# Leaving plane at intermediate stop?



## caravanman (May 9, 2022)

Pricing up flights I notice that most routes with a stopover, a change of planes, tend to be cheaper than direct flights.
Provided that one follows the full outward journey, is there any reason why a passenger with hand luggage only, could not just abandon the last leg of the return journey?
What sanctions, if any, do airlines impose?


----------



## neroden (May 9, 2022)

We've done it. Years ago, though.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (May 9, 2022)

Maybe if you just hang out in a terminal bar till your connecting flight leaves w/o you, you'll have an excuse to give them if they "catch" you.


----------



## jiml (May 9, 2022)

It's called "Hidden City Ticketing". There are a lot of routes this works on, but there can be penalties if they catch you. The "missed my flight and took the bus the rest of the way" excuse would likely only work once. That said, especially in current times with reduced staffing, the chances of being caught are fairly remote.

As a lifetime AA flyer familiar with their "variables" I'm aware of several... just not sure I'd jeopardize my status benefits for a one-time saving.


----------



## jiml (May 9, 2022)

caravanman said:


> Pricing up flights I notice that most routes with a stopover, a change of planes, tend to be cheaper than direct flights.
> Provided that one follows the full outward journey, is there any reason why a passenger with hand luggage only, could not just abandon the last leg of the return journey?
> What sanctions, if any, do airlines impose?


Your example is an interesting case study, since it involves actually completing 3/4 of a round trip. Would it be something like you live in Point B, took the train to Point A, then needed to fly to Point C and the cheapest routing was via Point B in both directions? On the return you wouldn't complete the trip?


----------



## jebr (May 9, 2022)

The biggest immediate consequence would be that any ongoing segments on that ticket would be cancelled - so you'd have to only book one-way trips. You also couldn't check baggage, as that's routed to your final ticketed destination. Other immediate considerations would be if there's a schedule change which results in a change of schedule (bypassing the layover point) or IRROPs where the airline reroutes you through another layover point, again causing you to miss your intended destination.

Long-term, most airlines do ban using these types of tricks in their contract of carriage. They almost certainly wouldn't do anything if it happened once or twice, but if it happens on a regular basis they'll likely take some sort of corrective action. It may just be a scary letter, or it may be as far as killing your loyalty account entirely (losing any miles/status tied to it as well) and/or banning you from the airline entirely.


----------



## Asher (May 9, 2022)

I have a hard time thinking of a situation that would require that type of scheme for me. I think it may cause the airline a little discomfort and you may get a call from the authorities. 
Cheerio.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (May 9, 2022)

Isn't this called "skipjacking" or something? There were flight forums dedicated to it - when I did a big international trip a couple years ago one of my fellow travellers wanted to try this, but it was overruled (especially as it wasn't actually cheaper). I remember it being problematic for some of the reasons above, even at the time.


----------



## PaunchyPirate (May 9, 2022)

Through the years, I've read stories about members of the airlines Frequent Flyer program being stripped of their status for doing this. If you have no status it may not matter. Either way, you can probably do it once, twice, who knows how many times. I suspect you might eventually be added to a no-fly list.


----------



## BCL (May 9, 2022)

As noted before, it's called "hidden city" and there's a ton of problems with it including the possibility of being rerouted where the replacement flights go a different route, including nonstop to the purchased destination. And since it would require a no-show where the rest of the ticket would be cancelled, it's a bad idea if one wants to book round trip.

And it does break the contract of carriage. The worst happens when it's the same plane with one or more stops. I've heard of serious security checks when the head count was off. That would make things really difficult for other passengers. Not only do they need to take time to figure out which passenger is not on the plane, but with security concerns they might worry about the possibility that someone left carry-on (or perhaps even check-in baggage) that might be a danger to the aircraft and passengers.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (May 9, 2022)

Metra Electric Rider said:


> Isn't this called "skipjacking" or something? There were flight forums dedicated to it - when I did a big international trip a couple years ago one of my fellow travellers wanted to try this, but it was overruled (especially as it wasn't actually cheaper). I remember it being problematic for some of the reasons above, even at the time.


I stand corrected: Skiplagging is the correct term!


----------



## VAtrainfan (May 9, 2022)

Especially now with all the staffing shortages causing canceled flights and re-routes to different hubs, there's a higher-than-normal likelihood you'd be rerouted. I have a flight coming up next month and it's already changed 7 times since I booked it, and my connecting hub has changed from DTW to LGA and back to DTW before ending up in ATL. And it's still more than a month out, so I expect to get rerouted to SLC before this trip actually happens.


----------



## jiml (May 9, 2022)

VAtrainfan said:


> I have a flight coming up next month and it's already changed 7 times since I booked it


I hear you. Similar situation on a domestic flight in 2 weeks. 4 time changes, 3 plane changes and several seating changes resulting from the above. Betting we're not done yet.


