"Nested" Itinerary????

[MarcB]

Ok...I am after some guidance please...

I have searched the forum and googled, but have not been able to satisfactorily answer my question, so I am hoping someone can assist.

I need to make 2 trips to the USA as follows:

BNE-LAX-BNE (Depart mid-April return early May) (Side trip to YVR but on separate ticket)
BNE-JFK-BNE (Depart mid-Dec return early Jan 2011).

If I price these as 2 returns originating from BNE, the cost is nearly $10k. However, if i book one return from BNE and one from YVR, I can do the same itinerary for about $6k because I can take advantage of low season fares. It would look like this.

Ticket one - BNE-LAX (April 2010) / JFK-BNE (via LAX) (Jan 2011)
Ticket two - YVR-BNE (via LAX) (May 2010)/ BNE-JFK (via LAX) (Dec 2010)

So clearly what I am doing here is using the tickets in the following order

Ticket One - Sector One
Ticket Two - Sector One
Ticket Two - Sector Two
Ticket One - Sector Two

Is this allowed? All the QF conditions of carriage state is that coupons must be used in order. In my view, these are being used in order - but maybe I am missing something???

I should note that I won't breach any min/max stay requriements for the fares with this combination.

Thanks in advance!

 

[markis10]

I cannot see why it is not allowed, Airlines rely on people not planning too far ahead but can only restrict fares to locations where the ticket is issued, and you are taking advantage of the disparity that exists between fares.

 

[serfty]

I do this all the time.

The "In order" refers to the specific PNR; does not apply to segments in different PNR.

I am in AKL at the moment; about to take the AKL-MEL outbound flight of a booking with the return segment MEL-AKL in April. Last Thursday I flew the return segment of MEL-AKL where the outbound AKL-MEL was flown in December. (I do this as it's been ~AUD360 ex AKL. This is ~AUD80 cheaper then booking similar flights ex MEL)

 

[dajop]

Is this allowed? All the QF conditions of carriage state is that coupons must be used in order. In my view, these are being used in order - but maybe I am missing something???

You're using two independent tickets so you are using these in order.

I have done this many times to/from SIN. The only thing is to ensure you carry printouts of both tickets, should you be queried about the length of stay in the US on the first ticket, which is a considerable time.

 

[MarcB]

Thanks for the help everyone - I thought it looked ok, but I wanted to check before I booked anything. The last thing I need is to be denied boarding!

 

[djfuzz]

We did this with our DONE4 positioning flights.

However, if you are using credit card travel insurance, you should consider when such insurance expires - ours was the sooner of our return on our outbound ticket or six months. In such circumstances, we woundn't have been covered on our second leg, and had to make separate insurance arrangements accordingly.

 

[JohnK]

I have done this a number of times in the past and I am in the process of doing it again. My next 4 trips to SE Asia look complex.

Ticket 1 - Award booking one-way
Ticket 2 - Sector 1 (SIN-SYD)
Ticket 3 - Sector 1 (SYD-SIN)
Ticket 4 - Sector 1 (SIN-SYD)
Ticket 2 - Sector 2 (SYD-SIN)
Ticket 3 - Sector 2 (SIN-SYD)
Ticket 4 - Sector 1 (SYD-SIN)

A little confusing but trying to take seasonality out of the price of the airfare....

 

[trooper]

My understanding is that the only time nesting is seen as "naughty" is when it is used to circumvent fare rules.... Saturday night stay etc..

Clearly your travel is doing nothing of the sort......

Add me to the list who "do it"! In my case LAX-AKL-SYDvv nested within SYD-AKL-LAXvv

 

[chrisb]

Ticket One - Sector One
Ticket Two - Sector One
Ticket Two - Sector Two
Ticket One - Sector Two

I'm sure lots of people do this, especially when a company pays for Ticket One and the employee takes a side trip at their own expense on Ticket2. I did it in December.

 

[dajop]

circumvent fare rules.... Saturday night stay etc..

Wow that statement brings back memories. It's been a while since we've had those sort of rules (at least domestically) in Australia. I guess in some places they're still the way of doing business ......

 

[ozbeachbabe]

I know people who did the back to back thing with what used to be Apex fares - 30 day advance purchase and 7 night minimum stay at destination. Then post deregulation there were the slightly less restrictive fares that still required a min stay of one Saturday night away or 3 nights midweek.

