I used to use google flights, skyscanner or kayak to fly to a random place with a nice fare quite a bit, but I've just given up on three potential trips in the next two months because I refuse to fly basic economy and it's impossible to search only regular econ fares with a flight map. Now that we have TATL BE, it's even worse. Are there others who've been flying less since BE fares showed up?

Its not going to be easy, but you can eliminate United BE from your search by hitting the bags tab on Google Flights and adding a carryon bag. United BE disappears.

Then you just have American and Delta left. Then pick one, and take off the BE option up top and you get your price. Pick the other and you get your price.

I am not going to stop traveling because there is an extra step in the search. Maybe its because I started traveling before there was an internet and, back then, you used to have to have a flight book and call each airline and ask for their price.

In light of that, a few extra clicks seems pretty trivial. So, no, I definitely have not stopped traveling because I have to click my mouse a couple more times.

As for overseas travel, my caveat is J class lie flat or stay home, so BE fares don't even impact my search.

It's not just a few clicks. The problem is that the map displays the BE price (except for UA) and the cheapest place to fly to on BE isn't necessary the cheapest to fly to on regular econ. If I know my destination, it's easy, but when planning a random trip because I find myself with a few days off, it's frustrating. As for TATL, when its for work and just me, sure I can upgrade or use miles, but I can't do that for the entire family (and the cost of J for a family of 4 is too much for me).

Yeah, you're right. Before BE I did a lot more "random" trips because it was easy to search random dates/destinations and find a cheap/nice looking place to go. Much harder now with BE as on most "flight searching software" the "lowest price" is the BE fare, which I refuse to purchase.

This thread makes no sense. The mere existence of BE is preventing you from taking trips?

I use ITA to initiate searches and get a feel for what airlines operate what routes, where competitive fares are likely to be found, etc. Then, usually based on times, routes, and where I have elite status, I go to the airline's site to book the flight. The airline may offer four or five levels of Y fares, and then I pick the best one for me. (It's often the 2nd or 3rd cheapest option.)

Added stratification of fares makes me read each set of fares rules more closely than I once did, but it isn't enough to make me *not* travel at all.

If anything, the ULCC movement that led to the "unbundling" to begin with has opened up some pretty attractive fares, including the ability to buy one-way tickets, where I couldn't do it before. So in a way, they enable *more* trips, even though I have no desire to buy a ULCC or Basic Economy ticket.

No. It's specifically that I'm taking less random flights since the tools available to search "flights to anywhere" cannot get rid of BE fares. I could guess where some lower fares may be, but it wasn't like it used to be (for example, a few years ago I found a sub-$200 summer fare to Montana and took a unplanned trip - I would never be able to guess that fare would exist if I just based my searches on ITA).

And there are people who just want the cheapest fare which, if it is BE, is what they will book.

My guess is that nothing will change because there are more people in this bucket than in OP's.

Kayak.com allows you to filter out Basic Economy. Click "filter", then "cabin" and deselect Basic Economy".

That's good to know. Unfortunately, you can't do that on their map search.

Maybe write a suggestion to the sites you use? Don't know how hard it would be to implement - can't think it's that hard since you can do it on a by-search basis, but worth a suggestion anyway. I don't use those map searches very often but have on occasion, once in awhile finding a good idea that way - so I can see where it would be irritating to not be able to filter that method.

Couldn't you still do the ITA search across wide ranges of geography and get a sense for where the best fares are? I remember years ago I had a string of cities (maybe 10 or 15) where if you entered them into ITA with +300 miles, it was effectively searching all of Europe in a single query. There were strings for every geography imaginable - I remember using the Western USA one as well.

That would reveal that the oddball Montana destination happens to have unusually good fares right now, and since we generally know the relationships between a BE fare and a non-BE fare on a given route, it'd be easy to go to the airline website and make sure you buy the non-BE fare.

Been a couple years since I've searched this way, but ITA still looks like it always did so it should work, right?

Actually ITA errors out a lot (or times out, hard to tell) when you do big complicated searches nowadays. Google (either by intent or by neglect) has made ITA much worse than prior.

A few clicks makes all the difference. If you look at studies based on people's behavior, if you make something a few clicks more then the percentage of people that finish it will drop significantly.

I am not the type of person who shops by cheapest fare. To me, airtravel is worth spending a bit more. It's that base cheapo stuff that makes airlines like Spirit so horrible and attracts the Kettles. I shop on availablity of higher classes of service and to avoid certain carriers like Spirit and Southwest, as well as any benefits I can get for my standing accounts on One World carriers.