Suggest New Rule: Flight Ticket Deals Must List out Whether There Is Layover, for How Long and All Airlines Involved

May I suggest a new rule for flight ticket deals:
Deal must list out whether there is layover + for how many hours, and all the airlines involved.

Flight ticket comparison web site associates have increasingly using OZB as a pure advertising tool.
They list out cheap price and dates, but deliberately miss out the long layover hours, and the airlines involved, only to attract people to access their website.
This has become so common that is so annoying.

For example in this deal:
Japan Airlines to Tokyo, Japan from Melbourne from $934, Brisbane $1045 Return, Sydney $1022 Return (Oct-Dec) @ Beat That Flight
Japan Airlines (JAL) has a regular 10 hours direct flight from Mel/Syd to Tokyo with a $2000 price tag.
In the above deal, the associate mentioned nothing about layover hours, which mislead us to think that $934 is the mark down price for a return direct flight.
However the $934 ticket is actually a QF Mel->SIN, then JAL SIN -TYO one stop trip, with a 16 hours layover, which makes it 32 hours one way.
That makes this "deal" isn't really a deal because there are other airlines with much shorter layover in similar price.
Plus, half of the trip is with QF, which service is much inferior than JAL.

I believe it's not fair for us to find these crucial info only after clicking through their website.
I am sure many members would have agreed with me.
Thank you. )

Comments

  • +9

    And if Kosher meal is available. And how far the seats can recline. And what the inflight movie is.

    • +5

      And if the guy in the next seat has requested a seatbelt extension.

  • +2

    I'm all for ainlines.

  • +4

    Finally a forum post I wish I could upvote ✅

  • +1

    It's nice to have layover in the title.

    And it's nicer to find a random Hayami fan on the Internet (guessing from your profile picture).

    Or, is OP a Taneda fan? Or both? :)

  • I like this idea.

  • They are increasingly frustrating but Im not sure how to police it.

    Equally frustrating, no baggage listings (I mean, how many really travel with only carry on?), short travel windows (only available between this full moon and this leprechaun fart if you click your heals 3 times on iOS), or seemingly only available through some dodgy 3rd party booking sites (which, realistically, should not be promoted due to their persistent failures with ticketing and refunds).

    Will it happen? Doubt it.

    • -1

      You can look up the details yourself though? They're just providing us with the cheapest possible prices and that's what we want them for? If you have other needs or want reliability, book directly with the airlines.

      Also, most of my generation do try to travel with just carryon.

  • This is already a guideline and we've been over it with the reps numerous times.

    See here

    Non-direct flights should be denoted with via City or City Stopover. So to your example:

    Will edit the deal. Use the report link so we can be notified and make changes in future.

    • What are the guidelines on ainlines vs airlines?

    • "we've been over it with the reps numerous times"
      three strikes and they get a ban?
      .

      • If we banned people for forgetting to put things in the title, we'd have no one on this site. 😋

        • -1

          shouldn't reps be held to a higher mark, they are promoting a business after all
          .

        • -1

          Disagree. They are not forgetting but doing so deliberately. Their intention is to gain commercial advantage by misleading consumers.
          I would argue this is one kind of false advertising.
          It's just a different story than a ordinary member sharing a deal in good faith.
          Please consider sending them a final warning then ban the store reps after another repeat offence.
          It's been four months since the rule change and they still don't follow. 😔

          • -1

            @TanedaR: Since you don't trust them, why don't you block or ignore their posts? Stop trying to ban reps and posts just because you don't appreciate them, some of us do.

  • I like this idea. You may think it's good for an extended long weekend but turns out you'd be spending 3 of your 4 days in airports.

    • Not everyone inherently hates layovers or airports. I like long layovers and airport vibes are amazing (at certain airports). And others are willing to put up with it even if they don't like it for significantly cheaper prices.

      • I don't mind a longer layover after a 15 hour flight, but having a layover longer than the flights combined is ridiculous to call a 'special'.

        • Yes, I think most people will accept 6 hours in Changi or perhaps even an overnight stay in Singapore or Dubai - generally, those are well supported by the country tourism boards and there's stuff to do.

          What people have issues with is a 24-48 hour 'layover' in Ho Chi Minh City where there is no relief provided etc. While a 20 something back packer may be happy with that, many many of us on here are family/business/pleasure/retiree travellers and this kind of stuff really ought to be front and centre in posts.

  • -1

    You just lazy!

Login or Join to leave a comment