----------



## blueman271 (May 9, 2022)

Metra Electric Rider said:


> Isn't this called "skipjacking" or something? There were flight forums dedicated to it - when I did a big international trip a couple years ago one of my fellow travellers wanted to try this, but it was overruled (especially as it wasn't actually cheaper). I remember it being problematic for some of the reasons above, even at the time.


It’s called hidden city ticketing and it is frowned upon by the airlines. While I don‘t see any problems with it I would take two big precautions while doing it. 1 Don’t do it on any airline you have a FF account, or status, with. 2 Don’t check any luggage and don’t fly with that airline again for a while if possible. Other than that customers have every right to select products that provide the best value and if that means you decide to cut your trip short at a connection point then so be it.


----------



## MARC Rider (May 9, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> It’s called hidden city ticketing and it is frowned upon by the airlines. While I don‘t see any problems with it I would take two big precautions while doing it. 1 Don’t do it on any airline you have a FF account, or status, with. 2 Don’t check any luggage and don’t fly with that airline again for a while if possible. Other than that customers have every right to select products that provide the best value and if that means you decide to cut your trip short at a connection point then so be it.


That's might work if you're changing planes at the intermediate point. In that case you'd just be a "no show" on the connecting flight. But if you get off a through plane that's just stopping at the intermediate, they do a headcount of continuing passengers before they let the new passengers board. If they come up short, I'm not sure what they do, but I can only suspect that it will severely delay the outbound flight and perhaps even raise issues of terrorism (maybe the person who left the plane left a bomb on board before he left.) I would imagine that the airline would be really, really upset at a passenger who pulled a stunt like that.

By the way, I don't think customers have "every right to select products that provide the best value" if what they're selecting violates the contract of carriage they implicitly accepted when they bought the ticket.


----------



## blueman271 (May 9, 2022)

MARC Rider said:


> That's might work if you're changing planes at the intermediate point. In that case you'd just be a "no show" on the connecting flight. But if you get off a through plane that's just stopping at the intermediate, they do a headcount of continuing passengers before they let the new passengers board. If they come up short, I'm not sure what they do, but I can only suspect that it will severely delay the outbound flight and perhaps even raise issues of terrorism (maybe the person who left the plane left a bomb on board before he left.) I would imagine that the airline would be really, really upset at a passenger who pulled a stunt like that.
> 
> By the way, I don't think customers have "every right to select products that provide the best value" if what they're selecting violates the contract of carriage they implicitly accepted when they bought the ticket.


When the contract of carriage allows the airlines to sell more seats on the plane than are physically present or change my nonstop midday flight to a one stop early morning flight with no recourse, who cares about the contract of carriage. They sell transportation, and transportation is what I bought. The contract of carriage is basically BS that is written to benefit the airlines and provides no real consumer protections. You can play by their rules if you want, I’ll save money flying how I want.


----------



## blueman271 (May 9, 2022)

caravanman said:


> Pricing up flights I notice that most routes with a stopover, a change of planes, tend to be cheaper than direct flights.
> Provided that one follows the full outward journey, is there any reason why a passenger with hand luggage only, could not just abandon the last leg of the return journey?
> What sanctions, if any, do airlines impose?


As an aside, this is really easy to do entering the US. Lets say you wanted to fly LHR-JFK, but the nonstop was too expensive. If you found a cheap ticket LHR-JFK-XXX, with XXX being a US domestic destination, it would be super easy to retrieve your luggage, clear customs and immigration, and walk out of the airport at JFK. Would the airline like it, no. Is there anything they could do if you weren’t flying them again in the near future, no.


----------



## MARC Rider (May 9, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> The contract of carriage is basically BS that is written to benefit the airlines and provides no real consumer protections. You can play by their rules if you want, I’ll save money flying how I want.


I'd like to see how that might end up in court. It might be true that the airlines are cheating passengers, but, then they're the ones who own and fly the airplanes, so they can make up whatever rules they want about fares. That was the whole point of airline deregulation. On the other hand, someone who violates these rules, however unfair, is really cheating the airline. The public has no entitlement to cheap airline fares, after all, especially cheap airline fares that violate the rules set by the airlines. Yeah, I play by the rules, and I really get annoyed at people who think that they're so special that the rules don't apply to them.


----------



## blueman271 (May 9, 2022)

MARC Rider said:


> I'd like to see how that might end up in court. It might be true that the airlines are cheating passengers, but, then they're the ones who own and fly the airplanes, so they can make up whatever rules they want about fares. That was the whole point of airline deregulation. On the other hand, someone who violates these rules, however unfair, is really cheating the airline. The public has no entitlement to cheap airline fares, after all, especially cheap airline fares that violate the rules set by the airlines. Yeah, I play by the rules, and I really get annoyed at people who think that they're so special that the rules don't apply to them.


