61–70 of 121 posts
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…
Now you just have a no-show at the gate (P>50% ? something they’re surely used to handle efficiently) giving them some slack to fly their overbook flight without having to bump anyone. Truly a win-win
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…
If this is impacting their margins so dearly, they should incentivize for optimizing against it: nobody would ever take a skiplagged flight if there were no pricing penalty.
> If you engage in skiplagging, you are sincerely a greedy fucking bastard
But the airline isn't greedy for this type of pricing, right?
Skiplagging is a very old practice. What's new here is just the website. Before 9/11 there was nothing the airlines could do to stop it because you didn't have to show ID to match your ticket. So they couldn't ban you even if they figured out you were skiplagging. Now they can and they do. Which is why the airlines love that the government "forces" them to check your ID.
> Now they can and they do. Which is why the airlines love that the government "forces" them to check your ID. Where is this happening? On over 100 domestic flights post-9/11, I've never had an airline review my ID - only on international flights has this occurred. The TSA or their private equivalent will match your ID to a boarding pass, but even now that's going away at major airports in favor of ID scans. Regardle…
Where do you live? Your boarding pass is scanned at the gate; you can’t just board any flight with your boarding pass from any other flight
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
It's 4.7 million each for trademark infringement and "disgorgement from the travel site's revenues" 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…
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…
Half right: > "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
For those who are wondering, skiplagging does work, and can save you a boatload of $$$.
AND you have to understand the system and have some attention to detail, especially internationally.
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).
Seems like this practice in general shows that a true free market doesn't exist in the airline industry. If it did exist then flights like these wouldn't be profitable to sell in the first place.
"True free market" does not mean "complete absence of all regulations"!