Could Delta Capitalize On Their Better Transfer Cities?
#1
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
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?
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?
#3
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: CHA
Programs: DL-DM (1.75MM), Bonvoy LifeTi, Hertz-PC
Posts: 618
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).
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).
#5
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: LAX/BUR, RDU
Programs: DL SM, AAdvantage, SPG
Posts: 1,360
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
I'd much rather layover at a pleasant airport than a chaotic megahub
#7
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: MEM
Programs: Starbucks Green Card
Posts: 5,431
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
I'd much rather layover at a pleasant airport than a chaotic megahub
#8
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: LAX/BUR, RDU
Programs: DL SM, AAdvantage, SPG
Posts: 1,360
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.
#9
Join Date: May 2015
Location: DCA
Programs: AA EXP, DL FO, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 6,712
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.
Ex-DCA, RDU is now a nice option, and is often the cheapest. Upgrade odds are better too.
#11
Join Date: May 2015
Location: DCA
Programs: AA EXP, DL FO, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 6,712
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,069
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.
#13
Original Member and FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Programs: DL PM/MM, AA ExPlat, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia, National ECE, Hertz PC
Posts: 16,579
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).
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).
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,190
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.
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.
#15
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: MEM
Programs: Starbucks Green Card
Posts: 5,431