Almosafer.com
2025 - 2026
Increase revenue by 1.7 times on Flight add-ons
Almosafer is a leading online ticket agent in Saudi Arabia. While my responsibility lies on improving conversion rate from flight search to payment, I was given the project to improve the add-ons offered within the funnel
The data and confidential information in this case study has been altered to comply with non-disclosure agreement. All information in this case study is my own and does not necessarily reflect the views of Almosafer Travel and Tourism co.
Role
Qualitative and quantitative research, design
Duration
6 months
Impact
Aimed to increase overall revenue by 1.7 times in 2026 by improving eligibility and attachment rate
Add-ons, our second best source of revenue. But where’s the money?
Unlike selling flight ticket, we received 100% revenue from add-ons selling.
We sell 7 add-ons but only 17.2% attachment rate from 90% eligibility and only one add-on supported the whole selling.
So, what’s the problem?
End-to-End designer means you own the research process too
To discover the problem, first we decided the scope to attachment rate so it wouldn't be too wide. I worked together with UX researcher and category team, who were responsible for the add-ons from business side.
I spent time to find out as many data I could from doing heuristic evaluation on current design, data analysis on Amplitude and the raw data from Tableu, and desk research on insights from previous research.
The problems then categorized into five:
01
Add-ons offered lacking of relevance with the flights or users.
Add-ons offered to those who wouldn't need it and weren't pushed for those who needed it.
38.6 % flight offered baggage protection add-on
were without baggage
Online auto checkin were not pushed for Flyadeal flyers
since airport check-in requires users to pay higher than Almosafer online auto check-in
18.8% of flight with stopover
were not offered baggage protection
02
Limited offer
Some add-ons offered were not up to user needs, not sufficient enough for users, or too expensive
e-sim offered only 1 GB for 24 hours
Users said its not enough, but they appreciate the instant connection upon landing anyway
Cancel For Any Reason only covered 75% of the flight fee
while other OTA showing 100% coverage
70% of the bookings were solo traveller
but Airport transfer shown flat fare for 3 passengers
03
Unclear pricing
No indicators of how many passengers the add-ons applied to
Flat price for 1 to 3 passengers
Price for all passengers
Price for 1 passenger only
04
Inconsistent design of add-ons on different pages and platforms.
Add-ons were presented visually various on different pages and different platforms.
Passenger detail page
Add-ons page
05
Insufficient information shown for each add-ons
Information provided were limited to the information regarding the benefits without further info about terms and conditions or how to claim the add-ons after purchase.
Ideation; because the more the merrier
I conducted ideation with the team to generate ideas based on the problems above that narrowed down within the scope. For example, adding more add-ons were, without question, out of scope since its basically a completely new business decision.
There were also ideas that treated as recommendations such as improving after sales since the post booking experience was owned by another team.
In conclusion, we decided to go with three approaches:
01
Dynamic add-ons recommendation
Recommend add-ons based on the user segment, flight type, with contextual placement within the funnel
02
Increase sales
Improve add-ons flexibility and push more add-ons accordingly
03
Improve information and UX
Clear pricing, complete information, and keep the consistencies between platforms and improve the visual, add CRO messafes
Finally, time to do design
The design solutions were based on the 3 directions derived from connecting the problem and the ideas generated on ideation session.
01
Pushed add-ons to more segments of users
To increase the segmented attachment rate without negatively affecting overall add-on revenue.
Cancel for All Reasons for non-cancelled flight
Could cover 68% of the users
Baggage Protection for flight with stopover
covered 20% of the flight bookings
Baggage Protection for flyers with extra baggage
covered 2% of the flight bookings
02
Ensured each add-on is visible / recommended to the most relevant customer segments
To increase in purchase intent and conversion rate.
03
Offered greater flexibility
To increase their perceived value and purchase intent, resulting in an overall increase in the add-on attachment rate
Tiering of one add-on
To give more options for users. For example multiple gigabyte options for e-SIM
Add bundling of multiple add-ons
Multiple add-ons bundled together with cheaper price than a la carte. Add-ons bundled were decided by product and add-ons team
04
Improved the clarity, visual positioning, and information architecture and keep the consistencies
To reduce confusion and enhance customer satisfaction
More information
Additional info include benefits, T&C, and how to claim could be found by clicking "See details"
“Add” CTA
based on previous experiment, using CTA button increased attachment rate compared to checkbox
1-2 lines description
To give context about the add-ons
Clear pricing
price shown per traveller to mimic the pricing shown in the funnel
Enhanced visuals
Icons and subtle background color to distinguish add-ons with other section on the app
Things went so smoothly, almost too smooth...
Then suddenly the upper management decided to change the direction to increasing revenue and eligibility.
So, the scope getting broader and out of design scope. This changes also surfaced different priorities and changed anything we had worked on.
In order to cover the revenue and eligibility, we got help from product and category team.
So, what changed? from design perspective, nothing...
In order to increase revenue, attachment should be improved and some changed needed to be adjusted on the business model.
Therefore, after compared the findings from both team we figured out that the research I did couldn’t completely discarded, Rather, my original direction became the design foundation for the expanded scope.
Since two approaches converged almost entirely with success metrics focusing more on the revenue and added the eligibility in the equation, the product team's revenue-led priorities mapped directly onto the segmentation and relevance work I'd already designed.
This suggested that the design direction wasn't just defensible on UX grounds, but also held up under business scrutiny
In the end, the design got handed over
Due to some factors, I had to hand over the concept design, the prototype and research plan. The research i made with the goal of:
To understand users perception of the add-ons and what motivates them to purchase
To validate the clarity on the design
Information architecture
Pricing
To examine the contextual positioning
To understand the optimal placement for selling add-ons while minimizing the risk of overwhelming them with frequent offers.
To validate the concept of tiering
After the iteration did based on research result, development was planned to be done throughout 3rd quarter of 2026 in several phases.
Unfortunately, by the time the impact data are gathered, I’ve already out of the company.
Changes sometimes inevitable, but can be anticipated
While working on this project, I was struggling in gathering the data especially because I didn’t have access to the raw data and the data scientist resigned when we just started the project.
Moreover, after spent time just to figure out the data, we faced the change of the project direction which could be mitigated since the beginning.
My mistake was to decide by myself that working on eligibility was out of the scope therefore no need to focus on that part.
Fortunately, the data I gathered included eligibility data as well so we dont have to restart our work. Our ideation was also broad enough to cover the eligibility.
