Hidden City Risk

 
Old Jul 21, 2010, 2:32 pm
  #91  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PDX
Programs: UA 1K 1.14 MM ALASKA MVPG
Posts: 126
Look, the only reason hidden pricing exists is because the market is not working properly. Supply and demand are not being balanced appropriately either through regulation/collusion/monopoly. United has pricing power to ORD (and many other destinations) that does not correspond to the actual demand to fly to ORD -- meaning that the system is not operating as a real market. I think one could make a moral case that this alone justifies others to ignore their rules and that UA is the one being immoral and enforcing it through a set of CoCs that are creating in collusion with the other airlines, which I presume all restrict hidden city pricing.

If we want to live in a capitalistic society we need to have markets that are free. Customers exposing the lack of free markets are not immoral they are exerting a balancing force that will make carriers charge no more for service to a hub than service through the hub. I think it is fairly simple.
ptspellman is offline  
Old Jul 21, 2010, 3:23 pm
  #92  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Too many
Programs: Lots
Posts: 5,760
Originally Posted by Colin
If UA wants to compete on price in the LAX-MKE market without harming its margins in the LAX-ORD market, then UA should fly LAX-MKE nonstop. There is nothing immoral about buying a ticket LAX-ORD-MKE and using only the LAX-ORD segment. Morality is not defined by the artificial constructs created by corporations to maximize profit or by whether a court would choose to enforce such rules.
Amen. ^
Axey is offline  
Old Jul 21, 2010, 3:35 pm
  #93  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: PHL & (gasp) AVP (NEPA)
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 787
Morality/ethics aside, on all of my ticket purchases I have not seen anything where I can be charged for not using a segment.

I assume this is the stuff like "NONREF-0VALUAFTDPT-CHGFEE -REFUNDABLE-CXLFEE-CHGFEE"...

Section 9, Contract terms:

http://airconsumer.dot.gov/publicati...s.htm#contract

There are additional notice requirements for contract terms that affect your air fare. Airlines must provide a conspicuous written notice on or with the ticket concerning any "incorporated" contract terms that restrict refunds, impose monetary penalties, or permit the airline to raise the price after you've bought the ticket.

If an airline incorporates contract terms by reference and fails to provide the required notice about a particular rule, the passenger will not be bound by that rule.
TechnoPagan is offline  
Old Jul 21, 2010, 10:18 pm
  #94  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,684
Originally Posted by TechnoPagan
Morality/ethics aside, on all of my ticket purchases I have not seen anything where I can be charged for not using a segment.

I assume this is the stuff like "NONREF-0VALUAFTDPT-CHGFEE -REFUNDABLE-CXLFEE-CHGFEE"...

Section 9, Contract terms:

http://airconsumer.dot.gov/publicati...s.htm#contract

Umm, I believe the ticket itself says "Origin LAX, Destination, MKE." If that isn't obvious enough, I don't know what else is required Just casue it's called hidden city, doesn't mean they hide the destination on the ticket.
fastair is offline  
Old Jul 22, 2010, 11:40 am
  #95  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by weero
Because UA cannot show in any way how the OP would cause them expense and harm by not flying on a paid segment.
Sure it can. UA would have lost the opportunity to sell the ORD-MKE and MKE-ORD seats at a higher fare than what the OP paid for those segments.

By not showing up with no notice, UA would assume those seats were taken and would not sell them to someone else (aside from whatever their overbooking algorithms might permit).
Bear96 is online now  
Old Jul 22, 2010, 11:52 am
  #96  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,684
Originally Posted by Bear96
Sure it can. UA would have lost the opportunity to sell the ORD-MKE and MKE-ORD seats at a higher fare than what the OP paid for those segments.

By not showing up with no notice, UA would assume those seats were taken and would not sell them to someone else (aside from whatever their overbooking algorithms might permit).
You hit on something there. I've seen the overbooking levels in some hidden city markets get pretty high. I've seen flights be boarded 20 min prior to dptr time, and sit and wait for other passengers (lots) that are checked in, and not misconnecting, that never show, thus making everyone wait an extra 10 min. I've seen the times where the overbooking lvl is high due to no shows, and everyone shows up. There are many costs associated with not showing up for a flight, that don't have a direct dollar value but add to the costs of an airline doing business, that are beyond the ticket price.

Of course on irrop days, there are people who want those seats, yet can't be confirmed because they have been booked by someone who has no intention of showing up, as he has already taken the blue line to his Chicago address. Some of these people then take the buss to MKE, which is not their 1st choice, but would rather be confirmed on a flight that eventually goes out with open seats.
fastair is offline  
Old Jul 23, 2010, 11:06 am
  #97  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,948
To fastair

Hey fastair,

I have never used the hidden city trick because I always have to carry over 200 lbs of baggage for my business (which is one of great perks of being *Gold), but I do book open jawed itineraries to Asia because of United stopover rules and then fill in the gap, with either an award flight or another purchased nested itinerary, and cancel the final segment. Sometimes I can pick-up the orphan segment at a later date because I am in Asia a lot but sometimes I throw it away. I have been doing this for about 15 years now in Asia and it always saves me at least $1,000- per trip (I value FF miles at 2 cents when I use awards). This trick I found on my own in the 1990's and only recently, after I joined FT, did I see that lots of other people here do the exact same thing.

