more weird roomette pricing

[Phil S]

Thinking to change my May 13 trip out to Oregon from Builder to SW Chief, I find that a roomette LAX/ALY is $254 (plus railfare) but SAC/ALY or SJC/ALY is $336, $82 extra to travel ~500 miles less distance. What exactly would be the logic behind this? Or absent any logic, the algorithm that produces this result? Or did I do something wrong? Unfortunately still no Amsnag.

 

[JoeBas]

No different than airlines.

My work bought tickets for 3 employees today. 2 are going IAH-ANC, the third LFT-ANC, connecting through IAH on the same flight & day as the other 2... and the one with the extra flight was $27 cheaper.

 

[gatelouse]

Actually it's subtly different from the airlines. On an airline, the bucket prices for each city pair determined more by market forces than distance. On Amtrak, prices within a bucket generally relate to distance traveled...but Amtrak will sometimes limit the actual bucket availability for popular travel segments (NYP-ATL, CHI-DEN, etc.). Similar result in practice, but different means of creating the effect.

Now the -real- airfare experts can talk about married segments and their impact on bucket availability...

 

[Rob3E]

No different than airlines.

My work bought tickets for 3 employees today. 2 are going IAH-ANC, the third LFT-ANC, connecting through IAH on the same flight & day as the other 2... and the one with the extra flight was $27 cheaper.

Yes, airlines have some wacky pricing. At least Amtrak seems to base it by distance traveled and popularity of the route. Airlines are a little more nebulous. When booking a flight, I noticed that I was changing planes in a city that was a short train ride away from my destination. I thought, "How much can I knock off of my airfare by just skipping that last leg and getting on the train." The answer was that my fare would have tripled because now I'm taking a direct flight with no transfers. That's when I realized that the airlines didn't place a value an a certain seat on a certain flight. Instead the value was based on how much they inconvenienced me in the process. A direct flight costs more because it's more convenient. An indirect flight that incorporates that exact flight costs less because I have to take more planes.

When I realized that the airlines were charging me more just to not deliberately inconvenience me, I booked the trip entirely on Amtrak.

 

[Trogdor]

Yes, airlines have some wacky pricing. At least Amtrak seems to base it by distance traveled and popularity of the route. Airlines are a little more nebulous. When booking a flight, I noticed that I was changing planes in a city that was a short train ride away from my destination. I thought, "How much can I knock off of my airfare by just skipping that last leg and getting on the train." The answer was that my fare would have tripled because now I'm taking a direct flight with no transfers. That's when I realized that the airlines didn't place a value an a certain seat on a certain flight. Instead the value was based on how much they inconvenienced me in the process. A direct flight costs more because it's more convenient. An indirect flight that incorporates that exact flight costs less because I have to take more planes.

When I realized that the airlines were charging me more just to not deliberately inconvenience me, I booked the trip entirely on Amtrak.

In general, airline ticket prices are based neither on the value of individual flights, nor on the level of inconvenience. They are based on individual markets and the level of demand and competition for those markets.

For an overly simplified explanation, a flight AAA-BBB-CCC is priced based on the fares for AAA-CCC. The airline flying AAA-BBB-CCC has to consider the overall market for AAA-CCC, and also consider what the competition is charging. The competition may fly AAA-DDD-CCC, or sometimes even AAA-EEE-FFF-CCC. But, ultimately, when an airline is quoting a fare, they are quoting it for AAA-CCC, regardless of what potential market combinations may exist for connections in the middle.

 

[Guest]

Yes, airlines have some wacky pricing. At least Amtrak seems to base it by distance traveled and popularity of the route. Airlines are a little more nebulous. When booking a flight, I noticed that I was changing planes in a city that was a short train ride away from my destination. I thought, "How much can I knock off of my airfare by just skipping that last leg and getting on the train." The answer was that my fare would have tripled because now I'm taking a direct flight with no transfers. That's when I realized that the airlines didn't place a value an a certain seat on a certain flight. Instead the value was based on how much they inconvenienced me in the process. A direct flight costs more because it's more convenient. An indirect flight that incorporates that exact flight costs less because I have to take more planes.

