Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Iata Fare Construction Simplification  
User currently offlinePA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 23
Posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20358 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

According to circular I just saw, IATA is simplifying international fare construction effective 15Jan.

The biggest change will be to do away with ISI codes and restrictions. Also being dropped is the COM check. Instead, HIP checks will be done for all transactions. DMC checks will apply only to travel to/from/via Japan, and only when the fare is not issued in country of commencement of travel.

Here is the summary of principle changes:
Reso 012 - ISI SITI/SOTI/SITO/SOTO: deleted
Reso 017b - COM check: deleted
Reso 017b - CTM check for special fares: Sectors that do not qualify for HIP checks will not qualify for CTM check.
Reso 017c - HIP check on Normal Fares will apply from:
1) any fare component origin to each intermediate stopover point
2) from each intermediate stopover to another
3) from each intermediate stopover to the destination
Res 017f - Rerouting of totally unused tickets. Such tickets may be reissued based on latest fares and IROE effective at the time of reassessment. No initial refund required.

Also new policy eff 01Jan 2005 (SGA)
Where no changes have been made to the original ticket and the operating carrier as a code share agreement with the original marketing carrier, the operating carrier may uplift a ticket closed to the marketing carrer without endorsement.

Per usual, the USA DOT order 99-7-8 still applies: "Any carrier or travel agent may depart from the provisions of IATA fare construction rules, including those in the Resolution 017 series, where a different methodology would produce a lower constructed fare."

Ya gotta love 'em!



It's been swell, but the swelling has gone down.
25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCtbarnes From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20343 times:

So, what does this mean in English?  Confused

Charles, SJ



The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20333 times:

Well... essentially, they make my life a bit easier...  Big thumbs up

There are a few things I won't have to look out for any more, and a lot of things that the CRSs won't have to do any more... and there are some new loopholes for - legally - getting cheaper fares...

By the way - here's the whole information provided by IATA... though I suspect that a lot of members won't really be able to get too much out of this...

Summary:
http://www.iata.org/NR/ContentConnector/CS2000/Siteinterface/sites/whatwedo/tariffs/file/Summary_MV.pdf

Additional Summary:
http://www.iata.org/NR/ContentConnector/CS2000/Siteinterface/sites/whatwedo/tariffs/file/ISI_for_BSP.pdf

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlinePA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20331 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A direct quote from IATA:

"The changes to be implemented are the result of IATA's intent to simplify fare construction and pricing policy to better accommodate the distribution of international iarline tickets via the Internet and to remove those fare calculation procedures which are obstacles to teh fast-growing e-commerce intiatives of IATA member carriers.

The changes repsond to and facilitate an increasingly mature online marketplace, one dominated by electronic ticketing, off-site call centres, and remote automated ticketing robotics."


I think everyone agrees that fares and fare rules have always been a byzantine concoction, somewhat closely related to alchemy! IATA is finally getting rid of archaic rules that have been in place for many years to prevent undercutting of fares from one market-place to another.

To quote Martha... It's a good thing.



It's been swell, but the swelling has gone down.
User currently offlineCtbarnes From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20301 times:

By the way - here's the whole information provided by IATA... though I suspect that a lot of members won't really be able to get too much out of this...

Yeeecch! I'm sorry I asked!

Charles, SJ



The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 5, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 20281 times:

Ctbarnes, don't get me wrong - I wasn't implying that you would not be able to understand it - in fact, I wasn't specifically aiming that comment at you at all.

The point is, I work in an area where these rules are essentially used every day, again and again - and of my 5 colleagues, two read through these two PDF files and looked at me and said: so what does that mean?

What I'm saying is that some people who use these things every day don't even understand what these changes imply - and it's not going to be easier for those who don't use them every day... or at all...

But just to clarify some of the points...

Reso 012 - ISI SITI/SOTI/SITO/SOTO: deleted
On each ticket, and in every fare calculation, you'll find one of these ISIs (International Sales Indicators): they're divided into "Sale" and "Ticketing", both followed by either an "I" for "Inside the Country of Fare Origin" or "O" for "Outside the Country of Fare Origin" - so "SITI" means "Sold inside the country of fare origin, ticketed inside the country of fare origin", while "SOTO" means "Sold and ticketed outside the country of fare origin"...

