41–50 of 121 posts
I'm surprised that this common enough that it's worthwhile for airlines to fight it. It requires both: - Flight being meaningfully cheaper using hidden city and - Traveller is willing to deal with the restrictions (no carry-on, risk of route changing, no frequent flyer etc).
>* the restrictions (no carry-on, ...* You mean no checked baggage, right? Carry-on is fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. I like the idea of being hostile to the airlines so I’ve used Skiplagged to search for flights before but I’ve never found a hidden city itinerary that I actually wanted to take. I’m guessing it probably makes sense with certain airports with high fees near concentrations of wealth? E.g. maybe London->NYC costs more than London(->NYC)->Albany because NYC airports have high fees and airlines presume wealthier…
I don’t even think it’s a “wealthier clientele” thing. Some routes are literally subsidized - for example, the Essential Air Service program pays airlines to run flights to places that would otherwise be unprofitable to fly to, and due to the grants the airlines can offer the complete route for (relatively) cheap. So, for example, it might be expensive to fly New York to Chicago, but subsidized (and cheaper) to fly N…
Essential Air Service flights might sometimes play a role here but from what I've seen I think the thing that creates opportunities for skiplagging is just typical airline revenue management doing it's inscrutable magic setting prices between 2 cities without any concern for the prices of the individual legs.
> Skiplagging is not illegal, but airlines view it as a policy violation that is grounds for termination of a traveler’s entire itinerary since the airline can't sell the empty seat in the onward flight. The poor airline, unable to sell an empty seat because ... checks notes ... the seat is already sold to someone, and that person decided not to show up. Truly the horror. Just think of all the revenue the airline los…
I don't understand how someone can be barred from an airline because they got a better deal on it. At a certain point there must be an individual who would've been barred from every airline due to this at which point it becomes some sort of cruel punishment on an individual from a whole industry for really doing nothing illegal or wrong or causing a nuisance. Airlines shouldn't be allowed to barr people simply for sk…
Because they cause a truly stupid amount of inefficiencies and hassle with their desire to save a buck at the cost of everyone else.
I think American Airlines's marketing and legal teams dropped the ball as far as how they impressed the court of public opinion, as demonstrated by this very thread. "We couldn't make more money" will almost never speak to the common man.
But speaking as someone who's familiar with the aviation industry and flies very often, shenanigans like this cause tremendous losses of time and money when margins are razor thin.
A missing passenger means lost time trying to find that passenger which leads to flight delays. Once a passenger is deemed missing, their checked luggage if any needs to be offloaded which causes additional checks of the flight manifest and the cargo bay, leading to even more lost time and flight delays.
A seat unoccupied-but-occupied means that seat couldn't have been used to deadhead the crew for another flight, which can include crews from other airlines. This makes scheduling logistics even harder than it needed to be, leading to inefficiencies and in the worst case flight cancellations.
This all causes problems for people on the ground: The ground crew at the airports, the flight crew on the plane, the logistics team scheduling everything, and more. It's not just middle management that everyone here likes to flip off.
Also a coup de grace for the audience here: Someone skiplagging means the airline flies an empty seat that should have been occupied, wasting fuel. Skiplagging is bad for the environment.
I am very happy American Airlines won this, and I will say the same with any other airline. If you want to fly somewhere, buy a ticket specifically for that. If you engage in skiplagging, you are sincerely a greedy fucking bastard and deserve every blacklisting you get.
> Skiplagging is not illegal, but airlines view it as a policy violation that is grounds for termination of a traveler’s entire itinerary since the airline can't sell the empty seat in the onward flight. The poor airline, unable to sell an empty seat because ... checks notes ... the seat is already sold to someone, and that person decided not to show up. Truly the horror. Just think of all the revenue the airline los…
Will this verdict stop Skiplagged from continuing its business in the future, either legally or financially? Or is it more like a one-time penalty they have to pay
First one is a "So what, just remove the American Airlines trademarks". They can drop them and say all good, and presumably not get sued again.
Second one is about what Skiplag was doing itself; I.E. cutting into AA's profits. If they continue to do this, the next court case will be much more expensive. Most courts don't like it when you get sued for something and treat it like the cost of doing business, and AA is big enough that I'd count on them bringing suit again.
Important note: "skiplagging" while frowned upon and grounds for an airline banning individuals from using them; is not why skiplagged is paying AA $9.4M. From the article: Paul Yetter, an attorney for American with Yetter Coleman in Houston, told jurors during opening statements that Skiplagged is not an authorized agent of the airline yet "dresses up" its website with American's trademarks to look legitimate and fo…
> "They ordered New York-based Skiplagged to pay *$4.7 million in disgorgement from the travel site’s revenues* and another $4.7 million for copyright infringement."
The fine is half trademark infringement, half for "costing" AA money through not letting them resell the seat themselves
- "American reportedly removed a 17-year-old from a flight last year and banned him for three years when he tried to fly from Gainesville, Florida, to Charlotte, North Carolina, on a ticket with a final destination of New York City. The ticket was supposedly cheaper than booking a flight to Charlotte alone."
There ought to be a consumer protection law about it. Not one specific to airlines, but a universal protection—a "right to optimize", if you will. If you ban customers for taking advantage of a publicly-advertised offer, then why are you allowed to advertise that offer in the first place?
> Skiplagging is not illegal, but airlines view it as a policy violation that is grounds for termination of a traveler’s entire itinerary since the airline can't sell the empty seat in the onward flight. 'Can't' or 'aren't supposed to'? Airlines oversell flights ALL THE TIME. This just allows them to double sell the seat without having to ask anyone to volunteer for a free flight credit on a later flight. Seems like…
I don't understand how someone can be barred from an airline because they got a better deal on it. At a certain point there must be an individual who would've been barred from every airline due to this at which point it becomes some sort of cruel punishment on an individual from a whole industry for really doing nothing illegal or wrong or causing a nuisance. Airlines shouldn't be allowed to barr people simply for sk…
>I don't understand how someone can be barred from an airline because they got a better deal on it. Because they cause a truly stupid amount of inefficiencies and hassle with their desire to save a buck at the cost of everyone else. I think American Airlines's marketing and legal teams dropped the ball as far as how they impressed the court of public opinion, as demonstrated by this very thread. "We couldn't make mor…
I've never intentionally skiplagged, but there was one time the first leg of my journey was late, I missed my connection and I was going to be in the airport for 8 or 10 hours to catch my 1 hour flight to my final destination. I decided not to, and instead minimized my misery and bought a ticket for the 3.5 hour train ride home.
If an airline looked at that behavior and blacklisted me for not using the service I paid for, then they are the greedy fucking bastards.