? on using second part of rt ticket a year later

[kanitter]

I am taking a ta cruise 9/2010 from Dover to NY. We are flying into London a few days before the cruise. I have found it's cheaper to buy round trip tickets instead of one way. I saw a post on here not long ago that mentioned how you can delay using the second part of your ticket by a year or more. I've tried using the search section but guess I'm not wording it right because I can't find it now. I would appreciate any help with this.:D

Thanks in advance,

Sue

[Gardyloo]

First, no round trips are good for more than a year.

 

Second, RTs that have inbound and outbound legs spread by more than 6 months are almost always priced very closely to two one-way fares. If you buy a RT with, say, a one- or two-month return date, then try to change the return to more like 12 months, the change penalties will be added to the "appropriate" fare (i.e. the one that would have been charged for a 12-mo return in the first place) so you'll be under water big time.

 

You might want to see for yourself by making a "dummy" booking (i.e. don't enter credit card information) on the website of your choice, specifying a 10- or 12-month return.

[greatam]

Let me try to clarify what I have posted quite a few times.

 

You need to purchase a ticket for a one way TA. Let's use the date of May 15, 2009 with a London to JFK routing.

 

Just a cursory look results in a fare in the mid-high $900's for a one way ticket on Delta, AA, Continental, BA, United, US, Lufthansa, etc. etc.

 

A return trip (JFK to LHR) on the same airlines on Nov 15 results is about the same fare on a one way basis. So two one ways will cost almost $2000.00.

 

However, a RT ticket using the same dates results in a fare of $553 on Delta, mid $700's on AA, Lufthansa, Swiss, United and as low as mid 400's on Air France, BA, KLM and Northwest. The saving is WELL over 50%.

 

In summary, IF you have a reason to use the second half of the ticket (like another TA), you will save considerable money booking the RT. Even if you have to change the date, paying the change fee will still save money (between $150-300 depending on ticket and airline). While the airlines have every right to charge you the difference in fare as well as the change fee, in my experience, they often don't if you don't put up too much stink about paying the change fee. YMMV

 

And IF you are buying a RT with the intention of throwing away the second half, you are far smarter booking the return as far out as possible. Lots of things happen in 6 months. Airlines have software to keep track of tickets that are not used. When your return is two weeks after your outbound flight and you do not take the flight, you raise red flags. You COULD be contacted by the airline and asked how you got home. Unless you have a VERY good reason (your long lost friend offered you a ride home in the corporate jet, you were invited on the Royal yacht, you got crew space on a racing sloop, etc. etc), you CAN be charged for a ONE WAY ticket at full fare. Saying you were ill (unless you were in the hospital and got home via medivac) or you took a cruise home are NOT good excuses.

 

All in all, you can only book airline tickets an average of 330 days in advance. So you will never be able to use the ticket a year later. But you can often save money booking a RT (even with an open jaw return) as far out as possible. The above scenario works as far out as Feb 15, which is about the end of the schedule.

[kanitter]

thank you Gardyloo for the info. :)

 

Greatam, I believe this was the posting I was looking for. I appreciate you taking the time for reprinting it. I guess I just have to convince Dh that we will need to take another ta to use the second half of our tickets.:D

Sue

[skf]

We sometimes see this on domestic flights. In 2007 flying to United from MHT to JFK one-way was more expensive than a round-trip. If we had been going to NY & not returning we would have saved money throwing away the return ticket.

Steve

[kanitter]

I just don't understand why airlines make it so hard to do a one way trip.:( There are a lot of reasons why someone would want just a one way ticket. Ya know, there is such a thing as being to greedy.:rolleyes:

Sue

[Gardyloo]

I just don't understand why airlines make it so hard to do a one way trip.:( There are a lot of reasons why someone would want just a one way ticket. Ya know, there is such a thing as being to greedy.:rolleyes:

Sue

A number of airlines are making it easier; Alaska Airlines, for example, has one way fares that often (not always) are one-half the round trip fare. I think the trend is likely to increase.