These two are the most common ones - a SITI is, for example, a ticket you buy within the US for travel within the US, while a SOTO would be ticket you buy (and get ticketed) in the US for travel commencing, for example, in Germany.

A "SOTI" would be a ticket commencing in, to stay with that example, Germany that you buy in the US but get ticketed here in Germany, while a "SITO" is a ticket that you buy here in Germany (for travel commencing in Germany), but - for whatever reason - you get it issued in the US...

Complicated? Yes... because each one of these four indicators could influence the fare you paid, or the rules applicable to your ticket - even though the fare itself would stay the same.

And that's why this part is being thrown out the window. The only thing that remains as indicator is the "“place where traffic document is issued" - in other words, the question of "where was it sold" is gone.


Reso 017b - COM check: deleted
The "Country of Origin Minimum" was a rule that, under specific (sorry, cannot even produce an example right now), forced a fare to be raised to a higher fare if travel commenced in a specific country...

Reso 017b - CTM check for special fares: Sectors that do not qualify for HIP checks will not qualify for CTM check.
Reso 017c - HIP check on Normal Fares will apply from:
1) any fare component origin to each intermediate stopover point
2) from each intermediate stopover to another
3) from each intermediate stopover to the destination

To summarise this - a "HIP check" is a check for a "Higher Intermediate Point". Say, you've got a ticket for a flight from LAX via JFK and LHR to FRA - normally, you'd think that you've got to pay for the fare from LAX to FRA, right? Wrong - at least if the fare from LAX to LHR is higher - that would be your "HIP": the fare from LAX to FRA would be raised to the LAX-LHR level... or, if JFK-LHR were even higher, then the fare would get raised to that level. Some of these checks (for example checks for ticketed transfer, but not stopover, points) now don't have to be made, and fares will, less frequently, be raised to higher levels.

Res 017f - Rerouting of totally unused tickets. Such tickets may be reissued based on latest fares and IROE effective at the time of reassessment. No initial refund required.
If a passenger requested a rerouting of his flight before beginning his journey, what we had to do so far was refund the original ticket and issue a new one - but refund-fees could, often enough, be higher than reissue-fees... so what we can do from now on is reissue the ticket, calculating any additional collection that might me required if the new itinerary is more expensive, but we won't have to charge the refund fee (at least this is how I understand this change - although I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this change is meant differently from how I understand it).


Once again, sorry for my mis-understandable comment earlier... I hope I've made some of these changes a bit more understandable this way...

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineCtbarnes From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 50
Reply 6, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 20270 times:

Thanks Frank. I was actually commenting on the complexity of the rules rather than your statement. Sorry for the confusion.

I'm also grateful for your explanation. It really was a help.

Alles Gute!

Charles



The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
User currently offlineBaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 7, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 20258 times:

PA110,
Since I happen to be an IATA certified tariff expert, let me be the first to fire back the questions: (For the rest of you, please be patient. If not, go to the bottom of this post and you will understand why I am asking these questions and making these comments. Hopefully, then you'll understand a little better).

RE: SITI/SOTO/SITO/SOTI - THANK GOD!!! Now we only have to know ONE set of rules instead of four! Note: For those of you who are not tariff experts:

SI=Sold Inside, SO=Sold Outside, TI=Ticketed Inside, TO=Ticketed Outside
Country of Origin of Travel.

This means that for each type of ticket, there is a set of fare construction rules that must be followed and each step in the fare calculation process has a rule variance. If IATA is getting rid of this nonsense, then this is a huge simplification of the process, since it will only be necessary to know one set of construction rules.

RE: RESO 17b - I presume you are referring to what we used to call backhaul. (God, I think I'm showing my age!! Yes, I am old enough to know what FCUs are.....and folks, it ISN'T what you think it is).

RE: HIP check (I have to ask this question first before I get into the minimum fare checks questions: Please clarify this for me: On Normal Fare HIP Checks:
a) origin to "stopover" not "ticketed" point
b) from "stopover" point to "stopover" point in the direction of travel
c) from "stopover" to destination.
the important point being the distinction between stopover and ticketed point. This is a radical change in all parts of the world except ex USA, since all HIP points for normal fares ex USA are calculated based on 'stopover' points and have been for a number of years.

