Impact of overnight at AMS/CDG on fare calculation
Jun 27, 2024, 10:29 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: VIE
Programs: SAS EBS / *A Silver, Hilton Diamond, Radisson VIP, IHG Platinum Ambassador
Posts: 4,468
Impact of overnight at AMS/CDG on fare calculation
Is anyone on this forum able to enlighten me about the mysterious ways AFKL fares work in relation to overnight transfers? 
When flying longhaul westbound, I don't fancy waking up at 2 AM as I have a long day ahead of me even without that. I also don't fancy having a 75 minutes Schengen-to-Nonschengen transfer to a once-a-day flight at CDG. Hence I prefer to fly out out my home airport (VIE) the evening before, spend the night at AMS/CDG, and then take the longhaul the next day.
The problem is that the search engine rarely offers this by default (when it does, it usually also throws AMS-CDG sector in the itinerary for a good measure). At other airlines I solve this by creating a multi city itinerary and as long as the transfers are below 24 hours, it prices as one trip. This doesn't seem to work at AFKL however, where splitting one leg into multiple input fields hikes up the price, even if the transfer is below 24 hours. I understand that occasionally this may be caused by the (lack of) booking class availability on the feeder flight but it happens too often for that to be the case.
The only workaround I found so far was to split the opposite journey as well, even if the flights remain the same. For example, BUD-CDG-PTY/SXM-CDG-BUD priced at around 2650€. When I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY and SXM-CDG-BUD, the price went up by approximately 200€ but when I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY, SXM-CDG and CDG-BUD, suddenly it dropped to 2555€, despite the SXM-CDG-BUD being on the same flights as when I inputed the return trip as one. In other words, I'm getting a price clearly based on what I enter into the fields, not merely on which flights I'm booking.
I'm wondering:
a) Is this by design and the fares are meant to be calculated this way (e.g. something with married segments) or is the booking engine simply too stupid to price "stopovers" under 24 hours as not stopovers (i.e. transfers)?
b) If the latter is the case, is there any workaround?
c) What happens if I book the cheaper fare with no overnight in AMS/CDG on Business Standard (free rebooking) and then call to change the feeder to the previous day? Would an agent be able to do it with no fare difference assuming the same booking class is available, or would it reprice the whole itinerary?
Thank you
When flying longhaul westbound, I don't fancy waking up at 2 AM as I have a long day ahead of me even without that. I also don't fancy having a 75 minutes Schengen-to-Nonschengen transfer to a once-a-day flight at CDG. Hence I prefer to fly out out my home airport (VIE) the evening before, spend the night at AMS/CDG, and then take the longhaul the next day.
The problem is that the search engine rarely offers this by default (when it does, it usually also throws AMS-CDG sector in the itinerary for a good measure). At other airlines I solve this by creating a multi city itinerary and as long as the transfers are below 24 hours, it prices as one trip. This doesn't seem to work at AFKL however, where splitting one leg into multiple input fields hikes up the price, even if the transfer is below 24 hours. I understand that occasionally this may be caused by the (lack of) booking class availability on the feeder flight but it happens too often for that to be the case.
The only workaround I found so far was to split the opposite journey as well, even if the flights remain the same. For example, BUD-CDG-PTY/SXM-CDG-BUD priced at around 2650€. When I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY and SXM-CDG-BUD, the price went up by approximately 200€ but when I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY, SXM-CDG and CDG-BUD, suddenly it dropped to 2555€, despite the SXM-CDG-BUD being on the same flights as when I inputed the return trip as one. In other words, I'm getting a price clearly based on what I enter into the fields, not merely on which flights I'm booking.
I'm wondering:
a) Is this by design and the fares are meant to be calculated this way (e.g. something with married segments) or is the booking engine simply too stupid to price "stopovers" under 24 hours as not stopovers (i.e. transfers)?
b) If the latter is the case, is there any workaround?
c) What happens if I book the cheaper fare with no overnight in AMS/CDG on Business Standard (free rebooking) and then call to change the feeder to the previous day? Would an agent be able to do it with no fare difference assuming the same booking class is available, or would it reprice the whole itinerary?
Thank you
Jun 27, 2024, 2:48 pm
#2
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NUE
Programs: *G (TK elite+), OW sapphire (QR), ST elite plus (AF). LA black
Posts: 4,059
Is anyone on this forum able to enlighten me about the mysterious ways AFKL fares work in relation to overnight transfers?
When flying longhaul westbound, I don't fancy waking up at 2 AM as I have a long day ahead of me even without that. I also don't fancy having a 75 minutes Schengen-to-Nonschengen transfer to a once-a-day flight at CDG. Hence I prefer to fly out out my home airport (VIE) the evening before, spend the night at AMS/CDG, and then take the longhaul the next day.
The problem is that the search engine rarely offers this by default (when it does, it usually also throws AMS-CDG sector in the itinerary for a good measure). At other airlines I solve this by creating a multi city itinerary and as long as the transfers are below 24 hours, it prices as one trip. This doesn't seem to work at AFKL however, where splitting one leg into multiple input fields hikes up the price, even if the transfer is below 24 hours. I understand that occasionally this may be caused by the (lack of) booking class availability on the feeder flight but it happens too often for that to be the case.