When I realized that the airlines were charging me more just to not deliberately inconvenience me, I booked the trip entirely on Amtrak.

In general, airline ticket prices are based neither on the value of individual flights, nor on the level of inconvenience. They are based on individual markets and the level of demand and competition for those markets.

For an overly simplified explanation, a flight AAA-BBB-CCC is priced based on the fares for AAA-CCC. The airline flying AAA-BBB-CCC has to consider the overall market for AAA-CCC, and also consider what the competition is charging. The competition may fly AAA-DDD-CCC, or sometimes even AAA-EEE-FFF-CCC. But, ultimately, when an airline is quoting a fare, they are quoting it for AAA-CCC, regardless of what potential market combinations may exist for connections in the middle.

This is a very good explanation. I will add that an airline who has the only nonstop in a market, or the most convenient time, etc., often attempts to charge a premium for that service. However, overall market demand/performance dictates pricing tactics.

 

[Phil S]

More than I wanted to know about airlines, though it definitely got me laughing But back to Amtrak, what gives? ALY is not exactly a popular destination, from anywhere! It's inconceivable to me that LAX/ALY is any more or less popular than SJC/ALY. And it's a whole 500 miles difference in distance!? As I said, even absent any logic, it's hard for me to imagine even an algorithm that would generate this. I hate to admit it, but maybe I should go read the thread about "if Amtrak were run like a business".

 

[jebr]

More than I wanted to know about airlines, though it definitely got me laughing But back to Amtrak, what gives? ALY is not exactly a popular destination, from anywhere! It's inconceivable to me that LAX/ALY is any more or less popular than SJC/ALY. And it's a whole 500 miles difference in distance!? As I said, even absent any logic, it's hard for me to imagine even an algorithm that would generate this. I hate to admit it, but maybe I should go read the thread about "if Amtrak were run like a business".

Maybe it's because, since you're taking the room, they can't fill it in ALY, so they have to price it, essentially, until that room could be filled again.

At least, that seems possible from looking at the CZ from ELK-CHI vs. ELK-OMA. Only about a $5-10 difference in (coach) fare for an additional 500ish miles, but if I book OMA - CHI, it's around $60.

 

[Guest]

More than I wanted to know about airlines, though it definitely got me laughing But back to Amtrak, what gives? ALY is not exactly a popular destination, from anywhere! It's inconceivable to me that LAX/ALY is any more or less popular than SJC/ALY. And it's a whole 500 miles difference in distance!? As I said, even absent any logic, it's hard for me to imagine even an algorithm that would generate this. I hate to admit it, but maybe I should go read the thread about "if Amtrak were run like a business".

Your taking that roomette that could be sold from LAX-SEA and maybe there's too much demand in the middle of the route for that particular day and they want to discourage choking off thru traffic.

 

[Rob3E]

In general, airline ticket prices are based neither on the value of individual flights, nor on the level of inconvenience. They are based on individual markets and the level of demand and competition for those markets.

For an overly simplified explanation, a flight AAA-BBB-CCC is priced based on the fares for AAA-CCC. The airline flying AAA-BBB-CCC has to consider the overall market for AAA-CCC, and also consider what the competition is charging. The competition may fly AAA-DDD-CCC, or sometimes even AAA-EEE-FFF-CCC. But, ultimately, when an airline is quoting a fare, they are quoting it for AAA-CCC, regardless of what potential market combinations may exist for connections in the middle.

This is good info, although it further upsets me because that means the airlines consider Charlotte a better destination than Raleigh. Having spent time both places, I disagree.

But it still makes for some confusing, illogical situations in which I could fly the exact same flight into Charlotte and pay less just because I was continuing on to Raleigh. If I actually wanted to go to Charlotte, I could book a flight to Raleigh, go through Charlotte, and catch a train back to Charlotte, all for less then taking that same flight directly to Charlotte. I wonder, if you fly with no checked bags, what the consequences are for simply leaving at your layover? Pre-TSA crackdowns, I would guess that their would be no consequences, and these pricing structures would be untenable. In the current environment, I'd be more concerned.