Legally the airlines have no grounds to go after any customer that engages hidden city ticketing. No US airline has tried, and when Lufthansa did they failed. You can find that information by googling hidden city ticketing lawsuits.

Airline contracts of carriage are very specific and spell out in no uncertain terms that they are selling transportation between two points. They do not guarantee specific seats, or specific planes, or even specific routes. When you buy a ticket between three cities the airline has agreed to transport you between those three cities. That you may not need the last portion of transportation is none of the airlines business. Pepsi doesn’t get mad if I buy a soda take a sip and throw the rest out do they? Furthermore, if you pay your fare, show up on time, engage in the kabuki theatre that is TSA checkpoints, respect airport and airline workers, and don’t cause any trouble on the planes you are following the rules. If you want to subject yourself to arbitrary rules designed by corporations for their benefit then that’s on you.


----------



## PVD (May 9, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> It’s called hidden city ticketing and it is frowned upon by the airlines. While I don‘t see any problems with it I would take two big precautions while doing it. 1 Don’t do it on any airline you have a FF account, or status, with. 2 Don’t check any luggage and don’t fly with that airline again for a while if possible. Other than that customers have every right to select products that provide the best value and if that means you decide to cut your trip short at a connection point then so be it.


Most airlines have rules that very specifically prohibit this type of activity. If you choose to violate the rules that you agree to under the contract of carriage, The airline may or may not take action against you, but in most countries, including this one, they have the right to make rules that benefit themselves and if you don't like it, you are welcome to risk the repercussions or not use that service. Many people feel the same way, but the laws are not on your side.


----------



## blueman271 (May 9, 2022)

PVD said:


> Most airlines have rules that very specifically prohibit this type of activity. If you choose to violate the rules that you agree to under the contract of carriage, The airline may or may not take action against you, but in most countries, including this one, they have the right to make rules that benefit themselves and if you don't like it, you are welcome to risk the repercussions or not use that service. Many people feel the same way, but the laws are not on your side.


If the legal case against this were as cut and dry as you make it seem then surely the airlines, with their large bank accounts and corporate lawyers, would go after customers that did this. They have all the information they could possibly need to file a lawsuit including full names, date of birth, current address etc. I wonder why the airlines haven’t been more proactive in using the courts to stamp this activity out? Maybe it’s because they know they would get laughed out of court.


----------



## PVD (May 9, 2022)

They do what takes the least effort and cost. Airlines have cancelled FF accounts, and occasionally cancelled return tickets. They will do what they can when they feel like it, and that puts the onus on the traveler to go to court seeking redress. They don't get laughed out of court. The record doesn't bear that out.


----------



## railiner (May 9, 2022)

While I like the old regulated way of charging mileage based fares, I have no problem with the current way of market based fares on nonstop fights.
However, I do find fault with someone on my flight, purchasing their ticket at the same time, but getting a lower fare because they are continuing on further. To me that is totally illogical, and if someone takes advantage of working the ‘system’, good for them…


----------



## PVD (May 10, 2022)

The system in place has its oddities and can be a plus for some and a negative for others. My point is, people who think they are gaming the system without breaking enforceable rules are mistaken, and many people think that rules that work against them are ok to be broken. If you don't like the terms of a deal, don't use that company or service.


----------



## blueman271 (May 10, 2022)

PVD said:


> They do what takes the least effort and cost. Airlines have cancelled FF accounts, and occasionally cancelled return tickets. They will do what they can when they feel like it, and that puts the onus on the traveler to go to court seeking redress. They don't get laughed out of court. The record doesn't bear that out.


Nowhere did I say there wouldn’t be consequences for engaging in this practice. I fully understand that airlines can and will claw back FF miles and or elite status. Those actions are outside the law. If you can show me a case where an airline has taken an individual to court for engaging in hidden city ticketing and won I would be eager to see it.


----------



## Ryan (May 10, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> who cares about the contract of carriage.


The answer seems to be "the airlines". If you're willing to pay the potential consequences, good for you. Some people take agreements that they enter into a little more seriously.


----------



## GAT (May 12, 2022)

Ryan said:


> The answer seems to be "the airlines". If you're willing to pay the potential consequences, good for you. Some people take agreements that they enter into a little more seriously.


Well said! That's the bottom line of this silly argument.

Silly in part because I wonder how many folks want to go from A to C with a connection at B, and then return only as far as B. And, I wonder how many fare structures would make that scenario financially better. I have no idea, except that when I fly Delta SFO-CDG, the non-stop flight they offer, operated by Air France, is always cheaper than the one- or two-stop flights operated by Delta.