[FlyerTalker]

I just don't understand why airlines make it so hard to do a one way trip.

Actually, it is easier to book a one-way trip than an R/T. Only one flight or set of connections to select.

 

Now, if what you mean by "hard" is "expensive", and if you meant that "easy" equals "cheap"....why didn't you say that in the first place?

 

Remember, the objective of airline fare structures, fare inventory controls and yield management is to get the highest return on each flight operated by an airline (with some market-share exceptions). When that goal happens to coincide with a leisure-market traveler, it's a nice bonus. But why do you think that an airline should tailor its business model for the once-a-year traveler who predominantly purchases on the basis of price?

 

And yes, there are a few exceptions who have deliberately carved out a different leisure-oriented niche (such as Allegiant). But those low prices come at a different "price".

[kenish]

Greatam- I see a possible problem with a very long gap between "halves" of a RT international ticket. Most countries require passport validity 3-12 months beyond the exit date from their country. Also, many require visas or other special paperwork for extended visits.

 

If a ticket indicates a "visit" of many months to another country, passports and any permits and visas must comply with the requirements or the airline can deny boarding on the original flight leg. Airlines check very carefully since passengers denied entry must be returned to the point of origin at airline expense. Even if the original leg is flown, you stand a good chance of Immigration denying entry, especially if "length of stay" on the form disagrees with the ticket. So you'd better be sure to get all the extended visas if required and have a good cover story of how you intend to spend your time in-country. Some countries also require proof of funds so you don't become indigent.

 

Just a thought, any comment?

[greatam]

Greatam- I see a possible problem with a very long gap between "halves" of a RT international ticket. Most countries require passport validity 3-12 months beyond the exit date from their country. Also, many require visas or other special paperwork for extended visits.

 

If a ticket indicates a "visit" of many months to another country, passports and any permits and visas must comply with the requirements or the airline can deny boarding on the original flight leg. Airlines check very carefully since passengers denied entry must be returned to the point of origin at airline expense. Even if the original leg is flown, you stand a good chance of Immigration denying entry, especially if "length of stay" on the form disagrees with the ticket. So you'd better be sure to get all the extended visas if required and have a good cover story of how you intend to spend your time in-country. Some countries also require proof of funds so you don't become indigent.

 

Just a thought, any comment?

 

IF you had to have a visa, there would be a problem using the original visa. You would have to get another visa. And IF you let your passport get below 6 months validity before your initial trip, you are a careless traveler. As you point out, the airlines will most likely not even let your board the plane. So having a passport with a MINIMUM of 6 months validity is a MANDATORY requirement IMHO no matter whether you are one trip 1 or 2.

 

Why would it cause any problems with immigration? You would have an entry and an exit on trip 1. You would also have and entry and an exit with trip 2. You would also have the cruise tickets which would show exit. I really don't see the problem.

 

I see much more problems with the way I often book my South America business trips. I often buy open jaw tickets with returns 6 months in the future because I really don't know how long I must stay or what cities I will be flying in and out of. Chile has unlimited trips in and out, Peru has no visa, Argentina-open entry. So I really don't know why you think this is a problem. Most European countries don't require visas of US citizens.

 

And for two repo cruises, one going to Europe, one returning FROM Europe, a single ticket is a money saving option.

[SelectSys]

...

And IF you are buying a RT with the intention of throwing away the second half, you are far smarter booking the return as far out as possible. Lots of things happen in 6 months. Airlines have software to keep track of tickets that are not used. When your return is two weeks after your outbound flight and you do not take the flight, you raise red flags. You COULD be contacted by the airline and asked how you got home. Unless you have a VERY good reason (your long lost friend offered you a ride home in the corporate jet, you were invited on the Royal yacht, you got crew space on a racing sloop, etc. etc), you CAN be charged for a ONE WAY ticket at full fare. Saying you were ill (unless you were in the hospital and got home via medivac) or you took a cruise home are NOT good excuses.

