The problem with the analogy (as I see it) is that A->B->C may be 'worse than' than A->B (because place C may be undesirable), whereas that isn't true for halves of a sandwich (because it is ok to not eat the second half of a sandwich).
Oh, and the airlines sell you the full sandwich for $3, but the half sandwich for $5.
It doesn't make a lot of sense, but it's the airlines right to set their prices and try to defend them; they may succeed or they may not. I doubt this particular lawsuit will be the test case that breaks them.
Oh, and the airlines sell you the full sandwich for $3, but the half sandwich for $5.
It doesn't make a lot of sense, but it's the airlines right to set their prices and try to defend them; they may succeed or they may not. I doubt this particular lawsuit will be the test case that breaks them.