----------



## caravanman (May 12, 2022)

"Some people take agreements that they enter into a little more seriously."



George said:


> Well said! That's the bottom line of this silly argument.
> 
> Silly in part because I wonder how many folks want to go from A to C with a connection at B, and then return only as far as B. And, I wonder how many fare structures would make that scenario financially better. I have no idea, except that when I fly Delta SFO-CDG, the non-stop flight they offer, operated by Air France, is always cheaper than the one- or two-stop flights operated by Delta.



My request for information was straightforward, and I have a good idea now about the pros and cons!
These days, I live pretty much "hand to mouth", and while I love to travel, I have to watch the pennies. Should I stop travelling because I can't afford it, or get creative to enjoy a few more trips before I fall off my perch?
I have identified a way to save around £100 on a transatlantic flight, which pays for two nights accommodation in a USA hostel, or a coach seat fare from NYC to CHI...

While it might lower some posters opinions of my character to try to save money in this way, that is a cross I can carry....


----------



## Ryan (May 12, 2022)

If it enables you do what you'd like, and the potential fallout is worth it, by all means go for it. My opinion of you will remain unchanged.


----------



## BCL (May 12, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> Legally the airlines have no grounds to go after any customer that engages hidden city ticketing. No US airline has tried, and when Lufthansa did they failed. You can find that information by googling hidden city ticketing lawsuits.
> 
> Airline contracts of carriage are very specific and spell out in no uncertain terms that they are selling transportation between two points. They do not guarantee specific seats, or specific planes, or even specific routes. When you buy a ticket between three cities the airline has agreed to transport you between those three cities. That you may not need the last portion of transportation is none of the airlines business. Pepsi doesn’t get mad if I buy a soda take a sip and throw the rest out do they? Furthermore, if you pay your fare, show up on time, engage in the kabuki theatre that is TSA checkpoints, respect airport and airline workers, and don’t cause any trouble on the planes you are following the rules. If you want to subject yourself to arbitrary rules designed by corporations for their benefit then that’s on you.



Legally one has only purchased transportation between two points. I could imagine that if there's something like a train breakdown, Amtrak could bring in a bus or perhaps call for Uber to bring a group of passengers to the final destination, even if someone intended on getting off early.

That being said, I've gotten off on intermediate stops on Amtrak, but that was specifically allowed. I had a multi-ride ticket that I made sure covered all bases, even though I didn't always use the endpoints. A conductor would typically ask me if I was going all the way, and if I said it was at an earlier stop that would go right on the seat check under the same reservation number on the ticket.


----------



## BCL (May 12, 2022)

George said:


> Well said! That's the bottom line of this silly argument.
> 
> Silly in part because I wonder how many folks want to go from A to C with a connection at B, and then return only as far as B. And, I wonder how many fare structures would make that scenario financially better. I have no idea, except that when I fly Delta SFO-CDG, the non-stop flight they offer, operated by Air France, is always cheaper than the one- or two-stop flights operated by Delta.



It actually happens a lot like that, where they're only pricing it based on supply and demand for those two specific endpoints. The airlines have to be competitive with other airlines, and many still use a hub and spoke system. Once the cheapest flight I had from Chicago to San Francisco was with Northwest via their Detroit hub, even though it was going backwards.


----------



## Bob Dylan (May 12, 2022)

caravanman said:


> "Some people take agreements that they enter into a little more seriously."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not only do I not question your character in this matter, I applaud you since I'm also a pensioner living on an ever decreasing income as Inflation ( aka Greed!) Runs amok!


----------



## railiner (May 12, 2022)

A different scenario than the so-called “hidden city” scheme, but what if you were flying (or taking a train) on a continuous trip from point ‘A’ to point ‘Z’, and due to a pricing glitch ( or perhaps market design), you could get a lower total by buying the trip in 2 (or more) segments than what the thru fare was.
I don’t believe there is any rule against taking advantage of the system that way, is there?


----------



## ehbowen (May 12, 2022)

Legally, by their one-sided and non-negotiable 'contract of carriage', the airline holds all the cards. If they choose they can make your life miserable. And, while I haven't read their contract(s), I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a provision which limited you to 'binding arbitration' while they, of course, are free to bring the full wrath of god down on you.

From a standpoint of morality and ethics (see also: 'contract of adhesion') the airlines' practice is as indefensible as back in the day when you could purchase a railroad ticket to California for (as little as) one dollar, but fares to intermediate cities were full price and even inflated. That practice was quite rightly stomped out and, while I generally prefer less regulation to more, it's not possible to have a fair game without consistent and consistently enforced rules.


----------



## jiml (May 12, 2022)

Here is a concrete example currently available: I can fly from Toronto (YYZ) to DFW, AA's hub, on a given day for $391CAD one-way. However I can take the same plane from Toronto, connect in DFW to Austin for $292CAD. Heck, I can continue all the way to LAX for $362CAD, so it's understandable why someone needing to go to Dallas with no checked bag might look at other options.


