ReplySubscribe
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
txp
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Programs: UA, AA, DL, BA, Marriott, Hilton, Accor, Hyatt
Posts: 1,322
Buy two tickets, only one place in low fare bucket: both priced at higher bucket!
Hi everyone,
I have noticed an interesting anomaly in pricing. Say that the inventory for a given flight is Z2 P1. Suppose the P fare is $400 and the Z fare is $600.
If I want to buy only one ticket, the quoted price is $400, as it should be. But if I want to buy two tickets, the quoted price is $1,200 instead of $1,000. Why? You can easily work around this by buying the two tickets separately.
Reply
D582
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SFO
Programs: *G^2, Bonvoyed, NEXUS
Posts: 3,547
All passengers on the same PNR have to have the same itinerary (flights, dates, booking class) - you can't book 1 in Z and 1 P. So in this case it would either book in Z at $600x2 = $1200, or with UA's continuous pricing it could book into P with some price >$400x2=$800 and <$600x2=$1200
Reply
IAH-OIL-TRASH
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 15,174
Originally Posted by txp
...Why?...
Obviously, there's only ticket available at the lower fare class. Since fare classes cannot be mixed on the same record, one has to pay the higher fare class to get two tickets on the same record. The work-around is as you pointed out.
moondog likes this.
Reply
#5
txp
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Programs: UA, AA, DL, BA, Marriott, Hilton, Accor, Hyatt
Posts: 1,322
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH
Obviously, there's only ticket available at the lower fare class. Since fare classes cannot be mixed on the same record, one has to pay the higher fare class to get two tickets on the same record. The work-around is as you pointed out.
Why can you not have two tickets on the same record in two different fare buckets: one in P, another in Z? Sounds like an artificial restriction with no logic. A relic of the Unix era?
Reply
moondog
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 42,684
Originally Posted by txp
Why can you not have two tickets on the same record in two different fare buckets: one in P, another in Z?
Because they are different products.
whlinder and SPN Lifer like this.
Reply
txp
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Programs: UA, AA, DL, BA, Marriott, Hilton, Accor, Hyatt
Posts: 1,322
Originally Posted by moondog
Because they are different products.
I apologize but this seems a bit of a tautology. So please allow me to ask the question differently -- why can't you have two different products in the same record?
Reply
Kacee
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 57,043
Originally Posted by txp
Why can you not have two tickets on the same record in two different fare buckets: one in P, another in Z? Sounds like an artificial restriction with no logic. A relic of the Unix era?
It was originally an IT limitation; whether that remains the reason I don't know. It's an airline-favoring restriction so from their perspective, there's no incentive to change.
NJSwamplands likes this.
Reply
IAH-OIL-TRASH
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 15,174
Originally Posted by txp
I apologize but this seems a bit of a tautology. So please allow me to ask the question differently -- why can't you have two different products in the same record?
One fare class might have a different advance purchase requirement or cancellation policy then the other. Fare classes aren't just random letters filled with random prices to annoy people. They often come with different restrictions. United wants a reservation and its listed passengers to be under the same terms. Seems pretty straight-forward and reasonable. We benefit from the variety of fares UA provides, and sometimes they can scrape a little extra at the fare bucket margins.
TerryK, moondog, SPN Lifer and 4 others like this.
Last edited by IAH-OIL-TRASH; Mar 15, 2024 at 11:05 amReason: speling
Reply
Lux Flyer
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 2,305
Originally Posted by txp
I apologize but this seems a bit of a tautology. So please allow me to ask the question differently -- why can't you have two different products in the same record?
Because you're working off services, standards and common interfaces which were developed 50+ years ago and are still limited by those initial decisions due to the need to communicate with other airlines reservations systems. The change you're asking for would require every one you interline with and they interline with to all reprogram their reservations systems to handle this change. And airlines have a hard enough time to get reservations to update properly & stay in sync when one partner makes a change, that there is bigger fish to fry then going after supporting multiple booking codes in a same reservation.
As an example, lets say SHARES suddenly has the ability to support multiple bookings codes in a single reservation, but there is a LH flight the passenger is connecting to - how do I transmit that to LH if Amadeus doesn't also support that capability? Am I making two separate reservations on LH's end to account for each booking code? Which passenger gets which? What if I want to make a change for only one of the passengers? WHat if LH has a schedule change, how do they send that message from 2 PNRs back to a single PNR in UA's system? ETc.
