It's entirely due to competition. I looked at several different city pairs. I found that it was possible to have a connecting flight that is cheaper than a non-stop. Why? My feeling is that the airline wants to get that last seat filled (these were all discounted fares) and if they have to fly a passenger out of his way to do it, they will. Actually, this is a win-win situation. The passenger gets a cheaper flight and the airline gets addtional revenue. David R > Competition doesn't *force* the airlines to charge the same, but they > do. (Unless of course, that without the business their seats would be > empty.. which of course is not really competition forcing them, but > rather inflexible labour contracts!... but we digress.) > > Airline 1: Boise, ID to Kansas City, MO - $100 > > Why would Airline 2, who's never going to offer such a direct flight, > match the price? In many cases they do. > > Airline 2 is going to fly your through Denver (more miles = more > expensive) but likely do it with more expensive operating costs (making > it even MORE expensive.) > > It's a pissing war that unless Airline 2 offers a direct flight, or has > labour costs so much lower than Airline 1 that dragging you through > Denver makes it worth their while. Neither which I think is going to > happen. > > Someone might argue that Airline 2 needs to only have a competitive > price but can rely on the loyalty factor due to their FF program. But > I'm guessing that loyalty on airlines will only sway for a small > difference in price. > > Ugly.. > > Matthew > > > > > On Thursday, September 18, 2003, at 10:45 AM, damiross2@xxxxxxxxxxx > wrote: > > > a) competition forces airlines to charge the same between 2 cities, > > regardless > > of routing > > > > b) Southwest does if you chose to fly between 2 cities on flights that > > are not > > shown in the timetable. For example, if you want to fly from Oakland > > to > > Dallas, you would have to chose your own connecting flights as this > > routing is > > not shown in the timetable. > > > > David R > >> Never understood this: > >> > >> Airlines can price their airfares based on either: > >> > >> a) Origin and Destination (regardless of routing) > >> b) By actual legs. > >> > >> Why do most airlines choose a) ? > >> > >> Which ones follow b)? > >> > >> I get the "got-to-steal-those customers" angle, but why would any > >> business (especially a capital and operating cost intensive one) want > >> the revenue model to be completely disconnected from the cost > >> structure? > >> > >> Matthew