----------



## jiml (May 12, 2022)

George said:


> Silly in part because I wonder how many folks want to go from A to C with a connection at B, and then return only as far as B. And, I wonder how many fare structures would make that scenario financially better. I have no idea, except that when I fly Delta SFO-CDG, the non-stop flight they offer, operated by Air France, is always cheaper than the one- or two-stop flights operated by Delta.


I would suggest that going from A to C with a connection at B may have been an accidental discovery arrived at by searching the lowest fare from A to C. Returning to B was likely not the original plan. Certainly in North America, _domestic_ flights are often cheaper with a connection in your favorite airline's hub versus a non-stop. International is a whole other ballgame.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 12, 2022)

MARC Rider said:


> I'd like to see how that might end up in court.


The only hidden city lawsuits I could find involved United Airlines and Lufthansa and neither airline prevailed. When airlines are able to collect money in response to accusations of hidden city ticketing it's probably due to a threat of expensive legal action rather than a favorable judgement. In other words, those who have the time and money to defend themselves in court will likely win while those who cannot will often pay up just to make the threat go away.


----------



## PVD (May 12, 2022)

Outside of the US there have been a few, laws of other countries are generally tougher on businesses than the US. United sued Orbitz and Skiplagged, Orbitz settled. It isn't worth suing an individual, not worth the bother for a small amount. But they have no problem cancelling mileage accounts, or return tickets, or putting you on no fly with that airline, that puts the ball in the passengers hands, and they don't have strong cases, since contracts of carriage are generally upheld.


----------



## blueman271 (May 12, 2022)

PVD said:


> Outside of the US there have been a few, laws of other countries are generally tougher on businesses than the US. United sued Orbitz and Skiplagged, Orbitz settled. It isn't worth suing an individual, not worth the bother for a small amount. But they have no problem cancelling mileage accounts, or return tickets, or putting you on no fly with that airline, that puts the ball in the passengers hands, and they don't have strong cases, since contracts of carriage are generally upheld.


If I ever plan on using hidden city ticketing in Turkmenistan I’ll keep this in mind. Here in the US customers do not have to worry about civil or criminal proceedings being brought against them.


----------



## PVD (May 12, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> If I ever plan on using hidden city ticketing in Turkmenistan I’ll keep this in mind. Here in the US customers do not have to worry about civil or criminal proceedings being brought against them.


Actually, in general the US is tougher on consumers than foreign countries. The airlines won't waste their time and money going after small timers, but if they feel like it they can cancel your tickets and leave you in the position of buying a very expensive no advance ticket on another airline. Better than suing for no gain. I don't think anyone mentioned anything about authorities being involved or criminal action, it is just simple contract law. You enter into it voluntary, and if you don't like the terms don't agree to them.


----------



## flitcraft (May 12, 2022)

I'm surprised at those defending the airlines in these cases. These are adhesion contracts, with no meaningful choice by consumers. For example, in the Before Times, I wanted to fly from Seattle to Tokyo and back. My only choice was Delta from Seattle, and given their monopoly position, the flight was extortionately expensive . So, I wondered if maybe flying from Vancouver BC to Tokyo might be a better option. And, indeed, it was hundreds of dollars cheaper--flying from Vancouver to Seattle, then taking the same exact Seattle to Tokyo Delta flight! No way is this anything but pure unadulterated airline greed--it couldn't cost them more to fly us Seattle to Tokyo than Vancouver-Seattle-Tokyo. So, in the end, we drove to Vancouver, stayed overnight in a Vancouver hotel, had a great meal in a Vancouver restaurant, left our car for two weeks at a Vancouver parking lot, and still saved a couple hundred dollars over the Seattle to Tokyo roundtrip flight. I admit it was tough after a trans-pacific flight to our home airport to have to fly oneway to Vancouver on Alaska to pick up the car and drive home. But the outrageous behavior of Delta made me determined never to fly them again. 

And, I haven't. And never will. I doubt that Delta will miss my business, but I'll be damned if I let them cheat me again. Pigs get fat but hogs get slaughtered.


----------



## JontyMort (May 13, 2022)

railiner said:


> A different scenario than the so-called “hidden city” scheme, but what if you were flying (or taking a train) on a continuous trip from point ‘A’ to point ‘Z’, and due to a pricing glitch ( or perhaps market design), you could get a lower total by buying the trip in 2 (or more) segments than what the thru fare was.
> I don’t believe there is any rule against taking advantage of the system that way, is there?


