Why is transiting onto 3rd destination cheaper than flying direct?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 168
Why is transiting onto 3rd destination cheaper than flying direct?
I was just looking AKL to HKG in business class return. $5500
Yet, AKL to HKG, to CAN in business class return, same dates, etc, only $3000
Why the price difference? Does not make sense to me.
Yet, AKL to HKG, to CAN in business class return, same dates, etc, only $3000
Why the price difference? Does not make sense to me.
#3
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 229
Yes, but it’s China Southern who fly directly into CAN that’s a more attractive option. Especiallly at this time of year flying their brand new 787-9 with the 1-2-1 layout....vastly superior to NZ.
#5
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 168
Yes the Air NZ business class seat is a joke. I rarely fly business but I am never envious of the business class seat. Rather save my money and spend it on the ground
#6
Join Date: May 2010
Location: YLMQ
Programs: QF Gold, WY Gold
Posts: 682
This is fairly common with carriers throughout the world, often because there is a premium for direct flights most likely due to demand. For instance LHR-AMS-JFK with KLM will often be cheaper than AMS-JFK whilst AMS-LHR-JFK with BA will be cheaper than LHR-JFK...
#7
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New Zealand (most of the time)
Programs: Air NZ Elite *G, Honors Gold, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 6,119
It might not make sense to you but it makes total sense to anybody who buys airfares regularly, and to those in airlines who set pricing!
Things have been this way for a long time, and will continue to be priced this way due to the simple fact airline pricing is often all about price perception and competition, not necessarily about consistency or logic.
Things have been this way for a long time, and will continue to be priced this way due to the simple fact airline pricing is often all about price perception and competition, not necessarily about consistency or logic.