Unpublished connections

LoneStarMike

Advanced
Aug 19, 2002
141
1
AUS
Visit site
I asked this question on another board and it generated some good discussion, so I''ll ask it here.

Why are some very reasonable one-stop connections not shown as published service?

Here''s an example:

When you look at AUS - LAS flights, the last published flight of the day, Flight 902 leaves at 5:10 p.m. and stops in ELP and ABQ before arriving in LAS at 8:00 p.m. Total elapsed time is 4 hours 50 minutes
If you want to leave after 5:10p.m. you''re out of luck.

But, if you bought two separate tickets, you could leave AUS at 7:55p.m. on Flight 1959 and fly to HOU, arriving at 8:40 p.m., have a 55 minute layover and depart on Flight 1191 at 9:35 p.m. and arrive in LAS 10:45 p.m.

Total elapsed time 4 hours 50 minutes- same as the last published flight with a departure that''s 2 hours 45 minutes later providing the customer another option and allowing Southwest to advertise another frequency in the AUS-LAS city-pair.

So why wouldn''t Southwest want to show this as a published connection? Especially since there''s no alternative to get to LAS on Southwest that time of day?

Do they not want you flying east only to have to backtrack and fly west? They have published service between AMA and LBB via DAL, so I don''t think that would be the case.

Besides, flying to HOU first is not that far out of the way. Folks in AUS flying Continental to the West Coast do it every day.

Is it because they don''t want to appear to be competing with Continental too much?

Did the computer just miss it as a valid connection?

I''m not really complaining, I was just curious what the rationale is for deciding whether or not a connection will be listed as published service.

I know they don''t have published connections between DAL and cities outside the Wright/Shelby Amendment, even though some are possible, but that wouldn''t apply to my AUS-LAS example.

LoneStarMike
 
Are these connections in Southwest''s CRS or as displayed through the website?

I''ve always noticed that the connections are a bit quirky - probably a derivative of the fact that you can connect though cities other than what traditionalists would call "hubs".

One thing that I have noticed is that non-airline websites (i.e. Travelocity) will publish routes that apparently Southwest would never do. A couple years ago, I looked at fares to MAF. Travelocity gave me a DOUBLE connection - something that Southwest is not supposed to do.
 
I was told, not sure how accurate it is, but the DOT requires airlines to provide options of only the most direct routes that is available in their system to passengers. Any airline has 1000''s of routing options between different cities and the passengers would be blown away with options if every connection was made available to them. Hub and Spoke carriers will have quite a few flights that doubleback, but the point to point carriers have very limited number of double back flights as they can go straight to the destination. I will see if the person who told me this can provide any DOT info to support it - until then it can be considered a theory.

With that being said, whenever you use the airlines website it will provide you with only the standard routing for flights. Other travel websites do not look for standard routings, they look for city pairs and because of that you will find off the wall routings to get you from point A to point B along with multiple connections or stops - most ask you how many connections or stops you are willing to make.

Wayne
HOU
 
It could have to do with the fact of going East to go West. I noticed that only in very selected markets does SWA let you fly past the destination to get their, mostly involving BWI with service to BUF and ALB. Just my spin on the topic.
 
----------------
On 5/5/2003 10:24:59 PM LoneStarMike wrote:

I asked this question on another board and it generated some good discussion, so I''ll ask it here.

Why are some very reasonable one-stop connections not shown as published service?

Here''s an example:

When you look at AUS - LAS flights, the last published flight of the day, Flight 902 leaves at 5:10 p.m. and stops in ELP and ABQ before arriving in LAS at 8:00 p.m. Total elapsed time is 4 hours 50 minutes
If you want to leave after 5:10p.m. you''re out of luck.

But, if you bought two separate tickets, you could leave AUS at 7:55p.m. on Flight 1959 and fly to HOU, arriving at 8:40 p.m., have a 55 minute layover and depart on Flight 1191 at 9:35 p.m. and arrive in LAS 10:45 p.m.

Total elapsed time 4 hours 50 minutes- same as the last published flight with a departure that''s 2 hours 45 minutes later providing the customer another option and allowing Southwest to advertise another frequency in the AUS-LAS city-pair.

So why wouldn''t Southwest want to show this as a published connection? Especially since there''s no alternative to get to LAS on Southwest that time of day?

Do they not want you flying east only to have to backtrack and fly west? They have published service between AMA and LBB via DAL, so I don''t think that would be the case.

Besides, flying to HOU first is not that far out of the way. Folks in AUS flying Continental to the West Coast do it every day.

Is it because they don''t want to appear to be competing with Continental too much?

Did the computer just miss it as a valid connection?

I''m not really complaining, I was just curious what the rationale is for deciding whether or not a connection will be listed as published service.

I know they don''t have published connections between DAL and cities outside the Wright/Shelby Amendment, even though some are possible, but that wouldn''t apply to my AUS-LAS example.

LoneStarMike

----------------​


I believe the reason may be do to revenue. The AUS HOU flight may be full of full fare passengers. If they sold the flight AUS HOU LAS that may casue them to sell the seat at a lower fare. EX. AUS-HOU 91.00 each way, but to LAS 278.00 on a discount. So now you get a lower yield per seat mile.

Just a thought.
 
----------------
On 5/7/2003 4:42:35 AM coolflyingfool wrote:

It could have to do with the fact of going East to go West. I noticed that only in very selected markets does SWA let you fly past the destination to get their, mostly involving BWI with service to BUF and ALB. Just my spin on the topic.

----------------​

They offer "backhaul" connections in Texas as well: AMA-ELP or AMA-MAF with a DAL connection, for example. Even AMA-LBB via DAL! Which has got to be quicker to just set the cruise at 75 or 80 and head the 140 or so miles down Interstate 27...