CTM Checks - Normal Fares: (Circle Trip Minimum fare check) You don't state any chances for normal fares; however, you do for special fares. Since the rules for calculating HIP points on special fares uses the same methodology as the normal fare CTM construction rules, can we assume that CTM construction rules have changed also?

Also, since the CTM check used to be stated as the highest fare between any two points on the circle, what we are now saying (if I understand correctly) is that the CTM check would be between any two "stopover" points in the direction of travel. Thoughts?

Reissues and Reroutes:

RE:RESO 17f- Voluntary Reissue of wholly unused tickets. Reissue is based on new fare and new ROE. I have really never reissued a wholly unused ticket and refunded it for a new ticket unless the point of origin changes and the itinerary is completely different. However, if the point of origin and destination remain the same and I am making routing changes to the itinerary, I have always reissued the ticket from point of origin with the new fare, new ROE, new BBR (if issued SOTO)...and charged the difference in local currency. If I am taking in a ticket issued in Italy and reissuing the entire ticket in USD, then I would simply recalculate the fare in NUC, subtract the amount in NUC from the old ticket, arrive at the amount in EUR at the current ROE and then collect the difference in USD at today's BBR. I'm not sure I see what is different.

Note: This is only for VOLUNTARY reroutings. If this were an involutary rerouting and I am at the airport, then I am going to FIM them off to ourselves via a different routing, or over another carrier (with whom we have a favorable FIM agreement). I would never take the time to reissue a ticket like that. It would take too much time and the priority at the airport is to process the passengers and get them out of town on time.

DMC (Directional Minimum Checks) - GONE!!! Finally. Expect for the poor schmo going to/from Japan who has his ticket issued outside Japan. Does the DMC check still only apply to normal fares and EE type special fares (mileage special fares that permit stops)? Also, does the stupid DMC rule still exist that if the LON-TYO J fare is NUC2500 and the TYO-LON J fare is NUC3500, then if you are going one way to Tokyo, the fare has to be raised to the TYO-LON level? This is the way I interpret what you are saying. Note: This rule does not apply to tickets issued within the USA.

To Summarize:
The advantages of these fare rules to the average consumer:
a) One set of fare construction rules worldwide (except in USA, where we have mostly accepted the SITI and SOTO rules)

b) Higher Intermediate Points (HIP) checks are based on stopovers - not ticketed points, e.g: Routing: SFO-X/LON-PAR. Fares: SFO-LON J USD4000.00, SFO-PAR USD3000.00. Since passenger is not stopping in LON, fare is USD3000.00.

c) If passenger were to stop in LON, fare would be USD4000.00, instead of USD5000.00 (SFOLON-SFOPAR = DSFOLON + SFOLON (HIP))...elimination of COM fare check?

d) Circle Trip Minimum fare check applies to normal/special fares with mileage and stopover provisions and is based on "stopover" points and not ticketed points and based on fares in the direction of travel...not "between" points.

e.g. Routing: SFO-LAX-LON-PAR-SFO J Class. All fares One way: SFO-LON-USD4000.00. SFO-PAR USD3000. LAX-LON USD4500.00. LAX-PAR USD3500. Highest fare one way, LAX-LON USD4500.00 X 2 =USD9000.00 is minimum fare (Circle Trip Minimum)

IF passenger connecting in LAX and not stopping, then highest one way fare is SFO-LON USD4000.00 X 2 = USD8000 minimum fare. So, SFOPAR USD6000.00 plus USD2000 DSFOLONSFOPAR, total fare USD8000.00.

e) Lastly, DMC Check only applies to tickets issued to/from Japan, whichever direction produces the highest fare is the fare that is used for the oneway or round trip journey, no matter where the passenger originates.
EXCEPTION: If tickets are issued in USA.

Notes: The USA has not had to follow a lot of these cumbersome rules for the past 20 years. The DOT ruled that we could use whatever fare calculation rule necessary to produce the lowest fare. Ah, another reason why you need a travel agent schooled in international pricing. How do you know the airline will calculate the fare? Especially one that is foreign based? There are VERY few travel agents who know the rules, but if you find one, they are GOLDEN.
We can apply rules to pricing which are completely legitimate but produce a lower fare than the airline will produce.

