programming forums Java Java JSRs Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Products This Site Careers Other all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
Sheriffs:
Saloon Keepers:
Bartenders:

# Question on pricing

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463
This issue has cropped up many times. And I am still not clear about what a flat price means here.
Does it imply
that Flying A-->B-->C
and A-->D-->C has same pricing .

Thanks
Dhiren

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463
Further clarifications..
While pricing it says add price for each segment. So then is A-->C actually considering two trips which get added but then for A--B--C B is not the destination .. whereas first its destination flat price and another place something else.....

I am pretty confused
Thanks
Dhiren

Ramon Gill
Ranch Hand
Posts: 344
Hi Dhiren,
Pricing can become a lot simpler if you make the right assumptions. A flat price per destination could mean a flat price per ... ?

Also, how many flights in a segment (see BDM) ?

It boils down to how you interpret the incomplete requirements.

Ray

D. Rose
Ranch Hand
Posts: 215
I think one price means single price from one source to one destination irrespective of route taken.
So it depends to how you have modelled the requirements.

In real life you would pay less if you take A-B-C rather than A-C! So make assumtins and state them.

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463
This brings me back to the same old question doing the round .. segment v/s flight..
for every segment the pricing is added and that is the net value.

Thats what is confusing me becuase if A-B-C is same price as A-D-C then where does segment totals fit in per flight .. ? I was thinking A-B and B-C is 2 segs and same goes for A-D and D-C

Still confused

Thanks
Dhiren

Joseph Zhou
Ranch Hand
Posts: 129
I think A->B-C has the same price as A->D->C is a good assumption, if we do other way, per segment, that totally doesn't make sense to customer, usually two tickets A->B plus B->C will much higher then A->C or A->B->C.

Joe Law
Greenhorn
Posts: 9
In the Price Itinerary use case:

"System calculates the price of each segment...."

Obviously, the price of each segment is the input of the calculating the itinerary price. If the route between source and destination does not matter, you don't need the price of each segment.

Also, in the Prepare Itinerary use case, if the route between the source and destination does not matter, all the alternative flights will have the same price....

I think how to calculate the itinerary price is quite clear indeed.

Joe

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463
Hi Joe,

In the Price Itinerary use case:

"System calculates the price of each segment...."

This is the confusing part. Flat price per source-destination and then price of each segment. If A-B-C is really same as A-D-C does that mean
A-B+B-C = A-D+D-C
Here price of each segment is included in calculating the flight price.

Obviously, the price of each segment is the input of the calculating the itinerary price. If the route between source and destination does not matter, you don't need the price of each segment.

Also, in the Prepare Itinerary use case, if the route between the source and destination does not matter, all the alternative flights will have the same price....

I would really prefer the easier way .
A-B + B-C = some value
A-D+D-C = some other value.
Where A-B ,B-C,A-D,D-c is a flat price between source and destination. In this way pricing for individual segments would also be come into picture.
But this seems absurd becuase The real source-destination is A and C. why should a customer be charged for travelling to A-B B-C or A-D and D-C.

If A and C are the source destination then IMO the segments and thier individual pricing have no relevance at all. A segment then I would consider as one source-destination.

Thanks
Dhiren

Joseph Zhou
Ranch Hand
Posts: 129
You are right, the price is not per itinerary, it is per segment in Pricing Itinerary, but I think it is really per flight, becuase the segment is just a from-to info in a flight.

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463
You are right, the price is not per itinerary, it is per segment in Pricing Itinerary, but I think it is really per flight, becuase the segment is just a from-to info in a flight.

Yeah thats just it and thats why the confusion.
The price is per flight and the use case says per segment but both are contradictory.
Else define segment as source-dest as one segment and another segment as dest -source.
Meaning a one way itineray has just one segment
and a round trip has 2 segments.
Looking at it this way it makes more sense then
Thanks
Dhiren

Ajith Anand
Ranch Hand
Posts: 40
Price ( A-->B--C ) = Price (A-->B ) + Price( B--> C )

Price ( A-->D--C ) = Price (A-->D ) + Price( D--> C )

The source and destination definition could be interpreted from the perspective of a customer or from the perspective of the AIRLINES.