As for the OP, I would have to agree that your situation seems absent logic. Or, at least, I think Amtrak is failing to look at the big picture. My guess is that because the SAC departure is later, rooms probably sell more frequently, therefore, price goes up. LAX departs in the morning when not everyone will be as concerned about a room, and therefore it remains at a lower price. It probably also depends of the number of people who board at LAX and continue on beyond SAC. If that were most passengers, then you would expect room prices to be more consistent, but if a large number of those people will not be continuing on through the night, then rooms might be harder to sell out of LAX, hence the lower price.

It does create another weird situation in which it costs less to travel further, but it may not be entirely without logic.

 

[JoeBas]

I wonder, if you fly with no checked bags, what the consequences are for simply leaving at your layover? Pre-TSA crackdowns, I would guess that their would be no consequences, and these pricing structures would be untenable. In the current environment, I'd be more concerned.

There are no governmental or legal consequences for doing so, at least officially.

However, most Frequent Flyer programs frown upon this kind of "Segment abandonment", and could under most TOS ding you or kick you out for it.

 

[Rob3E]

I wonder, if you fly with no checked bags, what the consequences are for simply leaving at your layover? Pre-TSA crackdowns, I would guess that their would be no consequences, and these pricing structures would be untenable. In the current environment, I'd be more concerned.

There are no governmental or legal consequences for doing so, at least officially.

However, most Frequent Flyer programs frown upon this kind of "Segment abandonment", and could under most TOS ding you or kick you out for it.

Since I'm not a frequent flyer, I guess that's not much of a threat. But since I also don't have any desire to disembark in Charlotte, I guess it's still a moot point for now.

 

[Trogdor]

In general, airline ticket prices are based neither on the value of individual flights, nor on the level of inconvenience. They are based on individual markets and the level of demand and competition for those markets.

For an overly simplified explanation, a flight AAA-BBB-CCC is priced based on the fares for AAA-CCC. The airline flying AAA-BBB-CCC has to consider the overall market for AAA-CCC, and also consider what the competition is charging. The competition may fly AAA-DDD-CCC, or sometimes even AAA-EEE-FFF-CCC. But, ultimately, when an airline is quoting a fare, they are quoting it for AAA-CCC, regardless of what potential market combinations may exist for connections in the middle.

This is good info, although it further upsets me because that means the airlines consider Charlotte a better destination than Raleigh.

No it doesn't. Nowhere did I say that airlines charge more for "better" destinations, or that airlines make any determination on what destinations are better, for that matter. Charlotte happens to be a hub for US Airways. Therefore, they basically own the market for nonstop service to Charlotte, except to/from other airlines' hubs. The market for one-stop service to Raleigh, on the other hand, is competitive because you're looking at all the flights through not only Charlotte, but also Atlanta, Washington, Detroit, Chicago, Newark, etc. That's a much larger web of competition than just looking at city X to Charlotte.

 

[GoldenSpike]

Thinking to change my May 13 trip out to Oregon from Builder to SW Chief, I find that a roomette LAX/ALY is $254 (plus railfare) but SAC/ALY or SJC/ALY is $336, $82 extra to travel ~500 miles less distance. What exactly would be the logic behind this? Or absent any logic, the algorithm that produces this result? Or did I do something wrong? Unfortunately still no Amsnag.

Leaves one wondering. A month ago I booked a trip on the EB, VAN-MSP. From VAN they only have one sleeper.

Planning on a roomette, I discoverd on that particular date they charged $60 LESS to be in the Family Bedroom.

Yet, they annouce on the roomettes to hurry as only X number are left!

I'll be enjoying my trip in the FBR!!

 

[gatelouse]

Enjoy the anomaly and enjoy the family room! It's rather hard to do yield management when the quantity being managed is exactly one. So Amtrak/Arrow took a guess that, for your particular day, no family would be interested in the room at a higher price.

There are good reasons to keep FB prices low to incentivize families to ride the train--a family of four can bring the equivalent of three adult fares along with it. But really, Amtrak ought to have a sanity check in the yield management so that all bedrooms are always priced at least a little higher than roomettes.

