Could Delta Capitalize On Their Better Transfer Cities?
 

Recently I flew up to DC and connected through CVG on the way up and RDU on the way back. I've been through CVG many times and it was a fantastic experience as always. I had never been through RDU before but it was an excellent experience as well.

Delta offers upgrades on their onboard product, why not extend it to airports? I know I paid more to avoid being treated like cattle at ATL or being treated as a nuisance from the surly employees at DTW and MSP. Why not advertise connection hubs or focus cities that are actually pleasant?

There's probably a direct correlation between airport experience and passenger/transfer volume.

Interesting...and worthy of thought provoking.

My best guess: money.

If some place like RDU had cheap rates for DL to use gates and increase pax flow through there, I'd think that a team of actuaries would be looking at that and determining the volume vs cost that would be incurred.

Delta, being a business, is all about profit - as any business (by definition) should be. ATL, with >200 gates can handle the flow. If they started routing 50+ flights per day to RDU, could they handle the volume? Is it worth the expense?

Supply/Demand, Profit/Loss, Ebidah, and other formulas come into play, I'm sure.
That's why they are investing so much into ATL club rooms and such, as that is their concentration point that can handle their volume.

But from a customer stand point, I agree with you. I'd love to layover in Bozeman, MT for a couple years before getting back to work, but the Mrs says no(t yet). ;)

I've never felt like cattle in ATL nor have I ever noticed surly employees in MSP or DTW.

IMO, the reason RDU is so pleasant is that it's a great medium sized airport. Not too many people know about the great terminal, or how easy D->D connections are. If DL starts advertising RDU, we'll get more traffic and that'll inevitably lead to a worse airport experience.

I'd much rather layover at a pleasant airport than a chaotic megahub :D

The answer to the question is, simply, no.

Most flyers don't buy tickets based on connection cities. They buy on price and schedule. Connections through RDU are limited much more by the fact that there's just a limited number of cities than by lack of advertising.

Yes, that is very true. At the rate DL is expanding at RDU, it wouldn't surprise me if adding more non-hub routes may create some better connection opportunities.

If you're connecting from the East Coast to the Midwest, CVG can't be beat. I suspect that there will be fewer connection opportunities though as DL adjusts CVG's schedule to better fit O/D needs.

Ex-DCA, RDU is now a nice option, and is often the cheapest. Upgrade odds are better too.

CVG seems to have an awful lot of CRJ-200 flights.

Fewer and fewer by the day. DL has announced that almost all will be gone by the end of the year.

It was the airport director (not DL) who stated that she thought they would be gone by the end of the year. DL has only officially stated that 75% of flights from CVG will have a FC cabin. When C-Series begin deliveries next year, additional larger RJ's will likely be freed up to further reduce the 50-seat RJ fleet.

These airports with only a few connecting options are great because there aren't a lot of flights ... so they should add more flights to these airports ... then they won't be great as they get bigger ...

I avoid CVG because most flights from my home airport are on 50 seat CRJ's. (I was about to say all, but I checked and they have some scheduled CRJ-900's, one a week tops, and it's not consistent even at that). We don't even have consistent 7 day a week service here (some weekends don't have a Saturday or Sunday or both days flights, again, it's not consistent either).

That is very likely the right answer. It doesn't help the OP develop an adequate understanding of why certain connections are presented by Delta's fare search.

Desirability of a connecting hub is both complex and subjective. How much would the OP pay as a surcharge vs. some other less-desirable hub? Would employer and clients paying for OP's ticket offer substantially the same valuation?

Does the OP recognize the value of frequency? ATL has more frequencies to essentially everywhere vs. RDU. That can lead to more efficient connections (next available flight in xx minutes vs. yyy minutes out of RDU. More frequencies mean more opportunities for rebooking in IROPs, too.

Does the OP recognize carrier routing optimization for profit? Let's assume a hypothetical connection: BOS-RDU-CMH. (Ignore the DL non-stops BOS-CMH.) Delta isn't just trying to optimize yield on BOS-CMH. It is also trying to optimize:

BOS-RDU for O&D traffic
RDU-CMH
BOS-RDU-xxx for all logical connections

vs.

BOS-DTW-CMH
BOS-LGA-CMH
BOS-ATL-CMH
...
all all of those O&D segments

...

plus BOS-ATL-everywhere
BOS-DTW-everywhere
xxx-BOS-RDU

and lots of other airport pairs among those available between 1,100+ Delta and partner-served airports.

I have nothing against RDU - and see that DL's fare rules routinely allow RDU as a connection even where RDU lacks non-stop flights. But RDU has no unique destinations. Nor, at ~75 flights a day, does it offer particularly compelling timing and frequency vs. ATL and DTW connections broadly.

Yes, but on some routes this means frequency will decrease. MEM-CVG is currently 2x daily on CRJ2 but is going to 1x CRJ9 in May.