Southwest Rapid Rewards - Book hidden city with RR points

Looking at Tus to Las next week one way. Lowest cost in points is 18,000. A one way Tus to Abq connect in las Vegas is less than 6,000 points. If I book that and don't fly the last leg will they charge my account the 18,000 for the Las flight? Thanks for your input!

I know this is officially permitted on a regular fare, so I would guess that this would work, but I don't know for sure.

Remember though that you won't be able to check any bags.

I know this is officially permitted on a regular fare,

It is no longer officially permitted, but no one has reported a problem doing it.

It is no longer officially permitted, but no one has reported a problem doing it.
On the specific example mentioned by the OP, there was a connection involved. I understand how they do detect it on connections.

But this being Southwest (with its A-to-B-to-C-to-D flights with open seating), how do they tell if it's not a connection (ie, you booked A-to-B-toC on the same flight but got off at B)? When they go through and count the passengers who haven't deplaned, do they compare it to the expect count right then? If it's one too low, do they search the rest rooms, and then quiz each passenger as to their name, or do they just let it go?

I've never observed them using this count for anything other than to be sure they don't have too many on board, but then I don't know if I've ever been through on a multi-leg flight where someone deplaned one stop early for this reason.

Most other airlines don't even have many continuation flights (under the same flight number, where you can stay on board). Even when they do, the time between flights is so much longer, few people actually stay on board!

So this issue of detecting people who unexpectedly deplaned a multi-segment flight seems fairly unique to Southwest...

From what Employees have reported here, they do investigate if the through count is low. It's been reported that it's so they can page the missing pax in the terminal in case they mistook where they were (but really, risking delaying the departure for that?) rather than identifying someone taking advantage of a fare quirk.

I did a hidden city IND-LAS-DEN a few months ago on points getting off in LAS and had the GA cancel my second leg. Got home to find almost 6,000 points refunded back out of the 14k I used for the one way. ^

I've done lots of hidden city on WN. Never with points. But I always tell the GA and FAs that I'm deplaning so my absence doesn't delay the flight.

One quirk with this process is that some funds remain on the ticket if one deplanes before completing the flight in toto. These funds have to be reinvested in another flight or they have to expire before the points and flight credit are credited to the pax.

But since they take the points up front on the flight I would do it. Don't see how they could take more a hidden city. Just haven't done it yet.

I've done lots of hidden city on WN. Never with points. But I always tell the GA and FAs that I'm deplaning so my absence doesn't delay the flight.

One quirk with this process is that some funds remain on the ticket if one deplanes before completing the flight in toto. These funds have to be reinvested in another flight or they have to expire before the points and flight credit are credited to the pax.

But since they take the points up front on the flight I would do it. Don't see how they could take more a hidden city. Just haven't done it yet.

There is a big difference between a direct flight and a connecting flight.

With a direct flight it is best to tell the FA you're deplaning so their through-count is correct. Sometimes they ask to let the GA know. There is no effect on points posting or taxes since this is no different than a non-stop flight for those purposes.

With a connection, you best cancel the onwards flight because they'd page you if not at the gate. Points will not post in this scenario, unless you reuse the remaining funds left-over from not taking the connection. It sounds like this is similar with a points reservation.

Hidden city and back-to-back ticketing used to be explicitly allowed but are no longer mentioned. I try to minimize it, but sometimes the fare difference is too big. Many GAs know exactly how to deal with this and why it is beneficial to create such itineraries. A friend had a mechanical once and it was no problem to route again to the intermediate city, even though the computer created a non-stop to the final destination. These stories is what keeps me on WN: great customer service.

Does anyone know why it is no longer mentioned and why it is no longer explicitly allowed? Is Southwest planning on eventually disallowing the practice?

Does anyone know why it is no longer mentioned and why it is no longer explicitly allowed? Is Southwest planning on eventually disallowing the practice?

My guess: some of the hidden city deals are just a little too good. As you suggest, Southwest could explicitly ban the practice on short notice, claiming that it hasn't been allowed since 2011 but that the unwritten rule simply was not enforced. That's the baloney they fed us when they decided to lock TTFs to one passenger.

Since Southwest is culturally behaving more like a legacy, and moving at least some of their attitudes and policies that way, it wouldn't surprise me if they eventually banned the practice.

Their prior mindset was essentially "fortress hubs and their associated pricing aren't part of our model, so if you find the infrequent hidden-city opportunity, go for it." Southwest never penalized one-way fliers, so throwaway tickets or nested tickets weren't an issue that even had to be addressed.

But now that they're the premium product, holding greater pricing power than legacies, I can see them getting more interested in preventing hidden-city where they can.

Southwest never penalized one-way fliers, so throwaway tickets or nested tickets weren't an issue that even had to be addressed.

My guess: The original policy made a virtue of necessity. Southwest did not (and probably does not now) have the ability to monitor this systematically. In the early years the fare structure did not offer significant hidden city savings. So it was easy to tout an advantage that cost Southwest virtually nothing.

The disappearance of that touting indicates that someone in Southwest believed that the policy now carries enough cost to warrant reconsideration. If the official policy reappears we will know that the reconsideration led to back to the original conclusion. Otherwise we have to wait. Pressing the issue would be much more likely to result in an explicit ban than explicit permission for hidden city tickets.

How about Hidden City using a 1.0/1.5 old-style Award if the trip between city pairs you want is not available? Any problem there and if not, has anyone done it?

How about Hidden City using a 1.0/1.5 old-style Award if the trip between city pairs you want is not available? Any problem there and if not, has anyone done it?

I don't think the award inventory every had seats for A to C via B but no inventory from A to B on that flight. Thus no hidden city opportunity.