Connecting flights can cut airfare costs
By Gary Stoller
USA Today
| |||
 |
|
||
With airfares breaking records, the fastest way to fly to your destination often isn't the cheapest.
Consider this: A family of four flying from Boston to Phoenix next week may save more than $1,200 round trip by taking a connecting flight rather than a non-stop.
The cheapest one-stop round-trip ticket, via Cleveland, cost $346 on Continental Airlines recently, compared with $649 for the cheapest non-stop flight on US Airways. That's a $303 per-person savings for a one-stop itinerary that's scheduled to take less than two hours longer each way than a non-stop flight.
Connections increase travel time and might add to the stress of a trip, but on routes between big cities, they can provide substantial savings, according to a study for USA Today by www.FareCompare.com.
"Non-stop flights garner a premium price in most city pairs," says Rick Seaney, CEO of FareCompare.com, which tracks airfares for consumers. "Flexible passengers with a choice of non-stop or a connection can save a bundle of money by booking a connecting flight."
Airlines have charged more for non-stop flights for many years, but the price differences have become easy for consumers to compare with the help of sophisticated search engines that can sort cheaper connecting fares at travel Web sites.
The technology is likely to be a boon for travelers in the months ahead. Seeking to cut costs and combat record jet fuel prices, airlines are eliminating or reducing the number of non-stop flights. That's putting more fliers on connecting flights.
"With huge domestic capacity cuts kicking in this month, we will see airlines pulling out of markets and leaving only one dominant non-stop player," says Seaney. "That means price-sensitive travelers will be well-served by considering connecting flights."
TRACKING FARES
At USA Today's request, FareCompare.com tracked the cheapest round-trip coach fares for non-stop and one-stop connecting flights on 641 of the most-traveled domestic routes. The fares, applicable on Aug. 19 for travel on Sept. 9, did not include those of Southwest Airlines, which is not listed in all computer reservations systems.
One-stop fares were cheaper on two-thirds of the routes. Connecting flights saved $50 or more on 28 percent of the routes and $100 or more on 16 percent.
The biggest fare difference — $565 — was for round-trip flights between Charlotte and Fort Myers, Fla. The cheapest one-stop tickets on that route cost $244 on Northwest Airlines, or $245 on AirTran. US Airways had the cheapest non-stop fare — $809.
Thus, a family of four could have saved more than $2,200 by flying on a one-stop itinerary.
Connecting fares can be a great bargain, but ticket prices can change daily. On Aug. 22, US Airways had a sale, dropping its cheapest, non-stop Charlotte-Fort Myers ticket to $280.
The amount of time a connection adds to a trip may influence a flier's decision. The non-stop Charlotte-Fort Myers flight had a scheduled one-way time of one hour and 56 minutes. The times of the two connecting flights, plus the layovers in between, were three hours and 29 minutes for the AirTran itinerary and seven hours and 18 minutes on Northwest.
Besides adding to travel time, connecting flights increase the chance of flight delays, cancellations and lost luggage. There's also more stress, fliers say, because more time is spent in crowded planes and airports.
ALLURING SAVINGS
Still, the savings offered by many connecting flights is quite alluring. AirTran's one-stop round-trip flights between Charlotte and Tampa via Atlanta, for example, add less than two hours each way over US Airways' non-stop flight. But, on Aug. 19, the savings for a flight on Sept. 9 was $467 per ticket.
Non-stop flights from a hub often have "a premium price compared to a connecting itinerary," says Continental Airlines spokesman Dave Messing.
"The reason for that is plain supply-and-demand economics," he says. "At any particular departure time, there are comparatively few seats available on non-stop flights compared to thousands of seats available on a range of connecting itineraries."
Bill Schilling of Oxford, Ohio, says he almost always books connecting flights to save money. Last week, he saved "several hundred dollars" by driving two hours to Indianapolis to catch a Delta Air Lines flight to Salt Lake City via Atlanta.
Schilling, the executive director for a national fraternity, says he has cut airfare costs by taking connecting flights on up to 10 trips since the beginning of last year.
FINDING FLIGHTS
USA Today's study points to ways that travelers can find connecting flights that will save money:
For example, the cheapest one-stop round-trip fare between Denver and Pittsburgh via Atlanta saved $447 over the cheapest non-stop fare. More than $395 could be saved by flying one-stops on routes between Seattle and Washington; Memphis and Phoenix; and Philadelphia and San Diego.
Flying one-way between New York and San Francisco, Northwest's one-stop itinerary via Minneapolis-St. Paul took nearly eight hours and cost $266 round trip. AirTran's one-stop itinerary via Milwaukee was about a half hour quicker and cost $323. Virgin America charged $379 for the cheapest non-stop flight, which took six hours and 15 minutes.
Flying one-way between Cincinnati and San Antonio, Continental Airlines had the fastest one-stop itinerary: four hours and 19 minutes via Houston. But the round-trip fare of $627 was higher than Delta Air Lines' $499 non-stop fare.
Northwest's one-stop itinerary via Detroit took the most time — 5 1/2 hours — but it was the cheapest: $199 round trip.
NOT ALWAYS CHEAPER
Connecting flights aren't always cheaper. A third of the connecting flights in USA Today's study offered no savings over non-stops. Between Boston and Indianapolis, for example, AirTran's one-stop, round-trip ticket cost $286 in FareCompare's survey — 67 cents more than US Airways' non-stop price.
A growing number of companies are recognizing the savings that connecting flights can offer, and some are establishing travel policies aimed at putting more employees on these flights.
Ken Morrison, an aerospace engineer in Manassas, Va., says his company sometimes points its traveling employees to connecting flights.
"If you can get to your destination within two hours of the non-stop, and there is a considerable price differential," he says, "then you may be asked to take the connecting flights."
Many companies require employees "to take the lowest logical fare" but don't want them on a connecting flight that adds more than two hours of travel time, says Susan Gurley, executive director of the Association of Corporate Travel Executives. The group represents 2,500 travel managers and suppliers.
Increasing the number of connecting flights to save money "can be highly counterproductive," Gurley says. There's a greater chance of flight cancellations and delays, and, "Travel managers agree that what you could save on airfares, you lose in productivity waiting in airports."
Kevin Maguire, president of the National Business Travel Association, says some companies "steer employees to the lowest logical non-stop fare" and give rewards to employees who select cheaper connecting flights. Some other companies "push employees to the lowest fare, including both non-stop and connecting options," but allow employees, with company approval, to choose a more expensive flight.
The savings offered by connecting flights means little to Jerry Green, a cargo security consultant in Maryville, Tenn., who takes more than 140 business trips each year.
Green says he stopped taking connecting flights three years ago, and he keeps track of his flights' on-time performance. Since abandoning connections, his flights' on-time rate has improved from 71 percent to 82 percent, he says.
"Delays have become so prevalent that I look at a connection as doubling the chance of a big delay," Green says. "I am flying on more non-stop flights than ever, regardless of price."
