Would Somebody Please Explain Married Segment Logic to Me?
Oct 14, 2013, 1:04 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Budapest
Programs: Hilton Diamond, IHG Platinum, Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 178
Would Somebody Please Explain Married Segment Logic to Me?
Hi,
I'm pricing a ticket to RSW from LAS for Christmas and don't quite understand the pricing logic; if I search by segment, LAS-ATL shows T/V availability, ATL-RSW shows mostly U.
But if I try and purchase the fare, class availability jumps way up, varying from S to M to B.
I'm guessing this is due to it being a "married segment" and luckily, I can fly pretty easily into FLL or PBI where fares show for about half (literally) of what RSW is coming up. Plus, I can wait and I think that eventually this will come down in price and availability will open.
But my question is really this : why is this good for the airlines? If they obviously have lower class availability on both segments (unless it books higher per fare rules?), why does it bump up when I try to purchase them together?
Could one of you explain this logic to me? I'd really appreciate your insights. Thanks.
I'm pricing a ticket to RSW from LAS for Christmas and don't quite understand the pricing logic; if I search by segment, LAS-ATL shows T/V availability, ATL-RSW shows mostly U.
But if I try and purchase the fare, class availability jumps way up, varying from S to M to B.
I'm guessing this is due to it being a "married segment" and luckily, I can fly pretty easily into FLL or PBI where fares show for about half (literally) of what RSW is coming up. Plus, I can wait and I think that eventually this will come down in price and availability will open.
But my question is really this : why is this good for the airlines? If they obviously have lower class availability on both segments (unless it books higher per fare rules?), why does it bump up when I try to purchase them together?
Could one of you explain this logic to me? I'd really appreciate your insights. Thanks.
Oct 14, 2013, 1:48 am
#2
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: JFK/LGA
Programs: DL DM, HH Gold, SPG Platinum 100, National Executive Elite
Posts: 1,687
Since airfares are sold point A to B, married segment logic allows an airline to gain more revenue between a city pair while allowing other city pairs to remain at cheaper prices. I.e. delta thinks it can sell you an M fare ticket between LAS-RSW, but expects to sell cheaper tickets point to point in your itinerary.
What may be worth investigating is trying to book it as a two segment trip, by putting LAS-ATL as one part of the reservation and ATL-RSW as other part. This would allow you to 'break' the fare in ATL and essentially have two separate tickets, but as long as you're on the same PNR you'll be protected in IRROPS. Often this method can come out with some pretty cheap tickets!
What may be worth investigating is trying to book it as a two segment trip, by putting LAS-ATL as one part of the reservation and ATL-RSW as other part. This would allow you to 'break' the fare in ATL and essentially have two separate tickets, but as long as you're on the same PNR you'll be protected in IRROPS. Often this method can come out with some pretty cheap tickets!
Oct 14, 2013, 7:01 am
#3
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,399
Since airfares are sold point A to B, married segment logic allows an airline to gain more revenue between a city pair while allowing other city pairs to remain at cheaper prices. I.e. delta thinks it can sell you an M fare ticket between LAS-RSW, but expects to sell cheaper tickets point to point in your itinerary.
What may be worth investigating is trying to book it as a two segment trip, by putting LAS-ATL as one part of the reservation and ATL-RSW as other part. This would allow you to 'break' the fare in ATL and essentially have two separate tickets, but as long as you're on the same PNR you'll be protected in IRROPS. Often this method can come out with some pretty cheap tickets!
What may be worth investigating is trying to book it as a two segment trip, by putting LAS-ATL as one part of the reservation and ATL-RSW as other part. This would allow you to 'break' the fare in ATL and essentially have two separate tickets, but as long as you're on the same PNR you'll be protected in IRROPS. Often this method can come out with some pretty cheap tickets!
Oct 14, 2013, 8:51 am
#4
Join Date: Sep 2007
Programs: DL Silver, AS MVP, UA Silver, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Plat, SPG Plat, National Exec Elite
Posts: 3,883
If you're booking this as a roundtrip, you might also want to look into booking as a back-to-back LAS-ATL and ATL-RSW. Again, have them merged into one PNR and you're covered on IRROPS.
Oct 14, 2013, 9:05 am
#5
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,399
Oct 14, 2013, 9:20 am
#6
Join Date: Mar 2013
Programs: AA ExPlt, UA Gold, HH Diamond
Posts: 356
I've read several posts on "Married Segments" across various blogs and there seems to be a misconception about what they are and how they are used in the industry. Most of the discussions I've read about "Married Segments" are actually talking about the difference between Local (single segment) Availability and Flow (connecting flight) Availability.
