Leo Muller

Using Google Flights or Skyscanner for asymmetric itineraries via secondary airports, like going from Charleroi to Eindhoven for Rock Werchter, is a gymnastics that doesn't pass the reality check for most people.
The cost of time, fatigue, luggage with children, often cancels out the savings from such an engineer’s calculation.
We seek simplicity for a family, not optimized complexity.

Connecting local events like festivals to flight search tools is a misuse of their primary function: price. These platforms are made to find the best fare, not to tell us if Rock Werchter is sold out, it's not the ticket for concerts. We use Skyscanner to avoid the exorbitant transportation costs, period. I have a friend who saved 150€ on a flight to Marseille during a jazz festival, just by changing the departure airport in Lille.

The idea that local events are just an influence on the atmosphere and availability is a good starting point, but it misses the potential for maximization that these platforms offer.
Flight search engines are not just there to reflect influence; they give us the opportunity to push the limits of what is possible.
We can actively use Google Flights or Skyscanner not just to avoid Rock Werchter in Werchter, but to find an asymmetric itinerary via a secondary airport, like flying to Eindhoven then taking a train to arrive there at optimal cost.
It's the difference between simply adapting and seeking the full expression of a travel strategy, turning a constraint into an advantage.
Maximum value is not in avoidance, but in the calculated flexibility that reveals true opportunities.