In addition, do not trust the airline computer systems. They are only as good as the programmmers. While I will admit the systems are getting better, they are still not perfect and on some occassions (not as many as before) I can still generate a lower price than the computer for the same itinerary.

So, PA110, what do you think. Am I getting this right, or am I just getting senile? In my previous posts, I have said I've been around the block a few times...this was one of them.  Smile

To those out there who think we have completely gone MAD, know this, PA110 knows how to play the game. Anyone who has this kind of intimate knowledge of the IATA pricing rules and the DOT ruling that allows us in the USA to get around those rules certainly knows his stuff....and he is certainly more up on it than I am...hence my questions. I am interested, because I do get involved with some complex international journeys and a lot of what I do involves issuance of tickets outside of the USA to gain a fare advantage over sometimes overly priced tickets (especially in F and J class) from the USA to points abroad, especially in Europe.

PA110, I would appreciate your thoughts and thanks again for bringing this to our attention. I'll bet not many understand it...but hopefully, by the time this thread really gets going, we will have educated a few people on the subject...and congrats for being the FIRST on my respected users list.

baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlinePA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 23
Reply 8, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 20219 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

BAW716,
Thanks for the compliments. Being ex-airline, I was dutifully schooled in the byzantine rules of fare construction, and to date myself, I also worked with FCU's. You can always tell an old time rate agent - just mention Pt. Harcourt, Nigeria! NUC's became the greatest thing since sliced bread!

Your interpretation of the rules seems right on the money, although I'm skimming because like pretty much everyone else out there, including those of us who work with the stuff... it can be absolutely mind numbing at times.

Though not as ground breaking as NUC's, these rules will really help simplify the pricing for complex constructed itineraries.



It's been swell, but the swelling has gone down.
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 9, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 20181 times:

Baw716, PA110 - the mentioning of FCUs and NUCs do bring back some memories... does EDELBOM also ring a bell for the both of you?

We'll be directly exposed to the changes from Saturday on, because we're directly bound by IATA regulations (nothing like the DOT ruling you had "inbetween")... but believe me - when I go through the Phase-4 TSTs in Sabre that were sent in by some of out agencies for ticketing (things like airpasses), I sometimes get nightmares - the errors made start with the most simple fact: there are no amounts after the decimal if quoting in Euro - you round the fare... 95% of the manually built fares I get have amounts like EUR 493.56 in the TOTAL column... and, believe me, often enough it only goes downhill from there.

I'm really waiting to see how well the computer systems will adapt to these changes - I don't really expect too many problems with AMA, Galileo, Worldspan and Sabre, but if I start thinking about all the hardware and software that we have attached to the CRSs these days...

I'd say that these changes really are a good start... let's wait and see if IATA manages some more streamlining of rules...

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineBaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 10, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 20170 times:

Frank and PA110,
I'll have multi GDS access at my desktop, so I will plug in a few itineraries and see what Sabre, Galileo, Worldspan and Amadeus pump out of their pricing systems.

I guarantee that it NOT be the same fare!

Ah, I do remember those days....especially the DPS ficticious break for circle pacific trips...EBOMDEL is another one that I've come across from time to time.
Now, a trivia question for you pricing guys.

How do you get around a CTM minimum on LON in this situation AND produce a lower fare? Let's have a little fun (for a change...these forums get so bloody serious at times!!!)

SFO-PAR-ROM-LON-FRA-SFO (J class)

Fares:
SFOPAR USD/NUC3140
SFOROM USD/NUC3245
SFOLON USD/NUC4140
SFOFRA USD/NUC3195
PARSFO-NUC3140
ROMSFO-NUC3245
LONSFO-NUC4140
FRASFO-NUC3195
PARROM NUC 250
PARLON-NUC 350
PARFRA-NUC 250
ROMLON-NUC 395
ROMFRA-NUC 375
LONFRA-NUC 350

Assume stopovers all points. There is more than one answer...but the LOWEST fare in NUC, please...and how you got to the answer! (before we get into ROE and BBR...lets keep it simple). All LEGAL fare construction techniques are OK. Lets assume new rules eff Jan 15. I think for the purposes of this discussion, we have explained it well enough...we understand it and if anyone has questions, they can ask.

