On Sep 6, 6:43 am, "tim....."  wrote:
> "Roland Perry"  wrote in message
>
> news:CTV6djYWZ83GFALH@perry.co.uk...
>
>
>
> > In message , at 10:08:01 on Thu, 6 Sep
> > 2007, tim.....  remarked:
> >>>>> Get a long haul into Heathrow and if you've got a six hour wait for
> >>>>> your
> >>>>> shuttle 'up north' they'll politely ignore you.
>
> >>>>That is a wait that you have scheduled, I don't do those,
> >>>>I find a better route!.
>
> >>> Better in terms of layover are often much more expensive.
>
> >>I don't agree.  I've never been offered a cheaper flight
> >>by waiting 6 hours for a connection instead of 2.
>
> > It's happened to me very often. Just this week I had what amounts to a
> > long layover in Geneva (the only EZY out after my meeting ended is at
> > about 10pm), and switching to a different carrier/routing would cost
> > vastly more.
>
> We are talking about connections.
>
> If making a single flight you don't need to spend the spare
> time at the airport, do you?
>
> > If you can magic up a £30 flight at 7pm, I'd catch it in a flash!
>
> >>> OK for those who can afford it.
>
> >>Is this really a big issue.  I think it likley that few people
> >>travelling, either on business or on holiday, are going to
> >>schedule a really crappy connection to save some money.
> >>You can usually find something more appropriate at a
> >>similar price.
>
> > I'm reminded of a trip I did to Bahrain, where the by-far-cheapest [and
> > I'm talking hundred of pounds) through-ticketed option involved a very
> > long layover in Dubai.
>
> I am sure that there are a few examples.  But not many


Traveling within North America or Europe or between them, no.  There
is almost always a cheap and fast way to get from A to B with at most
a minimal layover.

Traveling from North America or Europe to Asia, Africa, or South
America, on most routes there are far fewer flights, and scheduling
your trip to avoid a long layover, or to avoid having to take a crappy
airline, can easily cost hundreds of dollars more.