Is this technically not permitted? The reason I ask is that, back in the days when I booked all of my international travel on the phone with the Premier Exec desk, I used to tell the agents exactly what I was doing and they would help construct the itineraries, so I assumed that it was perfectly fine. But, reading some of these threads since I have joined FT, makes me think that UA may not consider this kosher either.
zombietooth is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2010, 11:15 am
  #98  
nnn
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Francisco
Programs: All-Around Kettle
Posts: 3,286
Originally Posted by zombietooth
Hey fastair,

I have never used the hidden city trick because I always have to carry over 200 lbs of baggage for my business (which is one of great perks of being *Gold), but I do book open jawed itineraries to Asia because of United stopover rules and then fill in the gap, with either an award flight or another purchased nested itinerary, and cancel the final segment. Sometimes I can pick-up the orphan segment at a later date because I am in Asia a lot but sometimes I throw it away. I have been doing this for about 15 years now in Asia and it always saves me at least $1,000- per trip (I value FF miles at 2 cents when I use awards). This trick I found on my own in the 1990's and only recently, after I joined FT, did I see that lots of other people here do the exact same thing.

Is this technically not permitted? The reason I ask is that, back in the days when I booked all of my international travel on the phone with the Premier Exec desk, I used to tell the agents exactly what I was doing and they would help construct the itineraries, so I assumed that it was perfectly fine. But, reading some of these threads since I have joined FT, makes me think that UA may not consider this kosher either.
I believe you're referring to throwaway ticketing (as opposed to hidden city ticketing). I believe there was a time when the UA CoC allowed throwaway ticketing, but I don't know if that has changed.
nnn is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2010, 4:50 pm
  #99  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Danville, CA, USA;
Programs: UA 1MM, WN CP, Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Gold, IC Plat
Posts: 15,649
Originally Posted by fastair
How about you find the cheapest itin that you plan on using as you purchased. I mean UA plans to fulfill their end of the agreement, why don't you? The train suggestion works. Honesty and honor should be wroth something to you, or if you are not concerned with what is ethical, then the open jaw seems to be popular, but I don't advocate dishonesty....that is, unless you feel that you should also be defrauded whenever possible, at which point, what goes around comes around in the world of karma.
With all due respect, that is a complete crock.

Originally Posted by mikew99
I agree with this. Please let me know when I can charge UA $150 every time they cancel or change my flight. After all, that's what they charge me when I do the same!

There are no ethical issues with not flying segments paid for (notwithstanding that the airlines represent some of the worst examples of honest and ethical behavior).
+1

Originally Posted by mecabq
I have been involved in many debates about hidden-city ticketing, too, and agree that a passenger is ethically, as well as legally, obligated to fulfill his end of the contract with the airline. Moreover, I believe that it's in all of our interest to do so because undermining airlines' pricing structures may well lead to even more customer-unfriendly tweaks in the future.
I think I'll take my chances. Who knows, we might get a fare structure that makes sense, like WNs. AS also has a pretty good website which shows all the fare options and permits mix and match without having to memorize the playbook.
Boraxo is offline  
Old Jul 27, 2010, 10:08 pm
  #100  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,684
Originally Posted by zombietooth
"Most expensive way" are my words not his and applied to this specific situation only--they wouldn't let him make his own deal with UA.

This happened last year, so maybe times have changed. However,
government widely touts the savings they are making across the budget to keep the taxpayers happy, count me as a skeptic who has seen enough both inside and outside to make me believe that this is not true.

Sorry, after seeing as much as I have, I just don't have the rosy view of government that you do.
Hey Zombie, I had some down time, so found this for ya, straight from the FY 2011 final version of the city pair contract:

"B.20 PRICE REDUCTION
If, after award, the Contract carrier offers an unrestricted coach fare available to the general public that is lower than the contract fare, the contract carrier shall provide the lower fare to Government travelers in lieu of the contract fare.
If, after award, the contract carrier offers a commercial fare, other than an unrestricted coach fare, that is lower than the contract fare, the traveler can request, and the contract carrier shall provide, the lower fare in lieu of the contract fare, if the traveler qualifies for the lower fare and space is available at the time of booking. "

" AUDITS BY GSA’S TRANSPORTATION AUDIT DIVISION
1. Contract fares. The Government reserves the right to issue overcharges whenever the lowest fully refundable coach fare charged is greater than the contract fare, provided payment was made through a GTR, contractor-issued travel card, or centrally billed account.
2. The Government reserves the right to issue overcharges whenever the fare charged is greater than any unrestricted lowest fully refundable coach fare offered by the contract carrier to the general public that is lower than the contract fare. In such cases, audits will be limited to the effective date(s) of any such lower fares."

