Travelers searching for flights from Europe to Southeast Asia are being shown journey options with 35-hour travel times and multiple self-transfers — saving only €100 over direct 20-hour options. The question: why do airlines and booking platforms present these inconvenient routes, and who actually books them?
A traveler posted to r/TravelHacks with frustration: "KLM shows me flights that take me to Amsterdam first, then to Paris for the long-haul flight (absolutely counter-intuitive and nonsensical). All these options are not significantly cheaper, maybe 100 euros or even less."
These aren't flights with intentional stopovers to explore new cities — they're routes with short layovers and self-transfers that make extended exploration impossible. So why show them at all?
Inventory Management
Airlines use dynamic pricing algorithms that factor in seat availability across their entire network. A route through Amsterdam and Paris might use emptier flights that the airline wants to fill, even if it's less convenient for passengers. By offering it at a small discount, they can fill otherwise empty seats while still making the direct flight seem like better value.
Ancillary Revenue
Longer journeys mean more opportunities for add-ons. Extra layovers increase the chance passengers will buy food, airport lounge access, or upgrade to premium economy for one leg. Multiple short flights also mean more checked baggage fees if bags need to be rechecked during self-transfers.
Codeshare and Alliance Politics
Many inconvenient routes result from airline partnerships. IATA codeshare agreements require airlines to display partner flights, even when routing is illogical. A Europe to Asia flight might route through multiple alliance hubs simply because those airlines have reciprocal agreements.
