Back to my work

Kupibilet / 2024

Bundling travel extras inside checkout

Kupibilet offered check-in, insurance and other extras separately during flight booking. Each offer added a decision before payment. The team wanted to increase the value of services per order without disrupting checkout.

+2%services AOV
−6%refund queries
−9%negative reviews

Reported outcomes and design scope. Measurement details are noted below.

My contribution

I mapped uncertainty in the booking journey and organized services by customer value. I reviewed offer patterns and helped test a separate screen against a checkout modal, alongside product, analytics, support and engineering.

Key decision

We chose a modal at the second checkout step over a separate pre-payment screen. In quick usability sessions, it was easier to scan and less disruptive, so customers could consider the bundle without leaving their booking.

Outcome

The project reported +2% average order value from services, 6% fewer refund-related support contacts and 9% fewer negative reviews.

Constraints behind the design

The package had to explain several services within an existing checkout. Moving the offer to a separate screen risked interrupting the booking; keeping it in place meant working with less space.

Separate offers added decisions before payment

Check-in, refunds, insurance and meals competed for attention during booking. Bundling them changed the task from evaluating each extra to understanding one package.

Choosing what to bundle before designing the offer

I mapped the booking journey and the points where travelers felt uncertain, then compared the value and placement of each service. This informed what belonged in the bundle before the team chose a layout.

Comparing how checkout flows explain extras

I reviewed travel competitors and other checkout flows to compare service explanations and placement. The question was how to communicate the bundle’s value within a booking customers had already started.

Why a modal worked better than a separate screen

Quick usability sessions compared a separate pre-payment screen with a modal at the second checkout step. The team observed easier scanning and fewer exits with the modal. These observations informed the choice; the project’s reported business results are listed separately below.

What changed

+2%average order value from services
−6%support contacts about refunds
−9%negative reviews

These figures come from the project summary. The baseline, measurement period and distinction between relative percentages and percentage points are not available here.

Next case study

Fundraise Up

Making donation fee coverage clearer

One fee-coverage interaction for three nonprofit settings. A/B testing reported +1.67% coverage conversion and 8% fewer default-setting opt-outs.

Open to Lead / Staff Product Design roles.

Based in Tbilisi, Georgia · Open to relocate