If anyone else cares to take a stab at this, please, by all means, let's have a little fun with this. I will post my answer at 0800z Friday, Jan 14.

Good luck!
baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 11, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 20162 times:

Baw716, I printed your trivia question out, and I'll see what I can find...  Big grin ... I hope my brain hasn't become too soft from all this computer based fare calculating...


Anyhow - how about we settle on a handfull of itineraries that we'll simply price on both sides of the Atlantic, just to see what the difference in fares is between today and Monday, after the changes are in effect? I'd say that we should have at least one itinerary beginning in the US, one in Europe and one somewhere else, so that we go through all types of possible rules that won't be relevant next week.

Interested?

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineBaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 12, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 20150 times:

Frank,
You send me one, I'll send you one, and let's see if we come up with the same answer...

Mine for you: Use the above example, except use real fares, calculate it for purchase in the UK at tomorrow's bank rate. It shouldn't take more than 15-20 minutes at the most.

Let me know if that works for you....send me one and I'll price it and we'll compare. Make it a normal fare, so we can apply the rules.



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineNumberTwelve From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 20133 times:

ChBarnes: "So, what does this mean in English? "

That's Travelagentish mixed with IATA accent and BSP slang  Wink/being sarcastic

I don't care about HIPs, SOTO, SITI or SOTI (when would I use SOTI in a travel agency anyway?????) , my favorite word was

BACK HAUL CHECK

I love that word, always got explained what it means but still don't know the meaning for it.




signature censored by admin - so check my profile
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined exactly 10 years ago today! , 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 14, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 20088 times:

This is huge! This is not only much more efficient, but will increase competition. The benefits to consumers cannot be overstated.

User currently offlineRjnut From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1218 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 20069 times:

i sometimes would have to bring our travelers back from MIddel East on a one-way ticket from , say, DXB to MCI and i would tell them never to transit LHR or FRA due to high HIP rates, rather I would have them come thru FCO or MXP, for exmaple.


I am assuming , now I will be able to do the former without much penalty of HIP?


User currently offlinePA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 23
Reply 16, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 20039 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Rjnut,
Precisely! These changes mean that HIPS will only be done at stopover points, not ticketed points. As long ahs your travelers do not stop at LHR or FRA voluntarily for more than 24 hours, you will no longer have to perform a HIP check.




It's been swell, but the swelling has gone down.
User currently offlinePA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 23
Reply 17, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 20032 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

BAW716,
I will print out your challenge and work on it when I have some free time. I'm absolutely slammed right now. Work is so busy, I an only grab a second here and there just to skim the forums and slip in a response when I can. I will be off on vacation next week (a week in Kauai - with no internet access!!!).



It's been swell, but the swelling has gone down.
User currently offlinePA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 20027 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

BAW716,
I couldn't resist... If we're doing just all in NUC's without ROE and BBR's, least expensive would be:

SFO PAR ROM 3245.00 LON 395.00 FRA 350.00 SFO 3195.00 NUC7185.00END

If incorrect, blame being busy, rushed, addled, senile (your pick).



It's been swell, but the swelling has gone down.
User currently offlineBaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 19983 times:

PA110,
Right idea. Wrong execution.

Here's why:
The new CTM rule states that the CTM check has to be taken out on any stopover point along the route. Even though you break out PARLONROM on side trip, because you have done it on the same ticket, it is still subject to the minimum fare check. So, the correct fare calculation based on your example would be:

SFO PAR ROM M3295.00 LON 395.00 FRA 350.00 SFO M3195.00 PLUS SFOLON 1095.00 NUC8280.00END.

In order to achieve what you want to do, you have to pull LON completely out of the ticket. e.g.