About 10 years ago I had do a training course for a client in ADL who were paying for the airfares BNE/ADL/BNE plus accommodation. The client just booked the 'cheapest' fare Sun to Fri which was the equivalent to the 'HOX' fare on QF which is as good as paying full economy.

coughy colleague took the first course on said fare and client booked her into the Riviera Hotel on Adelaide Terrace for her stay which I don't think was exactly her cup of tea.

When it was my turn to travel I knew I could book an wholesale fare (QITGET fare basis) through QF Holidays & if I had a min 3 night stay midweek and booked my hotel through them as a package. I booked the Hyatt ADL but because the airfare was about $400.00 cheaper it more than subsidised the better hotel.

I just rang the client, gave them the QF Hols booking number - they were happy as it was still cheaper & I'd done all the ground work.

The icing on the cake was when office cough said sarcastically "how did you like the Riviera"? Without blinking I said "Riviera? They put me up at the Hyatt"!

The expression on her face was priceless!

Miaow.

Oz

 

[MarcB]

We did this with our DONE4 positioning flights.

However, if you are using credit card travel insurance, you should consider when such insurance expires - ours was the sooner of our return on our outbound ticket or six months. In such circumstances, we woundn't have been covered on our second leg, and had to make separate insurance arrangements accordingly.

Thanks for the tip djfuzz - I will have to check the T&Cs for the credit card.

 

[simongr]

The only issue I would see would be the lack of protection for connecting flights.

 

[serfty]

The only issue I would see would be the lack of protection for connecting flights.

I guess this is the risk you take.

Dave Noble has often posted that a minimum if one day is desirable. In any case, a "Plan B" for shorter connections; even to the point of "Throw away ticketing" should be considered.

And this is why I take Annual insurance - relying on the vagaries of CC based insurance applicability is not a risk I like taking.

One personal experience I had some time ago was I had a same day booking sequence:

• ...-DFW-LAX-SFO (LAX transit 11:30 - 13:30) on AA in F class.
• another booking SFO-LAX (17:00-18:30) on AA in N class.
• with a final being LAX-MEL (departing 23:00) on QF

Needless to say, I had to make the QF flight.

I arrived into LAX on time, but the flight to SFO was showing delayed an hour until 14:30. This was due to limited visibility around SFO, a common problem.) Still OK. Then an announcement was made that while the flight would board for 14:30, the was to be an hour ground hold (They needed the gate). I ascertained it would be the same aircraft doing the turnaround -so little issue there.

I considered deeply, and decided to forego the SC's and not fly to SFO. I discussed this with an agent in the T4 Flounge and they were happy to free up the seats. (Standby lists were large).

In the end, the flight did actually arrive back from SFO into LAX around 20:20 - so I would have made it.

However, the risk was not worth it.

 

[JohnK]

I guess this is the risk you take.

Dave Noble has often posted that a minimum if one day is desirable. In any case, a "Plan B" for shorter connections; even to the point of "Throw away ticketing" should be considered.

But you can't always protect yourself against every risk.

e.g QF031 is due to arrive in SIN ~10:00pm and the next day a separate booking for a CX flight departing SIN ~8:30am. What if QF031 does not arrive into SIN that night? It is risky although one needs to consider how often QF031 has been cancelled and take the appropriate risk.

Cannot afford to have all flights on the same booking (especially purchasing tickets from different countries and in different classes) and cannot afford to keep wasting at least 1 day on connections.

And this is why I take Annual insurance - relying on the vagaries of CC based insurance applicability is not a risk I like taking.

Good point. The annual insurance is handy and is only a tiny amount compared to the rest of the money we spend on flights, accommodation etc.

 

[oz_mark]

e.g QF031 is due to arrive in SIN ~10:00pm and the next day a separate booking for a CX flight departing SIN ~8:30am. What if QF031 does not arrive into SIN that night? It is risky although one needs to consider how often QF031 has been cancelled and take the appropriate risk.

Thinking happy thoughts. QF31, aka my chariot to SIN this week, will be arriving on time, and not the next day.....

 

[MarcB]

The only issue I would see would be the lack of protection for connecting flights.

Agreed - this is my only concern. Thankfully, there is only one flight from LAX to YVR that might be a problem in that regard - and only if QF 16 is delayed. The other flights are booked on the same ticket so as to ensure I can be put on another flight if there are any delays.