Finally let's look at what we are first told:
"Interstellar travel is priced on the basis of accommodations; prices cover a trip
from starport to starport, encompassing one jump, regardless of length"
Would you please be kind enough as to give us the exact reference?
The sentence is not found in the 77 LBB2. I don't have 81, but I do have a pdf of The Traveller Book, which seems to be the 81 LBBs lumped together and repaginated. The above quote is on the first page of the "Travel" section (page 49 as paginated, or page 51 of the PDF count), which could be at the end of LBB2 page 1 or beginning of LBB2 page 2.
"A jump3 starship charges the same passage price as a jump-1 starship. The
difference is that a jump-3 ship can reach a destination in one jump, while the
jump-1 ship would take three separate jumps (through two intermediate destinations,
and requiring three separate tickets)"
So the jump 1 trip costs you Cr30000 while the jump 3 trip costs you Cr10000.
Mike has left off two preceding sentences that change the context of the quote. If you're gonna play rules lawyer, include all the text.
One point I've leaned upon whenever a conflict appears in a set of rules (often encountered back in the days of STI and Avalon Hill wargames), is that a specific rule or example always governs over a general rule or example.
Here are the full paragraphs in TTB (assumed identical to 1981 LBB2 text) detailing how to apply the rules (emphasis mine).
Passengers will pay the standard fare for the class of
transportation they choose: Cr10.000 for high passage,
Cr8,000 for middle passage, and Cr1,000 for low passage.
Passage is always sold on the basis of
transport to the
announced destination, rather than on jump distance.
Differences in starship
jump drive capacity have no
specific effect on passage prices. A jump-3 starship charges
the same passage price as a jump-1 starship. The difference
is that a jump-3 ship can reach a destination in one jump,
while the jump-1 ship would take three separate jumps
(through two intermediate destinations, and
requiring three
separate tickets) to reach it. Higher jump numbers also
may make otherwise inaccessible destinations within reach.
But for two ships of differing jump numbers going to the
same destination in one jump, each would charge the same
cargo or passage price.
Notice how the general rule first cited by Mike only applies "starport to starport." Immediately we have a potential conflict: what about a ship with fuel for 2 jumps crossing a void? The destination two jumps away is "starport to starport," but is not one jump. The definition given fails, and the rule therefore does not apply AS WRITTEN. So the next statement of the rule drops the "one jump" limitation and states that price is based on "transport to the announced destination, rather than jump distance." There are no loopholes in that rule, and therefore it governs. This is the first context that Mike's analysis ignores. Mike is calculating by jump distance, which is expressly denied.
The LEADING POINT of the example (second paragraph in the quote) is that drive capacity has no specific effect on passage prices. If comparing two ships that can reach the destination in one jump, this is tautology. It only matters if one ship in the comparison can't reach the destination in one jump. The only way the statement can hold is if prices are charged per parsec "to the announced destination" even if more than one jump is required. This is the second context that Mike's analysis ignores. He is allowing jump capacity to dictate passage cost, which is expressly denied.
Let's examine the example carefully: a J3 ship that can reach a destination in one jump vs a J1 ship that takes three separate jumps. Note that nothing indicates that there is a starport in any intervening stop. In such a case, the trip still counts as "starport to starport" in the first rule statement but fails in the "one jump" restriction. Again, this simply means that general rule doesn't apply. We still have a rule statement that merely looks at "transport to the announced destination," which therefore applies whether there are starports intermediate or not.
The fact that the author recognizes that transport can be sold to a destination three jumps away AUTOMATICALLY NEGATES the requirement that only trips of one jump define the price. That statement requiring passage "encompassing one jump" is, therefore, only a hypothetical "simplest case" price basis, and not a governing rule. Specific cases always govern over general rules.
Now let's look again at the example. The J1 requires "three separate tickets" to reach the destination. If the destination is across a void, and therefore still "starport to starport," the solution presented (elsewhere in this thread that I can't easily find) that NxJ1 would still only charge 1 fixed passage fails the "encompassing one jump" part of the rule and cannot apply. It also fails because the example specifically says that passage would be charged three tickets, not one.
ERGO: Passage can be booked to a destination more than one jump away, is paid for each leg of the journey, and costs the same no matter what the drive capacity or jump distance of each leg traversed to get to the destination. The ONLY way to resolve all the rules is to charge per parsec between origin and destination.
through two intermediate destinations 