SFO PAR ROM M3295.00 /- FRA SFO M3195.00 NUC6490.00END
ROM LON 395.00 FRA 375.00 NUC770.00END

NOW...WHEN YOU ADD THE ROE TO THE MIX:
ROM LON 395.00 FRA 375.00 NUC770.00END ROE0.749947
EUR577.459-->EUR578.50
USD757.00 BBR 1.308558

TKT 1 - USD6490.00
TKT 2 - USD 757.00
TOTAL USD7247.00

Or...take it one step further:

TKT 1- USD3295
TKT 2- USD 757
TKT 3- ?? USD3135.00
FRA SFO M3195.00NUC3195.00ROE0.749947
EUR2396.08-->EUR2396.10
USD3135.41....USD3135.00

GTTL - USD7187.00.

When we look at this strictly in NUC, then the answer would have been NUC7260. However, there is still a currency advantage to be gained over the USD when using EUR, assuming the NUC values are the same...which in some cases they are not (they are in this example).

So, breaking out the side trip is the right answer. You just have to break it completely out of the ticket. Additionally, when you factor in the ROE/BBR, you get an additional break because the BBR has still not overcome the current ROE for the EUR. At the end of the day, breaking out a third ticket would have reduced the fare another USD60.00. Since the cost of issuing a third e-ticket is negligable, then the additional 5 minutes to break out the last ticket would make good sense.

The point to be made to those who are not familiar with international pricing: Even though a lot of the quirks in the system have been taken out, some to eliminate cheating (fictious points...point beyonds). Some to simplify the process. If we had to do the HIP check on every single ticketed point in the itinerary (which had to be done outside of the USA until now...with some exceptions), this would be extremely time consuming...even for those who know how to do this. The computer programming has gotten very good, especially in the last 3-4 years. However, it still takes the creativity of the human mind to produce a result that generates a lower price. This is why international pricing is an art, not a science.

With this said, we must be mindful in our quest for the lowest fare that we do not create problems for our customer in the process. Multiple tickets creates baggage issues, since the contract of carriage only covers the checking of baggage from origin to destination on the ticket. If a bag is checked to a destination other than that on the ticket at the request of the passenger, then the delivering airline has NO liability for loss or damage of the bag because of the improper checking of the bag. Many check in agents are not aware of the contractural issues involved, they see you are going to Rome, they check your bag to Rome. They don't notice that there are two tickets.

So in closing, everything is a balancing act. Balance arriving at the lowest possible fare calculation for the passenger that does not put them at undue risk. If the passenger is willing to accept that risk (and sign a waiver so indicating, then splitting up the ticket is perfectly legal and appropriate.
The key is not making the mistake of NOT telling the customer what they are in for if they lose a bag.

and so it goes...
baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineAerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7184 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 19954 times:

That takes me back to IATA special fares & mileage training....Had 6h exam, had to get 100%...those were the days.
On quick scan of the points it looks all beneficial and timesaving to me.

btw....the best post topic in civil aviation for ages!!


User currently offlinePA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 23
Reply 21, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 19923 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Baw716,
I see where I went wrong. I was thrown off by the wording of Reso 17b section C:

2)a) the applicable fare for a circle trip (excluding any side trip which has been charged as a separate pricing unit) shall not be less than the direct route normal or special round trip fare, as appropriate, for the highest rated pair of points appliable to the class of service used from point of origin to any stopover point on the route of travel.

Although a separate pricing unit, the ROM-LHR-FRA sectors do not qualify as a side-trip, since ROM and FRA are part of the origin to destination construction.

Like I originally said... if I get it wrong, attribute it to being addled, senile, etc...

It just goes to show however that the rules simplification, as far as it goes, still does not address breaking sectors off on separate tickets. If IATA really wanted to simplify things, they would simply do away with mileage fares and charge everything point-to-point. There would be no way to manipulate the system other than currency (which applies universally across all industries, not just the airline business).

[Edited 2005-01-13 01:27:53]


It's been swell, but the swelling has gone down.
User currently offlineRjnut From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1218 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19912 times:

Oh please,PA110, dont suggest eliminating mileage fares...sometimes they work out very "Cool' for many itinernaries and travel patterns.. They really are a bargain if you take out hips and ctms and the like..especially to more remote areas of the world that are not served by legacy "alliance partners" and where interlining is a way of life!