That’s a common scenario on the trains in Britain, especially on a trip A-B-C, where the fare for A-C is set by by Operator X and A-B and B-C are set by Operator Y (or Y and Z). Savings can exceed 50%. It’s perfectly OK, provided that the train is booked to stop at station B (strictly speaking, it needs to be pick up AND set down). Notorious and well-known examples are Cross-Country runs from Birmingham, via Derby or Cheltenham.

In Britain, there has sometimes been a problem with long-distance trains out of London in the evening peak hour getting clogged up with short distance commuters. Reading (36 miles from London, non-stop) has often had “pick-up only” stops in an attempt to stop this, but of course the regulars are wise to this (even though their tickets are not valid). Sometimes the railway fights back. In the 1960s Gerry Fiennes once arranged for a relief train to run from Reading (to cater for the pick-up), and ran the main train non-stop from London to its next booked stop at Taunton or Exeter, well over 100 miles further on. Then he sent his revenue protection team down the train for some return fares.


----------



## toddinde (May 13, 2022)

At first impression, I had no issues with this although I personally wouldn’t do it. As I wrote this though, I reconsidered. I think it’s wrong. If you don’t have the money to travel, then take a holiday closer to home. Since you raised morality, you are potentially taking a seat from another person and driving up the fare for somebody else. If you are going to New York, but you buy your ticket to Cleveland and get off in New York, you hogged a seat on the New York to Cleveland leg. A struggling college kid might have needed that seat to see their grandparent, or comfort family through a loss, or travel for medical treatment. I think it’s selfish and rude. As for doing the same thing on Amtrak, I did it not long ago where my son was picking me up to do something in an area away from my original destination. I got off one stop before. I asked the agent, and if I had changed my ticket, it would have given me a much higher fare. Since I did not do this deliberately just to get a lower fare, I’m ethically comfortable with my decision. Deliberately hogging accommodations you don’t intend to use on a scarce commodity like today’s Amtrak or the airlines is, in my view, unethical and morally repugnant.


----------



## toddinde (May 13, 2022)

Ryan said:


> The answer seems to be "the airlines". If you're willing to pay the potential consequences, good for you. Some people take agreements that they enter into a little more seriously.


I would be laughing when the airline rerouted the person through a different city than the hidden destination city due to a delay or schedule change. It’s just unethical, and karma is going to get them.


----------



## toddinde (May 13, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> If I ever plan on using hidden city ticketing in Turkmenistan I’ll keep this in mind. Here in the US customers do not have to worry about civil or criminal proceedings being brought against them.


But you could lose your miles, and the airline could refuse carriage in the future. Then you would bear the cost of arbitration to try to get your miles back. You would also lose because you knowingly breached your contract for a few bucks. Not to mention driving up fares for others and wasting a seat that might go empty for no reason. It’s just not cool.


----------



## toddinde (May 13, 2022)

flitcraft said:


> I'm surprised at those defending the airlines in these cases. These are adhesion contracts, with no meaningful choice by consumers. For example, in the Before Times, I wanted to fly from Seattle to Tokyo and back. My only choice was Delta from Seattle, and given their monopoly position, the flight was extortionately expensive . So, I wondered if maybe flying from Vancouver BC to Tokyo might be a better option. And, indeed, it was hundreds of dollars cheaper--flying from Vancouver to Seattle, then taking the same exact Seattle to Tokyo Delta flight! No way is this anything but pure unadulterated airline greed--it couldn't cost them more to fly us Seattle to Tokyo than Vancouver-Seattle-Tokyo. So, in the end, we drove to Vancouver, stayed overnight in a Vancouver hotel, had a great meal in a Vancouver restaurant, left our car for two weeks at a Vancouver parking lot, and still saved a couple hundred dollars over the Seattle to Tokyo roundtrip flight. I admit it was tough after a trans-pacific flight to our home airport to have to fly oneway to Vancouver on Alaska to pick up the car and drive home. But the outrageous behavior of Delta made me determined never to fly them again.
> 
> And, I haven't. And never will. I doubt that Delta will miss my business, but I'll be damned if I let them cheat me again. Pigs get fat but hogs get slaughtered.


There is nothing the matter with what you did except from a climate change perspective, but I question your sanity. Extending an already long trip, the price of gas, meals and hotels to save a buck or two on the airline fare seems kind of ridiculous. But then people camp out in the freezing cold in front of Best Buy the night before Black Friday. You do you man.


----------



## blueman271 (May 13, 2022)

toddinde said:


> But you could lose your miles, and the airline could refuse carriage in the future. Then you would bear the cost of arbitration to try to get your miles back. You would also lose because you knowingly breached your contract for a few bucks. Not to mention driving up fares for others and wasting a seat that might go empty for no reason. It’s just not cool.


Hence the reason I recommend doing this on an airline that you don’t hold status on. Taking away all of zero is still zero.


