United & Orbitz sue over dropped sectors

I'm posting this because I know a lot of people have been discussing the ex-EU BA/VS fares recently.

While the general advice has been never to drop the first sector (e.g. DUB-LHR), because the ticket will likely get cancelled, I think the jury has been out - thus far, anyway - on dropping the fourth/final sector (e.g. LHR-DUB).

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-1 ... ng-1-.html

Thanks for the heads up Nylon. All the more reason to adopt TimCrawley's practice (as shown on the DUB sticky thread) of forward-dating the final leg so that it becomes the positioning flight next time, instead of the unwanted final leg this time.

Thanks for the heads up Nylon. All the more reason to adopt TimCrawley's practice (as shown on the DUB sticky thread) of forward-dating the final leg so that it becomes the positioning flight next time, instead of the unwanted final leg this time.

Those often are quite costly. I know for the BA one, the change had to be inside 24 hours, and changes not to that would cost 200 euros. The original enquiry was about whether it might be save on positioning. It might well with the likes of Copenhagen or Oslo, the typical ex-eu destinations of choice recently, but Dublin and Brussels are relatively cheap to get to.

Cost of the DUB/AMS flight doesn't bother me - peanuts set against the saving you're making - but I did like the idea of getting to LHR and going home without any risk attached to missing that final leg, because you were booked to take it some months hence, as Tim showed on his itinerary.

I don't think he mentioned whether the cost of doing that was greater than if he'd taken that flight immediately following his TATL leg.

Maybe he'll see this and comment?

Am I missing something, but in the cases demonstrated above, surely there would be problems when trying to resume their journey from City B, when they were not on the return flight from C to B?

What happens if, having flown the first three sectors, you phone up and cancel the fourth?

Are they really going to re-ticket the entire itinerary and say, "ok, if you cancel that leg, you'll have to pay [circa] 1,500 EUR"?

I love the comment about it affecting the ability to count passengers which can cause delays and affect fuel computations - because it's a total crock of s**t considering all airlines oversell and count on no-shows, and on the occasions when more people show than they want take to trying to bump pax to another flight! If the ability to count pax was that vital why not sell only what the aircraft can seat and if there are no-shows you're in pocket and you know how many pax you have. It's not rocket science.

Hidden city ticketing is strictly prohibited by most airlines apparently - so why did they open up the loophole? Because it is their loophole, it's not like any criminal act has taken place to misappropriate funds, they're just bitching because they could have sold full fare tickets instead of heavily discounted tickets. No-one's being defrauded if the tickets are legitimately available for purchase and the airline agrees to sell them. Talk about shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted... :0

lol, Bretty. My absolute favourite moment in the article is when American Airlines starts talking about ethics...

Am I missing something, but in the cases demonstrated above, surely there would be problems when trying to resume their journey from City B, when they were not on the return flight from C to B?

Hidden City ticketing works best on one-way flights. And in the US domestic market, buying a return fare rarely has any financial advantage over buying two single fares.

Or, you add the 'hidden city' onto the final leg of a standard return.

For example, there used to be a standard trick (now defunct) for NYC-LON-NYC fares, where you could add a third sector to PHL from NYC. For peak season in Y, this trick would reduce the fare by around $300, and significantly more if flying in J.

Just to reply to the query from Whiterose on pricing - there seems little robust logic to the prices you get offered:

On Expedia.ie tonight you can fly Business DUB-LON (get LHR) 18/12 BA, LGW-LAS 7/1 VS, LAS-LGW 19/1 VS and LON (get LHR)-DUB 18/3 BA (ready to use as positioning for next trip) for €2364. If you change back the DUB-LHR to 6/1 (no possibility to fly in time on 7/1 so no flights offered) and the LHR-DUB to 20/1 then price is €2823 (as it shows as sending you to LCY on AF then a Delta flight operated by VS!) BUT if you hard code the LHR instead of LON for the DUB legs you get back onto BA and VS directly for €1750. Pushing just the last leg out to LHR-DUB 27/1 and price changes to €1992.

