This might just be a US thing, I don’t know. But it seems like if I want to fly somewhere, the cheapest option is to choose the nonstop flight. If I pick a flight with a layover it always costs more.
I don’t think it used to be this way! Flights with stops and layovers were cheaper because of the inconvenience. What’s the point of picking one if they’re more expensive?
Nonstops being cheaper makes sense to me. Planes make money in the air, not sitting on the ground. A connection means one plane has to land (and stop making money) before another can take off (and start making money again). The whole process of deplaning passengers, unloading baggage, cleaning a plane for the next flight, and restocking the service items is at least doubled with a single stop, and tripled for two stops. None of that makes money, and only costs the airline. Also, airlines have to pay gate fees at airports. A direct flight means one gate fee, connections mean multiple gate fees.
Direct flights costing less are how the low-cost airlines got started. They weren’t burdened with providing flights to everywhere (with frequent partially filled planes). Low-cost carriers could cherry pick the best direct routes, and pack the planes full selling nearly every seat. The traditional airlines, seeing their lunch eaten by the low cost carriers, started using the same business model and introduced the “basic economy fare”. That may be part of what you’re seeing with cheaper non-stops.