![]() |
Originally Posted by hazelrah
(Post 19758397)
No one said they were going to leave ATL. They could have just shifted feed to MEM - In the same manner that they have shifted feed away from CVG and MEM.
|
Originally Posted by youngdlplat
(Post 19763661)
But in the end, no matter how good these things are for MEM, O&D is what drives Delta's decisions. Perhaps that really is the only thing that can make a hub profitable. If so, then the future of MEM seems certain. (Though I still don't understand why O&D is the major thing, as many people must connect. And ATL just doesn't seem like an ideal connecting airport anymore, too crowded, congested, and delayed. But then what do I know?)
ATL has the economy of scale and the O&D traffic, therefore it is going to be cheaper. That's really all that matters. |
Originally Posted by cbn42
(Post 19785616)
This can be explained by the purchasing behavior of most consumers. Yes, MEM is much easier to connect in than ATL. But how much extra will you pay? If you search online and connecting through MEM is even $5 more expensive, will you pay it? Some Flyertalkers might, but most people won't. Therefore, factors like ease of connecting and congestion do not play into Delta's decision on keeping the hub.
ATL has the economy of scale and the O&D traffic, therefore it is going to be cheaper. That's really all that matters. Actually, MEM is often cheaper due to the lack of PFC's. The issue is likely more a lack of frequency/destinations and the prevalence of CRJ's. Business fliers want schedule flexibility and a chance of an upgrade, something that is difficult to obtain when connecting through MEM vs. ATL. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:07 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.