When to Hold Out For a Lower Airfare
fivethirtyeight.com
fivethirtyeight.com
Or consider this gem: "For the five routes in which there was a financial benefit to waiting, Kayak successfully reduced my fare in each instance. [...] This is a sure sign of intelligence". Yes, of course if you cherry-pick 1/6 of the trials (a whole 5 of them!), the system will look effective. What kind of value is there in "analysis" of this level?
"...it still might be worth your time and energy to use airfare prediction software. Why? Because following the algorithm isn’t going to cost you more money..."
which is simply wrong, since the article explicitly gives examples of following the algorithm costing the author more money.
> If weighted equally, the prices paid, following Kayak’s algorithm, were 2 percent higher than the initial March 29 prices. Wearing my statistical hat, I’d call that a tie between the two strategies.
The author also claims that:
> in user surveys that in addition to appealing to quantitative types, another group of regular users said Farecast gave them “peace of mind.”
So if the price difference is 2% (basically a wash either way), then waiting would be a superior strategy because it "might actually relieve some of the second-guessing that occurs when you’re left to your own devices," and that peace of mind may be worth more than 2% of the ticket cost.
...or at least, I think that's the author's point.
This is why I'm looking forward to more and more journals becoming open access. I think that for people who are dissatisfied with 538, understanding academic publications would not be too big of a leap.
http://nbviewer.ipython.org/github/brianckeegan/Bechdel/blob...
Note that early termination rules are pretty common in bayesian statistics, as is taking only enough samples for a reasonable likelihood ratio.
I'd rather see samples covering different time periods as well as different routes, but I'm perfectly happy updating my belief in the efficacy of Kayak's price prediction based on these results.
A sensitivity setting would be nice. For example, when it says the fare is likely to increase in the next few days, does that mean increase by $40 or increase by $140? I'm more likely to give up a probable saving of $40 to be comfortable in knowing my flight is finally booked, but I would wait if it's $140. I imagine everyone's tolerance is different, which is why the sensitivity setting would be nice.
You will probably not save any money following Kayak’s price prediction algorithm and instead buying tickets two weeks ahead of your scheduled departure is a reasonable strategy. You should use prediction algorithms anyway, because they wont lose you money either and help you gain "piece of mind".
I'd say one nice thing about buying early is better seat selection.
Disagree. Airfare pricing is adversarial. It used to be "common knowledge" that buying tickets on Wednesday at 3:05am Eastern was optimal. Then, airlines responded by jacking up prices at that time. You'll also get different prices from an Incognito browser than one with cookies. I'd bet you get hosed if you use your iPhone, for obvious reasons.
If something becomes commonly known as "the right way" to get fair prices, it will surely lead to unfair prices as airlines take advantage of the herd.
Because it's adversarial, the landscape is constantly changing and there are no guarantees.
ITA's Matrix is my go-to choice. I wonder if they sell search metrics to the airlines.
It is common knowledge among frequent flyers that you can get better prices sometimes if you're not signed in. For example, if you fly 100,000 miles a year with an airlines, they're pretty confident you're going to fly with them, so why not show you a slightly higher fare? The worst part: it works. I go to HipMunk sometimes and see a fare for $500 dollars less (on the same airline), but I still book through my preferred airlines, because the benefits are worth it for me: no hassle security, no hassle baggage (first on, first off), no hassle boarding, good chance of 1st class upgrade, etc.
The good news is that if you do find a lower fare on ITA (and pretty much only ITA), you can usually call the airlines and get that fare. Fares are bucketed into fixed "fare classes" so if there is availability in a cheap bucket, the airline MUST sell it to you.
The bad news for frequent flyers is that many benefits do not extend to these cheaper fare buckets. For example, if I want even a chance to be upgraded to business class for free on a transatlantic flight, I have to purchase one of the most expensive economy fare classes. Concrete example: I am flying to Israel in a couple months; for the cheap economy fare it was $1400, but for a chance at an upgrade it was $2,100. I took the $2,100 fare, because being in business to TLV is quite important to me.
Its unfortunate, but its how it is.
I'm not necessarily doubting that this is a thing, I've just never seen hard evidence.
>If you visit the airline's site multiple times, you are not penalized (price-wise) for that.
>However, given well-known yield management techniques, you are likely to see the price rise over time.
>Variations such as the modulation on the time of day make generalizable comparisons harder.
>If you browse the site in a fresh browser, you may see a different offer but the resulting price is substantially similar. This kind of makes sense as a marketing ploy — try harder to attract the comparison shopper, but sell them the same ticket in the end.
http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/9597/do-ryanair-...
* http://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/16581/does-browsin...
* http://www.quora.com/Airfares/Does-searching-for-air-tickets...
* http://studenttravel.about.com/od/planes/a/The-Students-Guid...
Short answer: they use cookies to track your searching behavior, and raise fares if you keep looking with the intent of getting you to panic buy. Correlates of high income (e.g. using a Mac or an iPhone) also hurt you.