roof.

Your fare is market based.

OKC-LAX is a different market than OKC-SAN

OKC-SAN is offered via OKC-LAX and LAX-SAN. Buying OKC-SAN and getting off in LAX is using a different product than you paid for.

They could eliminate HCT if they didn't disclose your stopover. OKC-SAN (with 1 connection). After you bought the ticket they could disclose your connection city. But that's not feasible as some people prefer connections in certain cities. Some cities offer better hub amenities.

Another great example: MSP-DTW on DL and the extortionate fare DL charges (>$400 to fly just MSP-DTW, but if you add on DTW-DFW, suddenly the fare is a more palatable $152). Check out the relevant FT thread: Outrageous Delta tickets prices - MSP to DTW - FlyerTalk Forums (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta-air-lines-skymiles/1646072-outrageous-delta-tickets-prices-msp-dtw.html)

This is what I don't get. Yes, MSP-DTW is a hub-hub route, so DL has a monopoly and can charge what the hell they want. Good on them. Their profit margins certainly reflect that. So what's the matter if we want to play their game too? Clearly DL feels it can sell a MSP-DTW seat for $152 and make a profit - not only that, but a MSP-DTW seat as well as a DTW-DFW seat, which I don't work in the airline industry, but I think that trip burns a heck of a lot more gas than just MSP-DTW. Ridiculous IMO.

Judge Throws Out United?s Lawsuit Against ?Hidden City? Airfare Site Skiplagged.com ? Consumerist (http://consumerist.com/2015/05/01/judge-throws-out-uniteds-lawsuit-against-hidden-city-airfare-site-skiplagged-com/)

-M

Judge Throws Out United?s Lawsuit Against ?Hidden City? Airfare Site Skiplagged.com ? Consumerist (http://consumerist.com/2015/05/01/judge-throws-out-uniteds-lawsuit-against-hidden-city-airfare-site-skiplagged-com/)

-M

They'll refile in New York. Probably a bluff on UA's part to drain the owner's funds and bully him into shutting it down.

Yeah, throwing it out really has nothing to do with the merits of the case itself. Will be interesting to see how this progresses.

In the end...airlines can just easily fix this. If a history is detected of a passenger flying hidden city trips, and they have an issue with it (UA), then those people probably have frequent flyer accounts. Cancel and delete all miles earned to date and cancel their status. Don't sue a kid for making it easier for people to figure trips out...just penalize the activity by people actually following through. Or you could go the route of Southwest and just not care one way or the other.

Outside of that, not really sure there is a fix for the situation. Passengers aren't paying so much as the value/cost of flying them from point A to point B, but flying them from the Origin Market to the Destination Market. If a lot of people from OKC, for example, want to fly to LAX and they can sell 500 tickets a day regardless of how much they charge...then logically you are going to increase fares into that market to maximize profits. It doesn't matter if that person is going through DEN, PHX, or LAS to get there.

I think the lawsuit is, in and of itself, an effort to bleed the guy dry.

I can't fathom why a court would intervene in a case to shut down speech because it might encourage a third party to engage in a behavior contrary to it's own internal motives. The speech, in and of itself, should be protected.

In this vein, a company could sue a web author for publishing anything that company deemed desultory merely for the fact that it was desultory. "Bob's Burgers is suing JoesWebSite.com because it published the fact that we use motor oil in our mayonnaise, and since that's actually true, it might prevent people from purchasing our product and hurt our profits, JoesWebSite should be silenced."

Seems to me they could much more readily pursue a remedy under the notion that publication of the routes/fares with the "hidden cities" was a breach of intellectual property or trade secret information. Heck, it seems to me this would be a classic case where airlines could start licensing the use of their route pricing data, and anyone publishing any of it without a license gets the big DMCA hammer thrown on them.

If I order an extra value meal and throw the fries away can McDonalds sue me? Maybe the airlines should rethink their fare structure.

If I order an extra value meal and throw the fries away can McDonalds sue me? Maybe the airlines should rethink their fare structure.

Did you enter a contract saying you must consume all three components of the meal, if you wish to take advantage of the bundled price?

You didn't at McDonald's -- you did when you purchased a connecting fare at the airline.

If I order an extra value meal and throw the fries away can McDonalds sue me? Maybe the airlines should rethink their fare structure.

Throw the burger away and keep the fries.