Return tickets should be abolished to reduce problems for passengers

[Bletchleyite]

Trainsplit doesn't do multi stop or triangular journeys.

It kind of does, do it as one journey with lots of "via" points and stopover times specified.

I am sure it will do you Bletchley to MKC via Thurso and Penzance if you are bored enough.

 

[najaB]

It's the same as Trainsplit.

And by "the same as" @yorkie doesn't mean "similar to" - it's exactly the same underlying engine with a different interface on top of it.

 

[A S Leib]

It kind of does, do it as one journey with lots of "via" points and stopover times specified.

I am sure it will do you Bletchley to MKC via Thurso and Penzance if you are bored enough.

This is getting off-topic a bit, but it doesn't seem to like going between MKC and Bletchley or north of Edinburgh and Glasgow on complicated routes, so the closest I've found is Milton Keynes Central to Leighton Buzzard via Glasgow Central and Penzance (£348 for an advance ticket, £440 for flexible tickets splitting at Rugby, Wigan (northbound), Preston, Oxenholme (northbound), Carlisle (northbound), Glasgow Central / Queen Street, Bristol Temple Meads, (westbound only) Taunton, Tiverton Parkway and Plymouth, and Cheddington).

 

[miklcct]

It's the same as Trainsplit.

And it does do multi-stop journeys but not quite in the niche way in which @miklcct wants. I doubt anyone would make a booking site that quite covers that niche.

But all air ticket retailers I have used, except those low-cost carriers which have single-only price, do multi-stop journeys. What's the difference between air and train travel here that multi-stop itinerary is common in the sky, but niche on the rail?

 

[Watershed]

But all air ticket retailers I have used, except those low-cost carriers which have single-only price, do multi-stop journeys. What's the difference between air and train travel here that multi-stop itinerary is common in the sky, but niche on the rail?

Multi-stop airline tickets are a very niche product, which only really exist as a relic of the way that air travel used to be ticketed.

But fundamentally, air travel is just different to rail travel. Just as Hong Kong is different to Hampshire. Both are things which it seems you find difficult to accept.

 

[miklcct]

Multi-stop airline tickets are a very niche product, which only really exist as a relic of the way that air travel used to be ticketed.

But fundamentally, air travel is just different to rail travel. Just as Hong Kong is different to Hampshire. Both are things which it seems you find difficult to accept.

About half of my air travel in my recent years, until the COVID pandemic, was ticketed in multi-city itineraries. In one situation, the primary airport of a country started renovating with flights moved to another airport during my trip, in such case a multi-city planner was the only way to buy a "return" ticket.

 

[najaB]

What's the difference between air and train travel here that multi-stop itinerary is common in the sky, but niche on the rail?

If you mean "multi-stop" in the sense of A to B via C and D, then the total fare is rarely (if ever) the sum of the fares (A-C + C-D +D-B). Such routings are offered either because there is not A-B flight at all, or it is a popular route that is able to command a premium, where C-D and/or D-B are less favourable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you mean "multi-stop" in the sense of A to B via C and D, then the total fare is rarely (if ever) the sum of the fares (A-C + C-D +D-B). Such routings are offered either because there is not A-B flight at all, or it is a popular route that is able to command a premium, where C-D and/or D-B are less favourable.

Rail used to do "closed" multi-stop until quite recently (maybe 10-20 years ago). The fare was the sum of half of the appropriate return fare for each leg. I suspect it was just too complex to move onto online platforms and new automated TISs so got dropped, combined with Advance Singles sort-of offering it on a simpler basis.

Often you can do it anyway if there's an Off Peak without BoJ restrictions or on an Anytime, if Permitted Routes are wide enough. For instance on an Off Peak Euston-Manchester you could if felt like stop off at Birmingham one way or t'other, and if it's still valid via the MML (I can't be bothered checking) you could stop at Nottingham, say.

 

[miklcct]

If you mean "multi-stop" in the sense of A to B via C and D, then the total fare is rarely (if ever) the sum of the fares (A-C + C-D +D-B). Such routings are offered either because there is not A-B flight at all, or it is a popular route that is able to command a premium, where C-D and/or D-B are less favourable.

My sense is like A-B, B-C, C-A, where in airlines all legs are priced as half-returns, or A-B then C-A where B and C are not the same, but a short distance compared to A-B or C-A. also priced as half-returns.

Rail used to do "closed" multi-stop until quite recently (maybe 10-20 years ago). The fare was the sum of half of the appropriate return fare for each leg. I suspect it was just too complex to move onto online platforms and new automated TISs so got dropped, combined with Advance Singles sort-of offering it on a simpler basis.

and people requiring flexibility in triangular journeys in a local region have been penalised because of such change.