The only workaround I found so far was to split the opposite journey as well, even if the flights remain the same. For example, BUD-CDG-PTY/SXM-CDG-BUD priced at around 2650€. When I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY and SXM-CDG-BUD, the price went up by approximately 200€ but when I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY, SXM-CDG and CDG-BUD, suddenly it dropped to 2555€, despite the SXM-CDG-BUD being on the same flights as when I inputed the return trip as one. In other words, I'm getting a price clearly based on what I enter into the fields, not merely on which flights I'm booking.
I'm wondering:
a) Is this by design and the fares are meant to be calculated this way (e.g. something with married segments) or is the booking engine simply too stupid to price "stopovers" under 24 hours as not stopovers (i.e. transfers)?
b) If the latter is the case, is there any workaround?
c) What happens if I book the cheaper fare with no overnight in AMS/CDG on Business Standard (free rebooking) and then call to change the feeder to the previous day? Would an agent be able to do it with no fare difference assuming the same booking class is available, or would it reprice the whole itinerary?
Thank you
When flying longhaul westbound, I don't fancy waking up at 2 AM as I have a long day ahead of me even without that. I also don't fancy having a 75 minutes Schengen-to-Nonschengen transfer to a once-a-day flight at CDG. Hence I prefer to fly out out my home airport (VIE) the evening before, spend the night at AMS/CDG, and then take the longhaul the next day.
The problem is that the search engine rarely offers this by default (when it does, it usually also throws AMS-CDG sector in the itinerary for a good measure). At other airlines I solve this by creating a multi city itinerary and as long as the transfers are below 24 hours, it prices as one trip. This doesn't seem to work at AFKL however, where splitting one leg into multiple input fields hikes up the price, even if the transfer is below 24 hours. I understand that occasionally this may be caused by the (lack of) booking class availability on the feeder flight but it happens too often for that to be the case.
The only workaround I found so far was to split the opposite journey as well, even if the flights remain the same. For example, BUD-CDG-PTY/SXM-CDG-BUD priced at around 2650€. When I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY and SXM-CDG-BUD, the price went up by approximately 200€ but when I split it into BUD-CDG, CDG-PTY, SXM-CDG and CDG-BUD, suddenly it dropped to 2555€, despite the SXM-CDG-BUD being on the same flights as when I inputed the return trip as one. In other words, I'm getting a price clearly based on what I enter into the fields, not merely on which flights I'm booking.
I'm wondering:
a) Is this by design and the fares are meant to be calculated this way (e.g. something with married segments) or is the booking engine simply too stupid to price "stopovers" under 24 hours as not stopovers (i.e. transfers)?
b) If the latter is the case, is there any workaround?
c) What happens if I book the cheaper fare with no overnight in AMS/CDG on Business Standard (free rebooking) and then call to change the feeder to the previous day? Would an agent be able to do it with no fare difference assuming the same booking class is available, or would it reprice the whole itinerary?
Thank you
have you tried to search for the flights on google flights or kayak? these booking engines offer more overnight connections than the AF/KL website. in the end you could book with AF/KL by redirecting from Kayak:
/GF to the AF/KL website.
I would go with TK and forget about the additional documentation requirements for flights to PTY. I didn't have prepaid hotels in PTY and MEX - no issues at all - neither with TK or immigration
Jun 28, 2024, 1:55 am
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: VIE
Programs: SAS EBS / *A Silver, Hilton Diamond, Radisson VIP, IHG Platinum Ambassador
Posts: 4,468
the "free rebooking" will not work in the way you expect it. it will become expensive - you don't have to pay for the rebooking, but meed to pay the fare difference. on the day of travel cheap booking classes won't be available and you can only rebook the whole outbound - not only the feeder.
have you tried to search for the flights on google flights or kayak? these booking engines offer more overnight connections than the AF/KL website. in the end you could book with AF/KL by redirecting from Kayak:
/GF to the AF/KL website.
I would go with TK and forget about the additional documentation requirements for flights to PTY. I didn't have prepaid hotels in PTY and MEX - no issues at all - neither with TK or immigration
have you tried to search for the flights on google flights or kayak? these booking engines offer more overnight connections than the AF/KL website. in the end you could book with AF/KL by redirecting from Kayak:
/GF to the AF/KL website.
I would go with TK and forget about the additional documentation requirements for flights to PTY. I didn't have prepaid hotels in PTY and MEX - no issues at all - neither with TK or immigration
Thanks for the info re TK. I'm currently inclining towards that solution, although AFKL has its benefits too (no detour, shorter flights, etc). In any case, I ran into this problem more than once so it's not a question specific to this trip
Jun 30, 2024, 6:37 am
#4
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: FR
Programs: FB Plat
Posts: 329
+1 to use Google Flights instead. Search for the exact flights you want and once done, you will have a link to book the flights via the AF website. Surprisingly, Google Flights may allow you to book flights not shown on AF’s own search engine.
If it does not work, you can also call and tell the agent you can’t book the flight you want online thus asking to waive the phone booking fee.
If it does not work, you can also call and tell the agent you can’t book the flight you want online thus asking to waive the phone booking fee.
Aug 1, 2024, 3:59 pm
#5
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: France
Posts: 74
In my experience the link to book on AF almost never works. It takes me to the AF booking page, but the flights are not selected (and as you say, the AF engine doesn't offer the same flights). Is there some trick people use to make the Google Flights link work more reliably?