Does anyone have any insight into how Skyscanner differentiates from the many other flight booking websites (Kayak, Expedia, Travelocity, etc.)?
Skyscanner can also construct somewhat of surprising itineraries by piecing together tickets on multiple separate LCCs that involve non-protected transfers, which is something that other price search engines (Hipmunk/Kayak) or online travel agencies (Expedia/Orbitz) don't really do. Most fare engines won't say "hey, if you're trying to get from London to Ljubljana, how would you feel about taking Easyjet LGW-BRU and Adria BRU-LJU?" — but Skyscanner will.
And they have a fairly cool "I want to go from [x city] to [anywhere]" web UI that will show you, for a given weekend, what are the cheapest countries/cities you could visit? The UI is very good, arguably a bit better than the Google Flights fuzzy date/trip search.
It's a great tool for exploring European fares. But I'm not sure how they make money — there's not a lot of revenue in air bookings.
Also I've heard from people who work there that they do a fair bit of custom analytical reporting for destinations - presumably reporting both on what people search for and what they actually book.
You may put this in bold. This means, if your plane is late/delayed and you miss a flight, the other airline will give a f. about that and you are left stranded. Proceed with caution!
Furthermore, even "protected" transfers can be a hassle as many airlines treat those without status like crap. Sure, you'll get another flight, but when and you might be left footing the bill for the hotel for the night.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Which airline will not cover hotel costs if you are missing a connection because of their fault? Is that even legal??
Bad weather delay? Miss a connection to another United flight? Bad luck buddy!
I used to be a big fan of Skyscanner a few years ago, but recently they seem to have dropped the ball and competitors have caught up.
In terms of the non-protected transfers there is now Skypicker (http://www.skypicker.com/), which lets you search airports by distance from a location (so if you need to get to Copenhagen, Denmark you can also search flights to Malmö, Sweden and take the bus which takes ~1hr). It doesn't seem to have quite as many low cost airlines, and the UI isn't very user friendly.
For general flight searches Momondo (http://www.momondo.com/) has a nicer UI and easier access to the filtering options and price estimates. It seems to have the same airlines as Skyscanner too.
Skyscanner was the only one capable of answering my query. All the competition required me to provide a specific destination and the approximate travel date for any searches.
I looked for a flight from Manchester to Knock (MAN -> NOC) flying on 24 June, returning 27 June.
Skyscanner was able to show me that there is a direct Flybe service for £64 return: http://www.skyscanner.net/transport/flights/man/noc/160624/1...
Skypicker could only offer me Ryanair flights. Outbound via Dublin and Liverpool and return via Nottingham and Dublin for £85.15: https://en.skypicker.com/cheap-flights-from-manchester-unite...
Kayak and Skyscanner knows about Ryanair but Expedia and clones don't. In general, Skyscanner knows about non-GDS airlines. To see whether a search engine is Ryanair-friendly search for BUD-VDA (Budapest - Ovda) as this route is a recent Ryanair invention. http://corporate.ryanair.com/news/news/150707-ryanair-announ...
Same story for Allegiant, search for BLI-OAK.
For instance, you can ask: "what's the cheapest flight from Country 1 to Country 2 over the coming year?" and it'll use its internal cache to give you suggested arrival/departure airports and times that you can then combine with local transportation on your own. I'm not aware of any other site that offers this.