Other than the obvious reason to save money for yourself, there are some very good reasons why to back to back ticket (all honorable?). I am referring to back to back ticketing as buying one ticket from A to B over a weekend and the other from B to A over a weekend in order to get discount fares. The legality of this is in some question (see other thread on antitrust), although it appears if you do it on two unrelated airlines, this may not be true back to back ticketing. Why do it (for honorable reasons?)

Charities don't have lots of money but their staff and volunteers have to fly, sometimes to meet with decision makers who don't work on weekends, i.e. no cheap fares. To fly from the west coast to the east coast on a same day or next day mid-week return will cost me $2100 CAD--one may not mind this for business where one can bill a client but for charities, we should be more creative and cheap! If you fly mid-week on each part of the back to back tickets, you can fly for $300 return for each = $600 in total. If you plan it right, you not only use the first part of each back to back ticket, you can also use the return coupons of each ticket to create another trip for the charity. You can fly twice for less than a third of what it costs to fly once full fare. This is big money for charities!

There are some disadvantages -- usually they require advance booking (14, 7 or 3 day) and changing the return to a different date requires a change fee (you can usually fly standby at a different time on the same day for no additional charge)--but it is still cheaper than full fare.

Many charities hold meetings over weekends so they can get the benefit of over weekend discount fares but this is not always possible for every meeting.

I hope that is an honorable (and practical) reason for back to back?

I am not advocating violating the airlines fare rules (that can get you in to big trouble if you are caught). See the other thread for what might or might not be considered as violations of the fare rules, antitrust etc etc. Knowledge is power!

What about the case where one buys a ticket for a business trip which spans two weeks and then later takes advantage of a low fare weekend ticket to go back home for the weekend. Does that constitute back to back? I did that once on the same airline without being hassled by the airline.

Technically yes but I have done it on the same airline through their own booking facilities (before I was aware that there may evern be a rule to the contrary). I think the airlines are trying to go after a different type of back to back flyer though--i.e. one who uses it to do day trips mid week (fly in and out on the same day) where it is obviously just to get around the fare rules.

A follow up to pgupta011 would be the example of where you had legitimately booked a 2 week trip somewhere months in advance then at the last minute a sale came up that let you go home for the weekend on short notice (webfares, e-fares etc.). Surely that wouldn't be back to back as the airlines would have to prove intent to circumvent the fare rules. All you would be doing was taking advantage of a last minute sale!

Thanks BlondeBomber for clarifying back to back ticketing. I undertstand it a little better. And who knows -- I may have to use it on a future flight. CATMAN

What the airlines are really trying to eliminate (mostly by penalizing the already haggard travel agent) is back-to-back throw aways and hidden city ticketing. Examples:

I decide to go see Catman in beautiful Jerzee next Sunday, 12/20 and return on Tuesday, 12/22. Fare? $1644. Instead of this exorbitant fare, I book a departure on 12/20 with a return on 12/27. Fare? $513. I book a ticket originating in beautiful Jerzee for travel 12/22 and a return who cares when. Fare: $513. I throw away the returns on both tickets, see Catman (and beautiful Jerzee) and save $618! Or from the airlines point of view, cost them $618, tie up four deeply discounted seats when I'm only using two, etc.

Hidden city example:

I need to go to Denver next Sunday. Fare? $279. If I book the same flight as a connection to Kansas City and just get off the plane in Denver fare is $224 saving me $55.

There are literally thousands and thousands of these "opportunities" out there. The airlines have created the mess with their myriad of fare structures. Good travel agents used to take advantage of these but it has simply become too expensive for them should they be caught...

Hope this lengthy ramble is helpful...

As noted under other posts, please see www.rulesoftheair.com for descriptions of some of these high fare avoidance schemes and the airlines interpretation of them.

Here's an interesting thought. Are the airlines really supporting the use of photo id's for everyone these days for security reasons, or have they embraced it because it makes it much harder to, for example, try to use back to back tickets and then get rid of the second halves of the tickets and give them to someone else to use? Just a thought, although admittedly a pretty cynical one.

Djlawman, it is not just a thought. I once read an article where the writer concluded that the airlines are saving a lot.

Good travel agents will not knowing use these tactics, but these days there are myriad of online reservation systems where one could do so if one desires. Going back to the original question - if one does a back to back ticketing using two different airlines would that be breaking the rules?

And then there are some legal ways of saving on tickets. For example, I will often compare the fares flying out of Denver or Colorado Springs. Sometimes the flight out of COS is cheaper even though the flight from there connects through Denver.

Djlawman, as far as I know, I last read that the domestic photo ID checkin requirement was dropped by the FAA; however, the airlines chose to continue requiring photo ID because - they are concerned about security? or... they want to make sure that the ticketed passenger is the one who really uses the ticket? ...take your pick.

If, in fact, the FAA has dropped the photo ID rule, I'd opt for Audie's thought: The airlines continue to require it to be more assured that the person flying is the person who bought the ticket.
But then, what's wrong with that?

The photo ID issue is another classic case of desiring A and regulating B. Like using speed bumps instead of enforcing speed limits.

It certainly has nothing relevant to do with security.

If anyone wanted to travel on another's ticket, all that is needed is for the holder of the ticket to check in and get the boarding pass, then give it to the other person and go home. Admittedly, this would only work for a one-way ticket.

Another thing to do avoid full fare tickets is to book with the SAT night stay just fly stand by on a flight earlier in the week. True, its not a 100% "sure thing" that you will get on the flight you want, but it beats paying $1800 for a 1 day pleasure trip.