"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 15:30:19 on Fri, 20 Dec
2013, tim...... remarked:
you cannot possibly infer that just because I disagree with you about
the success that a particular pricing policy has, that I do not
understand the principle involved

Everything you post suggests it. For example that latest comment that
"booking early to get a cheap fare" and "booking indirect routes to get
a cheap fare" are somehow the same thing.

No I didn't say they were the same thing

I said (OK I implied) that they were filling the same seats

Both exist, and are largely independent of each other.

Except that they ARE filling the same seats, so they can't be independent
of each other. As soon as all of the "cheap" early booked seat have gone
I wager you that the "cheap "indirect" seats will be full too (or vise
versa)!

It's entirely possible that some seats on the feeder flights

They weren't the seats that I was referring to.

But it seems a lot of faf.

Just how many flights into LHR from points in Europe do BA have to keep
seats free on in case someone wants to connect to LA? 200, 300 400. That's
a lot of held sets for one potential connecting pax.

Though in most cases I doubt that they have to go to any lengths to make
sure that there are seats. I would guess that the booking profile of short
haul flights is that they become 50/75% full later than long haul BICBW

are reserved for passengers who go on to occupy a vastly more lucrative
seat on a long-haul.

selling a seat on a Long haul flight off at a rock bottom price to a connect
pax is not my idea of lucrative

tim

--
Roland Perry