Why did United sue Skiplagged?

United’s Failed Assault on Skiplagged: A Legal Battle Over Hidden City Tickets

United Airlines’ 2014 legal challenge against Skiplagged, the website facilitating “hidden city” ticketing, ultimately ended in a resounding defeat. The airline, arguing that Skiplagged’s business model violated contractual agreements, failed to present compelling evidence to support its claims. The dismissal of the case, in 2015, preserved Skiplagged’s controversial method of booking flights, demonstrating a significant legal setback for the airline industry’s efforts to curb this particular form of dynamic pricing.

The “hidden city” strategy, employed by Skiplagged, involves booking a flight to a destination that is merely a stepping stone on the way to a final, cheaper destination. United, along with other airlines, argued that this practice constituted a violation of their passenger agreements. They claimed that passengers who used Skiplagged were circumventing ticket purchase policies, potentially causing financial harm and undermining the traditional structure of flight booking.

United’s legal strategy centred on the idea that these bookings, though technically completed, were essentially a form of unauthorized arbitrage. Crucially, the core of United’s argument was that these indirect bookings undermined their pricing structures and revenue models. This, they argued, was in breach of the agreements passengers implicitly accepted when booking flights.

However, Skiplagged countered that their service was simply facilitating a way for consumers to access cheaper fares. They argued that the contractual agreements were not explicitly designed to prevent customers from connecting through less-expensive cities. The company’s defense emphasized that passengers were still paying for the full journey.

The court’s dismissal of United’s case in 2015, effectively validated Skiplagged’s business model. This ruling did not establish legal precedent that hidden city ticketing was permissible across the board, but it strongly indicated that, at least in the circumstances presented in the United case, airlines lacked the evidence required to legally block this practice.

The outcome of this legal battle highlights the complexities of regulating dynamic pricing strategies in the airline industry. While United’s claims focused on contract violations, Skiplagged successfully presented a case that emphasized consumer access to affordable travel. The subsequent years have seen continued use of hidden city ticketing, suggesting that the legal challenges to this practice remain fluid and far from resolved. The underlying question of whether these practices undermine the integrity of airline pricing models and consumer trust in the industry continues to be a topic of debate.