lg10

Actually, it was my impression that none of the above things motivates closing threads on FT, as long as the discussion is active and civil. Anyone who thinks it's pointless, could just refrain from reading the thread.

--LG

FlyerTalker683455

Yes you are right. Some threads on this issue became very uncivil for no reason other than that people ran out of things to say. I think this thread's come to that point of people running out of arguments. At least it would be nice to have seen valid analogies on occasion.

QueenOfCoach

It seems to be clear that they start writing "you have been warned" letters only after repeated offenses. By then, the dollar amount could be tens of thousands and, yes, it would be worth paying a lawyer to deal with the situation. At the very least, the airline prevents future repeated losses by warning the perp they are being watched and tracked.

The occasional offender has nothing to worry about. No one cares. If it's the last flight segment and you only have carry on luggage, go for it. I've done it, myself, once or twice in the past 40 years of being an airline passenger.

The repeat offender might want to reconsider the risk vs gain.

nsx

Based on reports, the risk seems very low until you get a warning from the airline. Then the balance changes, unless you switch airlines to get a fresh start.

My guess is that when the airline sees a pro-forma loss (the amount of extra fare that they would have charged for A-B tickets) exceeding $5k to $10k total, they will take notice. If you keep it under $5k total per route per airline I doubt they will bother you.

QueenOfCoach

True, I agree.

I'd just add "per unit time". If the amount lost was $5k over a couple of months, I would assume that would be noticed and tracked. $5K over twenty years, no one would care.

Ancien Maestro

I agree this thread provides some useful information..

I personally don't book throwaway ticketing.. because usually I only book on Reward Points for my flights..

But I can see the logic if you're loyal to one airline and wanting to earn status and status miles..

aktchi

I would love to be able to do just that - but then how do you earn points? All cc bonuses?

Ancien Maestro

That's all I do is earning points by swiping cc's.. have collected over 1.5 million points this way..

now on an FT acceleration plan.. got the Amex Gold and Platinum card.. earning lots of miles.^

aktchi

Great! I have always felt that if i had enough miles to always book premium cabin, that would bring in many of the elite perks anyway. In a way, status is most useful in economy. I may start moving towards your model.

amolkold

Did anyone ever figure out the routing in the OP? I'm just curious because I wanted to know which airline this was. Looking at the distances given, it was either DL with the DTW hub or USAir at CLT.

Ancien Maestro

I'm always on the rewards flight booking model mode..

Can't earn status on rewards flights.. just get the free flights.. and feel good about it because I don't spend thousands to get to where I want to go.. and have enough money for highend accomodations.. which I get a good deal at usually..

HONcircle

In a hypothetical situation, what would the UA apologist say if the the airline only sells etkt A to C via B, and no etkt A to B?

For those who believe in it, they might still claim the pax commited a sin and broke the CoC. But in this particular case, they can not claim that the airline suffered from a loss of revenue in any way.

cepheid

This issue has nothing to do with UA specifically; almost every airline (barring Southwest) has clauses against hidden-city ticketing. Perhaps you meant, "airline apologist?"

I'd say that you are correct - despite the breach of the CoC (which is fact, not belief - though I have no idea what you mean by "sin"), the airline would suffer no loss of revenue, in this ludicrous, completely unrealistic, hypothetical situation. No airline would ever routinely transit a city to which they would not sell a ticket ("B" in your example). The only time I've ever seen a regularly-scheduled landing in a non-serviced city was for a fuel stop, and no passenger was allowed to deplane there, anyway.

milty908

So if I buy a $5 Happy Meal and only intended to get the toy, which sells on ebay for $10, is that fraud? What if McD also sells the toy for $10, but will package it in a $5 Happy Meal? (maybe not guaranteed to the the toy you want, like maybe not guaranteed to fly A-B-C, maybe fly A-D-C). I think your legal reasoning is faulty, as you cannot play mad libs with legal reasoning and must apply logic and circumstance to it.

milty908

I think I see both sides on this...

1. Airline tickets are a paid for specific performance service, meaning it doesn't matter how the airline gets you from A-B, but only that they do get you from A-B. Therefore you are defrauding the airline if you purchased the service and not intending to fly from A-B.

2. Airline tickets are goods or services for air travel, making the supermarket bundle analogy work. If you want to throw away portions of the good or service, it would be at your discretion.


I think the truth lies somewhere in between given the distortion of supply/demand economics, monopoly/regulations, and corporate pricing schemes. I agree with the majority of the people here that say it's not a crime at all, but it does not comply with the airline's terms of service. The airline can choose to deal with you how they wish, within their legal rights.