Originally Posted by
Jerseyguy
Looks ok to me
What is helping F9 is nonstop service. I live 35 minutes away from TTN. If I'm going to Denver lets say, if I fly TTN-DTW-DEN on DL and save 45 minutes getting to the airport rather than EWR or PHL, I'm going to spend that 45 minutes connecting plus I have to worry I might miss my connection due to weather, mx or something. If I now have to pay more, I'm just going to go to EWR/PHL where I can get a nonstop and a cheaper fare.
Sometimes DL can be lower fare with connection especially for flights within 15 days of booking.
If Delta were to go at TTN, it could charge high on TTN-DTW like it does on PHL-DTW and EWR-DTW. But, it'd likely sell low to moderate fares on select routes to the Midwest and western US with connections. It'd just be for purposes of increase marketshare in the PHL EWR area, if it was interested.
If it was just one flight on a RJ, like how it services SWF, it'd likely won't be appealing and fares will be high everywhere. But if it was treated like how it services OAK with some competitive faring, it might be fit with PHL and EWR in a good way.
DTW bound service wouldn't capture southbound traffic well. For that, an ATL connection might make sense but since Frontier is flying low fare service year round on TTN-ATL, I'm not sure if Delta can manage on connecting passengers.
It'd likely prefer keeping a stronger ATL schedule at PHL and EWR as PHL-ATL is now a competitive market: 5 competitor market, with one LCC and 2 ULCCs likely causing a downward pressure on faring. ATL is also 200 miles more distant than DTW, whereas TTN-DTW is considered a short-haul route. It can charge high and operational costs being 200 miles less might be lower.
Delta does have service at HPN to both DTW and ATL. There is no competitor on either routes. The odd thing is Delta selling E fares on HPN-ATL even when no ULCC or LCC is around.