----------



## caravanman (May 13, 2022)

toddinde said:


> Deliberately hogging accommodations you don’t intend to use on a scarce commodity like today’s Amtrak or the airlines is, in my view, unethical and morally repugnant





toddinde said:


> If you don’t have the money to travel, then take a holiday closer to home.



Oh dear! I have decided to cancel my visit to the US this autumn, so I won't now attend the San Diego Gathering as intended.


----------



## blueman271 (May 13, 2022)

toddinde said:


> At first impression, I had no issues with this although I personally wouldn’t do it. As I wrote this though, I reconsidered. I think it’s wrong. If you don’t have the money to travel, then take a holiday closer to home. Since you raised morality, you are potentially taking a seat from another person and driving up the fare for somebody else. If you are going to New York, but you buy your ticket to Cleveland and get off in New York, you hogged a seat on the New York to Cleveland leg. A struggling college kid might have needed that seat to see their grandparent, or comfort family through a loss, or travel for medical treatment. I think it’s selfish and rude. As for doing the same thing on Amtrak, I did it not long ago where my son was picking me up to do something in an area away from my original destination. I got off one stop before. I asked the agent, and if I had changed my ticket, it would have given me a much higher fare. Since I did not do this deliberately just to get a lower fare, I’m ethically comfortable with my decision. Deliberately hogging accommodations you don’t intend to use on a scarce commodity like today’s Amtrak or the airlines is, in my view, unethical and morally repugnant.


What about the person flying for bereavement purposes who gets their flight canceled because the airline doesn’t have enough staff to fly the schedule they have created and sold? Is that morally repugnant? What about the family with a toddler that bought a ticket to minimize connection time whose flight was changed to a four hour connection because of a schedule change? Is that morally repugnant? It amazes me how many of you friends of the airlines are going out of your way to defend corporation that only care about their bottom lines.


----------



## BCL (May 13, 2022)

toddinde said:


> At first impression, I had no issues with this although I personally wouldn’t do it. As I wrote this though, I reconsidered. I think it’s wrong. If you don’t have the money to travel, then take a holiday closer to home. Since you raised morality, you are potentially taking a seat from another person and driving up the fare for somebody else. If you are going to New York, but you buy your ticket to Cleveland and get off in New York, you hogged a seat on the New York to Cleveland leg. A struggling college kid might have needed that seat to see their grandparent, or comfort family through a loss, or travel for medical treatment. I think it’s selfish and rude. As for doing the same thing on Amtrak, I did it not long ago where my son was picking me up to do something in an area away from my original destination. I got off one stop before. I asked the agent, and if I had changed my ticket, it would have given me a much higher fare. Since I did not do this deliberately just to get a lower fare, I’m ethically comfortable with my decision. Deliberately hogging accommodations you don’t intend to use on a scarce commodity like today’s Amtrak or the airlines is, in my view, unethical and morally repugnant.



It might not make that much of a difference because of overbooking. They expect a certain proportion of no-shows or cancellations so they often book more passengers than space availability. Of course this doesn't always work out, and they'll end up offering money (as well as transportation (hopefully) the next day plus meals and a hotel room. I know a travel agent who said that early volunteers often got the best offers.


----------



## BCL (May 13, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> What you have given an example of is not hidden city ticketing and is quite nonsensical. Hidden city ticketing only works on one way tickets with carry on baggage only. For example if I were flying from EWR to SFO and found tickets too expensive for my liking I might book a cheaper EWR-SFO-SAN fare. When my first flight lands at SFO I would simply walk out of the airport instead of boarding my connecting flight. Despite what all the friends of the airlines on this board claim the airline will not sue you nor will the authorities detain you. The airline might cancel your FF account, remove any status you have with them, and clawback any miles you have earned. That is why it is best to do this on airlines where you don’t hold status and have very few miles.



Some have done this on a flight that continues, and then the hilarity ensues when the headcount doesn't match, and then the searching for baggage starts once they figure out who left. Must be especially nuts without assigned seating like on Southwest.


----------



## jebr (May 13, 2022)

toddinde said:


> you are potentially taking a seat from another person and driving up the fare for somebody else. If you are going to New York, but you buy your ticket to Cleveland and get off in New York, you hogged a seat on the New York to Cleveland leg. A struggling college kid might have needed that seat to see their grandparent, or comfort family through a loss, or travel for medical treatment. I think it’s selfish and rude.



Or the airline had a meltdown the day before, so him not traveling actually frees up a seat for that person to be able to be pulled off the standby list instead of waiting for a confirmed seat three days later. Or the airline overbooked a bit too much, and him not showing up meant every ticketed passenger could go instead of having to pull off one traveler. If you think about it, he's really doing other travelers a favor!



toddinde said:


> As for doing the same thing on Amtrak, I did it not long ago where my son was picking me up to do something in an area away from my original destination. I got off one stop before. I asked the agent, and if I had changed my ticket, it would have given me a much higher fare. Since I did not do this deliberately just to get a lower fare, I’m ethically comfortable with my decision.