I think in this context the source and destination is to be interpreted from the perspective of the AIRLINES. There maybe an Amsterdam-Brussels-Cairo flight and also an Amsterdam-Dhaka-Cairo I am sure it wouldnt be profitable to price the flights alike. I interpret destination from Amsterdam to be Brussels and Dhaka. it would be priced P ( A-->D) , P ( A-->B), P ( B-->C), P ( D-->C)

But if we look from the perspective of customer his destination could be DHAKA, BRUSSELS or CAIRO. The system
calculates the prices of each destination using P ( A-->D) for Dhaka , P ( A --> B ) for Brussels

for Cairo he would need to make a choice
1. Price (A-->B ) + Price( B--> C )
or
2. Price (A-->D ) + Price( D--> C )

1 v/s 2 there are definitely tradeoffs: The price , Distance, Seat Availability etc...

That is how I interpret it.

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463
Thanks Ajith,
That was how I interpretted it intially but got confused which is the real source-- destination.

Great explaination .Now it is very clear how I proceed.

Thanks again
Dhiren

Joseph Zhou
Ranch Hand
Posts: 129
Let's roll back a little bit...It looks like the Price discussion is "path" specific, if we drop our real world experience, I'd say Price is Segment specific, that means all fights of FBN for a specific Segment have the same price. I think that also make sence for me and it is discribed in use cases.

Ganesh Krishnan
Ranch Hand
Posts: 42
All,

I dont see any issues with the interpretation of the pricing here :

Say I want to go from A-->C, suppose the possible routes available are:

A--->B---->C and

A--->D---->C

According to the use case, the flat prices are per destination.

so if A--->B = \$100
B--->C = \$150

A-->D = \$125
D-->C = \$100

So A--->B--->C would cost me \$250
where as A-->D-->C would cost me only \$225.

does it make sense?

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463

A--->B---->C and

A--->D---->C

According to the use case, the flat prices are per destination.

so if A--->B = \$100
B--->C = \$150

A-->D = \$125
D-->C = \$100

So A--->B--->C would cost me \$250
where as A-->D-->C would cost me only \$225.

Yeah u are correct.
The confusion was there becuase I was thinking on a different line.
That given
A--->B---->C and

A--->D---->C
I was of the opinion that .
A is the source and C the destination.
A-- >C
But I agree with the each segment priced separately.
That works with the requirement now.
Thanks
All
Dhiren

Ajith Kallambella
Sheriff
Posts: 5782
'Ajith And Ajith And'

Unfortunately your name violates our naming policy. Please take a quick look at the rules and edit your profile accordingly.

Thank you!

Joseph Zhou
Ranch Hand
Posts: 129
So, forget the real world experience, think just as simple as Ganesh showed us, but the discussion is really helpful, thank you all.

Alvin Tang
Greenhorn
Posts: 20
if the itenary is A->B->C, since A->B is a segment and B->C is another segment, the requirement spec. already said that the total price is equal to the summation of indiviudual segment, so I think that 'flat price per destination' should be rephrased as 'flat price per segment'. If 'flat price per destination' implies that the price is the same for A->B->C and A->D->C, then the ticket of an itenary from A->B is not of the same price as the ticket which is a segment of another itenary A->B->C.

Imagine if the price is irregardless of the route from a point to a destination, then there is no need to do add the price for individual segment.

Josep Andreas
Ranch Hand
Posts: 90
Could there be a difference between 'Price Flight' and 'Price Itinerary' in the way it is handled?
IMO only the latter has to be calculated?

What do you think?

Dhiren Joshi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 463
Could there be a difference between 'Price Flight' and 'Price Itinerary' in the way it is handled?
IMO only the latter has to be calculated?

After having discussed this for several months now, I will finally stick to one solution.
That of price per segment.

Flight price and price itinerary would definitely be different becuase one is price of the flight ;sum of segments and the other

Price itinerary : The total price including return and round way.

HTH
Dhiren