...

 

I have both thrown away return tickets as well as booked back to back on any number of occasions. I used to do this a ton on AA when I would do mid and long term consulting gigs away from home.

 

Do you have any experience or know of anyone where the airlines came after anyone? I know it can happen but I guess I wonder how frequently it does happen and if it has changed over the years (sort of like charging for baggage.)

[greatam]

I have both thrown away return tickets as well as booked back to back on any number of occasions. I used to do this a ton on AA when I would do mid and long term consulting gigs away from home.

 

Do you have any experience or know of anyone where the airlines came after anyone? I know it can happen but I guess I wonder how frequently it does happen and if it has changed over the years (sort of like charging for baggage.)

 

Not very frequently, according to my AA rep. But there were some frequent FLAUNTERS who were charged and had their AA miles confiscated and accounts closed. Most of this was as a result of the Saturday night stay requirements and nested tickets.

 

I have done throw aways quite a few times for my employees on various airlines. Out on the plane, back on one of the trucks. I do it myself to save a few dollars here and there but NEVER on AA. I just like my nice cushy AA status and all those miles.

[SelectSys]

... Most of this was as a result of the Saturday night stay requirements and nested tickets...

 

That was exactly the situation. I haven't done it in a while as the Saturday night stay isn't as big a deal for domestic travel anymore and my schedule isn't as predictable.

 

My statement to AA was going to be be, do you want to lose half the revenue to UA?

[Globaliser]

Do you have any experience or know of anyone where the airlines came after anyone? I know it can happen but I guess I wonder how frequently it does happen and if it has changed over the years (sort of like charging for baggage.)

There was a time when it was relatively inexpensive to buy British Airways tickets starting from a European point, and fly (for example) LIS-LHR-CPT-LHR-LIS, compared to buying a LHR-CPT-LHR ticket. Of course, you'd start the trip by buying a cheapie one-way ticket from London to LIS. There were many people who wouldn't bother flying the last sector, but there were reports that BA went after some regular recidivists. They pursued quite a soft line: fly the last sector, or we will charge you for the travel undertaken. The extra time and hassle involved in flying the last sector and then getting home again will put a lot of people off.

[kenish]

IF you had to have a visa, there would be a problem using the original visa. You would have to get another visa. And IF you let your passport get below 6 months validity before your initial trip, you are a careless traveler. As you point out, the airlines will most likely not even let your board the plane. So having a passport with a MINIMUM of 6 months validity is a MANDATORY requirement IMHO no matter whether you are one trip 1 or 2.

 

Greatam- Agree with your comments but I will restate my original question/comment hopefully more clearly. Take for example a US citizen flying JFK-LHR for a cruise back to New York. They plan to fly on May 19, 2009 and board the cruise on May 26. To save money and have a LHR-JFK segment for future use, they purchase a RT airline ticket with a return date of November 19, 2009.

 

My first comment (we agree) is the traveler's passport must be valid 6 months beyond the return date *on the ticket* or they might be denied entry at LHR or denied boarding at JFK. Based on the "extended return" RT ticket, their passport expiration needs to be past May 2010 instead of November 26, 2009. Using the return on a future visit is totally valid, but could require explanation. The airline might require purchasing a OW ticket with an acceptable return date (6 months before pp expiration) in order to travel. The tactic of course would be to purchase a fully refundable OW ticket and get a refund later.

 

My question on visas was similar....most countries require a visa (even as a tourist) for stays over 90 days. Even though the actual trip does not require a EC visa for the 2 week pre-cruise stay, Immigration and the airlines will use the ticketed date. Since the stay appears to be 6 months, won't they require a visa?? (As pointed out, there is no problem leaving the country sooner but there may be a problem getting there)!

[greatam]

Greatam- Agree with your comments but I will restate my original question/comment hopefully more clearly. Take for example a US citizen flying JFK-LHR for a cruise back to New York. They plan to fly on May 19, 2009 and board the cruise on May 26. To save money and have a LHR-JFK segment for future use, they purchase a RT airline ticket with a return date of November 19, 2009.

