Originally Posted by
chfenton
Is this simply to prevent hidden city ticketing and have people walk off the plane in LAX- that is what I thought of; but why would JFK-MIA-LAS be that crazy as well?
I'm sure that's part of it, but since AA can sell JFK-LAX o/w in J for $2k+, why let the seats go just because the flight is part of an itinerary with onward travel? AA needs to preserve the inventory; this isn't one of those flights like LGA-ORD where the full F fare is $1,500+ o/w but nobody actually pays that. People do pay the high prices on this route so why let the seats go for less?
Originally Posted by
ijgordon
Flying via ORD or DFW or STL (the latter two only from LGA) should be about the same price as the nonstop, assuming the same inventory is available. The published fares on NYC-LAS allow routing via these cities. They also allow routings via SFO or LAX, but the fare rules disallow their use the 3-class transcons, and of course, there's no SFO-LAS on AA.
I don't see any F fares that allow routing via MIA, so as mentioned above, that would be pricing as JFK-MIA plus MIA-LAS.
This is further evidenced by the fact that coach fares are significantly more when connecting via MIA as well. JFK-LAS r/t is $400-415 when flown direct or via LAX (or via ORD or DFW, for that matter) but are about $558 flown via MIA (random days in Oct.).