As most folks on here know, fares are tied to various inventory codes which are limited to 26 (A thru Z) by industry standard. Some carriers have enahnced their systems to allow for additional codes, but those can be used for internal purposes only (they don't transimt between other airlines or the GDSs).
Given that fares aren't generally priced on an equivalent revenue/mile system from market to market, selling a seat to a customer flying in one market is actually more valuable than selling the same seat to a customer flying in a different market. Let's use an example:
DCA-ATL with a Q fare of $200 OW
ATL-PHX with a Q fare of $300 OW
If DCA-PHX had a Q fare of $500 OW AND there was equal probability of demand from one passenger for DCA-PHX as for one passenger on DCA-ATL and one passenger on ATL-PHX, the Q seat has the same value to the airline regardless of which passengers buy the Q seat on the two flights.
Where things get interesting is when the DCA-PHX Q fare is $700. As such, this passenger is more valuable and the DCA-PHX Flow Availability in Q will be higher than the Local Availability in Q for DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX.
When the concept of Flow and Local Availability was first introduced in the 1980s, many travel agents and airline employees figured out that they could book connecting flights which had higher availability and then cancel the unwanted segment(s) to obtain a seat at a fare in a market that wasn't actually available. For example, booking DCA-ATL-PHX then cancelling ATL-PHX would allow you to then price the DCA-ATL fare that wasn't actually availabile.
To address this loophole, the industry implemented Married Segments which, as their name implies, means that they are coupled. If you book DCA-ATL-PHX, the segments are married to one another and cancelling one generally can't be done without cancelling both.
Of course, it is also possible that the example above could be reversed where the DCA-PHX Q fare is only $400 (less than the sum of the two local segments). In this case, Flow Availability in Q for DCA-PHX would be lower than the Local Q Availability for the DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX segments.
Again, many agents tried to game the system by booking DCA-ATL first then booking ATL-PHX as a second transaction, but in the same PNR. This would then allow them to obtain seat to price the $400 fare that wasn't available in DCA-PHX. To address this problem, the industry developed an additional solution known as Journey Data.
With Journey Data, any previously booked segments in the PNR are passed along with newly requested segments to a carrier's inventory system. The inventory system then detemines if the new segment forms a connection with any of the previously booked segments. If so, the avaialibilty for the new segment will be based on the Flow Availability for the connection, not the segement's Local Availability.
So if you book DCA-ATL and then request ATL-PHX, the system will see DCA-ATL is a connectio to ATL-PHX and the ATL-PHX Q availability would be based on the Flow Availability for DCA-PHX. Likewise, if you book ATL-PHX first then try to add DCA-ATL in front of it, the DCA-ATL availability will be based on DCA-PHX.
In instances where the inventory system allows the new segment to be booked, it will set a "New Marriage Condition" on the previously booked segment(s) that was deemed to be part of the connection, thus protecting the Flow Availability decision.
Hope that helps.
As most folks on here know, fares are tied to various inventory codes which are limited to 26 (A thru Z) by industry standard. Some carriers have enahnced their systems to allow for additional codes, but those can be used for internal purposes only (they don't transimt between other airlines or the GDSs).
Given that fares aren't generally priced on an equivalent revenue/mile system from market to market, selling a seat to a customer flying in one market is actually more valuable than selling the same seat to a customer flying in a different market. Let's use an example:
DCA-ATL with a Q fare of $200 OW
ATL-PHX with a Q fare of $300 OW
If DCA-PHX had a Q fare of $500 OW AND there was equal probability of demand from one passenger for DCA-PHX as for one passenger on DCA-ATL and one passenger on ATL-PHX, the Q seat has the same value to the airline regardless of which passengers buy the Q seat on the two flights.
Where things get interesting is when the DCA-PHX Q fare is $700. As such, this passenger is more valuable and the DCA-PHX Flow Availability in Q will be higher than the Local Availability in Q for DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX.
When the concept of Flow and Local Availability was first introduced in the 1980s, many travel agents and airline employees figured out that they could book connecting flights which had higher availability and then cancel the unwanted segment(s) to obtain a seat at a fare in a market that wasn't actually available. For example, booking DCA-ATL-PHX then cancelling ATL-PHX would allow you to then price the DCA-ATL fare that wasn't actually availabile.
To address this loophole, the industry implemented Married Segments which, as their name implies, means that they are coupled. If you book DCA-ATL-PHX, the segments are married to one another and cancelling one generally can't be done without cancelling both.
Of course, it is also possible that the example above could be reversed where the DCA-PHX Q fare is only $400 (less than the sum of the two local segments). In this case, Flow Availability in Q for DCA-PHX would be lower than the Local Q Availability for the DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX segments.
