The article looks at common sense from the passenger point of view, but in fact if you look at it from an airline point of view you can sometimes see a very different picture.<p>For example, take the following 2 principles, each of which make sense individually:<p>1. A non-stop product from A to B is a superior to a one-stop product from A to B. Therefore, A to B non-stop is priced higher.<p>2. If only one airline has a non-stop product from A to B, they will price it higher than if multiple airlines have a non-stop product from A to B.<p>Let's see how this can play out in practice:<p>If many airlines can offer a one-stop product from A->B, your airline will offer it cheaply to compete. It may just so happen, as an implementation detail, that your product happens to connect at C since that's your hub.<p>Now, if you look at the A->C market, you may have the only non-stop product, and thus you price it high.<p>Result, your price for an itinerary (remember the actual itinerary is an implementation detail of the A->B one-stop product you purchased) from A->C->B is priced much lower than the person sitting next to you that is travelling from A->C only, even though the direct fuel cost to the airline of A->C->B is clearly higher than A->C only.