The more straight-forward solution is to keep your existing PNR structure for commonality with your interline partners and find some other way to provide a proper link of the PNR so for all intents they're treated as if they're travelling together in your own system, as that doesn't require a huge buy-in/investment for all airlines.
whlinder, jsloan, SPN Lifer and 3 others like this.
Reply
txp
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Programs: UA, AA, DL, BA, Marriott, Hilton, Accor, Hyatt
Posts: 1,322
Originally Posted by Kacee
It was originally an IT limitation.
This is what I meant when I said it was a relic of unix!
Originally Posted by Lux Flyer
Because you're working off services, standards and common interfaces which were developed 50+ years ago and are still limited by those initial decisions due to the need to communicate with other airlines reservations systems. The change you're asking for would require every one you interline with and they interline with to all reprogram their reservations systems to handle this change. And airlines have a hard enough time to get reservations to update properly & stay in sync when one partner makes a change, that there is bigger fish to fry then going after supporting multiple booking codes in a same reservation.
As an example, lets say SHARES suddenly has the ability to support multiple bookings codes in a single reservation, but there is a LH flight the passenger is connecting to - how do I transmit that to LH if Amadeus doesn't also support that capability? Am I making two separate reservations on LH's end to account for each booking code? Which passenger gets which? What if I want to make a change for only one of the passengers? WHat if LH has a schedule change, how do they send that message from 2 PNRs back to a single PNR in UA's system? ETc.
The more straight-forward solution is to keep your existing PNR structure for commonality with your interline partners and find some other way to provide a proper link of the PNR so for all intents they're treated as if they're travelling together in your own system, as that doesn't require a huge buy-in/investment for all airlines.
OK, I finally understood. It is path-dependent. Initially, an IT limitation, no one has any incentive to change now because the costs would be prohibitive.
Traveling on separate records is annoying in case of changes or cancellations. It happened to me once when a flight was canceled, and different passengers were rebooked on different flights. It took hours on the phone to sort this out. Since that time, I usually pay the premium and book everyone at the higher bucket. But I wished someone corrected this 1970s relic. Seriously.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Mar 15, 2024 at 1:11 amReason: merged consecutive posts by same member
Reply
paperwastage
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,424
Originally Posted by txp
. But I wished someone corrected this 1970s relic. Seriously.
No benefit for airlines to do this.
On the other hand, as mentioned above, united has (monetary) reasons to introduce continuous pricing, which has potential to alleviate some of this pain from the consumer side
Reply
WineCountryUA
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA LT Plat 2MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 67,414
Originally Posted by txp
This is what I meant when I said it was a relic of unix!
....
No, COBOL
And as mentioned having a PNR with individual tickets having different fare classes that have different fare rules would make nightmare in ticket changes
SPN Lifer, wrp96, PLeblond and 1 others like this.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Mar 15, 2024 at 1:18 am
Reply
txp
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Programs: UA, AA, DL, BA, Marriott, Hilton, Accor, Hyatt
Posts: 1,322
Originally Posted by WineCountryUA
No, COBOL
I stand corrected. Yes, it is how COBOL works. I meant "Unix" more as a vernacular for mainframe computers...
Speaking of path-dependent relics, I wish someone would start a thread in a different forum on why we are still using 1950s communication tools in air traffic control -- verbal instructions conveyed by radio!
Reply
ctownflyer
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CLE
Programs: UA GS+LT UC, AA EXP+LT PLT, Fairmont LT PLT, Marriott PLT, Hilton DIA, Hyatt Glob, Avis CHM
Posts: 4,687
UA can certainly have different rules for different passengers in the same PNR, just look at baggage allowance for cardholder's companions. They just only do it when it benefits UA.
rjburns likes this.
Reply
Show Printable Version
Email this Page
Reply Closed Thread
- First
- Prev
- 1 / 3
- Next
- Last
1
2
3
Forum Jump
Contact Us -Manage PreferencesArchive -Advertising -Cookie Policy -Privacy Statement -Terms of Service -
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.