Now, there wasn't that obvious difference when I did my booking a week or so ago, I just checked a week or two and then a month or two either side on legs one and four after zeroing in on when I wanted legs two and three to be - finding generally a difference of only €10-20, but tonight I can see huge price differences (but also bear in mind the VS price is now £3860.54 compared to £2413.44 when I made my booking 10 days ago).

So, I don't have expertise that says take legs 1 and 4 two days, fifteen days or nine weeks and two days before / after to get best prices - experimentation seems to be the order of the day once you've homed in on when you want legs 2 and 3 to be. Some logic might suggest that certain times of the day or certain days of the week might cost more or less on legs 1 and 4 if you were booking those independently but I can't even say that feeds through into 1-2-3-4 flights total cost!

So I would say first check the dates you want for legs 2 and 3 on VS and/or BA or whoever to be sure flights running & have seats available in price class you want on those days and what the prices are without having to do legs 1 and 4. Then on Expedia or wherever you like do the searches directly to get the legs 2 and 3 you wanted, without "pushing out" legs 1 and 4 to see if a nice saving is on the cards at all to cover positioning flights / aggro. Then just play around with both dates AND airports at BOTH ends for your positioning flights (so start points DUB, AMS, BRU etc, interim points in LON, LHR, LGW, LCY, MAN etc) to see what comes up on days of the week in the weeks and months before and after legs 2 & 3 where you would find it easier to take a day / few days city break (instead of 'risking' your positioning flights fouling up close to main legs or dealing with luggage issues).

You've gotta love them for trying!

"It is tantamount to switching price tags to obtain a lower price on goods sold at department stores.” - American Airlines.

Anyway, have signed up to Skiplagged, who I hadn't heard of before, so well done Orbitz!

I was looking at a little Delta run out with my time in Miami but s return MIA to ATL was ridiculous, just looked at Mia to Birininghsm and its brought it down by more than half!!! Might have to go Alabama instead of Georigia!!!

[mitchja]

Maybe someone should also point out to AA that the difference is though, department stores don't sell the same item at different prices based on if you want to return it or not or if you buy the item 6 weeks in advance of needing it, it's cheaper than buying it to use tomorrow

Might have to go Alabama instead of Georigia!!!

Good work: enjoy!

It's like Tesco getting annoyed because you buy a meal deal, and throw away the crisps, because the meal deal was cheaper.

It all reminds me of this!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11420790

'A Durham University professor has said being charged £155 for getting off a train a stop early was "absurd".'

[honey lamb]

I've got a ORK-LHR-JNB-DUR return itinerary which is significantly cheaper than LHR-JNB-DUR return or ORK-LHR-JNB return. I'm happy because I shall be leaving from Cork and want to go to Durban. However if I were only going to Jo'burg, I would be sorely tempted to drop the last leg.

The downside is that it is with BA as VS could not deliver even via Expedia v(

And as AA brought up ethics(!), here's the New York Times column 'The Ethicist' on this very matter:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/magaz ... .html?_r=1

It's the section starting: "NO-SHOW NO-NO?"

I love the comment about it affecting the ability to count passengers which can cause delays and affect fuel computations - because it's a total crock of s**t considering all airlines oversell and count on no-shows, and on the occasions when more people show than they want take to trying to bump pax to another flight! If the ability to count pax was that vital why not sell only what the aircraft can seat and if there are no-shows you're in pocket and you know how many pax you have. It's not rocket science.

Hidden city ticketing is strictly prohibited by most airlines apparently - so why did they open up the loophole? Because it is their loophole, it's not like any criminal act has taken place to misappropriate funds, they're just bitching because they could have sold full fare tickets instead of heavily discounted tickets. No-one's being defrauded if the tickets are legitimately available for purchase and the airline agrees to sell them. Talk about shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted... :0

Couldn't have put it better myself y)

Until airlines start behaving themselves in response on EU261 in terms of informing customers of their rights and not looking for lame excuses to avoid compensation, I have no sympathy.

Spot on Bretty. And clarky !