Again, many agents tried to game the system by booking DCA-ATL first then booking ATL-PHX as a second transaction, but in the same PNR. This would then allow them to obtain seat to price the $400 fare that wasn't available in DCA-PHX. To address this problem, the industry developed an additional solution known as Journey Data.
With Journey Data, any previously booked segments in the PNR are passed along with newly requested segments to a carrier's inventory system. The inventory system then detemines if the new segment forms a connection with any of the previously booked segments. If so, the avaialibilty for the new segment will be based on the Flow Availability for the connection, not the segement's Local Availability.
So if you book DCA-ATL and then request ATL-PHX, the system will see DCA-ATL is a connectio to ATL-PHX and the ATL-PHX Q availability would be based on the Flow Availability for DCA-PHX. Likewise, if you book ATL-PHX first then try to add DCA-ATL in front of it, the DCA-ATL availability will be based on DCA-PHX.
In instances where the inventory system allows the new segment to be booked, it will set a "New Marriage Condition" on the previously booked segment(s) that was deemed to be part of the connection, thus protecting the Flow Availability decision.
Hope that helps.
Oct 14, 2013, 9:34 am
#7
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: JFK/LGA
Programs: DL DM, HH Gold, SPG Platinum 100, National Executive Elite
Posts: 1,687
I've read several posts on "Married Segments" across various blogs and there seems to be a misconception about what they are and how they are used in the industry. Most of the discussions I've read about "Married Segments" are actually talking about the difference between Local (single segment) Availability and Flow (connecting flight) Availability.
As most folks on here know, fares are tied to various inventory codes which are limited to 26 (A thru Z) by industry standard. Some carriers have enahnced their systems to allow for additional codes, but those can be used for internal purposes only (they don't transimt between other airlines or the GDSs).
Given that fares aren't generally priced on an equivalent revenue/mile system from market to market, selling a seat to a customer flying in one market is actually more valuable than selling the same seat to a customer flying in a different market. Let's use an example:
DCA-ATL with a Q fare of $200 OW
ATL-PHX with a Q fare of $300 OW
If DCA-PHX had a Q fare of $500 OW AND there was equal probability of demand from one passenger for DCA-PHX as for one passenger on DCA-ATL and one passenger on ATL-PHX, the Q seat has the same value to the airline regardless of which passengers buy the Q seat on the two flights.
Where things get interesting is when the DCA-PHX Q fare is $700. As such, this passenger is more valuable and the DCA-PHX Flow Availability in Q will be higher than the Local Availability in Q for DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX.
When the concept of Flow and Local Availability was first introduced in the 1980s, many travel agents and airline employees figured out that they could book connecting flights which had higher availability and then cancel the unwanted segment(s) to obtain a seat at a fare in a market that wasn't actually available. For example, booking DCA-ATL-PHX then cancelling ATL-PHX would allow you to then price the DCA-ATL fare that wasn't actually availabile.
To address this loophole, the industry implemented Married Segments which, as their name implies, means that they are coupled. If you book DCA-ATL-PHX, the segments are married to one another and cancelling one generally can't be done without cancelling both.
Of course, it is also possible that the example above could be reversed where the DCA-PHX Q fare is only $400 (less than the sum of the two local segments). In this case, Flow Availability in Q for DCA-PHX would be lower than the Local Q Availability for the DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX segments.
Again, many agents tried to game the system by booking DCA-ATL first then booking ATL-PHX as a second transaction, but in the same PNR. This would then allow them to obtain seat to price the $400 fare that wasn't available in DCA-PHX. To address this problem, the industry developed an additional solution known as Journey Data.
With Journey Data, any previously booked segments in the PNR are passed along with newly requested segments to a carrier's inventory system. The inventory system then detemines if the new segment forms a connection with any of the previously booked segments. If so, the avaialibilty for the new segment will be based on the Flow Availability for the connection, not the segement's Local Availability.
So if you book DCA-ATL and then request ATL-PHX, the system will see DCA-ATL is a connectio to ATL-PHX and the ATL-PHX Q availability would be based on the Flow Availability for DCA-PHX. Likewise, if you book ATL-PHX first then try to add DCA-ATL in front of it, the DCA-ATL availability will be based on DCA-PHX.
In instances where the inventory system allows the new segment to be booked, it will set a "New Marriage Condition" on the previously booked segment(s) that was deemed to be part of the connection, thus protecting the Flow Availability decision.
Hope that helps.
As most folks on here know, fares are tied to various inventory codes which are limited to 26 (A thru Z) by industry standard. Some carriers have enahnced their systems to allow for additional codes, but those can be used for internal purposes only (they don't transimt between other airlines or the GDSs).