I don't see a major difference here. Your plans changed, yet to save money you didn't change your ticket to your intended destination. By the logic above, that could've denied someone the opportunity to buy that seat to visit their grandparent, travel for medical treatment, or comfort their family through a loss. Frankly, I see little difference between the two - both are ways to get around paying more by being ticketed to a destination beyond your intended destination.

Most of us tend to draw the ethical vs. unethical line just beyond what we're willing to do - after all, we surely can't be unethical, can we? But the things we're against, oh boy those people doing that are unethical! I'm certainly guilty of it too, although in this particular case while I wouldn't do hidden city ticketing myself (the risks are too high for me) I don't see it as unethical.



toddinde said:


> Deliberately hogging accommodations you don’t intend to use on a scarce commodity like today’s Amtrak or the airlines is, in my view, unethical and morally repugnant.



In an era where airlines overbook because they expect some people to not fly their ticket as intended, I see no ethical or moral issue with hidden city ticketing. The airline is already factoring in that sort of thing in the number of tickets they sell (and I think Amtrak does to some extent as well.) There's also standby lists that airlines can use just in case there's an extra seat right before door close, so buying the ticket but not taking the flight simply means one more person from the standby list will get a seat.


----------



## Ryan (May 13, 2022)

jebr said:


> Most of us tend to draw the ethical vs. unethical line just beyond what we're willing to do - after all, we surely can't be unethical, can we? But the things we're against, oh boy those people doing that are unethical! I'm certainly guilty of it too, although in this particular case while I wouldn't do hidden city ticketing myself (the risks are too high for me) I don't see it as unethical.


This. It's just like speeding. Anyone driving slower than me needs to get out of the way, and anyone driving faster than me is an uncaring lunatic.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 13, 2022)

toddinde said:


> Deliberately hogging accommodations you don’t intend to use on a scarce commodity like today’s Amtrak or the airlines is, in my view, unethical and morally repugnant.


Every time I've seen a substantial difference in pricing the discounted segment was in low demand and would have little or no impact on other travelers.



toddinde said:


> I would be laughing when the airline rerouted the person through a different city than the hidden destination city due to a delay or schedule change. It’s just unethical, and karma is going to get them.


Karma is good at guiding how we choose to live our own lives but bad at being weaponized to punish those who live by another code.


----------



## GAT (May 13, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> What about the person flying for bereavement purposes who gets their flight canceled because the airline doesn’t have enough staff to fly the schedule they have created and sold? Is that morally repugnant? What about the family with a toddler that bought a ticket to minimize connection time whose flight was changed to a four hour connection because of a schedule change? Is that morally repugnant? It amazes me how many of you friends of the airlines are going out of your way to defend corporation that only care about their bottom lines.


I'm sorry, but your argument is nothing but deflection from the issue we're discussing. In ay event, as the saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right.


----------



## toddinde (May 13, 2022)

jebr said:


> Or the airline had a meltdown the day before, so him not traveling actually frees up a seat for that person to be able to be pulled off the standby list instead of waiting for a confirmed seat three days later. Or the airline overbooked a bit too much, and him not showing up meant every ticketed passenger could go instead of having to pull off one traveler. If you think about it, he's really doing other travelers a favor!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Amtrak doesn’t with sleepers because you really can’t. I only got off one stop before and had paid the full fare to my destination, so my position was both morally superior and fair and just to all concerned. I did not cheat to get a cheaper fare to another’s detriment. I like to sleep at night.


----------



## jebr (May 13, 2022)

toddinde said:


> Amtrak doesn’t with sleepers because you really can’t. I only got off one stop before and had paid the full fare to my destination, so my position was both morally superior and fair and just to all concerned. I did not cheat to get a cheaper fare to another’s detriment. I like to sleep at night.



But you _did_ cheat to get a cheaper fare to someone else's detriment. If anything, your actions were _more_ morally repugnant than what OP wants to do. In OP's case (with the airlines) the airline will almost certainly find a way to sell that seat if someone's willing to pay for it, since most airlines do oversell their planes and they can use standby lists to fill planes as well. In your case, Amtrak had no way of selling that roomette to someone who would've paid for it, thus actively denying Amtrak from selling that room and from someone being able to use that space from the stop you ultimately intended to disembark at. Both you and OP would be/have gotten off one stop earlier, so there's no difference in morality there.


----------



## pennyk (May 13, 2022)

This thread has been temporarily/permanently locked. It has likely run its course and several posts were removed because they were either personal attacks and/or posts made in an unfriendly manner.


----------