User currently offlineBaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 23, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 19869 times:

PA110,
I'm not sure I agree with doing away with mileage based fares. If we look at where mileage based fares apply, the vast majority of them are full Y, J and F. Of course, you will see the occasional EE or APEX fare which is mileage based, but those are few and far between.

Since those passengers are paying a rather substantial amount of money for traveling (to make multiple stops, flexibility, premium cabins, etc.), they should be entitled to get as much advantage for their travel dollar as possible. If you look at most mileage fares, the unit revenue runs between $0.75 and $1.00 per mile. The only thing that mileage fares allow passengers to do is make stopovers and have the flexibility of changing their tickets. If we removed the mileage benefit to these fares and made them simply point to point, the price point for these fares would become so ridiculously high that it would be beyond the reach of most people for whom these fares were intended...the full fare paying passenger.

We like those people. We want more of them. If we have to work a little harder to get them by doing a little math, well, I am willing to bear that cross.

BTW, don't sweat the miss on the side trip. When I first started in tariffs (when I was a kid, literally), I spent hours just reading the tariff....I was that interested. Over the years, it became a little scary how much I remembered. There has been more than one case over the years when an airline rate desk has called me for counsel on a rule interpretation. Of course, when you work with tariff people at different airlines, you kind of get known around the block.

You are neither addled or senile. You get a hell of a lot of credit for knowing the rules...its a lot more than I can say for a lot of airline and travel agency personnel.

Cheers,
baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 24, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 19874 times:

Ok... so I can access a.net from work after all...  Big thumbs up

Baw716, here's the itinerary I used:
 1 AF  83C 01FEB 2 SFOCDG SS1  1545  1135   02FEB 3 /DCAF /E    
2 AF1504C 05FEB 6 CDGFCO SS1 0935 1140 /DCAF /N
3 BA 549J 10FEB 4 FCOLHR SS1 1215 1400 /DCBA /E
4 LH4727C 15FEB 2 LHRFRA SS1 1245 1515 /DCLH /E
5 UA 901C 20FEB 7 FRASFO SS1 1400 1635 /DCUA /E


If I price that with WPAAF‡SLON‡TLON I get...

       BASE FARE      EQUIV AMT      TAXES             TOTAL    
1- USD8736.00 GBP4677.00 114.20XT GBP4791.20ADT
XT 10.00GB 10.40UB 3.70XY 2.70XA
1.30AY 28.00YQ 15.00US 2.70YC
3.10FR 5.60FR 4.40QX 1.40EX
3.90IT 1.30VT .70HB 5.00DE
12.60RA 2.40XF
8736.00 4677.00 114.20 4791.20TTL
ADT-01 CRT CR
SFO AF PAR AF ROM BA LON LH FRA 15M4425.20CRT UA SFO Q25.00
4286.00CR NUC8736.20END ROE1.00 SOTO XFSFO4.5


Just for comparison, I get this when pricing it for sales & ticketing in Europe/Germany:

       BASE FARE      EQUIV AMT      TAXES             TOTAL    
1- USD8736.00 EUR6634.00 163.14XT EUR6797.14ADT
XT 7.21DE 3.80YC 5.32XY 3.76XA
1.90AY 40.00YQ 21.42US 17.99RA
4.48FR 7.95FR 6.29QX 2.05EX
5.63IT 1.81VT 1.00HB 14.27GB
14.84UB 3.42XF
8736.00 6634.00 163.14 6797.14TTL
ADT-01 CRT CR
SFO AF PAR AF ROM BA LON LH FRA 15M4425.20CRT UA SFO Q25.00
4286.00CR NUC8736.20END ROE1.00 SOTO XFSFO4.5





And for "my" Itinerary, I selected one of the last itineraries that I booked for one of my corporate clients back when I still had my own agency...

