LAS-DEN-SEA (or the other way) is not that out of the way. UA 484 SEA-DEN 8:00 AM SEA - 11:35 AM DEN UA 1409 DEN 12:20 - LAS 1:09 PM This trip has 5 hrs and 9 mins of block time. The shortest trip in the city pairing is 4 hrs and 9 mins through SFO. So, it would make sense to connect through DEN. Oh well, maybe I will try two tickets, or just fly them on the weekend just for the heck.. BAHA Fan of DEN and UA. -----Original Message----- From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of damiross2@xxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:34 AM To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Frontier question That reminds me - a while back I was looking at flights between OAK and Boise. It offered me (at a very high increase over the other fares shown) a trip that connected via MSP. Just recently I looked at Alaska's web page for flights between OAK and LAX. I don't think a connection in PDX or SEA was worth the extra 100's of dollars! The point of this? It appears that Frontier's online booking engine is pretty smart and won't allow a way out-of-the-way connection such as LAS-DEN-SEA. David R > In a message dated 2/23/2004 9:56:30 PM Pacific Standard Time, > damiross2@xxxxxxxxxxx writes: > > > Think about it - why go hundreds of miles to the southeast then go hundreds > > of miles southwest to fly to a destination that is nearly directly south of > > Seattle? > > ATA offers San Francisco- Honolulu via Chicago... > Air Canada SFO- Hong Kong via Toronto... > > Now thats going out of the way. > > Scott- SFO