Given that fares aren't generally priced on an equivalent revenue/mile system from market to market, selling a seat to a customer flying in one market is actually more valuable than selling the same seat to a customer flying in a different market. Let's use an example:
DCA-ATL with a Q fare of $200 OW
ATL-PHX with a Q fare of $300 OW
If DCA-PHX had a Q fare of $500 OW AND there was equal probability of demand from one passenger for DCA-PHX as for one passenger on DCA-ATL and one passenger on ATL-PHX, the Q seat has the same value to the airline regardless of which passengers buy the Q seat on the two flights.
Where things get interesting is when the DCA-PHX Q fare is $700. As such, this passenger is more valuable and the DCA-PHX Flow Availability in Q will be higher than the Local Availability in Q for DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX.
When the concept of Flow and Local Availability was first introduced in the 1980s, many travel agents and airline employees figured out that they could book connecting flights which had higher availability and then cancel the unwanted segment(s) to obtain a seat at a fare in a market that wasn't actually available. For example, booking DCA-ATL-PHX then cancelling ATL-PHX would allow you to then price the DCA-ATL fare that wasn't actually availabile.
To address this loophole, the industry implemented Married Segments which, as their name implies, means that they are coupled. If you book DCA-ATL-PHX, the segments are married to one another and cancelling one generally can't be done without cancelling both.
Of course, it is also possible that the example above could be reversed where the DCA-PHX Q fare is only $400 (less than the sum of the two local segments). In this case, Flow Availability in Q for DCA-PHX would be lower than the Local Q Availability for the DCA-ATL and ATL-PHX segments.
Again, many agents tried to game the system by booking DCA-ATL first then booking ATL-PHX as a second transaction, but in the same PNR. This would then allow them to obtain seat to price the $400 fare that wasn't available in DCA-PHX. To address this problem, the industry developed an additional solution known as Journey Data.
With Journey Data, any previously booked segments in the PNR are passed along with newly requested segments to a carrier's inventory system. The inventory system then detemines if the new segment forms a connection with any of the previously booked segments. If so, the avaialibilty for the new segment will be based on the Flow Availability for the connection, not the segement's Local Availability.
So if you book DCA-ATL and then request ATL-PHX, the system will see DCA-ATL is a connectio to ATL-PHX and the ATL-PHX Q availability would be based on the Flow Availability for DCA-PHX. Likewise, if you book ATL-PHX first then try to add DCA-ATL in front of it, the DCA-ATL availability will be based on DCA-PHX.
In instances where the inventory system allows the new segment to be booked, it will set a "New Marriage Condition" on the previously booked segment(s) that was deemed to be part of the connection, thus protecting the Flow Availability decision.
Hope that helps.
However, the sad truth is that buggy delta IT often lets you price out the fare as two separate segments!
Oct 14, 2013, 9:45 am
#8
Join Date: Mar 2013
Programs: AA ExPlt, UA Gold, HH Diamond
Posts: 356
Yes, that's right. When it comes time to price, most systems will still allow a sum of local fare regardless of whether the inventory is sold from local or flow availability.
Feb 14, 2016, 5:34 pm
#9
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, MLife Gold, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Caesars Diamond, Amex Plat
Posts: 5,939
Has anyone had success recently calling in to DL and ticketing as single segments for an award that is pricing out higher at married segment rate?
Feb 14, 2016, 7:23 pm
#10
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: PIT, BWI, or IPT
Programs: Dividend Miles, WorldPerks
Posts: 1,302
Has anyone had success recently calling in to DL and ticketing as single segments for an award that is pricing out higher at married segment rate?
Feb 14, 2016, 8:35 pm
#11
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San Diego
Programs: IHG Spire Amb, HH Diamond, DL Diamond and 1MM
Posts: 3,610
But my question is really this : why is this good for the airlines? If they obviously have lower class availability on both segments (unless it books higher per fare rules?), why does it bump up when I try to purchase them together?
Could one of you explain this logic to me?
Could one of you explain this logic to me?
Limes: cheap
Tequila: cheap
Limes + Tequila: costly
(And they'd stop you from gaming the system by checking out twice!)
Last edited by Bowgie; Feb 14, 2016 at 8:54 pm
Feb 14, 2016, 8:53 pm
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bye Delta
Programs: AA EXP, HH Diamond, IHG Plat, Hyatt Plat, Marriott Plat, Nat'l Exec Elite, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 16,273
Ask them specifically to book it as a multi-city award. It will price additively, based on the cities they enter while searching.
Feb 15, 2016, 8:55 am
#13
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, MLife Gold, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Caesars Diamond, Amex Plat
Posts: 5,939
If I end up doing this trip (still waiting to see if I can get the dates right w/ work, etc), then I'll call in and try. Shall report back.