 

My first comment (we agree) is the traveler's passport must be valid 6 months beyond the return date *on the ticket* or they might be denied entry at LHR or denied boarding at JFK. Based on the "extended return" RT ticket, their passport expiration needs to be past May 2010 instead of November 26, 2009. Using the return on a future visit is totally valid, but could require explanation. The airline might require purchasing a OW ticket with an acceptable return date (6 months before pp expiration) in order to travel. The tactic of course would be to purchase a fully refundable OW ticket and get a refund later.

 

My question on visas was similar....most countries require a visa (even as a tourist) for stays over 90 days. Even though the actual trip does not require a EC visa for the 2 week pre-cruise stay, Immigration and the airlines will use the ticketed date. Since the stay appears to be 6 months, won't they require a visa?? (As pointed out, there is no problem leaving the country sooner but there may be a problem getting there)!

 

WHY would you be denied entry at LHR?? You have CRUISE tickets showing you are leaving the UK in 6 days. Or you buy a cheapo Ryan Air ticket to wherever showing you are leaving in 15-30 days. Immigration is looking at how you are going to get out of their country. They are NOT looking at your airline ticket, UNLESS that is the only thing you have. How many times has anyone looked at your airline ticket??? In all my international travels to some weird places, the few times I have been asked for return info are either Communist countries (China, Vietnam, Cambodia, China, Burma, Laos) or war zones (Iraq, Djibouti, and Afghanistan). Never been asked in South America or Europe.

 

You should keep your passport current. Obviously, if you are going to split the departure and return or your tickets, you should definitely have 6 months validity when you use the second half of the ticket. Why wouldn't you renew your passport if you KNEW you were going to use the second 1/2 of an airline ticket??? Maybe I am missing something.

 

As for visa's-LOTS of people (especially college age somethings) buy a RT ticket to/from their home. Then travel to other countries/continents on all kinds of charters, trains, buses and LCC's and return to the place where their RT departs from. They have EXIT stamps from lots of countries. They have NOT been in the original country overstaying their visa. NO need to worry about being in the country for more time then the visa is issued for or how it correlates with an airline ticket.

 

I don't see the concern.

[kenish]

As mentioned I have never tried an irregular itenerary so have no experience. The questions were "what if", obviously a red herring since it sounds like there is no checking to see if your visa is consistent with the airline ticket. Thanks!

[SelectSys]

There was a time when it was relatively inexpensive to buy British Airways tickets starting from a European point, and fly (for example) LIS-LHR-CPT-LHR-LIS, compared to buying a LHR-CPT-LHR ticket. Of course, you'd start the trip by buying a cheapie one-way ticket from London to LIS. There were many people who wouldn't bother flying the last sector, but there were reports that BA went after some regular recidivists. They pursued quite a soft line: fly the last sector, or we will charge you for the travel undertaken. The extra time and hassle involved in flying the last sector and then getting home again will put a lot of people off.

 

Isn't this the famed "hidden city" approach?

 

BTW - your new signature prompted me to start a poll in the "ask a cruise question" board regarding HOHO buses. I would be curious to get your take.

[Globaliser]

The questions were "what if", obviously a red herring since it sounds like there is no checking to see if your visa is consistent with the airline ticket.

It's the same when you fly into a country on a one-way ticket. You will, at most, be asked to show when and how you are going to leave. It's no big deal. Ditto if you couldn't legally stay in the country until the return date of the ticket on which you flew in - you just need to show when and how you are actually going to leave by the time the law says you must.

[Globaliser]

Isn't this the famed "hidden city" approach?

I think this is one of the things that is sometimes called "hidden city".

 

But I think that it's actually an inaccurate term to apply to that approach; in strict technicality that term describes a particular fare calculation technique that is waaaay beyond the expertise of anyone booking directly on the internet.