felicidad76

Well dot is now investigating if these are legal practices. I was here put to shame to mention this horrendous practice by alaska. I hope they publish truncated schedule and if they can add more routes better.
https://www.rawstory.com/airline-fraud/

JetAirways77W

Any single fare bucket is now priced significantly more if you're connecting vs. that same fare bucket on a nonstop (e.g., an N fare SFO-BOS is $230, but an N fare SFO-SEA-BOS is $330).

mtofell

My PDX > OGG are similar... non-stop is usually 270 while routed through SEA is 335 (Main). For some reason going to PDX there is rarely an SEA routing but heading to OGG there usually is. Probably has to do with time change and general routing of planes - flights from PDX to OGG are usually in the morning. Getting off this island to head back to the mainland early in the day is tough.

xliioper

To be more specific, there are separate fare filings with different price points which apply to non-stop flights (routing code 4), vs. connecting options on this route (routing code 56) as covered in the routing rules. Examples from EF below. There can be multiple fare filings in a single fare class with different advance purchase requirements, seasonal application, etc. But they basically duplicate each filing with a non-stop specific one that is cheaper than the corresponding fare filing for connecting flights which is more expensive.

Generally, it is more profitable to sell seats on SFO-SEA and SEA-BOS flights to two different passengers rather than to a single passenger on one fare. There are other ways of pricing the connecting itins higher (married segment inventory), but hard-coding it in the fare rules achieves the same outcome without having to resort to married segment inventory bucket manipulation.