 

[Anderson]

Enjoy the anomaly and enjoy the family room! It's rather hard to do yield management when the quantity being managed is exactly one. So Amtrak/Arrow took a guess that, for your particular day, no family would be interested in the room at a higher price.

There are good reasons to keep FB prices low to incentivize families to ride the train--a family of four can bring the equivalent of three adult fares along with it. But really, Amtrak ought to have a sanity check in the yield management so that all bedrooms are always priced at least a little higher than roomettes.

I don't necessarily agree that bedrooms should be "held" above roomette fares. If the roomettes are selling out but you have lots of bedrooms left (remember, some LD trains have 15 bedrooms upstairs), trying to entice a couple that would otherwise pick the roomette to grab one of the bedrooms with a lower price isn't a bad move. If nothing else, it might get Amtrak some extra revenue by filling those bedrooms, eventually vaulting them to the higher bucket(s), and leaving the roomettes unoccupied at a lower fare that may still get a rider.

Also, this is no worse than the classic "please travel past Atlanta" fares on the Crescent's sleepers...and it's about on par with the RVR-NYP sleeper situation (because the Silvers' sleepers usually sell out at some point south of RVR, roomettes north of Richmond are often locked to low bucket due to the inability to sell them through from further on south...frequently resulting in lovely anomalies such as the roomette costing the same as a single BC ticket over the same distance in spite of including a proper breakfast and sleeping accommodations as the trip dictates versus BC's free drink and a paper).

 

[Bob Dylan]

Which Train has 15 Bedrooms Upstairs? At most the LD Superliners have Two Revenue Sleepers, the Trandorms have Zero Bedrooms and of course Viewliners only have Three bedrooms on each Sleeper so at the most you would have 10 Bedrooms Max on a Superliner Upstairs. (not counting the H Room and Family Room Downstairs!)

 

[AlanB]

Jim,

The Empire Builder has 3 regular sleepers year round for a total of 15 Bedrooms; 2 to Seattle and 1 to Portland. And the Coast Starlight for the last few years, as well as the CZ I believe, get's three sleepers during the summer months.

And of course the Auto Train has dozens of Bedrooms all year round, usually at least 35 during the slow times and 40 during the busy times.

 

[leemell]

I can't remember the last time the CS had only two sleepers. Almost without exception year round, they have had a Transdorm and three Sleepers. What has varied is the number of coaches. Non-travel season, three coaches, travel season, four coaches, with exceptions.

 

[Trogdor]

Two sleepers is a winter thing for both the Builder and Starlight.

They ran with two during January and February. But, the "off peak" on those trains has shrunk considerably.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Jim,

The Empire Builder has 3 regular sleepers year round for a total of 15 Bedrooms; 2 to Seattle and 1 to Portland. And the Coast Starlight for the last few years, as well as the CZ I believe, get's three sleepers during the summer months.

And of course the Auto Train has dozens of Bedrooms all year round, usually at least 35 during the slow times and 40 during the busy times.

:blush: Alan, I stand corrected, of course I know the AutoTrain has Many Bedrooms but I forgot about the Portland section of the EB which is dumb because Ive ridden both sections several times! Ive not seen more than 2 Sleepers on the CZ or CZ but havent ridden them in the Summer "Season"! If only EVERY LD Train could have this many Sleepers!

And last Oct. on the way to the Gathering I was able to Upgrade to a Bedroom ("A", but it's a Bedroom! :wub: )on the Eagle from AUS-STL for a Lower Price than the Roomette I had booked and this was the day before my Trip!

 

[leemell]

Two sleepers is a winter thing for both the Builder and Starlight.

They ran with two during January and February. But, the "off peak" on those trains has shrunk considerably.

OK, I made the remarks on the consist based on my memory of what I have seen. Knowing that it is not always that reliable, but still feeling I was recalling correctly, I did a search. I found a couple dozen videos, forum discussions, or travelogues of the Starlight in January and February of various recent years that mentioned or showed consist. Every one of them showed or mentioned three or four sleepers (four, I believe counted the Transdorm). I found two videos in mid-January of this year. I don't know what Amtrak says, but this is what is I and others saw. <_<

 

[Trogdor]

I've also seen the train with two, very recently. Was some time in January, don't remember the exact date.