 1 OS7202C 01FEB 2 FRAVIE SS1  0855  1015  /DCOS /E             
2 OS 51C 03FEB 4 VIENRT SS1 1335 0855 04FEB 5 /DCOS /N
3 CA 928C 10FEB 4 KIXPEK SS1 1400 1620 /DCCA
4 SQ 857C 15FEB 2 HKGSIN SS1 1030 1415 /DCSQ /E
5 SQ 456C 20FEB 7 SINDXB SS1 1300 1635 /DCSQ /E
6 LH 635C 25FEB 5 DXBFRA SS1 0310 0645 /DCLH /E


Pricing (SITI, validating carrier OS):
       BASE FARE                     TAXES             TOTAL    
1- EUR6381.00 199.18XT EUR6580.18ADT
XT 7.21DE 15.14RA 107.67YQ 8.00AT
14.17ZY 19.38SW 11.69HK 9.71SG
6.21AE
6381.00 199.18 6580.18TTL
ADT-01 C
FRA OS VIE OS TYO //OSA CA BJS //HKG SQ SIN Q4.24 C/OSA M
VIEBJS5506.53C SQ DXB LH FRA M2997.54C NUC8508.31END ROE
0.749947 SITI



Same with SOTO pricing in LON:

       BASE FARE      EQUIV AMT      TAXES             TOTAL    
1- EUR6381.00 GBP4457.00 127.20XT GBP4584.20ADT
XT 63.20YQ 5.00DE 10.60RA 5.60AT
9.90ZY 13.50SW 8.20HK 6.80SG
4.40AE
6381.00 4457.00 127.20 4584.20TTL
ADT-01 C
FRA OS VIE OS TYO //OSA CA BJS //HKG SQ SIN Q4.24 C/OSA M
VIEBJS5506.53C SQ DXB LH FRA M2997.54C NUC8508.31END ROE
0.749947 SOTO



I guess I still won't be able to get back here until this evening - there's quite a bit of paper on my desk right now, so I'll have to start issuing tickets now...  Big grin

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineRjnut From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1218 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 19790 times:

Well, it works..no more HIP in London...i have many more options to offer my travelers on trips back from MIddle East!

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
New IND Construction Photos posted Wed Feb 27 2008 17:15:35 by Indy
Odd Booking Class/Fare Structure At YX posted Sun Feb 24 2008 00:32:04 by SkyguyB727
Which Regionals Look To Fare Well In 2008? posted Mon Feb 11 2008 20:07:02 by Allstarflyer
Icon Status Of Iata Code. posted Fri Feb 8 2008 04:14:41 by StealthZ
How To Know Fare Class On SQ Before Booking? posted Sun Jan 13 2008 23:18:39 by Halophila
CLE CO Construction? (Rumor/Eavesdropping) posted Sun Jan 13 2008 18:15:56 by Lincoln
JXB Construction On Google Earth posted Fri Jan 4 2008 07:29:18 by Philzh
Currency Change Venezuela Adds 30000 Euro To Fare posted Fri Jan 4 2008 03:43:03 by PHKLM
LAX Theme Building Construction? posted Tue Dec 25 2007 19:48:25 by Wedgetail737
Iata Code For LED posted Wed Dec 12 2007 14:36:35 by Nycaross
Ryanair Fare Buckets posted Mon Aug 24 2009 14:20:28 by Doug_or
MIA Starts Bid For A380 Gate Construction posted Tue Aug 18 2009 14:09:12 by MAH4546
Would BA 's 77W Be Under Construction Yet? posted Tue Aug 11 2009 04:28:13 by ClubWorld1986
Swiss End Of Cheap Fare Policy? posted Tue Aug 4 2009 03:57:33 by Dtswi
Virgin Australia IATA Codes posted Thu Jan 26 2012 14:59:55 by wrldtvlr
JFK T4 To Have 2 More Construction Phases posted Fri Jan 13 2012 12:55:40 by ATLflyer
New Construction At DTW B/t Runways posted Wed Jan 4 2012 13:41:33 by NASCARAirforce
1000th Boeing 777 - Construction To Start Shortly posted Fri Dec 23 2011 14:08:41 by BMIFlyer
Tony Tyler And His New Style Ruling Iata posted Thu Dec 8 2011 09:15:41 by Gonzalo
Help With Old Airline Iata Code - DI? posted Tue Nov 29 2011 08:00:24 by PI767
129th Iata Conference In Singapore 17-19 November posted Fri Nov 18 2011 22:28:22 by infinit
BA Iata Gold Award For LGW Investment posted Sun Oct 23 2011 04:52:54 by VV701