That jerk KNEW he was violating contracts! He wants us to believe he was the ONLY one in history to notice that. HECK, I noticed it a long time ago. The travel agencies have ALSO!

The problem is that the airlines could give you some trouble AND, if you do the London trip, as you indicate, at least they THREATEN to CANCEL the return leg. So you fly TO London, fail to fly to Canada, and they cancel the entire flight FROM London.

HECK, I once came up with the idea of STRADDLING flights, to lower the cost of subsequent flights. I certainly wasn't the first to come up with it. Sometimes that simply MUST happen, and I saw no statements against it, but a travel agent told me THAT wasn't allowed either.

At least US airlines don't recognize THEIR obligations in contracts, but they have NO resistance to acting against YOUR violations of it. As for THEIR obligations, I guess we are lucky that the FAA and the federal government have a LITTLE bit of a leash on them.

I can't explain WHY the prices are so bad, but there are likely reasons. SUPPOSEDLY they often don't make that much per flight, and sometimes LOSE money! Fuel and support costs a FORTUNE. And don't get me started on the salaries, DUMB requirements, and pensions.

I have had flights where just the AIRPORT TAX was 200% of the flight price! YEP! So a $100 flight has $200 in AIRPORT taxes, and you end up paying $300, for the ticket! Do any of these people talk about THAT?

Anyway, I would hate to be stranded because of a cancelled flight, like above. I HAVE straddled some flights, but only because it could happen by accident, etc.... ALSO, ironically, earlier corporate rules(From companies I worked for) FORBID straddles, etc...!

It would be interesting if an airline SERIOUSLY went to a fair pricing strategy.

Steve

NOPE! That is the guy we spoke about earlier. He DOESN'T try to find discount flights. He finds flights that are somewhat reasonably priced to go to a layover city, that the purchaser wants as a destination, and then they can buy the whole flight, taking only PART of it. The problem is NOT that they are "finding discount flights", but that they are encouraging people to violate contracts.

According to that crankyflier site, this is a necessity play, where they bilk those that NEED to fly to a popular destination, to get the other people a fare THEY like. If true, I DISLIKE the bilk part, especially since I am one in that group and all, but if true, and a site like skiplagged took off, the OTHER flights would just go up in price.

Steve

Yeah, at least in the US, the seats are even getting smaller, and seats aren't the same size. Service is HORRIBLE! They USED to offer peanuts in economy and often some snack in first class, and had free non alcoholic drinks planewide, and free alcoholic drinks in first class. Today, FORGET IT! You want peanuts? MAYBE you can BUY some peanut m&ms or a snackbox. Both cost perhaps $5. They used to have free first checked bags, they don't anymore.

I don't know about other countries, but Irelands "ryan air" is apparently WORSE! Ryan Air is supposed to be THEIR version of Southwest BUT, last I knew, Southwest was pretty good and CHEAP!

Still, they aren't like they were in the 1960s. I had memories of the flights I was on in the sixties, and they seemed like a scifi flick! They would be SO foreign today. Well, I have since seen documentaries and commercials from that era that show detail JUST LIKE I REMEMBERED! But apparently they charged a LOT back then. And gas, and labor were cheaper then! ALSO, as I recall, the carts were PLASTIC back then. I remember asking why they had all these holes in them, and the flight attendant said it was to cut down on weight. TODAY, for whatever reason, they are METAL. As for the technology and all? It improved a bit, but is largely IDENTICAL. ALSO, planes were allowed to go FASTER back then!

Steve

Huge CapEx* requirements + wafer thin margins + intense competition = avoid as an investment.

Or, as Sir Richard Branson put it when being asked "What's the best way to become a millionaire?"


*Capital expenditure (the cost of buying planes).

The pricing is bizarre, looking at it superficially. I suspect that even looking at it in depth, and "understanding the industry", it's still pretty bizarre.

I can fly from the North of England to Amsterdam (45-50 minutes flying time) on a "budget airline" with proper planes for a price that's so low the sandwiches and drinks you buy on board cost about the same as the ticket. Or I can travel half an hour later and fly with KLM (Dutch national airline) and pay three times as much for the ticket. Apart from the price, the other catch is that with KLM the plane is a poxy little "City Hopper" (my father calls it a "toy airplane") and if there's much wind or snow, in the winter, it doesn't even take off for a few hours until the wind drops because it can get blown away (so you never know whether you'll catch your connecting flight out of Schiphol, if you have one). I swear they do it just to make life difficult for people.


.

It's not just international flights that do this.

A few years ago while I lived in Sydney, I wanted to book a flight from Sydney to Perth to attend my Mum's 70th birthday.

A direct flight cost twice as much as taking one that went via Brisbane!!!!!

(For non-Aussies have a look at a map of Australia to see how much sense that makes.)

So is it the fact that the prices aren't static and predictable that makes airlines shifty? I guess I just don't see it that way. To me that just means that the airline industry is very competitive, has low margins and thus requires sophisticated supply/demand models in order to remain profitable. I'm certainly no expert, but my guess is that the airlines do lose a bit of money on many sold seats -- especially, the flights with one or more stops -- but that they make it up (or at least try to) on the surpluses they are able to charge for direct flights, business class or other gimmicks (e.g., "economy plus"). So in a sense their "shiftiness" really amounts to a subsidy to people willing to trade inconvenience for a cheaper ticket. They'll sell you a seat at a even price lower than the cost to them -- if you're willing to have a 10 hour layover in Timbuktu, have only 2 1/2 inches of legroom and get nothing to eat but a stale bag of peanuts.

As to the internet service example, yes there might be differences in cost but (1) this is often not the case and (2) even when it is, the price isn't being set based on the cost, but what the market will allow. What I mean is that if there is a mountain town that has 50 internet service providers, internet there will still cost less there than a non-mountainous town with just one ISP. Again, the cost is irrelevant to the price; and especially in industries with high fixed costs (like an airline or an ISP), once the investment is made (by, for instance dropping hundreds of millions on jumbo jets) the goal is to recoup that initial investment as best as they can. For an airline, that means dynamic pricing, which as I said is frustrating. And annoying. But again, it's not shifty. It's just business.