Kinda what I said earlier. Had he qualified (not made a deal) but qualified for a lower fare, he could have used it. That would mean advance purchase, ticketing, booking class, roundtrip if necessary...Even though this language is being quoted for the FY 2011 contract, the same language is/has been standard for years.
fastair is offline  
Old Jul 27, 2010, 11:10 pm
  #101  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by fastair
Hey Zombie, I had some down time, so found this for ya, straight from the FY 2011 final version of the city pair contract:

"B.20 PRICE REDUCTION
If, after award, the Contract carrier offers an unrestricted coach fare available to the general public that is lower than the contract fare, the contract carrier shall provide the lower fare to Government travelers in lieu of the contract fare.
If, after award, the contract carrier offers a commercial fare, other than an unrestricted coach fare, that is lower than the contract fare, the traveler can request, and the contract carrier shall provide, the lower fare in lieu of the contract fare, if the traveler qualifies for the lower fare and space is available at the time of booking. "

" AUDITS BY GSA’S TRANSPORTATION AUDIT DIVISION
1. Contract fares. The Government reserves the right to issue overcharges whenever the lowest fully refundable coach fare charged is greater than the contract fare, provided payment was made through a GTR, contractor-issued travel card, or centrally billed account.
2. The Government reserves the right to issue overcharges whenever the fare charged is greater than any unrestricted lowest fully refundable coach fare offered by the contract carrier to the general public that is lower than the contract fare. In such cases, audits will be limited to the effective date(s) of any such lower fares."

Kinda what I said earlier. Had he qualified (not made a deal) but qualified for a lower fare, he could have used it. That would mean advance purchase, ticketing, booking class, roundtrip if necessary...Even though this language is being quoted for the FY 2011 contract, the same language is/has been standard for years.
Maybe since United was waiving ticketing rules for him, the fare wouldn't qualify as "available to the general public". But if that is the case, it still seems ridiculous to not allow conditional waivers based on unusual circumstances to save the government money, and the flyer, great inconvenience. Also, the connecting flight to the international gateway wasn't UA, it was a foreign carrier with no relationship with the GSA, but it was only $150- and he could have made his originally booked flight home minus his first connecting segment to the gateway.
zombietooth is offline  
Old Oct 7, 2010, 12:57 pm
  #102  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K/MM, AA GLD
Posts: 1,706
I was perusing the August 19, 2010 version of the contract of carriage and noticed that hidden city ticketing is now explicitly prohibited:
http://content.united.com/ual/asset/COC19aug10final.pdf
FARES APPLY FOR TRAVEL ONLY BETWEEN THE POINTS FOR WHICH THEY
ARE PUBLISHED. TICKETS MAY NOT BE PURCHASED AND USED AT FARE(S) FROM AN
INITIAL DEPARTURE POINT ON THE TICKET WHICH IS BEFORE THE PASSENGER’S
ACTUAL POINT OF ORIGIN OF TRAVEL, OR TO A MORE DISTANT POINT(S) THAN
THE PASSENGER’S ACTUAL DESTINATION BEING TRAVELED EVEN WHEN THE
PURCHASE AND USE OF SUCH TICKETS WOULD PRODUCE A LOWER FARE. THIS
PRACTICE IS KNOWN AS “HIDDEN CITIES TICKETING” OR “POINT BEYOND
TICKETING” AND IS PROHIBITED BY UA.
Page 14, Tickets, section C.1

And UA now explicitly allows deleting miles from the FF account or revoking elite status.
rob_flies_ua is offline  
Old Oct 7, 2010, 1:09 pm
  #103  
nnn
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Francisco
Programs: All-Around Kettle
Posts: 3,286
Originally Posted by rob_flies_ua
I was perusing the August 19, 2010 version of the contract of carriage and noticed that hidden city ticketing is now explicitly prohibited:
http://content.united.com/ual/asset/COC19aug10final.pdf

Page 14, Tickets, section C.1
Interesting. Though, FWIW, this prohibition was previously in the CoC. It just wasn't expressly called "hidden cities ticketing." See post 69.
nnn is offline  
Old Oct 7, 2010, 1:17 pm
  #104  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K/MM, AA GLD
Posts: 1,706
Originally Posted by nnn
Interesting. Though, FWIW, this prohibition was previously in the CoC. It just wasn't expressly called "hidden cities ticketing." See post 69.
Actually, what was prohibited there was issuing hidden city tickets; this includes a prohibition against using them and provides for penalties to the traveler. (The early penalties seemed more aimed at travel agents.)
rob_flies_ua is offline  
Old Oct 7, 2010, 2:49 pm
  #105  
nnn
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Francisco
Programs: All-Around Kettle
Posts: 3,286
Originally Posted by rob_flies_ua
Actually, what was prohibited there was issuing hidden city tickets; this includes a prohibition against using them and provides for penalties to the traveler. (The early penalties seemed more aimed at travel agents.)
I wonder if United plans to take a harder look at passengers who use hidden-city ticketing. I would think one would have to be a very frequent offender to be noticed.
nnn is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.