 

[Watershed]

where in airlines all legs are priced as half-returns

This is far from universally being the case. Most "full service" airlines price one-way fares significantly higher than returns, on the basis that it's assumed they are a distress purchase.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is far from universally being the case. Most "full service" airlines price one-way fares significantly higher than returns, on the basis that it's assumed they are a distress purchase.

Not universally so now, a lot of them are shifting to the low-cost model, even on long-haul where singles were typically overpriced because the only people who wanted them were people relocating internationally. Though some still do.

European flights are almost all priced as singles now, whatever the airline.

 

[AM9]

Not universally so now, a lot of them are shifting to the low-cost model, even on long-haul where singles were typically overpriced because the only people who wanted them were people relocating internationally. Though some still do.

European flights are almost all priced as singles now, whatever the airline.

Agreed, - I've had low price open jaw bookings using a series of singles arranged by travel agencies, (a decent agent like Trailfinders can usually get better prices than me trying to manipulate web offerings).

 

[najaB]

Not universally so now, a lot of them are shifting to the low-cost model, even on long-haul where singles were typically overpriced because the only people who wanted them were people relocating internationally. Though some still do.

What I have found with several airlines is that they price each half of the return journey separately - giving you the flexibility to find the price/schedule combination that works, but that in most cases the total price is lower than both would be as as a one-way journeys. The one way isn't as much of a premium as it used to be - often times it was over twice as much as the return fare - but still at a premium.

As an example, I was looking at return flights to visit my parents. As a return flight it was priced at £250-ish each way, two one way tickets were over £340 each.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What I have found with several airlines is that they price each half of the return journey separately - giving you the flexibility to find the price/schedule combination that works, but that in most cases the total price is lower than either half would be as as a one-way journey. The one way isn't as much of a premium as it used to be - often times it was over twice as much as the return fare - but still at a premium.

As an example, I was looking at return flights to visit my parents. As a return flight it was priced at £250-ish each way, two one way tickets were over £340 each.

I suppose this is comparable to say Avanti's approach, which is of singles being about 70% of returns, which is more reasonable than the old "10p less" thing and might be genuinely revenue neutral.

 

[najaB]

I suppose this is comparable to say Avanti's approach, which is of singles being about 70% of returns, which is more reasonable than the old "10p less" thing and might be genuinely revenue neutral.

The explanation/excuse given by airlines is that most people want to go somewhere and return so they'll have roughly the same number of bums in seats in each direction. One-way flights leave them with a seat that they're less likely to be able to sell in the other direction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The explanation/excuse given by airlines is that most people want to go somewhere and return so they'll have roughly the same number of bums in seats in each direction. One-way flights leave them with a seat that they're less likely to be able to sell in the other direction.

Of course it's an excuse, because if you have one way passengers in one direction you are likely going to have them the other way too. Plus airlines overbook anyway.

The real reasons are:
1. To be able to overcharge people who need one way flights in an emergency, e.g. because they've missed one, because they (or their insurer) will pay whatever as they have no choice.
2. To be able to overcharge people who are relocating internationally, because if you're doing that there are so many costs that having to pay more for your flight is inconsequential.
3. So you'll go both ways with them and not out with one airline and back with another because it's cheaper.

 

[miklcct]

This is far from universally being the case. Most "full service" airlines price one-way fares significantly higher than returns, on the basis that it's assumed they are a distress purchase.

You have misunderstood my post.

On a triangular journey, each of the leg is priced as half-return.

 

[najaB]

Of course it's an excuse, because if you have one way passengers in one direction you are likely going to have them the other way too. Plus airlines overbook anyway.

I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you! Are you trying to tell me that the airlines lie about this?

The most extreme example I've personally seen was last time I was home was just as the Covid restrictions where starting to bite the second time. I didn't reschedule my return flight in time to meet the rebook requirements so had to pay for a new ticket back to the UK. A return flight was ~$450 but a one-way was well over $1,000!

 

[Cdd89]

1. To be able to overcharge people who need one way flights in an emergency, e.g. because they've missed one, because they (or their insurer) will pay whatever as they have no choice.
2. To be able to overcharge people who are relocating internationally, because if you're doing that there are so many costs that having to pay more for your flight is inconsequential.
3. So you'll go both ways with them and not out with one airline and back with another because it's cheaper.

I’m not sure about reasons 2 and 3.

(2) are so rare as to be not worth worrying about, and (3) will lose an airline as much business as it gains.

I think the sole reason is that, if single pricing were allowed, it would mean airlines couldn’t enforce Saturday Night Stay requirements, which allow them to segment between leisure and business travellers.

 

[najaB]

I think the sole reason is that, if single pricing were allowed, it would mean airlines couldn’t enforce Saturday Night Stay requirements, which allow them to segment between leisure and business travellers.

Related to this, my company's travel policy actually encourages people to stay an extra night/over the weekend if travelling on the Sunday/Monday is sufficiently cheaper. I've taken advantage of that a couple of times to have a 'free' weekend break on the company dime.